Transcript Highlights:

• Up first we have the Attorney General. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair.
• Deputy Attorney General Albert Crook, for the state, from the Attorney General's Criminal Justice Division
• General Albert crook for Deputy Attorney General Albert crook for the<00:05:33.039><c> state</c><00:
• </c> the state from the attorney general's the state from the attorney general's criminal<00:05:35.319
• I have a quick question for the Attorney General's office or department: would artificial intelligence

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Labor and Technology heard testimony on several measures. SB 338, relating to taxation, would temporarily reinstate the Act 221 technology infrastructure renovation tax credit and expand eligible technology-enabled infrastructure to include data servers; Tax Department said it had no requested changes, SurfPAC supported the bill, and the Tax Foundation offered comments. Members later advanced SB 338 with amendments, including a report to the Legislature before the 2029 session and technical changes. SB 1491, on departmental data sharing, would add the Department of Taxation to the state longitudinal data system to share aggregated wage data; UH, Hawaii P20, and the Tax Foundation supported it, and Taxation said it could comply as written. The committee amended the bill to also include DBEDT and then passed it with amendments. The committee also considered SB 1156 on sexually explicit deepfakes, SB 853 on an immigration services trust fund, SB 436 on limiting State Fire Marshal service to three terms, and SB 1034 on rest periods in the food service industry. The Attorney General said SB 1156 was unnecessary because existing law already covers AI-created deepfakes, and the committee deferred the bill. SB 853 drew support from DLIR/Office of Community Services and civil rights advocates, but opposition testimony noted substantial public opposition; the committee deferred the measure, saying existing resources from Act 7 made the trust fund premature. SB 436 drew concerns from the State Fire Council representative that term limits would add complications, but the committee passed it with amendments. SB 1034 drew mixed testimony: DLIR stood on comments, the restaurant association supported the intent but suggested changing the five-hour threshold, and the Hawaii Food Industry Association opposed it over the lack of a definition of food service industry; the committee amended the bill to add that definition and passed it with amendments. At the later 3:15 p.m. decision-making-only agenda, the committee deferred SB 730 indefinitely after conferring with the PSM chair, saying it was special legislation needing further work in the interim.

Transcript Highlights:

• General with the Vermont Attorney General's Office, counsel from the Office of Legislative Counsel,
• General with the Vermont Attorney General with the Vermont Attorney<00:44:47.119><c> General's</c><00
• :44:47.599><c> Office,</c><00:44:48.560><c> council</c><00:44:49.200><c> from</c> Attorney General's
• And third reading is ordered. remedies both for the uh attorney remedies both for the uh attorney general's
• uh in connection obligation of attorneys uh in connection with<00:47:34.400><c> uh</c><00:47:34.560>

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Crease is an attorney himself.
• Crease is an attorney himself.
• Crease is an attorney himself.
• Crease is an attorney himself.
• Crease is an attorney himself.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Executive Departments and Administration Committee met in executive session on November 5, 2025, to consider House Bills 244, 610, and 727, and Senate Bills 94 and 193. On HB 244, which recodifies municipal enforcement of the building and fire code, the committee adopted amendment 2025-2952H by a 16-0 vote, then voted 16-0 to report the bill ought to pass as amended and placed it on the consent calendar. The discussion emphasized that the bill reorganizes building code statutes into a single chapter and was the product of substantial subcommittee work. On HB 610, concerning repeal of the Office of the Consumer Advocate, the committee adopted amendment 2025-3076H by a 16-0 vote. The amendment narrowed the office’s charge to residential utility customers, added duties for the Residential Ratepayer Advisory Board, allowed a two-thirds board recommendation to remove a consumer advocate for failing to perform duties, and broadened the qualifications pool for the position while retaining attorney eligibility. The current consumer advocate, Donald Crease, testified that he still preferred the existing statute but appreciated the committee’s effort to preserve a vigilant, independent ratepayer voice; members generally described the amendment as a more focused, less drastic approach. The committee then voted 16-0 to report HB 610 ought to pass as amended and placed it on consent. For HB 727, relating to the New Hampshire retirement system, the committee voted to inexpediently legislate by a 15-0 vote, with one member recused, explaining that the bill’s subject matter had already been addressed in House Bill 2 and signed by the governor. The bill was also placed on the consent calendar. On Senate Bill 94, prohibiting municipal amendments to the state building code, the committee heard extensive explanation from Mr. Sherman about a substitute amendment, 2025-2972H, which would preserve the prohibition on technical municipal amendments and avoid an unintended trigger that could reopen technical amendments across the code if the state falls behind on model code updates. The committee adopted the amendment 15-1 and then moved toward an ought to pass as amended recommendation; the transcript cuts off before the final disposition on SB 94 is fully completed. Senate Bill 193 was listed at the start of the meeting, but no discussion of it appears in the provided transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• In my discovery of talking with different attorneys, both in this building, Attorney General's Office
• , national attorneys, and others, there's, on the national scene right now, what's going on is there's
• In my discovery of talking with different attorneys, both in this building, Attorney General's Office
• , national attorneys, and others, there's, on the national scene right now, what's going on is there's

Bills: HB1318

Keywords: HB 1318, pesticide labeling, pesticide warning, duty to warn, failure to warn, labeling defense, EPA-approved label, Federal Insecticide Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, FIFRA, North Dakota agriculture commissioner, product liability, tort reform, preemption, carcinogenicity classification, human health assessment, pesticide regulation, agricultural chemicals, herbicide, insecticide, rodenticide

Summary: The Agriculture and Veterans Affairs Committee met on April 10 and took up House Bill 1318, a bill dealing with pesticide-related liability and warning-label issues. The chair explained that the bill had drawn strong interest from both agriculture and public health sides, and that the committee was trying to craft language that would protect consumers without unduly harming agricultural production. He said the committee had worked through multiple draft amendments and was now considering Amendment 1006, which was described as a compromise combining earlier proposals and narrowing the bill’s scope to pesticides registered with the state commissioner. Members discussed whether the amendment would weaken the original intent of the bill. Senator Myrdal said the revised language added needed guardrails and addressed concerns about overly broad preemption language and warning-label standards, while also preserving agriculture’s ability to operate. After a motion to rescind the earlier action on the bill passed, Amendment 1006 was adopted unanimously by the members present. A motion to move the bill without committee recommendation failed for lack of a second. The committee then voted on House Bill 1318 as amended. The do-pass motion passed on a roll call vote, with Senators Weber, Luick, Myrdal, and Lemm voting yes, and Senators Marcellais and Weston voting no. The chair said he would carry the bill. The meeting ended with members thanking the chair and staff for their work during the session, and the chair noted he might call the committee back if a conference committee report required further input.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm an attorney for the state board of home inspectors.
• I'm the attorney for the State Board of Home Inspectors.
• Federal law requires that an attorney cannot solicit for... the bill, but I would suspect that it has
• I never really, I've never dealt with a public adjuster or an attorney.
• Representative McCormick, and let me say, as a former practicing attorney, there were attorneys in the

Bills: HB267, HB478, HB617, HB659, HB800, HB922, HB924, HB947, HB1166, HB1223

Keywords: home inspectors, board membership, licensing, term limits, Louisiana State Board, utility, reimbursement, overcharges, consumer protection, economic relief, hidden fees, junk fees, drip pricing, price transparency, mandatory fees, surcharges, unfair trade practices, advertising disclosures, total price, service fees

Transcript Highlights:

• And the individuals who generally request these records are attorneys for insurance companies.
• And so, attorneys will request records and sometimes it's found that those records don't exist.
• </c><00:02:13.680><c> And</c> attorneys for insurance companies.
• And attorneys for insurance companies.
• And so, attorneys will request exist.

Bills: HF3521, HF1807, HF1270, HF2070, HF3136

Keywords: hospital moratorium, hospital construction, bed capacity, hospital expansion, health care facilities, hospital licensing, safety-net hospital, level I trauma center, Ramsey County, Minnesota health law, hospital beds, new hospital exception, certificate of need, inpatient capacity, emergency care, trauma services, health system regulation, state moratorium, hospital modernization, health infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:

• And the second is that if Hawaii were to institute HB 22, it would be well within its rights, as Attorney
• general Lopez stated um uh as attorney general Lopez stated um the<00:11:29.519><c> Amendment</c><00
• who want to work on these also attorneys who want to work on these cases<00:24:23.960><c> pro</c><00
• You have the right to have an attorney, or one provided to you.
• You have the right to have an attorney, or one provided to you.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Economic Development and Technology heard testimony on several bills, beginning with HB 22, which would limit state and local cooperation with federal immigration detainers. Supporters, including the Legal Clinic, the Office of the Public Defender, and the ACLU of Hawaiʻi, argued the bill would protect due process and constitutional rights regardless of immigration status. Some supporters requested amendments, including removing a probable-cause terrorism provision, adding enforcement language, and preserving warrant requirements. Public testimony was heavily in favor, with the chair announcing 91 testimonies in support and 52 in opposition. The committee then heard HB 73, which would prohibit setting aside public lands for immigration detention facilities. Testifiers in support said public land should serve local needs, not detention centers, and cited housing, food security, and community trust concerns. The Office of the Public Defender and others also supported the measure, and the chair reported 85 testimonies in support and 40 in opposition. The committee next took up HB 438, which would fund legal representation for people in immigration proceedings. Supporters, including the Public Defender, the University of Hawaiʻi Law School Refugee and Immigration Clinic, the Hawaiʻi Coalition for Immigrant Rights, the Legal Clinic, and the ACLU, emphasized the civil nature of immigration court, the severe consequences of removal, and the need for more pro bono and trained attorneys. Several suggested amendments focused on training and building a legal-services pipeline; the chair reported 83 testimonies in support and 51 in opposition. The committee also heard HB 457, aimed at requiring notice to detained individuals about their rights when ICE seeks to interview them or has a detainer request. Supporters said the bill would ensure people understand their right to remain silent and to refuse interviews, and the Legal Clinic suggested the warning be given orally, potentially via recorded messages, rather than only in writing. The Office of the Public Defender noted the bill aligns with existing due-process warnings in criminal court and suggested referencing current law. Finally, HB 476, which would raise the capital gains tax rate, drew support from Hawaiʻi Appleseed on fairness grounds; the Department of Taxation said it would review revenue questions but had no estimate available. After recess, the committee returned to decision-making and moved HB 22 forward on the chair’s recommendation of HD1, with the chair noting that the bill already contained language allowing counties to adopt stronger standards and protections.

Transcript Highlights:

• Public policy that has been passed by this very chamber has been fought against by H.O.A. attorneys and
• You know, I don't I'm not an attorney. I just play one on TV.
• And we've been through a couple of different attorneys and it and it's difficult to get in the tourney
• He's done as holds panels with the turn of the attorneys and consultation groups like Tamara Reyes to
• Despite this, the H.O.A. has been awarded more than $23,000 in attorney fees placed a lien on my how

Transcript Highlights:

• And the enforcement would happen through the attorney general's office.
• </c> through the attorney general's office. through the attorney general's office.
• </c> bill, uh I believe that the attorney bill, uh I believe that the attorney general<00:46:54.880><
• </c> happen through the ways the attorney happen through the ways the attorney general<00:47:23.920><
• </c> violating the law alert the attorney violating the law alert the attorney general<00:47:35.599><

Bills: HF3806, HF2687, HF497

Keywords: housing, infrastructure bonds, funding, appropriation, Minnesota Statutes, HF2687, single-family homes, corporate landlords, corporate ownership, real estate investment trust, REIT, landlord registry, landlord database, tenant transparency, housing affordability, homeownership, deed tax, transfer tax, property tax, affordable housing

Transcript Highlights:

• Larry Freeman, Chief Deputy Attorney General, testified that the bill is very much needed because there
• He said NIL is pervasive down to the high school level and that the Attorney General's office and the
• Chairman, to our Assistant Attorney General Olivia Nuss.
• Chairman, to our Assistant Attorney General Olivia Nuss.
• Assistant Attorney Jack. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Bills: SB389, SB525

Keywords: athlete agent, registration, endorsement contracts, name image likeness, eligibility, unfair trade practices, student athletes, unclaimed property, abandoned property, escheat, state treasurer, administrator, claimant, purchase agreement, assignment, property recovery, owner verification, documentation requirements, fraud prevention, bankruptcy

Transcript Highlights:

• After much review and discussions with the Attorney General's office, um, it appears that the civil and
• After much review and discussions with the Attorney General's office, um, it appears that the civil and
• One is the current statute already has a very similar provision and the attorney general's testimony
• </c> very similar provision and the attorney very similar provision and the attorney general's<00:05:
• So, and the attorney general testified that it would be a title problem. Are there concerns?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to take up several House bills and adopted recommendations on a number of them. HB 111, which would authorize civil claims against persons or businesses profiting from sexual exploitation or sex trafficking and extend the civil statute of limitations to 10 years, was recommended to pass unamended after discussion with the Attorney General’s office. HB 54, increasing penalties for repeated excessive speeding offenses, was recommended to pass with the Attorney General’s first suggested amendment requiring identification processing, including fingerprinting and photographing, for convicted violators unless already done. HB 70, dealing with condominium budget summaries and reserve requirements, was recommended to pass as amended, and HB 320, allowing supported decision-making agreements for qualified adults including those with disabilities, mental illness, or age 65 and older, was also recommended to pass as amended. These recommendations were adopted without objection, though some members noted reservations on HB 54 and HB 70. HB 239, which would clarify that inability to provide certain needs to a child due solely to lack of financial resources does not constitute abuse or neglect, was deferred to Thursday, April 3, at 10:00 a.m. HB 359, concerning covered offender registration and a proposed exemption related to sexual assault in the fourth degree, was recommended to pass with amendments deleting section 2 after concerns that the current statute already covers the issue and that the added language would create a title problem by addressing two topics. The committee adopted that recommendation. HB 412, establishing presumptions and expanding lobbying-related definitions for certain communications with government officials, was recommended to pass with an added clarification excluding purely informational, ceremonial, or routine relationship-building communications from the presumption; that recommendation was also adopted. HB 472, which would allow digitized identification cards to be accepted as valid identification and authorize law enforcement agencies to accept them under certain circumstances, was not decided. After a recess, the chair announced that everything after HB 412 would be deferred to Thursday, the 27th, at 10:30 p.m. in room 016, and the remaining items were postponed.

Transcript Highlights:

• , to be heard for 30 minutes; second, proponents of the initiative petition as documented by the Attorney
• Senator Fattman, next we’ll hear from Susan Murphy, a zoning and land use attorney. Ms.
• Next we'll hear from Susan Murphy, a zoning and land use attorney. Ms. Murphy, welcome.
• As a land use attorney, I find that often overlooked factor in development is infrastructure.
• Thank you, Attorney Murphy, and leaving two minutes to spare, so well done on the timing.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-03, House Bill 5000, which would allow single-family homes on small lots in areas with adequate infrastructure. Committee chairs outlined the Article 48 process and the hearing format, then heard first from two subject-matter experts. Under Secretary Chris Clutchman of Housing and Livable Communities explained that the proposal would amend Chapter 40A’s Section 3 (the Dover Amendment) to require most municipalities, except Boston, to allow single-family homes on residentially zoned lots of at least 5,000 square feet with 50 feet of frontage and access to public water and sewer, while still allowing reasonable local regulations on setbacks, height, bulk, and short-term rentals. He distinguished the proposal from Chapter 40Y starter-home zoning, said implementation would likely require regulations to address issues such as wetlands, infrastructure capacity, and nonconforming lots, and answered committee questions about lot subdivision, MBTA Communities, and the relationship to existing zoning tools. Attorney Susan Murphy testified that the petition would significantly override local zoning and could create conflicts with existing statutes, including Chapter 40A Section 6 protections for certain nonconforming lots, subdivision control law, and other residential zoning districts. She raised concerns about how “access” to water and sewer would be defined, whether the measure could apply in business or industrial districts where residential uses are allowed, and whether the proposal could allow large homes on small lots without any affordability limits. She also warned that the measure could have significant infrastructure impacts and argued that the Legislature should consider broader, more comprehensive housing legislation rather than expanding exceptions to the zoning framework. Committee members asked both experts about frontage, lot size, infrastructure capacity, and how the proposal would interact with 40Y and MBTA Communities. The proponents, led by Andrew McCulla of the Legalized Starter Homes Coalition, argued that Massachusetts faces a severe housing shortage and affordability crisis, citing high home prices, high rents, declining listings, and outmigration of younger residents. They said the measure would legalize modest single-family homes on smaller lots, increase housing supply, and help first-time buyers and downsizing seniors, while leaving most other local rules in place. Other proponents, including representatives from Abundant Housing Massachusetts, the Charles River Regional Chamber, and individual residents, emphasized workforce retention, the need for more starter homes, and the view that large minimum lot sizes are a major barrier to production. Committee members pressed the panel on the lack of any home-size or affordability requirement, possible effects on 40B compliance, the number of new lots and homes that might result, and the fact that the ballot initiative would not be amendable by the Legislature. The hearing then turned to opponents from the Massachusetts Municipal Association, who urged the committee to take no action. MMA leaders said zoning should remain a local decision made by residents and elected local officials, and argued that the proposal would preempt local control with a one-size-fits-all mandate. They also said the measure is impractical because many communities with water and sewer are already at or near capacity, so infrastructure availability does not necessarily mean development capacity. The hearing ended during the MMA’s testimony, with no vote or final committee action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• , for IT software and hardware, which we heard from our district attorneys last week.
• , for IT software and hardware, which we heard from our district attorneys last week.
• This is $1.5 million from the Attorney General. This is $1.5 million from the Attorney General.
• And this is for extraordinary litigation expenses for the Attorney General.
• 10 for the Attorney General.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We did discuss the issue with the Office of the Attorney General.
• The right to talk to your attorney is sacrosanct in our judicial system.
• Everyone has a right to confer with their attorney.
• to help their attorney in defense cannot be divulged.
• We have you registered as Richard Gladden, your attorney.

Bills: HB240

Keywords: tax exemption, farm products, ad valorem taxation, tax code, producer ownership

Summary: The subcommittee heard a series of county and regional government bills, with most measures left pending after testimony. HB 2097 would let counties that opt in give sheriff’s deputies an alternative appeal route for certain discipline cases through an independent hearing examiner instead of the Civil Service Commission. The author and a CLEET witness said it would be faster, cheaper, and fairer; questions focused on why the bill was needed and whether sheriffs could already use such a process. No opposition testified, and the bill was left pending. HB 4642 drew extensive testimony after the author said it was prompted by a death involving an out-of-state jail contract. The bill would require counties contracting with out-of-state jail facilities to include Texas-like jail standards and oversight provisions. The author, a former detainee held in Louisiana, his wife, and a Texas Jail Project advocate described poor conditions, lack of accountability, and multiple deaths of Texans housed out of state. The Texas Commission on Jail Standards director said five counties are currently housing 1,251 Texas inmates out of state, mostly because of staffing shortages, and said the bill would give the commission more authority and oversight. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard HB 4350, which would allow peace officers to request redaction of personal information from online real property records. Supporters said officers face retaliation risks and should have protections similar to judges and other officials; a title industry witness cautioned that redaction should not compromise the integrity of land records. The bill was left pending. HB 3687 would require county fire marshals in counties over 100,000 to meet specified training and certification standards, and HB 4105 and HB 4205 would give Harris County preferences in construction contracting and require pay parity for comparable law enforcement ranks within the county, respectively; all drew support from county officials and were left pending. HB 5403 would repeal a special rule requiring Dallas and Tarrant county sheriffs to get commissioners court approval for commissary disbursements, and it was also left pending. Later, HB 4462 would let elected county officials in large counties choose outside counsel in civil cases involving them, rather than relying solely on the county attorney. Supporters argued this would reduce conflicts of interest and protect officials’ reputations; questions centered on who qualifies and whether it could conflict with county interests. Finally, HB 240 would restore a five-member quorum requirement for Harris County tax levies, effectively requiring all commissioners to be present before a new tax rate can be adopted; supporters framed it as a taxpayer protection, while the Conference of Urban Counties opposed it as giving one member a de facto veto and potentially disrupting the budget process. Both bills were left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• He said it is also a national issue, and that he spoke to some attorneys in Washington some months ago
• I’m not an attorney.
• My name is Denise Wong, Deputy Attorney General.
• Attorney General providing comments on Attorney General providing comments on Zoom<01:00:19.520><c> oh
• </c> my name is Denise Wong Deputy attorney my name is Denise Wong Deputy attorney general<01:00:29.280

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Transportation met on January 28, 2025, and heard testimony on a series of bills dealing with vehicle titles, motor vehicle taxes, window tinting, license plates, electric bicycles, insurance penalties, vehicle inspection fines, and transportation discrimination. For HB 532, which shortens the time to forward a transferred vehicle title from 30 days to 14 days and allows a letter of attestation to serve as an endorsement certificate, testimony was listed in support from Councilmember U. Hajin and the City and County of Honolulu Department of Customer Services, and in opposition from Maui Mayor Richard Bisson and Sylvie Madison. HB 655 would require payment of unpaid motor vehicle taxes, fees, and penalties for the most recent five consecutive years of delinquency; the Tax Foundation of Hawaiʻi stood on written comments, with Tim Rymer and Robert Souza providing comments/support. HB 368, which would exempt certain medically sensitive drivers from sunscreen-device tint limits, drew opposition from the Department of Transportation and support from several individuals. HB 226, lowering allowed windshield tint from 35% to 20%, drew opposition from the Department of Transportation and support from TNT Tinting Specialists; members asked about federal preemption, and DOT said federal guidance applies to manufacturers while states retain authority over aftermarket tinting. The committee also heard HB 543, prohibiting license plate flipping devices and imposing a $2,000 fine, and HB 228, authorizing counties to adopt rules for electronic license plates, repealing flipping devices, and setting a minimum fine for obscuring plates; both measures had DOT support, comments from the Honolulu Department of Customer Services, and opposition from Sylvie Madison. HB 70 would require insurance for electric bicycles and create a regulatory framework effective January 1, 2026. The Office of the Public Defender opposed it, arguing the bill improperly distinguishes e-bikes from mopeds; PeopleForBikes and the Hawaiʻi Bicycling League opposed it as costly and unnecessary, while the Insurance Division said the bill could conflict with existing no-fault definitions and might fit better in the motor scooter/moped insurance framework. HB 231, increasing the fine for violating motor vehicle insurance requirements from $500 to $1,500, was opposed by the Office of the Public Defender, which argued it would burden low-income residents and add to court congestion; members debated whether higher fines would improve compliance. Later, HB 227 would add fines for operating a vehicle without a current inspection certificate and had DOT support. HB 184 would require operators of low-speed electric bicycles to have a driver’s license, instruction permit, or provisional license; Kawaii Path, PeopleForBikes, and Get Fit Kauaʻi opposed it as a barrier to low-cost transportation and noted concerns for riders with disabilities, while DOT later said it would support the measure and was asked to research whether other states have similar licensing requirements. The final major measure discussed was HB 468, which would require the Civil Rights Commission to investigate discrimination complaints involving transportation network company drivers and riders with service animals and allow DOT to issue penalties to the companies. The National Federation of the Blind of Hawaiʻi, the Disability Rights Center, and individual riders supported the bill, saying current protections lack enforcement and that denials still occur; Uber and Lyft opposed it, saying they already prohibit discrimination, train drivers, investigate complaints quickly, and that the bill would duplicate existing law and create unnecessary penalties. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> enforcement by the attorney general. enforcement by the attorney general.
• And your bill for the attorney general.
• Turner, on the attorney general things.
• The attorney general has no costs for 3655.
• Assistant Attorney General Eric Maloney.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I originally discussed the bill with the Attorney General's office.
• So is your position that the Attorney General is asking for this?
• No, I think the Attorney General noticed a discrepancy in where cases are being argued.
• We are sending our attorney general to one place or the other to argue these cases.
• Sharon Galway Jones here today on behalf of the Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys.

Summary: The committee first met in executive session and approved House Bill 2666, Representative Keithley’s anti-SLAPP bill, on an 8-4 vote after a brief clarification that it was the anti-SLAPP measure being considered. The committee then held a public hearing on House Bill 3054, also by Representative Keithley, which would shift Cole County appellate venue to the Eastern District for workload balancing and require certain challenges to the enactment or validity of statutes and regulations to be filed originally in Cole County to reduce forum shopping. Representative Keithley said the bill was intended to centralize procedural and constitutional challenges tied to lawmaking or rulemaking in Jefferson City, not to move ordinary fact-based civil cases. Committee members pressed him on whether the language would also sweep in personal injury, medical malpractice, or criminal cases, and several expressed concern that the bill was broader than intended and could create venue fights or burden litigants. Keithley acknowledged the language might need clarification, especially regarding whether it could affect cases with constitutional counts in otherwise ordinary civil actions. Opposition testimony came from the Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys and the Missouri Circuit Judges Association. Both groups said the bill, as drafted, was too broad and could unintentionally move many cases to Cole County, including cases where constitutional challenges are commonly pleaded, and possibly criminal matters because of the “notwithstanding” clause. They also warned it could encourage new venue disputes and undermine expected local venue. The Judicial Conference of Missouri offered to provide data on case types if the committee wanted more information. No further action was taken on HB 3054, and the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So Representative, if we're doing a new section of law on this, like if the Attorney General is involved
• Um, so then, basically, if the Attorney General is involved in a lawsuit in any other industry, nothing
• No, it has to be a suit that's filed by the attorney general for the State of Oklahoma.
• Next, right next door and it doesn't the case doesn't get picked up by the attorney general's office,
• A suit that would be filed by the attorney general for the State of Oklahoma.

Bills: SB1346, SB1509, SB1928, SB2028, SB2071, SB2110, SB2117, SB2127, SB2134, SB722, SB3

Keywords: 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, aquifer management, water allocation, water permits, temporary permits, irrigation

Transcript Highlights:

• A California attorney and member of the Conference of California Bar Associations, who are sponsors of
• I'm an attorney with 36 years of experience on the ground and an adjunct associate professor of law at
• I'm here not only as the spokesperson for the CCBA, but as an attorney who has seen firsthand how the
• I'm an attorney with 36 years of experience on the ground and an adjunct associate professor of law at
• I'm here not only as the spokesperson for the CCBA, but as an attorney who has seen firsthand how the

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee met in subcommittee and heard three non-consent bills plus a consent calendar. SB 1159 by Senator Cabaldon would let public agencies disregard AI- or bot-generated public participation that is not from a human, in response to concerns about floods of automated comments and public records requests overwhelming local government processes. Supporters included Sierra Club California, the League of California Cities, counties, special districts, municipal clerks, and several local governments; there was no opposition. Committee members raised questions about how agencies would detect AI-generated submissions, possible liability or First Amendment concerns if human comments were mistakenly excluded, and whether the bill needed more specific amendments for each affected act. The author said the bill does not create enforcement against bots but instead clarifies that agencies need not treat non-human input as human participation, and the committee voted the bill out on a series of roll calls, ultimately 12-0, to the Senate Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection Committee, with the bill placed on call during the process. SB 932 by Senator Dato would require greater transparency in civil proceedings involving assignments of claims, aiming to prevent people from hiding behind shell companies or transferred rights to collect money while avoiding debts or other obligations. The Conference of California Bar Associations sponsored the bill, and its witness said the measure would help identify the real party in interest and curb misuse of assignments, including in bankruptcy and other recovery actions. The Utility Wildfire Survivor Coalition opposed the bill unless amended, arguing that in complex litigation—especially wildfire cases with multiple overlapping interests and litigation financing—the proposal could miss important disclosures and create inequities. The author said the bill was a narrow accountability measure and acknowledged broader issues would require more discussion. The committee passed SB 932 on a 12-0 vote, with the bill also placed on call during the vote sequence. The committee also approved a consent calendar containing several other measures, including SB 994, SB 1100, SB 1374, SB 1189, and SCR 124. Those items were adopted unanimously after roll calls, and the committee adjourned after completing the final votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• For an attorney, this is the best job that I can imagine.
• Their attorneys are absolutely fantastic.
• I'm allowed to hire and train my own attorneys to compete with them.
• And I've heard attorneys say, 'Settle nothing, let them guess what you're after.'
• They don't even have an attorney.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Counsel Oversight met with a quorum present and heard an update from Public Counsel Walt Trierweiler on the work of the Office of Public Counsel. Trierweiler described the office’s role in representing Florida utility customers in rate cases and related proceedings, including investor-owned electric, water, and wastewater matters. He emphasized the office’s use of depositions, expert witnesses, customer correspondence, and service hearings to challenge unsupported utility costs while seeking outcomes that are “fair, just, reasonable, and affordable.” A major focus of the presentation was the office’s work on large utility dockets, especially the Florida Power & Light rate case, as well as other recent cases involving Duke, TECO, Sunshine, and St. Joe. Trierweiler said the office had settled some cases but not others, had two appeals pending, and had filed motions for reconsideration where required. He also discussed storm cost recovery, affordability concerns, and the new challenge of data center tariffs and related energy and water demands. He said the office brought in new experts on affordability and data centers and was trying to get ahead of those issues through workshops and settlement efforts. Members asked questions about how customer input is gathered, how the office evaluates a fair profit for utilities, the role of settlements and counterproposals, and the impact of data centers on energy and water use. Trierweiler said customer voices come in through hearings and correspondence, that utilities are entitled to a fair return but not imprudent costs, and that the office is concerned about data center growth and its resource demands. No votes were taken, and the committee concluded its agenda and adjourned.