Transcript Highlights:

• <00:35:47.320> once<00:35:47.600> we draft a bill, and then once we draft a bill, and then
• drafting a bill in October? drafting a bill in October?
• > >> I I'd like to draft a bill in the >> I I'd like to draft a bill in the >> the<
• <00:36:18.800> on authorize bill draft in October based on authorize bill draft in October based
• <03:00:19.880> bills just drafting bills just drafting bills willy-nilly.<03:00:22.600>

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These omnibus bills are large bills. End of session moves very, very quickly.
• /c><00:02:48.400> bill.
• These omnibus bills<00:02:51.200> are<00:02:52.000> large<00:02:52.480> bills.
• <00:02:53.280> End<00:02:53.519> of<00:02:53.680> session bills are large bills
• End of session bills are large bills.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Seclusion Working Group approved the prior meeting minutes and then spent most of the meeting discussing draft recommendations and a Senate amendment, 007-7, related to seclusion in schools. The chair explained the history of the issue, including Minnesota’s 2023 ban on seclusion from birth through grade 3, and described 007-7 as a compromise developed with stakeholders that would extend the ban through grade 6 unless strict conditions are met. Those conditions include explicit written informed consent from all parents or guardians in their primary language, oral translation of safeguards, showing the seclusion room before consent, mandatory follow-up IEP meetings after repeated use, outreach and education for families, and data reporting on use of seclusion. The chair also said the amendment would prevent judges or other officials from ordering seclusion over a parent’s objection. Members then reviewed the draft recommendations line by line. They agreed to revise language to add “and fund” after “mandate” in the first section, and discussed changing references from “level three and level four” to “level three and higher,” though several members ultimately preferred keeping the focus on school settings and not expanding into medical or correctional settings. They also discussed replacing the word “subjected” with more neutral language such as “experience” or “whose IEP includes seclusion.” Another issue was whether the recommendations should distinguish between students whose IEP already includes seclusion and students who experience seclusion in an emergency but do not have it in their IEP; members suggested splitting that into separate recommendations and possibly adding a new item for the latter situation. A final discussion focused on whether the working group should recommend a mandated alternative-to-seclusion program and whether such a mandate should be tied to funding. School district representatives said many districts already use programs such as CPI, but others, especially outstate districts, charter schools, hospitals, and residential settings, may face significant costs if required to adopt new programs like Ukeru. Members generally agreed that if the legislature is asked to require implementation of new alternatives, funding should accompany the mandate. The chair also noted that existing law already requires an IEP team meeting after restrictive procedures are used twice in 30 days, and encouraged members to compare that with the 007-7 language before finalizing recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• bill HB1643. bill HB1643.
• So I just wanted to flag that for the committee: we believe that, as currently drafted, this bill may
• as currently drafted that this bill may as currently drafted that this bill may be<01:33:42.639>
• Uh, next bill, House Bill >> Thank you.
• Bill 2187. Bill 2187.

Bills: SB2275, SB2390, SB2540, SB3142, SB2414, SB2340, SB2848

Keywords: Medicaid, disability, buy-in program, workers with disabilities, income eligibility, premium structure, biomarker testing, health insurance, medical coverage, state law, health maintenance organization, juvenile justice, youth penalties, minors, court fees, court costs, fines, surcharges, restitution, fee waiver

Summary: The House Committee on Health heard testimony on a series of bills related to public health, pharmacy regulation, disability access, and health care infrastructure. HB 1535, creating an income tax credit for automated external defibrillator installations, drew support from the Department of Health, tax department comments, and public testimony emphasizing AED access in community and transit settings. HB 1765, requiring safety warnings for spear fishing gear, received comments from DLNR and strong support from a free-diving safety advocate who described blackout risks and argued for point-of-sale warnings. HB 1549, which would repeal the law prohibiting drug paraphernalia, drew mixed testimony: the Department of Health, the Public Defender, and harm-reduction advocates supported repeal as a public health measure, while HPD and a county prosecutor opposed it, warning it could encourage drug use and create public safety issues. The committee also heard HB 1550, which would exclude drug testing products from the definition of drug paraphernalia. The Department of Health and harm-reduction advocates supported the bill, saying drug checking tools save lives and help prevent overdoses, while one written opponent was noted. HB 1995, allowing people who are blind or deaf to receive disabled parking permits, drew opposition from the State Council on Developmental Disabilities, the Disability and Communication Access Board, and other opponents, while a few written supporters were also noted. HB 1671, allowing licensed dental hygienists to place interim therapeutic restorations in public health settings, received support from the Department of Health and several oral health organizations, with the Board of Dentistry offering comments. HB 1643, establishing a framework for pharmacy audits and record retrieval, prompted the most extended discussion. The Board of Pharmacy and independent pharmacy representatives supported the bill as a needed framework to limit burdensome audits and protect patient care, while HMSA raised concerns about possible conflicts with upcoming federal PBM reforms and potential unintended consequences. Committee members questioned both sides about timing and workload, and supporters argued the bill was needed now to protect rural and independent pharmacies. Finally, HB 1978, appropriating funds for a new outpatient care center in North Kona, received strong support from Hawaii Health Systems Corporation, Queen’s Health Systems, the Kona-Kohala Chamber, and others, who described it as a long-term investment in West Hawaii’s health care capacity and economy. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The current draft of the bill, or the latest draft, is a full repeal of school impact fees.
• The current draft of the on this bill.
• The current draft of the bill,<00:02:07.640> or<00:02:07.720> the<00:02:07.800> latest
• bill, or the latest draft, is a full bill, or the latest draft, is a full repeal<00:02:09.560>
• The current draft of the<00:05:06.800> bill<00:05:07.000> limits<00:05:07.720> county

Bills: HB2241, HB1163, HB1514, HB1696, HB2021, SB2135, SB2466, SB2727, SB3082, SB3097, SB2861, SCR100, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, SCR162, SB2614, SB3118, SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: renewable energy, income tax credit, solar energy, wind energy, low-income households, energy policy, commercial drivers license, non-domiciled, federal regulations, commercial learner's permit, citizenship, lawful residency, Department of Transportation, workers' compensation, vocational rehabilitation, injury recovery, employment services, return to work, commercial driving, driver's license

Transcript Highlights:

• cons you know, proposed bill draft. cons you know, proposed bill draft.
• I'm fine with the bill draft going forward.
• I'm fine with the bill draft going forward.
• <01:47:01.160> to forward bill draft to go forward to forward bill draft to go forward to
• bill draft signify saying I. bill draft signify saying I.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As you can see, the draft that you can see, the draft that you... ...will be a very strong final report
• It will remain so in the final draft.
• I appreciate the first draft that came through.
• You did a very nice job on the first draft. Perhaps... ...very nice job on the first draft.
• I did not draft anything.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism met to hear testimony from Chief James Hicks of the Natick Police Department, who chairs the Municipal Police Training Committee, and Chief Thomas Fowler of the Salisbury Police Department. They described the statewide civil-rights-officer model for hate-crime response, the HEART Unit, and MPTC training authority under POST, and urged the commission to recommend incorporating the IHRA definition of antisemitism into police training and to fund that effort. Commissioners asked about how law enforcement should handle antisemitic incidents that may not rise to crimes, the 2022 Mapping Project, masking during protests, and the role of HART; the chiefs said departments can update training quickly, that every department should have a trained civil-rights officer, and that HART’s expertise should be integrated statewide. The commission also approved the October 16, 2025 minutes after correcting an initial procedural error. The rest of the meeting focused on the draft report, especially the prefatory statement and the definition section. Commissioners broadly praised the report’s scope and the chairs’ work, but offered many edits aimed at tightening language, reducing advocacy tone, and clarifying the “Massachusetts way” of combating antisemitism. Several members wanted stronger emphasis on Massachusetts values, education, moral leadership, and the distinction between hate incidents, hate crimes, and statutory offenses; others urged clearer references to constitutional protections, First Amendment limits, and Attorney General review of legal statements. There was also discussion of whether to keep or remove references to alternative definitions of antisemitism: some commissioners argued that only the IHRA definition should be centered, while others said acknowledging other definitions was factually important and would reflect the range of testimony. Commissioners also raised specific substantive edits for later sections, including adding examples such as the 2022 Mapping Project, strengthening language on online intimidation, academic boycotts, and divestment campaigns, and clarifying that some conduct may be hateful even if lawful. In the higher education section, members praised recommendations on mandatory training, bystander intervention, trauma-informed responses, mental health supports, and campus climate surveys, while suggesting a few technical edits and additional best-practice examples. No final votes were taken on the draft report during this portion; the chairs said they would incorporate feedback into a revised draft before the remaining meetings and eventual vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• . bill. bill.
• recommendation on 1618 is a Senate Draft recommendation on 1618 is a Senate Draft 1.<00:16:24.320
• So, next item is House Bill 1888.
• For House Bill 1850... House Bill 1550... Excuse me.
• Next item, House Bill 1718. House Bill 1718. Recommendation is to pass unamended. Any discussion?

Bills: HB1618

Keywords: cesspool conversion, cesspool replacement, wastewater, sewer connection, sewerage systems, septic system, pollution control, water pollution control revolving fund, Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, HGIA, low-interest loans, forgivable loans, homeowner financing, environmental infrastructure, public health, wastewater treatment, low- and moderate-income households, revolving loan fund, Department of Health, memorandum of agreement

Summary: The committees held a joint hearing on HB 1618 HD1, which would create and fund a cesspool conversion revolving loan fund administered by the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority to help homeowners upgrade, convert, or connect cesspools. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support from state agencies and advocacy groups, with witnesses emphasizing that cost is the main barrier to cesspool conversion and that recent Kona flooding underscored the public health and pollution risks of cesspools. One testifier suggested the fund should actively pursue outside funding sources, and another urged an effective date that would allow counties to contribute sooner. A member raised concerns about whether loans would be affordable and whether other financing tools, such as tax credits, should also be considered; another member opposed the bill as not adequately addressing district-level sewer and septic issues. The committees ultimately recommended passage with amendments, including changing the effective date to July 1, 2050, and the motion was adopted. The joint Judiciary and Ways and Means committees then considered HB 2592 on the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority. The chair outlined amendments to clarify that the authority would assume property and liability associated with transferred assets, preserve existing liability rules, transfer conditional use permits if not already transferred, allow lease extensions before transfer, and set reversion triggers if the authority fails to adopt a management plan by June 30, 2028, or administrative rules by December 31, 2029. Members asked about preserving the public trust and whether the amendments would keep the Board of Land and Natural Resources’ role intact; the chair confirmed the fee and board role would remain unchanged. The committees voted to pass the bill with amendments, and the recommendation was adopted. The committees also took up HB 2033, making further amendments to clarify the definition of state, delay certain effective dates, allow rental and U-Drive lessors to avoid liability by identifying renters, delete one section, and add administrative hearing language and bus-camera clarifications. HB 1888 was amended to expand protections for educational workers to include sports officials, define sports official, make intentional bodily harm a felony with enhanced penalties for repeat offenses, and authorize the attorney general to assist with restraining orders. Both measures were recommended for passage with amendments and adopted. Later, several bills were moved with little or no discussion: HB 1515, HB 1713, HB 1718, HB 2022, and HB 2385 were recommended for passage unamended; HB 2375 was deferred; and HB 1741 was amended to reflect Honolulu’s concerns, narrow study requirements, add exemptions and a delayed implementation date, and was recommended for passage with amendments. The committees adopted the recommendations on these measures, with some members noting reservations or prior opposition on certain bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1888, House Draft 3.
• House Bill 1780, House Draft 1.
• House Bill 1780, House Draft 1.
• House Bill 1780, House Draft 1.
• House Bill 1780, House Draft 1.

Bills: HB1890, HB1888, HB1676

Keywords: teacher pay, teacher salaries, salary step increase, annual increment, longevity step, public school teachers, public charter school teachers, collective bargaining, Hawaii Department of Education, teacher retention, teacher recruitment, cost of living, educator compensation, public employee bargaining, appropriation, salary schedule, school staffing, teacher shortage, HB1888, Hawaii

Summary: The committees heard three measures, beginning with HB 1890 HD3, which would provide automatic step increases and a COVID-era retention bonus for teachers. Supporters included HSTA, the Democratic Party’s Education Caucus, and a student who said higher pay and predictable salary growth would help retain teachers in Hawaii. The Department of Education supported the intent but asked that the bill be expanded to cover all department employees. The Attorney General’s office said the draft needed clarification to avoid conflict with Chapter 89 and to make clear any funding was subject to legislative appropriation. The Office of the Public Defender and B&F testified in opposition, and committee members questioned whether the step increases were already in the current contract and whether the bill was needed. HSTA said the current contract includes automatic step increases subject to funding, but argued the bill was still needed because funding is not guaranteed and the measure would codify the policy. HSTA also said the COVID bonus would apply only to active teachers who worked during the pandemic and estimated the total cost at roughly $150 million to $200 million over four years. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up HB 1888 HD3, which would require DOE and charter schools to report harassment incidents and strengthen penalties for harassment of educational workers from a petty misdemeanor to a misdemeanor. DOE supported the bill and suggested narrowing language about assisting workers with temporary restraining orders, saying that function would be better handled through the Attorney General’s pilot program. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the bill, arguing the harassment language was overly broad, vague, and potentially unconstitutional, and that existing assault and terroristic threatening statutes already protect educational workers. HSTA, the State Commission on the Status of Women, and several individual testifiers supported the measure, describing increased intimidation and harassment of teachers and other school staff, especially since COVID. The Special Education Advisory Council opposed the bill’s language on “disrupting and interfering” with school functions, saying it could chill parents of students with IEPs from advocating for their children. Testimony was split, with the chair noting 20 in support and 16 in opposition in the portion shown. A final witness, Michelle Pestana, testified in opposition based on her family’s experience with special education services, describing alleged seclusion and restraint of her daughter and expressing concern that DOE testimony in prior hearings had targeted special education parents. Her remarks were cut off as time expired. The transcript ends before any committee action or vote on HB 1888 was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Question comes on passing these two bills to be enacted.
• Question comes on passing these two bills to be enacted. All those in favor say aye.
• The ayes have it, and the bills are passed to be enacted.
• products, Senate No. 2546, be reported by the Committee on Ways and Means with the recommended new draft
• With the Ways and Means new draft pending, the Senate will be in a very brief recess.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and then took up two local bills for final passage: House No. 2320, establishing an appointed treasurer-collector in Berkeley, and House No. 4136, further regulating stabilization funds in Leicester. Both bills were approved to be enacted and sent to the Governor after being signed by the President. The Senate also adopted a resolution offered by Senator Gomez commending the Taino people in recognition of October 13, 2025, as Indigenous Peoples Day. In addition, the chamber suspended Joint Rule 12 to refer a House petition by Paul McMurtry concerning off-premises retail alcohol licenses near other such licenses to the Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure. Several Senate orders from Senator Rodrigues were then adopted, advancing bills related to disposable menstrual products, menstrual product ingredient disclosure, the move over law, and use restrictions for the Foxborough State Hospital. Each order required suspension of Senate rules and placed the measures on the Orders of the Day for later consideration with Ways and Means new drafts pending where applicable. Before adjournment, the Senate adopted an order setting the next meeting for Tuesday at 11:00 a.m. and dispensing with the printing of a calendar. The Senate then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• of this bill, House Bill 1749. of this bill, House Bill 1749.
• On House Bill 1749, House Draft 2, of the four members in attendance, anybody voting with reservations
• On House Bill 1921, House Draft 2, of the four members in attendance and by voting with reservations,
• Um we've written in<00:43:31.320> the<00:43:31.400> bill in the bill in the bill um<00:
• amendment to the bill. amendment to the bill.

Bills: HB1730, HB1985, HB1749, HB1921

Keywords: cesspool, wastewater systems, public health, environmental protection, affordable upgrades, coral reefs, water quality, Hawaii legislation, cesspools, wastewater, environment, pollution, Hawaii, sustainable development, sewerage system, real estate, disclosure, environmental impact, wastewater management, housing

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several cesspool-related measures. HB 1730 HD2 would create a cesspool conversion implementation working group to help the Department of Health review rules and practices and develop changes to make conversions more affordable. DOH and DLNR stood on written testimony, while environmental and wastewater advocates strongly supported the bill, emphasizing the need for dedicated staffing, technical expertise, and smaller, more focused advisory groups. Members discussed the high cost of upgrades and the need for new technologies that reduce excavation and leach field costs. The bill was passed with amendments, including clarifying the DOH director’s discretion over the size of the working group, and the committee noted DOH’s appropriation request for consideration. HB 1985 HD1 would extend certain cesspool conversion deadlines and authorize funding for consultants, while also advancing outreach and education. Testimony split sharply: advocates supported the education component but opposed deadline extensions as premature, arguing the state still has many years before the 2050 mandate and should not weaken the conversion timeline. The committee agreed to amend the bill to delete the deadline-extension portion, keep technical changes, and note DOH’s position request. HB 1749 HD2 would require sellers to disclose cesspools to buyers before a real estate purchase contract is executed and direct DOH and the Real Estate Commission to create a standardized form. Realtors supported the intent but asked to avoid duplicative statutory form requirements, and advocates stressed that disclosure should be prominent and not buried in paperwork. The committee adopted amendments removing the standardized-form mandate and passed the bill. HB 1921 HD2 would allow certain existing cesspools in priority level three areas to continue serving dwellings with additional bedrooms under conditions. DOH brought the measure, and supporters from the real estate and environmental sectors discussed innovative wastewater technologies, retrofits, and composting toilets as ways to reduce costs while improving treatment. The committee amended the bill to require DOH director-approved wastewater technology using solid waste separation for bedroom-count increases and to clarify priority-level determinations using block-level data from the Hawaii cesspool prioritization tool, then passed it. The committee also heard HB 2310, an emergency appropriation for the Department of Human Services to restore funding used to keep SNAP benefits flowing during the federal shutdown; DHS, public health, children’s advocates, and others supported it, and members questioned why it was not handled through the budget. The discussion clarified that the bill sought new money to move quickly for ACA-related premium support. No final vote on HB 2310 was shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• A bill draft on the family court is what I was thinking. Others might be thinking something else.
• We have Beth have some bill drafts prepared? Any comments on that? You all in agreement? Okay. Mr.
• That could go in the same bill draft, or it could be done separately.
• I just have two more questions on the bill drafts.
• I just have two more questions on the bill drafts. Okay.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and reviewed a memorandum compiling member suggestions for possible legislation. The memo grouped ideas into topics including creation of a family court, expanded education for parents, attorneys, and judges, expedited hearings for parenting-time violations, limiting law enforcement involvement in custody disputes, creating parenting time expediters, and adopting more uniform court procedures. Members also discussed whether to form subcommittees, but the task force decided to continue working as a full committee rather than create subcommittees at this time. The committee then heard testimony from Dr. John Perez, a mental health professional, who described his personal custody experience and his professional work with families he believes have been affected by parental alienation. He argued for stronger education, faster court response times, and better tools to address intentional interference with parenting time. Members questioned him about his case history, the concept of parental alienation, and whether specialized family courts or judges with family-law training could help. Dr. Perez said a dedicated family court and faster hearings would likely have helped his situation. The task force spent substantial time discussing the possible creation of a family court. Judge Hovey supported the idea of a specialized family court or at least a study of one, saying family cases are distinct from ordinary adversarial litigation and that judges with family-law experience could better handle them. Several members agreed that a family court could improve consistency, expertise, and speed, but others cautioned that the task force’s current directive is focused on enforcement of existing orders rather than broader custody policy, and noted that voters had previously rejected equal shared parenting proposals. The group also discussed expedited procedures for parenting-time disputes, with Judge Hovey suggesting a 30-day hearing timeline may be workable. On education, members generally supported requiring parents to complete a parenting education course and adding educational materials explaining court process, child support, and what judges can and cannot do. Mr. McLean suggested a short instructional video for litigants and more family-law education for judges and attorneys, while Ms. Moldenhauer said education could be incorporated into scheduling orders or mediation orders. Members also discussed the Parents Forever course, including whether it should be mandatory in all counties and whether cost is a barrier; no vote was taken on any of these proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, the chair's recommendation is to pass House Bill 800, House Draft 1, with amendments, of the four
• one<01:42:02.119> with House Bill 800 house draft one with House Bill 800 house draft one
• The recommendation is to pass House Bill 1141, House Draft 1, with amendments, of the four members present
• 1 to pass House Bill 1141 house draft 1 to pass House Bill 1141 house draft 1 with<01:43:35.880>
• Bill 1316 house<01:45:12.440> draft<01:45:12.760> two<01:45:13.080> of<01:45:13.199

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several water, land, and conservation measures. HB 86, which would fund a permanent DLNR Makai Watch coordinator position, drew strong support from DLNR and community advocates. Testifiers said the coordinator is needed to connect community-based nearshore monitoring groups with government, support training and reporting, and provide stable civil-service funding instead of relying on grants and philanthropy. The committee discussed the position’s duties and cost, estimated at about $110,000 with fringe benefits, and noted broad support from organizations including Kuaʻulu, The Nature Conservancy, OHA, and others. HB 36, relating to state water code penalties, was also supported in principle by DLNR, but the agency proposed amendments to create two tiers of violations, distinguish first-time/non-harmful violations from repeat or harmful ones, and give the commission discretion on whether each day counts as a continuing violation. DLNR said the bill is intended to address egregious cases such as Red Hill while avoiding undue impact on small farmers and others without malicious intent. Testifiers from the Board of Water Supply, Lono Initiative, and others supported stronger penalties and transparency, while Earthjustice raised concerns about broader structural issues and the risk of penalties being applied unfairly. The committee then heard HB 316, which appropriates funds to continue the Green Jobs Youth Corps program. DLNR, the Hawaiʻi State Energy Office, Kōkua, The Nature Conservancy, and other groups testified in support, describing the program as a workforce pipeline that places young professionals in communities, builds trust, and helps recruit future state employees. Supporters said the program has expanded capacity in watershed and reef management and has drawn extensive public backing. Finally, HB 506, funding equipment for the Oʻahu branch of DOCARE, received support from DLNR and others. DOCARE said recent recruit classes are moving through training, that the new positions will expand patrol capacity, including nighttime enforcement, and that the Oʻahu-specific funding is tied to priorities such as the Māʻili Bay herbivore rules. The committee also began hearing HB 510 on water shortage and emergency declarations. DLNR proposed limiting shortage declarations to 90 days unless extended, capping groundwater reductions at 20% for lower-priority permits, removing climate-crisis language as a standalone criterion, and moving the process into rulemaking for more public input. The Board of Water Supply supported the bill and the proposed changes, while Earthjustice urged deferral absent broader Water Commission reforms. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided; the chair indicated the committee would be decision-making after the hearing on items on the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• I rise in strong support of House Bill 194, House Draft 1, which seeks to designate May 22nd of each
• one sc141 House Bill 664 house draft one sc141 House Bill 664 house draft one reps<05:44:03.400><
• ><05:44:44.638> reps 1154 House Bill 649 house draft 1 reps 1154 House Bill 649 house draft 1
• 1<05:44:59.558> reps 1159 House Bill 229 house draft 1 reps 1159 House Bill 229 house draft
• 2 43 SC 1166 House Bill 476 house draft 2 43 SC 1166 House Bill 476 house draft 2 reps<05:45:38.280

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll have work sessions in here on bills and, of course, on House Bill 1 and 2, like the budget.
• You may want to draft an amendment for one of the bills that's in our committee.
• Bill 1 and House Bill 2.
• Bill 1 and House Bill 2.
• Bill 1 and House Bill 2.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting was an introductory House Finance Division Two session focused on committee procedures, staffing, and the upcoming budget process. Mickey Landrian, the division analyst, introduced himself and explained that the subcommittee operates more informally than the full committee, does not hold executive sessions or public hearings itself, and makes recommendations back to House Finance. Members were told that public hearings on legislation occur in the full committee, while Division Two will hold work sessions and vote on recommendations such as ought to pass, retain, or ITL. The chair also welcomed new members and a new clerk, and noted that meetings will be recorded and streamed, with microphones required for audio capture. A substantial portion of the meeting covered the division’s workload and schedule. Landrian outlined the agencies assigned to Division Two, including Safety, Fish and Game, Transportation, Education, the Lottery Commission, Police Standards and Training, the University System, and the Community College System. He explained the different fund types the division will handle, especially Education Trust Fund, Highway Fund, and Fish and Game Fund, and reviewed reference materials distributed to members, including agency budget requests, prior recommendation tracking sheets, and surplus statements. He emphasized that the agency budget requests and related handouts are available online and useful for members to review before budget work begins. Members discussed the compressed timeline for the session, with a target date of March 26 for completing Division Two recommendations. Landrian said only a few bills had been referred to Finance so far, none yet to Division Two, but that more bills and amendments were expected, including many amendments to House Bill 2. He noted that the committee would need to move efficiently and frontload meetings. Representative Papich added that Fish and Game may require closer scrutiny than in prior years because of its push for direct general fund appropriations, and members also discussed the importance of getting preliminary budget documents before the governor’s budget is finalized. No votes were taken and no formal actions were reported beyond the procedural overview and distribution of materials.

Transcript Highlights:

• history of how many times has this bill history of how many times has this bill or<00:08:34.200>
• <00:47:12.280> and the college they got the GI Bill and the college they got the GI Bill and
• I've emailed Bill and Jamie many times, and this is Bill, yes, Bill GD.
• housekeeping and dietary unlike Bill housekeeping and dietary unlike Bill goodro<02:23:32.080>
• That's why I support this bill. bill from Bridgewater New hampsh welcome bill from Bridgewater New hampsh

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, I'm sorry, I'm on the wrong bill. Oh my gosh. Wrong bill. Chair votes I. Co-Chair Miyake, I.
• /c><00:04:25.360> pathway bill modifies the alternative pathway bill modifies the alternative
• Oh my I'm sorry, I'm on the wrong bill. Oh my gosh. Wrong<00:05:36.760> bill. Wrong bill.
• Our next bill is Senate Bill 2338, relating to housing.
• Our next bill is Senate Bill 2338, relating to housing.

Bills: SB2876, SB3253, SB2125, SB2781, HB549, HB1768, SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB1515, SB2835, HB2282, SB3083, SB2031, SB2519, SB2667, SB2140, SB2544, SB2069, SB2697, SB874, SB2043, SB888, SB2721, HB2152, HB1334, HB2385, HB1643, HB2314, HB1688, HB1692, SB2568, SB2983, SB2108, SB3136, HB1959, SB3156, HB1511, HB1753, HB1824, HB2137, HB1810, HB2279, HB2309, HB1548, HB2078, HB2293, SB3262, SB2169, SB2607, SB2964, SB3255, HB2576, HB1481, HB1864, HB1550, SB2818, SB3067, SB2061, HB1728, HB1881, HB2361, HB2395, HB1823, SB2050, SB2397, SB2175, SB2852, SB847, SB3001

Keywords: natural hair braiding, hair braiding, braids, braider, braiding license, cosmetology, barbering, barber board, Board of Barbering and Cosmetology, registration, licensure exemption, sanitation training, health and safety, hair extensions, cornrows, twists, locks, protective hairstyles, beauty industry, occupational licensing

Transcript Highlights:

• The first bill we're going to open the hearing on is House Bill 6.
• the public body and just say, no, it's a draft, we don't publish drafts.
• the public body and just say, no, it's a draft, we don't publish drafts.
• the public body and just say, no, it's a draft, we don't publish drafts.
• I have an amendment drafted that will fix that appropriation section six of the bill.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee opened its hearing with a procedural discussion about a forthcoming Monday hearing, and the chair confirmed that any amendment deemed non-germane would be made public in advance and included in the calendar. The committee then took up House Bill 6, which would replace the word “citizen” in the Right-to-Know law with “any person,” allow requesters to specify the format of records, and expressly reference preliminary drafts circulated to a quorum or majority of a public body as disclosable material. The sponsor said the bill was intended to clarify existing law, remove uncertainty after a Rochester-related dispute over requester eligibility, and make records easier to obtain electronically unless doing so would be impossible, unusual, unduly burdensome, or harmful to recordkeeping integrity. Testimony was mixed. Cordell Johnston, speaking for himself as a municipal attorney, opposed most of the bill, especially the requirement that records be delivered electronically or by mail, arguing that out-of-state or out-of-country requests can be fishing expeditions that impose significant burdens on towns and clerks. He said local residents already can obtain records at town hall and that many municipalities voluntarily email records as a courtesy, but should not be required to mail large volumes of material. He also said the preliminary-draft language was unnecessary because such drafts are already covered when circulated to a quorum or majority. Representative Alexander raised concerns about the breadth of “any person,” potential abuse by bad actors, and the cost to municipalities, while Representative Peternell asked about whether the bill should account for nonresident property owners and business owners. The sponsor responded that limiting requesters by residency would not meaningfully stop abuse and said he did not know the bill’s fiscal impact, though he suggested it might improve efficiency. Yil Biset of the ACLU of New Hampshire testified in support of HB 6, calling it a modest and reasonable transparency measure. He said the preliminary-draft language was acceptable and consistent with existing exemption language in the public-meeting and documents statutes, and he said he was not aware of foreign-bot document requests occurring in New Hampshire. He also noted that current law already requires electronic disclosure when records exist electronically and can reasonably be provided that way. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a lot faster to draft an amendment than it is to get a bill drafted in this current environment,
• It's a lot faster to draft an amendment than it is to get a bill drafted in this current environment,
• It's a lot faster to draft an amendment than it is to get a bill drafted in this current environment,
• It's a lot faster to draft an amendment than it is to get a bill drafted in this current environment,
• It's a lot faster to draft an amendment than it is to get a bill drafted in this current environment,

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 3472, there is a PCS that we will adopt as a working draft without objection.
• Adopt that into the bill. So now you are recognized to present your amended bill. Thank you, Mr.
• There was an oversight in that original drafting, and this bill is correcting that to clearly state.
• and after discussing bills with this bill with concerned members, OML, and judges.
• House Bill.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll adopt that as a working draft. You're recognized to explain the bill. Thank you, Mr.
• Senate Bill 1930. Proend, more. You're recognized to explain the bill.
• So, Senate Bill 1613 is basically a mirror bill of House Bill 3142.
• It's a recommendation as a work draft. You recognize, explain the bill.
• The last bill on the agenda today is Senate Bill 1314.

Bills: SB3, SB1346, SB1509, SB1928, SB2028, SB2071, SB2110, SB2117, SB2127, SB2134, SB259, SB1191, SB1246, SB1314, SB1439, SB1613, SB1930, SB1976, SB330, SB2069, SB2095, SB3, SB1346, SB1509, SB1928, SB2028, SB2071, SB2110, SB2117, SB2127, SB2134, SB259, SB1191, SB1246, SB1314, SB1439, SB1613, SB1930, SB1976, SB330, SB2069, SB2095

Keywords: industrial hemp, program licensing, agriculture, cannabinoids, state regulation, water infrastructure, wastewater, investment program, loans, local government, SB1509, groundwater, water wells, well spacing, water rights, Oklahoma Water Resources Board, OWRB, basin, subbasin, maximum annual yield