Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 512 makes clear that a user cannot be fined for a violation of terms of service by a money
• The bill merely places a civil penalty with a fine set at 3 times the amount of the fine or penalty imposed
• The In 2022, PayPal announced a plan to charge customers a fine of $2500 for users found to have spread
• And third, provides for a civil penalty set at 3 times the amount of any fine or penalty imposed by the
• OK, that, that's fine. We'll figure it out. Yes, sir. Thank you. Members, other questions?

Transcript Highlights:

• They all have looked at the language and they're fine with it.
• Our fine isn't as serious as some.
• something then a fine would be levied. something then a fine would be levied.
• How on balloon a balloon $1,000 fine.
• They would fine to let go balloons.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Campaign fines, you find them, how much have you gotten as a result of the fines?
• How much have you received, and you fine them, and whoever you find is supposed to pay the fine?
• And whoever you find is supposed to pay the fine, how much have you received in fines in the last two
• This fine is set by statute.
• This fine is set by statute.

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The committee began with Article I budget items for the Secretary of State. LBB staff outlined recommendations that would reduce the agency’s appropriation by about $40.3 million, including changes to HAVA funding, removal of one-time business system replacement money, and a rider directing the agency to use Fund 5095 first. Secretary Jane Nelson and staff then defended several exceptional items, especially additional staffing for elections and business filings, a new website, digitization of records, cybersecurity tools, and renovation of the James Earl Rudder Building. Members focused heavily on election administration, cross-checking voter rolls, Harris County complaints, call-center response times, and whether online voter registration should be expanded. No votes were taken; the discussion was informational and budget-focused. The committee then heard the Office of the Governor and trustee programs. LBB presented a recommended $2.4 million decrease for the governor’s office proper and a much larger decrease in trustee programs driven by one-time funding and unexpended balances, while still preserving major border security funding and victim assistance funding. Governor’s staff emphasized Texas’ economic growth, the importance of border security, and efforts to seek federal reimbursement for the roughly $11 billion Texas has spent on border operations. Members discussed whether shifting National Guard deployment to federal control could reduce state costs, and they also reviewed the music incubator program, the Governor’s University Research Initiative, and the semiconductor innovation consortium. Staff highlighted a $5 million late-added request for grants to protect nonprofits from violence and terrorism. Again, the exchange was largely explanatory, with no formal action. Finally, the committee took up the Texas Facilities Commission and lease payments for revenue bonds. LBB recommended major reductions overall, including removal of border wall construction funding and capital complex bond funding, but added money for higher utility costs, renovation of the Rudder Building, and additional facilities staff. George Purcell also noted stable maintenance-and-renewal funding and new riders related to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission building, tenant communications, and space utilization. For lease payments, LBB recommended a smaller appropriation tied to revenue-bond costs allocated across agencies. The discussion was informational, with members asking about the Rudder Building renovation, border wall progress, and capital complex construction timelines; no votes were recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• It ensures new licensees assume responsibility for existing fines and correction orders regardless of
• It ensures new licensees assume responsibility for existing fines and correction orders regardless of
• It ensures new licensees assume responsibility for existing fines and correction orders regardless of
• Um, these aren't new fines; they're existing fines already, and these are not revenue-generating for
• <00:37:16.000> fines new fines, they're existing fines new fines, they're existing fines already

Bills: HF4210, HF4212, HF4549, HF4464, HF4546, HF4447

Keywords: senior nutrition, older adults, aging services, home-delivered meals, congregate dining, meal delivery, grocery delivery, food insecurity, nutrition support, area agencies on aging, Minnesota Board on Aging, human services, special revenue fund, nonprofit grants, SNAP outreach, medically tailored meals, rural nutrition, food access, transportation services, elderly

Transcript Highlights:

• Severgis, made; that's perfectly fine.
• That's fine.
• Otherwise, I think it's fine.
• court would impose a minimum fine of $50,000 per violation.
• Tenants deserve real protections, not just fine print.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 1521, the Judiciary Committee’s civil law omnibus measure. The bill makes a number of minor, mostly clarifying changes, including repealing obsolete Government Code provisions, allowing juvenile courts to hear petitions to establish records of birth, death, or marriage, requiring notice of probate petitions to the Department of Child Support Services, and correcting typos in existing law. It had no opposition and was moved on a do-pass basis to Appropriations, though it was later placed on call pending additional votes. Members then heard AB 57, which would reserve at least 10% of California’s Home Purchase Assistance Program funds for descendants of formerly enslaved people. The author and supporters framed it as a reparative, race-neutral-by-lineage effort to address historic housing discrimination and the racial wealth gap, while opponents argued it was an unconstitutional racial proxy and should instead be based on individual injury. The bill drew strong support and opposition testimony, was amended, and was approved on a do-pass as amended vote to Appropriations, then placed on call. AB 495, the Family Preparedness Plan Act, was heard next. The bill would expand and standardize caregiving and guardianship tools for families facing immigration-related separation, including broader use of caregiver authorization affidavits, recognition of non-relative extended family caregivers, and a new short-term guardianship process that preserves parental rights. Supporters said it would reduce trauma and help children remain with trusted caregivers; there was no opposition testimony. The committee approved it on a do-pass to Human Services vote and placed it on call. The committee also heard AB 392, which would address non-consensual sharing of sexually explicit media by requiring uploader consent certifications, faster takedown procedures, and civil remedies against uploaders and hosting sites. A survivor testified in support, and members discussed implementation details and possible amendments; the bill was moved on a do-pass as amended basis to Appropriations and placed on call. AB 692, which would prohibit employer “stay-or-pay” debt agreements that require workers to repay training or other costs if they leave or are terminated, also advanced despite opposition from business and industry groups concerned about impacts on signing bonuses and voluntary training programs. It was sent to Appropriations on a do-pass as amended vote and placed on call, along with AB 1234, a wage-claim enforcement bill aimed at reducing Labor Commissioner delays and adding consequences for employers who fail to participate in the process. The committee also heard AB 394, which expands protections for transit workers and allows transit agencies to seek restraining orders against violent riders; it received broad support, some concern about system-wide bans, and was discussed with amendments that preserved judicial discretion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Anthony said that he was fine with that. I said that I was fine with that.
• That's fine. Okay, board staff— Clock will portion out time accordingly, okay? That's fine.
• If you disagree with it, that's fine."
• If you disagree with it, that's fine. If you disagree..."
• "Final order, if you are in agreement with it, that's fine.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The hearing resumed on day two of the Legislative Ethics Board fact-finding matter involving Representative Tara Simmons. After opening remarks and confirmation that board members had not engaged in outside research or ex parte communications, Simmons’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she improperly combined a legislative proviso for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and private conduct were intertwined and that the board had enough evidence to require a defense. After deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss and proceeded to hear defense testimony. The first defense witness, Sharon Navas, testified that she met Simmons through advocacy work, later hired her at the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), and maintained written employment policies intended to separate Simmons’s legislative role from her work for EEC. Navas said Simmons was never compensated for lobbying or legislative acts, that EEC paid her from unrestricted funds, and that Simmons did not work on the AEJG dashboard project or participate in the contract dispute with Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley. Navas described the proviso request and later contract issues as separate from Simmons’s legislative duties, and said she continued to pay invoices while the project was being completed. Simmons then testified about her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics advice before taking outside employment or pursuing provisos. She said she repeatedly consulted House ethics counsel and reviewed prior board decisions to ensure her outside work and legislative actions were separated. Simmons described her relationship with Anthony Powers, the dashboard project, the proviso process, and her understanding that the work was distinct from her legislative role. The hearing paused for lunch after part of Simmons’s direct examination, with testimony set to continue after the break.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we can come up with 250 million dollars for choice, and that's fine.
• If we can come up with 250 million dollars for choice, and that's fine.
• If we can come up with 250 million dollars for choice, and that's fine.
• If we can come up with 250 million dollars for choice, and that's fine.
• project over here and that's fine. project over here and that's fine.

Bills: HB151, HB152, HB138, SB221, SB190, SB69, SB225, SB272

Keywords: fire chaplains, distinctive license plate, firefighter, volunteer service, criminal penalties, sales tax exemption, baby supplies, baby formula, maternity clothing, menstrual hygiene products, pregnancy, pregnant defendant, incarceration, jail intake, pregnancy test, bail, pre-incarceration probation, supervised probation, electronic monitoring, electronic supervision

Transcript Highlights:

• If everyone thinks this is fine, then I...
• So I'm fine with the way it is, but if you asked me to change it, I would.
• So I'm fine with the way it is, but if you asked me to change it, I would.
• So I'm fine with the way it is, but if you asked me to change it, I would.
• So I'm fine with the way it is, but if you asked me to change it, I would.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think if we think in paragraph three of average teacher salaries, that's fine.
• . fine. fine.
• that's fine. that's fine.
• It'd be fine if you wanted that in a new section and definitions to say administrator shall mean the
• >> be<01:16:48.920> fine<01:16:49.240> if<01:16:49.360> you<01:16:49.480><

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The conference committee first discussed HB 1099, which creates a committee to study private business providing special education services and local school district reimbursement. Members explained that the issue is broader than special education alone, involving residential placements, foster care, court-ordered placements, and questions about which entity pays for education and care costs when students are placed in residential facilities. The House proposed an amendment to expand the study to include students placed in residential facilities by school districts as well as those placed through episodes of treatment or court order, and members agreed the existing commission would not resolve the issue before its July 1, 2026 expiration. Representative Coker raised concern about the phrase “but not limited to,” but members said the broader language was needed to capture placements beyond the existing statutory categories. The committee then agreed to accede to the Senate version of HB 1099 with a committee amendment, and the House voted unanimously to adopt amendment 2026-1845H. The bill was placed on the consent calendar, and the meeting adjourned. The transcript also includes a separate conference committee discussion on HB 1807, concerning mandatory reporting to voters. The main dispute was how to present administrator compensation: the House favored total administrative cost, while the Senate initially preferred average administrator salary. Members debated whether voters would be better informed by totals or averages, and whether the bill should define “administrator” more clearly by reference to DOE rules. The committee reached a tentative compromise to add both an average administrator salary graph and a total administrator cost graph, define administrators by reference to ED 501.02(B), scale the graph more precisely, and list the top 10 highest-paid administrators plus any employee earning over $100,000. Both chambers then gave unanimous support to the revised approach, with the understanding that the draft would be finalized and signed later.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's fine.
• Then when you move to 10 miles per hour and over, it mirrors the traffic fines.
• It mirrors the exact traffic fines that the judge has set in place for our regular fines.
• It mirrors the exact traffic fines that the judge has set in place for our regular fines.
• I think the fines and costs are a lot less.

Bills: HCR32, HB493, HB679, HB745, HB896, HB1000, HB1024, HB1050, HB1159, HB1172, HB1173, HB1207, HB1208, HB1218

Keywords: Saint Claude Avenue Bridge, Port of New Orleans, backup motors, infrastructure, traffic management, expropriation, property rights, Amite River Basin, drainage, East Feliciana Parish, St. Helena Parish, government authority, traumatic brain injury, identification card, law enforcement training, medical verification, disability rights, special permits, transportation, tandem loads

Summary: The House Transportation Committee met on April 21 and considered a series of transportation, licensing, tolling, and public safety measures. It reported favorably House Bill 745, extending special permits for tandem loads hauling containers to and from port facilities; House Bill 1000, a DOTD cleanup bill that clarifies Highway Priority Program reporting and raises the letter-bid contract threshold from $1 million to $3 million; and House Bill 1050, which clarifies commercial driver’s license rules, including age and intrastate/interstate driving limits. The committee also approved House Bill 1172 naming a portion of U.S. Highway 165 in Oberlin the Coulin Brooks Manuel Memorial Highway, House Bill 1218 naming a portion of Louisiana Highway 1090 the Lewis Pat Miramon Memorial Highway, House Concurrent Resolution 32 urging backup motors for the St. Claude Avenue Bridge, and House Bill 1207 on public contracting standards and competition in public bidding. A major portion of the meeting focused on House Bill 896, which responds to tolling issues at the Belle Chasse bridge project. The bill would require toll signage, local toll customer service centers, dispute procedures, and limits on administrative fees, with amendments addressing effective dates, in-person assistance, appeal deadlines, law-enforcement exemptions, and limits on certain charges. The author and witnesses described high administrative fees, long travel distances to customer service locations, and problems with toll bills, while committee members noted the issue was complex and ongoing. The committee reported the bill favorably as amended. The committee also heard House Bill 1159, allowing Jefferson Parish municipalities to use automated speed enforcement devices again under local control. Supporters from Gretna, Westwego, Harahan, and Kenner said photo enforcement reduced crashes, improved safety, and helped limited police resources, while opponents were not emphasized in the transcript. After discussion about whether the measure should be voluntarily or involuntarily deferred, the committee ultimately deferred the bill. House Bill 493, which would prohibit expropriation by the Amite River Basin Drainage and Water Conservation District in East Feliciana and St. Helena Parishes, drew extensive testimony about reservoir fears and local opposition; the committee voluntarily deferred it. House Bill 679, as substituted, created a driver’s license designation for people with brain injuries and required related law-enforcement training; witnesses described personal experiences with brain injury and the need for officers to recognize communication and behavioral effects, and the committee reported the substitute favorably. House Bill 1173, which waives late fees for certain reinstatement-relief payment plans for driver’s licenses, was also reported favorably, and House Bill 1024 creating a Louisiana Democratic Party prestige plate was approved as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• Restitution and fines.
• Once they get out of prison, they have to pay the fine.
• All right, if you've done the time and you paid the fine...
• You're doing fine. Thank you.
• I think you make a fine point: supervised versus unsupervised.

Bills: HB2244, HB2364, HB2573, HB2749, HB2862, HB2870, HB4117, HCR2004

Keywords: evictions, judgment satisfaction, tenant rights, landlord obligations, court procedures, abortion-inducing drugs, medical abortion, pharmaceutical regulation, felonies, state law, DUI, ignition interlock, substance abuse treatment, driving privileges, alcohol education, felony conviction, misdemeanor designation, court judgment, criminal justice reform, rehabilitation

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> I'm just curious, what does a surveyor, what do they get fined for?
• a year in fines and penalties.
• what type of what do they get fined for?
• >> Um<00:15:32.000> the<00:15:32.320> fines<00:15:32.800> vary<00:15:33.600
• averages about $20,000 a year in fines averages about $20,000 a year in fines and<00:15:40.240><

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These, anything in this resolution will not affect those fines for anything for this past quorum break
• Oh, sorry, it increases the fine.
• There's a fine currently in the House rules that's set at $500 a day.
• The fine goes to 3 times per diem. Right now, I think our per diem is set at $222 a day to $21.
• Beginning on page 1, line 24, fines as provided by this section, payment of costs, reprimand, censure

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> SENATOR FINE. >> Senator Fine: HERE. >> SENATOR GRUTERS. >> Senator Gruters: HERE. >> SENATOR INGOGLIA
• THE ROLL. >> SENATOR BERNARD. >> SENATOR BOYD. >> SENATOR BURGESS. >> SENATOR CALATAYUD. >> SENATOR FINE
• THE ROLL. >> SENATOR BERNARD. >> SENATOR BOYD. >> SENATOR BURGESS. >> SENATOR CALATAYUD. >> SENATOR FINE
• THE ROLL. >> SENATOR BERNARD. >> SENATOR BOYD. >> SENATOR BURGESS. >> SENATOR CALATAYUD. >> SENATOR FINE

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, that's fine.
• But I would be fine with an August 1st date. Linda? I heard...
• And I'm fine with either of those, but this isn't a First Amendment issue.
• I kind of think that that's fine. It's just not how we've looked at it before.
• I'd be fine with what we talked about with the primary date.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The meeting focused on ethics guidance for legislators’ official newsletters and social media posts about a major tax bill that has since become a ballot measure. Members and staff debated whether existing board guidance, which allowed comments on legislation previously before the legislature, should also apply to social media and to the current biennium rather than only the immediately preceding session. Several members argued that legislators should be able to state how they voted on the bill and discuss it as part of their legislative record, while others stressed that using state resources to advocate for or against a ballot measure is prohibited and that posts could become an indirect appeal to voters. The discussion also covered whether there should be a bright-line cutoff tied to the primary election date, after which official communications should stop discussing the bill if it is now a ballot measure. Staff and members raised concerns about tone, tenor, and proximity to the election, and whether official social media, caucus communications, and newsletters should be treated differently. One motion to extend the prior rule to the full biennium and apply it to social media failed. A second motion then passed establishing the primary date as a date certain for monitoring these discussions, with the understanding that official communications should be more limited after that point. Members noted that personal social media and campaign resources remain separate from official legislative resources. The meeting then moved toward adjournment of the public portion, with no public testimony offered, before a brief break and executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fines for domestic battery and assault are increased, with doubled fines for repeat offenders and a third
• notice to any political committees violating the filing requirements prior to assessing any civil fines
• Engrossed Committee Substitute for House Bill 4538, regarding fines and DOH work zones.
• This strike-and-insert amendment keeps current fines and penalties in place.
• What this does is ensure that these higher fines are applicable when workers are present.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• OK, that's fine. I'm Jamie Haynes with Texans Wake Up. I'm here to testify against HB 1589.
• That's fine. I just need you to stick to your script. That's fine, Mr. Chairman. I'll do that.
• And basically, for all the points that the fine lady just before me mentioned.
• It's an issue and, you know, the toll authorities send out these big fines.
• Fine mail and regular, what the cost difference is? I do not.

Bills: HB1589, HB2208, HB2297, HB2560, HB2725, HB3080, HB4417, HB4473, HB4520, HB4662, HB4888, HB4905, HB4906

Keywords: HB 1589, toll road, toll project, toll project entity, voter approval, local control, county election, commissioners court, Transportation Code, Chapter 372, road construction, highway funding, infrastructure, public referendum, ballot measure, transportation policy, Texas toll roads, regional mobility, toll collection, vehicle registration

Transcript Highlights:

• Fine. And it's the coming out.
• states that um raised only their fines states that um raised only their fines were<00:12:40.959>
• <00:23:49.280> And the fine from $250 to $500. And the fine from $250 to $500.
• And it has a significant fine.
• That's fine. Um, you're up. Um, sure. That's fine.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:24:03.280> That's<00:24:03.440> fine. You do it. Okay. Okay. That's fine.
• That's fine.
• No, that's fine. We're good. Yeah, we're fine. Any opposed? Oh, and you want us to skip?
• <02:20:10.080> But that's fine. We can discuss that. But that's fine.
• That's fine.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first revisited HB 781, the cell phone bill, after previously retaining it. On reconsideration, members moved to OTP the bill, and it passed unanimously. The committee then moved into the budget tracking packet and adopted an amendment to HB 2 to add the same cell phone policy language, also unanimously, and separately reduced HB 1 by $1 million to match the policy change. Members noted the cell phone language had already been stripped of grant funding language in the House version and that the policy and funding pieces were being aligned across the budget bills. The committee then took up a Department of Education technical amendment to HB 2 on charter school grants, which made timing and administrative changes without altering grant amounts, and adopted it unanimously. Members also discussed but held other education-related items, including adequacy grants, pending broader decisions on overall education funding. Another HB 2 item concerning E-911/state police radio communications prompted a longer discussion about whether E-911 surcharge funds were being used for purposes that should instead be general-funded. After debate over whether to leave the current practice in place or split the funding 50/50 between E-911 and general funds, the committee adopted a joint HB 1/HB 2 change to shift the funding source to a 50/50 split and delete the HB 2 language authorizing the prior use; the motion passed 7-0. The committee also discussed but did not act on several lottery-related provisions, including the video lottery terminal amendment, the increase in maximum ticket price from $30 to $50, and related tax split changes, with members planning to hear from the Lottery Commission on Monday. The meeting ended with the committee beginning review of new amendments in the tracking packet, including a Department of Education request related to Public School Infrastructure Commission grant administration, but no action was taken on that item in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, so the fines that we're talking about here are criminal fines, and so those would be assessed when
• > would<01:13:03.560> be uh criminal fines, and so those would be uh criminal fines, and
• If people know about the fines, then yes.
• ,<01:14:06.360> then If people know about the fines, then If people know about the fines,
• I'll put Yeah, that's fine. Thank you.

Bills: SB3253, SB2401, SB3169, SB17, SB3014, SB3032, SB1432, SB2002, SB2972, SB3247

Keywords: conservation, endangered species, wildlife preservation, native birds, biodiversity, sanctuary, nonprofit, DLNR, agricultural district, land use, chapter 195D, chapter 205, chapter 42F, state funding, public purpose, habitat restoration, predator-free sanctuary, ecosystem restoration, Zealandia, wildlife refuge

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard testimony on SB 5253 SD2 relating to conservation and SB 2401 relating to regional shoreline mitigation district, with the chair emphasizing short testimony limits and the need to finish before session. On SB 5253, DLNR said it stood on its written testimony and answered questions about the bill’s proposed nonprofit endangered species sanctuary. Members asked whether existing entities or agreements, such as land trusts, private landowners, and DLNR safe harbor agreements, could accomplish similar conservation goals without creating a new entity. DLNR said similar work already exists, but it was not aware of a comparable sanctuary model in the state. A member also questioned language suggesting for-profit businesses in the sanctuary, and DLNR said the intent appeared to be sales of outreach or similar materials, though it agreed that such activities could be handled by a nonprofit. The bulk of the hearing focused on SB 2401, which would create a regional shoreline adaptation/mitigation framework. The Department of the Attorney General said it had concerns about inconsistent use of the terms “mitigation” and “adaptation,” warning of possible title-subject issues. DLNR said it was neutral on the terminology and more concerned with the substance, and noted that the bill would not waive permits; any plan would still require environmental review and applicable state and county permits. DLNR also supported OHA’s recommendation to consider impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during regional planning, and said the bill’s language on temporary shoreline protection measures could help address the gap between emergency permits and longer-term planning while avoiding a hardening-only approach. The Office of Planning supported the regional planning concept but noted it is not a regulatory agency and would need to work with DLNR and the Land Board. OHA supported the bill’s planning-based approach but recommended amendments to require assessment of impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during plan development and to clarify that environmental review would still apply at the project level. Testifiers from the Ka‘anapali Steering Committee strongly supported the bill, saying it would provide a regional framework for ongoing erosion problems while preserving full regulatory authority and normal permitting, and they proposed amendments to standardize terminology, create a limited pathway for temporary shoreline protection, and address ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Members discussed the meaning of “mitigation” versus “adaptation,” the scope of shoreline hardening, and whether the bill would help the legislature take a broader, more holistic view of shoreline decisions. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.