Transcript Highlights:

• So the interns also reviewed academic literature, and key conclusions...
• And at that time, all social workers were in the Group 1 retirement classification.
• In 2012... ...retirement group classification.
• The law should acknowledge this service with Group 2 classification.
• My manager has recommended not sharing my last name in reviews because of the risk.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several retirement and workforce-related bills. House Bill 2980 would place county correctional nurses and certain medical staff into Group 4 retirement. Representative Trino, Middlesex Sheriff Peter Koutoujian, and nurse manager Leanne Cameron argued that correctional nurses work in dangerous, high-stress settings with frequent contact with incarcerated people, high rates of mental illness and substance use in the jail population, and significant workplace violence, and that the change would help recruitment and retention with limited statewide fiscal impact. The committee also heard Senate Bill 210, which would create a commission to study additional regular compensation and annual expenses for members of the General Court. Senator John Keenan said Massachusetts has high leadership stipends compared with other states and argued the current structure can affect independence and public trust. Representative O'Day testified on House Bill 2928 to extend Group 2 retirement to additional Department of Children and Families social workers, and SEIU 509 witnesses described frequent transport of children, crisis response, threats, assaults, and other high-risk duties that they said match Group 2 work. Additional testimony supported House Bill 2943 for DDS service coordinators and supervisors, with witnesses describing home visits in unsafe conditions, transport of vulnerable individuals, direct care during staffing crises, and exposure to violence. House Bill 2899 drew support from the Association of Social Work Boards for social work field placement grants, incentives for supervisors, and expanded retirement benefits for DCF social workers. The committee also heard Senate Bill 2613, a local retirement bill for Salem police officer Kathleen Roachville, who described a severe line-of-duty injury during an arrest involving a combative person in a mental health crisis. Finally, Susan Smith Campbell testified for reclassifying certain DYS administrative officers into Group 2 because of their direct involvement in restraints, assaults, and crisis management. After testimony concluded, the committee adjourned without taking any votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is like a blanket guarantee of classification for four years, unless those three things happen.
• Madam Chair Members, HB 2104, Agricultural Property Classification Inspection outlines the reasons a
• This is like a blanket guarantee of classification for four years, unless those of classification for
• HB 2108 increases those classifications to a Class 4 felony if a person commits unlawful flight from
• Madam Chair, members, HB 2046, annual probation review, pre-hearing notification.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus began with introductions from pages and interns, followed by a procedural reminder on consent calendars and how bills can be pulled for floor debate or amendment. Members were told that third-read consent bills bypass caucus debate, while caucus consent bills may have committee amendments adopted together unless pulled. The meeting then moved into Minority Caucus Calendar No. 2. A large number of bills were briefly presented, with several members pulling measures from consent or voicing opposition. Topics included appropriations and federal monies accounting (HB 2148), a Buffalo Soldiers memorial (HB 2062), school library funding restrictions (HB 2008), prayer at school governing body meetings (HB 2110), school safety center administration (HB 2142), parental rights and social transitioning disclosures (HB 2249), insurer assessments (HB 2091), agricultural property classification and inspection rules (HB 2104 and HB 2105), firefighter workers’ compensation definitions (HB 2138), truth-in-taxation bond notices (HB 2289), late tax filing penalties (HB 2016), engineering and professional licensing reciprocity (HB 2122), felony murder involving an unborn child (HB 2043), body concealment and mutilation penalties (HB 2044), domestic violence order-of-protection service rules (HB 2048), mandatory reporting of partial-birth abortions (HB 2074), unlawful flight sentencing enhancements (HB 2108), weapons trafficking and fentanyl sentencing changes (HB 2131 and HB 2132), drive-by shooting forfeiture rules (HB 2045), probation review notice changes (HB 2046), venue changes for cases involving court employees (HB 2126), and child support for pre-born children (HB 2144). Members repeatedly criticized several abortion-related bills, the library bill, and the tax and agriculture measures as harmful, unnecessary, or unfunded mandates. The latter part of the meeting focused on water and election legislation. Water bills included snowpack augmentation funding (HB 2024), water conservation grant disclosures (HB 2029), removal of education/research as an eligible water grant use (HB 2030), stormwater recharge mapping with an appropriation (HB 253), cesspool remediation assistance (HB 2096), groundwater pumping limits in INAs (HB 2097), Colorado River litigation funding (HB 2116), and natural resource conservation board changes (HB 2117). Election-related items included moving the primary date earlier and changing signature cure timelines and observer rules (HB 2022), a memorial urging designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization (HCM 2001), a memorial urging review of CAIR for terrorist designation (HCM 2002), and a constitutional amendment on citizenship, voter ID, foreign contributions, and early voting limits (HCR 2001). Members raised concerns about voter access, anti-Muslim rhetoric, and the practical effects of the election changes. The caucus concluded with birthday acknowledgments and an announcement for Muslim Day at the Capitol before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, do I have a motion for review? Seeing none, do I have a motion for review?
• Review of this request will increase the total authorized positions by three.
• Seeing none, do I have a motion for review? I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second.
• Seeing none, do I have a motion for review and a second? I've got a motion and a second.
• All right, seeing no questions, those reports stand reviewed.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The committee reviewed several personnel and appropriation items. Item C, a two-for-two position swap with no increase in total authorized positions and recommended by OPM, was approved. Item D, a Department of Higher Education request for South Arkansas College, added three authorized positions overall, including food service, public safety, housing, and project/program support roles, and was also approved. Item E moved positions and $3 million in salary and match appropriation within Workforce Services to consolidate shared services, with no net change in positions; it was approved as well. The committee then considered Items F through O as continuations of previously approved or reviewed personnel actions into FY27. These included growth and surrender pool positions, various pay differentials, hard-to-fill and on-call differentials, a labor market adjustment for crime lab medical examiners, and continuation of several federal grant-funded positions at Commerce, Emergency Management, State Police, and Military Department. No questions were raised, and the block of continuation items was approved on a single motion. Reports were taken up with no action required and were simply noted as reviewed. On the supplemental agenda, the committee suspended the rules and approved Item A-1, which authorized salary increases for 92 employees whose merit raises would place them over their grade maximums. Senator Dotson asked about the public safety entries on the list, and staff indicated they were likely crime lab medical examiner positions. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And for members, um, review, review, review—oh, this joint— we did distribute uh the chair's decision-making
• And for members um review review review >> oh<00:03:40.959> this<00:03:41.200> joint<
• So, I think that's what the new classification system will help us do and help us move people downstream
• Professor Janet Davidson from Shaunat University completed a study of our classification system, and
• They should be reviewed.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 3040, which would create an Office of Gun Violence Prevention. Supporters, including Moms Demand Action and a crime-victim advocate, argued the office would improve data collection, research, and coordination to help reduce gun violence. Opponents, including several gun-rights advocates, said the proposal was duplicative, lacked oversight, and would exclude the firearms community. The chair noted 41 testimonies in support and 77 in opposition, but no vote was taken on the bill in the portion provided. The committee then moved through a series of decision-making items and adopted the chair’s recommendations on several measures. SB 17 on wildfire mitigation passed with amendments from multiple agencies and a report date shifted to the 2028 session. SB 2730 on criminal justice reform passed with a defective effective date amendment, SB 2749 on sentencing passed with a defective effective date, SB 2688 on compassionate release passed with amendments narrowing eligibility and adding notification and funding language, and SB 2798 on law enforcement passed with a defective effective date to make the agricultural enforcement pilot program permanent. SB 2645, a short-form bill, was amended to insert substantive provisions and recommitted to the committee. SB 2383, which would have provided a $15,000 retention bonus for sworn law enforcement officers, was reconsidered and held in committee because it was identified as a duplicate. The committee also passed SB 2575, relating to firearms, with amendments adopting a proposed SD1 that would establish minimum mandatory prison terms for certain class A firearm felonies and add clarifying language. SB 2720, which would create a Hawaii firearm injury restitution fund funded by firearm manufacturer licenses, also passed with amendments clarifying the fund’s scope and eligible injuries. Later, the committee began hearing SB 3107 on parole eligibility. The Office of the Public Defender and the Hawaii Paroling Authority supported language allowing the parole board to waive certain program requirements, while the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission opposed the bill, warning it could keep people incarcerated longer if program access remains limited. The Department of Corrections said it is working on classification changes and a pilot project to move inmates through the system faster.

Transcript Highlights:

• system or to ask for targeted increases or changes to our classification plan.
• or to suggest an increase in the targeted increases for those classifications.
• and comp usually finishes their reviewing all of the requests that have come into them.
• or to suggest an increase in the targeted increases for those classifications.
• Implementing targeted and general wage increases to specific classifications.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Employment Relations met for work sessions on supplemental bargaining for Washington Public Employees Association (WPEA) agreements in general government and higher education, followed by an overview of the collective bargaining process. OFM staff explained that bargaining for the 2025-27 biennium began in 2024, reached tentative agreements, was not ratified in time for the October 1 deadline, resumed, and ultimately produced ratified agreements in August 2025 that were submitted for financial feasibility review under RCW 41.80.010. Staff outlined the tentative agreements’ costs and covered employee counts, including roughly 2,500 FTEs in general government and 2,100 in higher education, with estimated 2025-27 total fund costs of about $22.25 million and $13.5 million respectively. Staff then gave a broader briefing on how state collective bargaining works, including the bargaining calendar, the role of class and compensation review, the June revenue forecast, interest arbitration, and the October 1 submission deadline. They described the groups OFM bargains for, including general government, higher education, health care coalitions, and certain non-state provider groups such as adult family home providers, child care providers, and language access providers. In response to a question from Senator King, staff said the legislature requires bargaining for those non-state provider groups and has also provided interest arbitration for them. Staff also discussed bargaining priorities such as general wage increases, targeted classification adjustments, recruitment and retention, low-wage worker increases, and maintaining the health care premium split. In executive session, the committee voted to keep the current co-chairs, Senator Robinson and Representative Couture, through 2026. Members also voted to recognize that the committee met twice in 2025 and to set the 2026 meeting schedule at two meetings. The motions passed without opposition, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• appears to continue discussion of county assessor procedures, notice requirements, and tax commission review
• There is a hearing in court, and the first party to use the violation section may seek review.
• pharmacy to notify the board when a practice agreement is initiated, and addresses the contents, review
• LB 1261A is an appropriation bill related to LB 1261 and the Nebraska Power Review Fund. ...appropriated
• $4,750 from the Nebraska Power Review Fund to the Nebraska Power Review Board for Program 728, to carry

Bills: LB764, LB815A, LB839, LB888, LB955, LB972A, LB1029, LB1087, LB1091, LB1126A, LB1181A, LB1237A, LB1261A, LB304A, LB762, LB889, LB929, LB966, LB1022, LB1187, LR508

Keywords: law enforcement, correctional services, Department of Correctional Services, corrections officers, state prison employees, peace officer, certification, police standards, training academy, Nebraska Commission on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, Nebraska Police Standards Advisory Council, criminal justice, correctional staff, conditional officer, law enforcement authority, public safety, LB815A, LB815, appropriation, appropriations bill

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman and former review. And Mr.
• other mechanism for any kind of review other mechanism for any kind of review or<00:21:47.200>
• It if another privacy classification It if another privacy classification exists,<01:23:37.600><
• From parties classification regime.
• :05:00.800> the clarifies data classification in the clarifies data classification in the AG's

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so I will start by just giving a little review of it.
• We encourage you to review those outside of the public comment period.
• Also, there are concerns over the classification as a Class B.
• Given the restricted time frame for reviewing this bill... Thank you. That is time.
• Second, the legislation does not alter or establish the new valuation classification methodology for

Bills: HB371

Keywords: HB371, Delaware Agricultural Lands Preservation Act, farmland preservation, agricultural lands, agricultural preservation district, Farmland Preservation Advisory Board, county advisory board, Delaware Foundation, Department of Agriculture, DNREC, planning and zoning, growth zone, open space, land use, farmland protection, rural land preservation, agribusiness, active farmers

Summary: The Senate Executive Committee met in hybrid format, approved the minutes from its June 17 and June 18 meetings, and considered several nominations and bills. The committee heard testimony from Michael T. Skeuse for the Delaware Thoroughbred Racing Commission and Jay Eric Fearwald for the University of Delaware Board of Trustees; both nominees described their backgrounds and qualifications, and no objections were raised. The committee then moved to legislation focused largely on property tax reassessment and related school-tax issues, along with a technical constitutional corrections bill, an agricultural lands preservation cleanup bill, and a child-safety/service-letter bill. A major portion of the meeting centered on Senate Bill 350, which would create a third multifamily residential tax classification at 1.2 times the residential rate. Supporters argued apartments are housing and should not be taxed as commercial property, emphasizing relief for renters and fairness after reassessment. Opponents, including county and school officials, warned the bill would reduce local revenues, complicate tax administration, and create unintended consequences for counties, municipalities, school districts, and agriculture. Similar themes carried into House Bill 462, which would make the split-rate school tax structure permanent and lower the nonresidential cap to 1.85, and House Bill 463, which would align New Castle County senior school-tax exemptions with county exemption rules; both bills drew discussion about shifting burdens, fiscal impacts, and timing. The committee also heard House Substitute 1 for House Bill 320, a technical corrections bill to the Delaware Constitution, with one public commenter objecting to charter-related changes being included in a correction bill. House Bill 371, which removes the requirement for county farmland preservation advisory boards under the Delaware Agricultural Lands Preservation Act, was presented as a streamlining measure and had support from the Department of Agriculture and public comment in favor. House Bill 438, expanding service-letter requirements to a broader set of child-serving facilities and requiring reporting when employers fail to respond, was described as a cleanup bill closing a safety loophole. After public comment and committee discussion, the meeting ended with a motion and unanimous adjournment; no recorded votes on the bills were taken in the transcript.

Bills: SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB14, SB24, SB108, SB112, SB125, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB318, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB513, SB565, SB621, SB650, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB761, SB763, SB815, SB854, SB875, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1006, SB1018, SB1019, SB1024, SB1026, SB1146, SB1194, SB1198, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1379, SB1497, SB1498, SB1527, SB1532, SB1547, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SJR37, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Transcript Highlights:

• And the amendment also removes the requirement that all claims be reviewed by a physician. of the same
• through a. long-winded traveling winding process just to try to get a the actual doctor or a person to review
• adverse determinations, specifically the amendment first removes the requirement that all claims to be reviewed
• Now that the Chevron doctrine has been overturned, the bill would codify. the standard for judicial review

Bills: SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB14, SB24, SB108, SB112, SB125, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB318, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB513, SB565, SB621, SB650, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB761, SB763, SB815, SB854, SB875, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1006, SB1018, SB1019, SB1024, SB1026, SB1146, SB1194, SB1198, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1379, SB1497, SB1498, SB1527, SB1532, SB1547, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SJR37, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Transcript Highlights:

• to report under this section must disclose any decision. to decline to issue a cancel or refuse to review

Bills: SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB14, SB24, SB108, SB112, SB125, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB318, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB513, SB565, SB621, SB650, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB761, SB763, SB815, SB854, SB875, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1006, SB1018, SB1019, SB1024, SB1026, SB1146, SB1194, SB1198, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1379, SB1497, SB1498, SB1527, SB1532, SB1547, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SJR37, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Bills: SCR 5, SCR 13, SB 3, SB 6, SB 10, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15, SB 17, SB 18, SB 19, SB 24, SB 35, SB 57, SB 65, SB 112, SB 284, SB 290, SB 388, SB 400, SB 402, SB 412, SB 495, SB 499, SB 502, SB 509, SB 621, SB 706, SB 740, SB 815, SB 842, SB 854, SB 875, SB 893, SB 917, SB 974, SB 1025, SB 1061, SB 1073, SB 1106, SB 1268, SB 1281, SB 1300, SB 1362, SB 1379, SB 1447, SB 1451, SB 1555, SB 1902, SJR 36, SJR 12, SCR 13, SCR 25, SCR 5, SCR 22, SCR 12, SCR 24, SB 495, SB 412, SB 10, SB 18, SB 565, SB 372, SB 842, SB 765, SB 62, SB 19, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 706, SB 847, SB 290, SB 13, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 917, SB 925, SB 388, SB 1902, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 35, SB 6, SB 815, SB 3, SB 1281, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1451, SB 1061, SB 15, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 17, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 12, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SJR 57, SCR 8, SB 213, SB 681, SB 1172, SB 1252, SB 378, SB 610, SB 918, SB 1343, SB 608, SB 487, SB 955, SB 957, SB 988, SB 990, SB 1019, SB 1021, SB 1120, SB 251, SB 958, SB 535, SB 761, SB 1, SB 541, SB 315, SB 379, SB 1018, SB 1737, SB 266, SB 1415, SB 3, SB 6, SB 15, SB 35, SB 290, SB 706, SB 842, SB 917, SB 1281, SB 1451, SB 1902, SB 12, SB 13, SB 17, SB 19, SB 388, SR 261, SR 265, SR 276, SR 277, SR 281, SR 286, SR 293, SCR 5, SCR 13, SB 2425, SB 2880, SB 10, SB 12, SB 13, SB 17, SB 18, SB 19, SB 388, SB 412, SB 495, SB 2425, SB 2880

Keywords: SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming, education K-16, State Affairs, Texas Legislature, public school tribute, water rights

Transcript Highlights:

• structure and transparency to the processes and standards for school library book acquisition. and the review
• library material acquisition will continue. to be initiated by librarians, but will additionally be reviewed
• What we've done is put in a reliability review process that has to be done in 180 days by our cops.
• to do a deal and go off the grid or behind the meter, that they have to go through a reliability review
• really need the power they can come temporarily back online things that nature, so a reliability review

Bills: SCR5, SCR13, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB24, SB35, SB57, SB65, SB112, SB284, SB290, SB388, SB400, SB402, SB412, SB495, SB499, SB502, SB509, SB621, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB854, SB875, SB893, SB917, SB974, SB1025, SB1061, SB1073, SB1106, SB1268, SB1281, SB1300, SB1362, SB1379, SB1447, SB1451, SB1555, SB1902, SJR36, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SCR12, SCR24, SB495, SB412, SB10, SB18, SB565, SB372, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB13, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840, SJR57, SCR8, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB610, SB918, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB535, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB3, SB6, SB15, SB35, SB290, SB706, SB842, SB917, SB1281, SB1451, SB1902, SB12, SB13, SB17, SB19, SB388, SR261, SR265, SR276, SR277, SR281, SR286, SR293, SCR5, SCR13, SB2425, SB2880, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB388, SB412, SB495, SB2425, SB2880

Keywords: SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming, education K-16, State Affairs, Texas Legislature, public school tribute, water rights

Transcript Highlights:

• It requires agencies to... ...submit a regulatory plan specifying which 20 percent would be reviewed
• each year until reviews are complete and to provide an annual report indicating intended action on each
• This requires agencies, after the review... ...has occurred to take action making a change.
• Agencies must provide a history notes for reviews even if the rule is unchanged or only technical changes

Bills: SCR5, SCR13, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB24, SB35, SB57, SB65, SB112, SB284, SB290, SB388, SB400, SB402, SB412, SB495, SB499, SB502, SB509, SB621, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB854, SB875, SB893, SB917, SB974, SB1025, SB1061, SB1073, SB1106, SB1268, SB1281, SB1300, SB1362, SB1379, SB1447, SB1451, SB1555, SB1902, SJR36, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SCR12, SCR24, SB495, SB412, SB10, SB18, SB565, SB372, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB13, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840, SJR57, SCR8, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB610, SB918, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB535, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB3, SB6, SB15, SB35, SB290, SB706, SB842, SB917, SB1281, SB1451, SB1902, SB12, SB13, SB17, SB19, SB388, SR261, SR265, SR276, SR277, SR281, SR286, SR293, SCR5, SCR13, SB2425, SB2880, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB388, SB412, SB495, SB2425, SB2880

Keywords: SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming, education K-16, State Affairs, Texas Legislature, public school tribute, water rights

Transcript Highlights:

• And determined by our classification system.
• Classification changes usually come down from OFM.
• We are informed of those classification changes and react accordingly.
• Classification changes usually come down from OFM.
• The arbitrator reviews the evidence and determines an agreement.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Employment Relations met on May 8, 2026, to receive updates on upcoming collective bargaining for the 2027–29 biennium. OFM’s Jenny Sheehan reviewed the state workforce, noting that most employees are represented, the workforce remains constrained by hiring limits and civil service rules, and bargaining goals include financially feasible agreements, maintaining labor relations, supporting an inclusive workplace, and addressing issues such as AI use, leave, and immigration-related workplace protections. She also outlined the bargaining calendar, the role of the June revenue forecast in determining what compensation proposals can be funded, and the need to reach tentative agreements by September 2026 for October 1 submission and legislative consideration. She described recent bargaining themes from unions, including limits on AI, expanded leave, access to union members in hybrid workplaces, and classification changes, and she summarized prior-cycle costs, including about $1.2 billion in general funds and $1.7 billion in total funds for 2025–27 awards, excluding the delayed WPEA agreements that were later funded after a return to bargaining. The committee then heard from Western Washington University and the University of Washington on higher education bargaining. Western described its locally bargained contracts, the importance of re-opener clauses tied to state budget decisions, and concerns about the instability of the state “fund split,” which shifts compensation costs between state funds and tuition revenue. Western also emphasized that student employees are increasingly central to retention and urged inclusion of student compensation in the wage base. UW similarly described its large and diverse workforce, the split between RCW 41.56 and 41.80 bargaining frameworks, and the reliance on state funding, tuition, and other revenue sources to cover compensation increases. UW highlighted the financial strain of the fund split, the lack of state funding for academic student employee compensation, and the impact of rising ASE costs on class sizes and the university’s teaching and research missions. OFM also presented on Washington Management Service bargaining, explaining that only certain WMS employees are covered, that bargaining began in 2024, and that current agreements include addenda for WMS-specific provisions. The presentation noted that WMS bargaining is still limited in scope, with only a few represented units, and that compensation bargaining generally covers band minimums and maximums rather than all salary levels. Finally, OFM reviewed interest arbitration rules for certain state employee groups, explaining that arbitration is available for some essential-service and statutorily covered employees, that arbitrators decide disputed contract language based on statutory criteria, and that awards still must be found financially feasible by OFM. Committee members asked about PFML treatment, the timing of arbitration, and the budget pressures facing bargaining, and the meeting adjourned without any votes or formal actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• by them it um so it was peer reviewed by them it was<00:26:02.559> reviewed<00:26:03.159>
• across States agencies peer- review across States agencies peer- review journals<00:37:26.119>
• words nonpublic to the classification words nonpublic to the classification statement<01:24:04.679
• classif or the emergency classification classif or the emergency classification is<01:47:20.520>
• emergency classification emergency classification applications<01:47:48.840> we<01:47:49.000

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:42.240> system the Civil Service classification system the Civil Service classification
• Fink and his issues, I think there's more to it that needs for the review.
• Fink and his issues, I think there's more to it that needs for the review.
• Fink and his issues, I think there's more to it that needs for the review.
• Fink and his issues, I think there's more to it that needs for the review.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for the shortage and the classification for the shortage and the classification of<01:05:47.760>
• fall in the permit classification.
• of classification is done by system of classification is done by commission<01:12:24.600> action<
• <01:13:46.199> and this system of permit classification and this system of permit classification
• illegally until envir the en enal review illegally until envir the en enal review process<01:32:

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard testimony on several measures, beginning with HB 347 relating to goats. The Department of Land and Natural Resources offered comments and said its Division of Forestry and Wildlife was available to answer questions. Testimony on the bill was largely opposed, with speakers arguing it would amount to a “free-for-all” rather than game management and urging deferral. DLNR responded that bag limits can be adjusted by area and game management unit under adaptive management rules, and that hunters typically take out their catch. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up HB 1278, on which DLNR testified in support. The record in the excerpt does not include discussion of the bill’s substance beyond the department’s support, and no action or vote is shown. A substantial portion of the hearing focused on HB 144, relating to the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority and proposed exemptions from Sunshine Law requirements during the transition period. The authority’s vice chair testified that the body is a startup agency with a complex transition from the University and needs to be able to discuss strategic planning, operational formation, and other day-to-day matters with more than two members present. Opponents, including the Public First Law Center, Hawaiʻi Environmental Alliance, and community members, argued the bill would cut the public out of the deliberative process, allow decisions to be hashed out in private, and set a poor transparency precedent. One testifier also raised cultural and environmental concerns about Mauna Kea. Committee members questioned whether existing law and narrower guardrails could address the authority’s concerns, and the authority said it had already proposed a narrower alternative but the bill returned in similar form. The excerpt ends before any final committee action on HB 144 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:48:54.240> private, data of any classification, private, data of any classification,
• <00:53:03.839> Classification agency? I I missed that. Classification agency?
• 1.14 to 1.17 removes data classification 1.14 to 1.17 removes data classification language<01:14
• Um it involves review of thorough.
• second review.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• provisions, the data classification provisions, the data classification provisions<00:36:14.960>
• <01:19:19.760> This<01:19:20.080> classification This classification would subject
• Because the notification, that's where the classification becomes active, and the classification is on
• <01:26:18.000> page look at the current law on review page look at the current law on review
• becomes active and the classification becomes active and the<01:28:35.040> classification<01:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all