Transcript Highlights:

• Chair Zelinsky and members of the committee, my name is Adam Jeneac, and I'm a negotiation specialist
• ><c> increase</c><01:48:03.000><c> in</c><01:48:03.080><c> what</c> negotiated for a modest increase
• </c><01:51:10.320><c> total</c> and unions to negotiate total and unions to negotiate total compensation
• And uh by you their negotiating power.
• </c> that they would lose their negotiating that they would lose their negotiating party<02:07:16.480

Bills: HF3714 , HF4399 , HF4176 , HF2544 , HF60 , HF4231 , HF4232

Committee: Senate Education Policy

Keywords: foster care, child welfare, enrollment priority, education programs, child care assistance, education, school board, elections, local governance, school district, site-governed schools, education reform, local control, autonomy, interchange, bond issuance, transportation, infrastructure funding, Sherburne County, student eligibility

Transcript Highlights:

• We strongly believe this is a negotiable matter.
• We strongly believe this is a negotiable matter.
• </c> to that negotiable. to that negotiable.
• </c> negotiator JN Mosto. negotiator JN Mosto. &gt;&gt; Thank<00:37:44.560><c> you.
• Um, so I'll be frank: it's a one-sided negotiation.

Committee: Senate Labor and Technology

Summary: The committee first heard SB 2122, which would tie public service flexible spending account contribution and carryover limits to the annual IRS cafeteria plan caps. DEER supported the bill and said it would help the state keep pace with federal limits, though it suggested deleting the words “inflation/adjusted” and “for that calendar year” as unnecessary. HGA and UPW strongly supported the measure, saying state limits lag the IRS amounts and that higher caps would help employees offset rising health care costs. In response to questions, DEER said the plan has a fund balance of about $1.6 million but noted some risk if employees leave before contributing enough to cover reimbursements. The unions agreed to DEER’s suggested wording change so long as the bill still clearly required future increases to track the IRS limits. The committee then took up SB 2116, which would create a confidential process in the Attorney General’s office for anonymous complaints against public employees, with complaints forwarded to the appropriate agency and annual reporting required. DLIR and the Attorney General opposed the bill. The AG’s office said anonymous complaints cannot truly be guaranteed to remain anonymous, that existing laws already provide confidential complaint processes in specific areas, and that the AG would effectively be only a repository without meaningful authority over how complaints are handled. HGA and UPW supported the bill, saying it would begin a conversation about protecting complainants while discouraging frivolous complaints. In questions, senators raised concerns about how anonymous complaints would be investigated and whether the AG could serve as an appeal body; the AG said the proposal would likely require broader changes to existing complaint laws. The committee also heard SB 218, which would amend the amount a disbursing officer may deduct from an employee’s wages to repay indebtedness to the state. HGA and UPW supported the bill, saying it would create a more lenient repayment process for employees who were overpaid and should not have to repay large amounts in a single pay period. UPW said the bill would eliminate a provision allowing recovery of debts of $1,000 or less in one pay period, which it described as problematic for members. The Libertarian Party of Hawaii was listed in opposition, and additional comments were submitted by the state controller and the University of Hawaii Professional Assembly. Finally, the committee heard SB 2114, which would repeal the prohibition on certain exempt employees grieving suspensions or discharges and allow bargaining-unit members to grieve disciplinary actions. DHRD and the City and County of Honolulu opposed the bill, arguing exempt employees are at-will employees who serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority and already have other legal remedies for discrimination or harassment; they also said the issue is a negotiable matter under collective bargaining agreements. HGA and UPW supported the bill, saying exempt positions have increased in number and that just-cause protections would improve recruitment and retention. Senators questioned how unions would represent exempt employees and whether the bill would change the at-will nature of those positions; no vote or final action was taken on the measures in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've negotiated some drafts of written.
• So I'm hoping that we are in the negotiating range and we have a negotiating window to resolve this,
• </c><02:16:18.560><c> settlement</c> vehicle to get a negotiated settlement vehicle to get a negotiated
• So, I hope you're in the negotiating range.
• </c> So, I hope you're in the negotiating So, I hope you're in the negotiating range.<02:28:35.280><c

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 291, which would update religious land-use and property tax exemption rules for church-owned parsonages, parish houses, and similar properties. Senator Tim Lang, speaking for the sponsor, said the bill was intended to address situations where former parsonages are no longer occupied by clergy and are instead used for church-related purposes such as housing staff, religious education, or congregate living tied to ministry, including addiction recovery. He emphasized that the bill was not meant to create commercial rental housing and that it also preserves reasonable zoning and environmental regulations. Committee members pressed the sponsor on how the bill would be applied, especially the meaning of “religious purposes,” the six-unit limit, the “same lot” language, and whether churches could use the exemption to rent units for revenue. The sponsor said the six-unit cap was added to prevent large-scale commercial rental use, that congregate housing would be limited and defined, and that the bill was meant to cover uses like substance abuse recovery, homes for unwed mothers, and religious education, but not apartments converted for ordinary rental. He also said churches would still file annual exemption paperwork and towns could challenge claims they believed were commercial. Questions also raised concerns about whether the bill treated religious and nonreligious housing trusts differently; the sponsor responded that the bill was aimed at church-owned property used in pursuit of a religious mission. Several witnesses testified in support. Representative Mark Pearson, an active clergyman, said the bill would not remove additional property from the tax rolls because clergy housing allowances typically lead clergy to buy taxable homes elsewhere, while the church-owned parsonage remains exempt. Nick Taylor of Housing Action New Hampshire supported the bill as a modest expansion that could help create more attainable housing by allowing better use of existing religious land and structures, though he noted his organization would support even broader use. The hearing ended without a vote or final action, and the chair closed questions after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• To be clear, the idea behind this bill is that there is a negotiated price between the manufacturer and
• What it's meant to do is to mirror, under the IRA, what allowed Medicare to directly negotiate with the
• So if I can follow up, so you see the So if I can follow up, so you see this as a negotiation process
• So I want to be clear that the negotiated prices between the federal government and Medicare, that is
• And so we would not know how that negotiation process would affect the negotiation process for our supplemental

Bills: AB6 , AB102 , AB131 , AB212 , AB213 , AB220 , AB259 , AB282 , AB376 , AB396 , AB479 , AB503 , AB570 , AB572 , AB574 , AB576 , AB593 , SB185 , SB207 , SB507 , AB6

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Absolutely in support because we recognize that something needs to happen, and through that negotiation
• on House Bill 1789 in 2023. ...safeguards similar to what was negotiated on House Bill 1789 in 2023.
• House Bill 1508 is the negotiated version; HB 2170 is the department's version.
• House Bill 1508 is the negotiated version; HB 2170 is the department's version.
• Settlement negotiations must happen in parallel to these court proceedings.

Summary: The committee held public hearings on House Bill 2170, which would authorize DNR to enter ecosystem service and carbon contracts on state trust lands, and House Bill 2578, which would add tribal members and alternates to the Fish and Wildlife Commission. For HB 2170, the Department of Natural Resources and supporters said the bill would diversify revenue, help meet climate goals, and allow DNR to participate in emerging carbon and ecosystem markets without necessarily eliminating timber harvest. Opponents, including counties, school districts, timber companies, loggers, and forest industry groups, argued the bill could reduce harvest levels, harm rural jobs and mill supply, and lower revenues for schools and other trust beneficiaries; several said any new authority should be limited to additive projects with stronger safeguards. Supporters included environmental groups and some local officials who said the bill would provide a more stable revenue stream and better align land management with climate and watershed benefits. The chair noted there are two related vehicles in committee, HB 1508 as the negotiated version and HB 2170 as the department version, and the public hearing on HB 2170 was closed after extensive testimony. For HB 2578, staff explained that the bill would add four tribal commissioner positions and four alternates to the Fish and Wildlife Commission, with representation from federally recognized tribes on both sides of the Cascades and staggered terms. Prime sponsor Rep. Deborah Lekanoff said the measure would strengthen co-management and the state’s government-to-government relationship with tribes, while acknowledging there are other related bills and ongoing legal issues involving WDFW. The chair asked whether the bill would affect existing tribal consultation obligations, and Lekanoff said it would not replace government-to-government consultation; she also said she would follow up on how the governor would make appointments. The hearing on HB 2578 was then suspended so the committee could return to HB 2170 testimony. The committee also heard staff briefing and sponsor testimony on House Bill 2544, which would create a pilot process for the Upper Columbia River water rights adjudication. Staff said the bill would require Ecology to run the adjudication in two phases, starting with tribal and federal claimants and allowing time for settlement before bringing in other claims, with a report due by June 2035. Rep. Larry Springer said the bill is intended to establish a baseline of water use more efficiently in a process that can otherwise take decades. After the briefing and sponsor remarks, the committee began public testimony on the bill, with tribal representatives and other stakeholders queued to testify.

Transcript Highlights:

• Client choice and tie the hands of PBMs in their negotiations against drug manufacturers.
• And so things like that have made it tougher to negotiate.
• Rebates get so much time and attention, but really those savings that are negotiated are passed on to
• Contracts which doesn't allow us much room to negotiate, and when we do negotiate... ...I appreciate
• it's... ...allow us much room to negotiate, and when we do negotiate, it's like 0.001% changes in the

Summary: The committee heard several health-related measures. SB 27 by Senator Umberg would revise and expand California’s CARE Court by limiting the expansion to people with bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, clarifying the definition of “clinically stabilized,” and narrowing the role of nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Supporters, including behavioral health officials and family members, said the bill would reduce dismissals and better serve people with severe illness; opponents warned the expansion would strain county staffing and housing resources and could undermine voluntary engagement. The bill passed on a do pass motion to the Committee on Public Safety. SB 503 by Senator Weber Pierson would require AI tools used in health care facilities to be identified, monitored, and mitigated for bias when used in clinical decision-making or resource allocation. The author and supporters from Kaiser Permanente and the California Medical Association said the bill would help prevent discriminatory outcomes and improve trust and safety. The committee discussed the need to clarify developer and deployer responsibilities, and the bill passed as amended to Privacy and Consumer Protection. SB 68 by Senator Menjivar would require restaurants to provide written allergen information for the top nine food allergens, with tiered flexibility for smaller establishments. The bill was supported by patients, families, nurses, and allergy organizations, who described severe reactions and the difficulty of relying on verbal disclosures alone. The California Restaurant Association opposed unless amended, seeking broader use of the national model food code and additional liability language. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 403 by Senator Blakespear, which would remove the sunset from the End of Life Option Act; supporters described the law as a compassionate, well-functioning option for terminally ill patients, while faith-based groups opposed it. The bill passed to Judiciary. Later, SB 41 by Senator Wiener was introduced to rein in pharmacy benefit manager practices that steer patients to mail-order pharmacies and reimburse community pharmacies below cost; community pharmacists and several health organizations testified in support, describing pharmacy closures and patient access problems.

Transcript Highlights:

• , client choice and tie the hands of PBMs in their negotiations against drug manufacturers.
• And so things like that have made it tougher to negotiate.
• Rebates get so much time and attention, but really those savings that are negotiated are passed on to
• Those contracts don't allow us much room to negotiate, and when we do negotiate, I appreciate it's...
• ...not allow us much room to negotiate, and when we do negotiate, it's like 0.001% changes in the AWP

Committee: House Health

Summary: The committee heard several health-related bills. SB 27 by Senator Umberg would expand and clarify the CARE Court process, with amendments narrowing the new diagnosis category to bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, clarifying the “clinically stabilized” standard, and limiting the role of nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Supporters, including a psychiatrist, a family member, and several local and business groups, said the bill would help more people access needed services; opponents, including counties, disability rights, peer-run organizations, and consumer advocates, warned it would expand the program faster than counties can provide housing, staffing, and court-related services. The committee discussed capacity concerns at length, then passed SB 27 on a do pass motion to the Committee on Public Safety. SB 503 by Senator Weber Pearson would require AI used in health care facilities to be identified, monitored, and mitigated for bias when used in clinical decision-making or resource allocation. The author and supporters from Kaiser Permanente, the California Medical Association, hospitals, and psychiatrists said the bill would help prevent discriminatory outcomes and improve trust in AI tools. Committee members noted the need to clarify deployer and developer responsibilities and accepted amendments before voting. The bill passed as amended to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. SB 68 by Senator Menjivar would require allergen disclosure on restaurant menus, with different requirements for larger chains and more flexible options for smaller restaurants. The bill was presented with emotional testimony from the author and a nine-year-old witness with severe food allergies, along with broad support from medical, nursing, parent, and allergy advocacy groups. The California Restaurant Association opposed the bill unless amended, seeking broader menu-format flexibility and additional liability language. After discussion of those concerns, the committee passed SB 68 as amended to Appropriations. SB 403 by Senator Blakespear would remove the sunset date from California’s End of Life Option Act, making the law permanent. Supporters, including a physician, a social worker, hospice professionals, and family members of terminally ill patients, described the law as a compassionate, carefully regulated option that has worked as intended. Faith-based and Catholic health organizations opposed the measure. The committee approved SB 403 and sent it to Judiciary. The hearing also included consent items, which were approved, and a vote change on SB 68 from no to aye by Senator Sanchez.

Transcript Highlights:

• He said they did no behind-the-scenes negotiations. Everything was done in front of the public.
• 11.720><c> And</c><00:09:11.839><c> I</c><00:09:11.920><c> would</c><00:09:12.160><c> urge</c> negotiations
• And I would urge negotiations in public.
• We did<00:09:19.360><c> no</c><00:09:19.600><c> behind-the-scenes</c><00:09:20.280><c> negotiations.
• </c> did no behind-the-scenes negotiations. did no behind-the-scenes negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, um, I think we're still in the process of negotiating and drafting the CD1.
• So, um, I think we're still in the process of negotiating and drafting the CD1.
• Thank you. process of negotiating and drafting the process of negotiating and drafting the CD1.<00:08
• So for this measure, I believe we're still negotiating our CD1.
• So why we're still negotiating our CD1.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill puts a time frame on that, 28 days in this bill, though she thinks negotiations may end up with
• The bill puts a time frame on that, 28 days in this bill, though she thinks negotiations may end up with
• The bill puts a time frame on that, 28 days in this bill, though she thinks negotiations may end up with
• The bill puts a time frame on that, 28 days in this bill, though she thinks negotiations may end up with
• The bill puts a time frame on that, 28 days in this bill, though she thinks negotiations may end up with

Transcript Highlights:

• You said you've negotiated a year to get this in place back in 2022 and 2023.
• So how long have you negotiated this increase? We first discussed this in January.
• That would mean negotiable.
• If they want to negotiate, that's fine.
• If they want to negotiate, that's fine.

Summary: The committee met on April 15 at 5:13 p.m. with a quorum present and took up several local and municipal bills out of order to accommodate members’ travel. HB 87, which would increase the per diem for the Livingston Parish Gas Utility District No. 1 board, was presented as a local bill with no opposition and was reported favorably without objection. HB 481, dealing with the cost of publishing official proceedings and public notices, drew extensive testimony from the Louisiana Press Association, the Police Jury Association, and committee members. Supporters said a prior agreement intended a 15% to 20% reduction in notice costs, but a calculation error would instead produce roughly a 40% reduction, threatening small newspapers; opponents questioned the process and impact on local governments. The committee ultimately voted 10-5 to send HB 481 to the floor, with members urging further negotiation and possible amendment. HB 573, a major New Orleans Sewerage and Water Board governance bill by Rep. Hilferty, was amended in committee and then supported by Mayor Helena Moreno and several council members as a way to shift more oversight and accountability to the New Orleans City Council. Supporters argued the current structure diffuses responsibility and that local elected officials need more direct authority over operations, contracts, and transparency. Dr. Tracy Washington of the Louisiana Justice Institute opposed the bill, warning that transferring control could worsen financial strain, blur accountability, and raise equity and human-rights concerns for vulnerable residents. Despite the opposition, the committee voted to report HB 573 favorably to the floor. The committee also advanced HB 162, allowing the Jefferson Place/Bocage crime prevention and improvement district to impose a fee after local approval, and HB 368, which raises penalties for unauthorized demolition in New Orleans historic districts to the greater of $50,000 or 15% of assessed value. Both were reported favorably after brief discussion. HB 441, a cleanup bill clarifying that New Orleans Sewerage and Water Board employees remain in city civil service rather than state civil service, was also sent to the floor without objection. Finally, HB 257, concerning the powers and duties of the police chief of the city of Central, was amended to require consultation with the city attorney before discipline or dismissal and to delay effectiveness until January 1, 2027; after debate over due process and the chief’s authority, the committee voted to report it favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• Although the department reported it was not directly involved in compact negotiations, both the 2021
• However, they did not work on the negotiations themselves of the actual compact.
• I'm just really concerned with the payout and finishing up those negotiations because we're entering
• I think that certainly feel that the 2021 compact negotiations were That the 2021 compact negotiations
• But as you heard testimony from the director, those negotiations are in the compact and That is, those

Committee: Senate Senate Regulatory Affairs & Government Efficiency Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first heard the Arizona Auditor General’s 2025 sunset review of the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The audit found the board generally processed licenses and complaints timely and had adopted required school curriculum rules, but it also identified inconsistent disciplinary actions, gaps in required infection-prevention and law education for some reciprocity and instructor applicants, weak application review controls, and noncompliance issues involving open meeting law, public records, and conflicts of interest. Auditors also recommended statutory changes on esthetics scope of practice, cease-and-desist authority, and eyelash technician training standards. The board’s executive director said the agency agreed with the findings, had already implemented some changes including updated disciplinary parameters, conflict-of-interest training, lawful presence verification, and revised cash-handling procedures, and was working through the remaining recommendations. After questions, the committee voted 7-0 to recommend the board implement the audit recommendations and be continued for six years, until July 1, 2032. The committee then took up the combined sunset review and performance audit of the Arizona Department of Gaming, the Arizona Racing Commission, and the Arizona Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts Commission. The Auditor General reported that while the department distributed tribal gaming funds and issued some licenses appropriately, it failed to consistently obtain and review required independent audit reports for event wagering and fantasy sports operators, did not fully comply with conflict-of-interest disclosure requirements, lacked comprehensive complaint-handling processes, and had delayed some compact trust fund distributions. Additional issues included IT security documentation, horse-racing suitability checks, fee-setting reviews, rulemaking, and public records procedures; the Boxing and MMA Commission also had licensing and fee-setting deficiencies. The department and commissions agreed to implement the recommendations, and the department director said the agency was already making changes, including updated guidance to operators, a new complaint-tracking process, conflict-of-interest training, and work on trust fund distributions and rule changes. Committee members pressed both the auditor and the department on why fantasy sports audit reviews had not been completed, whether underpayments would be recovered, and why no distributions had yet been made to certain Category 3 tribes under the 2021 compact trust fund. The director said the department was now doing a look-back review, would seek any owed fees, penalties, and interest, and was helping tribes resolve the baseline-revenue formula needed for distributions. Members also asked about conflict-of-interest practices, problem gambling, and whether prediction markets fall under gaming regulation. The discussion continued into the department’s broader presentation, with the director describing the agency’s regulatory role and ongoing modernization efforts.

Transcript Highlights:

• We negotiated for years with G Shores. This negotiated for years with G Shores.
• During the split, negotiations are an effort to split, negotiations are an effort to split, negotiations
• to strong armed tactics negotiations to strong armed tactics negotiations to strong armed tactics that
• All of these factors were negotiated, including this tax with were negotiated, including this tax with
• , and agreed up, discussed, negotiated, and agreed up, discussed, negotiated, and agreed upon.

Bills: HB258 , HB324 , HB333 , SB270 , HB258 , HB324 , HB333 , SB270

Committee: Senate County and Municipal Government

Keywords: primary election, election calendar, off-presidential year, May primary, second Tuesday in May, fourth Tuesday in May, runoff primary, special primary, presidential primary, election administration, candidate filing, ballot access, political parties, county election officials, state election law, Alabama elections, sheriffs, term of office, Alabama law, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• is, I had another representative asked me earlier today, or Senator, actually, why don't you just negotiate
• Well, there is no negotiating the contract. Either you sign or you don't do the work, period.
• There is zero negotiations. Okay. Well, thank you very much. You bet. Rep. Kimball, please.
• Well, there is no negotiating the contract. Either you sign or you don't do the work, period.
• There is zero negotiations. Okay. Well, thank you very much. You bet. Rep. Kimball, please.

Committee: House Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment

Summary: The Commerce Committee heard Senate Bill 916, sponsored by Senator Berger, which would limit certain liability exposure for contractors working on MoDOT projects when they are following approved plans and standards. The sponsor argued the bill aligns responsibility with control, prevents contractors from being sued for conditions they did not create, and stops the state from requiring indemnification as a condition of bidding or starting work. He cited examples of long-running lawsuits arising from highway work zones and said the bill would not protect negligence or defective workmanship. Several supporters testified, including a general contractor, representatives of the Missouri Asphalt Payment Association, the AGC of Missouri, the Missouri Municipal League, the Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry, and the American Council of Engineering Companies. They said contractors often face lawsuits and higher insurance costs for incidents outside their control, sometimes even before work begins or after a project is complete. The Municipal League also supported language clarifying that naming a public entity as an additional insured does not waive sovereign immunity. MoDOT’s deputy director and chief engineer testified for information, warning the bill could create unintended consequences by bringing the state into litigation during construction if contractor indemnification is removed. After testimony and questions, the committee moved into executive session once a quorum was established. Senate Bill 916 was voted do pass by unanimous roll call, 8 ayes and 0 noes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Traditionally, we haven't negotiated the special session agreement until all those bills have been posted
• Traditionally, we haven't<00:01:29.520><c> negotiated</c><00:01:30.080><c> the</c><00:01:30.240><c> special
• </c><00:01:30.560><c> session</c> haven't negotiated the special session haven't negotiated the special
• I'd really like to say we have talked a lot about the negotiations, but we haven't talked that much about
• important to recognize that these pieces of these bills that make up the budget have been fiercely negotiated

Transcript Highlights:

• Can we negotiate entrances?"
• We just wanted to negotiate happy.
• We tried to negotiate just moving them.
• We couldn't even negotiate moving the entrances. So, a turning lane was not even negotiable.
• <00:29:08.680><c> are</c><00:29:08.760><c> over,</c> negotiations are over, negotiations are over, um

Summary: The Joint Agriculture Committee met in October with a quorum present and approved the September minutes. The main presentation focused on condemnation of agricultural land and eminent domain, featuring testimony from Stephanie Barnett of a family-run livestock and farming business in Todd County, with support from Kentucky Farm Bureau. Barnett described a state road project that would take about 29 feet of frontage and affect entrances, fencing, a sign, drainage, a water well, and parking, saying the process involved poor communication, correspondence sent to the wrong address, and limited opportunity to negotiate changes such as a turning lane or relocated entrances. She said the business was not opposed to progress, but wanted the property restored and fairly compensated for the full impact on the operation, not just the land value. Committee members broadly agreed that eminent domain is sometimes necessary but should be handled with more transparency, communication, and fairness. Several members said the issue affects both rural and urban property owners and raised concerns about fair market value, compensation for agricultural infrastructure improvements, long-term impacts on farm operations, and the cost and delay of litigation. One member asked about the firm involved and suggested hearing from the people responsible for the correspondence problems; Barnett said she would share names after negotiations conclude. Another member noted that the maps had already been drawn before the landowner was brought in and said local meetings and clearer public input could reduce conflict. Chairman Dossett said he was interested in pursuing legislation for the upcoming session focused on property owner protection, fair treatment, and fair compensation, not just for agricultural land but for all Kentucky property owners. Members discussed possible ideas such as requiring better notice, more public transparency, and accounting for related costs like wells, fencing, drainage, and access changes. No votes or formal actions were taken beyond the approval of minutes and the discussion of potential future legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• So on previous committees, it was discussed that potentially this could be negotiated, right?
• That sounds great, but in theory that's supposed to be negotiable, right?
• Ten years ago, you see different schedules for UTF based on negotiations.
• right but before getting to negotiated right but before getting to that<01:21:16.440><c> what</c><01
• you don't see you've already negotiated you don't see this<01:22:25.760><c> as</c><01:22:25.920><c>

Committee: House Consumer Protection & Commerce

Summary: The Consumer Protection and Commerce Committee met on February 12 and heard several bills. HB 97, relating to travel insurance, drew only brief testimony: the Insurance Division stood on written testimony, one industry witness supported the bill and requested a minor amendment, and no one else testified or asked questions. HB 226, relating to window tinting, received support from the Department of Transportation, while the Honolulu Police Department offered comments on the proposed amendments, asking for clearer language on what it means to roll windows down, when the requirement applies, how it handles bad weather, and what sanctions would apply for noncompliance. No further testimony was offered on that measure. The committee also heard HB 1179, relating to rural emergency hospitals. The Department of Human Services stood on written testimony, and Maui Health Systems strongly supported the bill, saying it would help critical access hospitals better serve kūpuna and provide long-term care beds. There were no questions or additional testimony. HB 420, relating to remedies and the contractor repair act, generated extensive and sharply divided testimony. Opponents, including attorneys representing homeowners and AARP Hawaii, argued the bill was anti-consumer, would weaken homeowners’ ability to recover for construction defects, and would shift costs and risk to consumers. Supporters, including builders, realtors, the Chamber of Commerce, and D.R. Horton Hawaii, said the bill would create a more balanced and efficient process, reduce unnecessary litigation, and help builders address legitimate defects more quickly. Testimony on HB 420 focused heavily on whether the contractor repair process and class actions help or hinder repairs. Opponents said the bill would delay or limit homeowner recovery, especially for life and safety defects, while supporters said current class-action litigation can prevent direct communication with homeowners and slow repairs. Committee members asked questions about when communication with homeowners stops and whether repairs could be made before a class is certified. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• the scope of that definition of providers who would have access because of how really carefully negotiated
• ...” “...providers who would have access because of how really carefully negotiated, as well as the lack
• I have a couple follow-ups on some of that because I wasn’t here either during the negotiations.
• I guess my pause, I wasn’t here for the negotiation.
• that happened during the PDMP negotiation, which I was...” “...wasn’t here for, admittedly.

Committee: House Joint Committee on Administrative Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a continuation of the negotiation on criminal justice reform.
• This amendment is a result of continuing negotiations between the two parties. Yield for questions.
• and meetings during negotiations?
• They have to negotiate with the association that their teachers choose to negotiate with.
• I don't feel like that teacher was fairly represented in those legal negotiations.

Bills: HB3407 , HB1242 , HJR1081 , HB3443 , HB3781 , HB1939 , HB4237 , HB3430 , HB3321 , HB3905 , HB3329 , HB4253 , HB4421 , HB4311 , HJR1046 , HB2015 , HB3244 , HB4265 , HB3941 , HB4203 , HB2941 , HB3695 , HB3380 , HB3132 , HB3673 , HB3134 , HB3383 , HB4490 , HB4058

Keywords: property rights, abandoned homes, manufactured homes, notification, salvage, real estate, Oklahoma Tax Commission, landowner liability, redemption, HB1242, cervidae, deer, elk, sales tax exemption, agricultural exemption, livestock, ranching, farm tax, agricultural sales tax, agriculture

Transcript Highlights:

• The amended language makes clear that any negotiated contributions must remain fully consistent with
• AB 569 gives local governments that option, not the obligation, to negotiate for, This bill does not
• The amended language makes clear that any negotiated contributions must remain fully consistent with
• that option, not the obligation, to negotiate for stronger retirement security.
• It would allow a small contribution to those plans, allow the union to negotiate a small contribution

Committee: House Public Employment and Retirement

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement heard several bills dealing with pensions, holidays, public employee accountability, and first responder retirement. AB 912 was taken up on the consent calendar and passed. AB 569, as amended, would allow local public employers and unions to negotiate contributions to supplemental defined benefit pension plans; the author and Teamsters said it would clarify existing PEPRA grandfathering rules, while labor supported it, and the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 989 would make California Native American Day a paid state holiday, with strong support from Native organizations and tribes and no opposition; the committee members spoke in favor and the bill passed. AB 268 would recognize Diwali as an official state holiday, also with broad support and no opposition, and it passed. AJR 3 urged protection of Social Security, Medicare, and Medi-Cal from federal cuts; retirees, caregivers, and health advocates testified in support, and the resolution passed. AB 1067 would require public employers to complete misconduct investigations even if an employee retires during the process; the author said it closes an accountability loophole, while opposition raised due process and family-retirement concerns, and the bill passed as amended. AB 1510 was presented as a cleanup bill making technical changes to state employee pay and benefits and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority labor law; it passed with support from AFSCME. The committee then heard AB 1233, which would create a statewide database of classified school employee positions and certain egregious misconduct records to help school employers screen applicants. School administrators and county school officials supported the bill as a student-safety tool, while classified employee groups raised concerns about fairness, due process, and the scope of misconduct covered; the author said the bill already focuses on serious sex and drug offenses involving children and was open to narrowing language. The bill passed to the Committee on Education. Finally, AB 1383, a major first responder retirement bill, drew extensive testimony. The author and firefighters argued that lowering the normal retirement age for public safety employees from 57 to 55 and restoring some bargaining flexibility would help recruitment, retention, and health, citing cancer and other job-related risks. Cities, counties, and local government associations opposed it, warning it would roll back PEPRA reforms, increase pension costs, and strain local budgets. Despite the opposition, committee members spoke strongly in favor of first responders and the bill passed to Appropriations. The committee then adjourned after all items were voted out.