Transcript Highlights:

• Turning to page six, Item 6, judicial salaries... Item 6, judicial salaries.
• Moving on to item two, judicial salaries: as we've discussed, the Judicial Compensation Commission has
• for changes in judicial tenure.
• of judicial misconduct against judges, as well as judicial disability.
• Because people are more upset about the judicial rulings than they are any true allegation of judicial

Bills: SB 1

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

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee convened for its first hearing of the 89th regular session, confirmed a quorum, adopted committee rules by a 15-0 vote, and began review of Senate Bill 1, the state budget for fiscal years 2026-27. Chair Huffman outlined the committee’s organization, introduced staff, and described the budget as conservative and focused on one-time investments. She highlighted major SB 1 priorities including property tax relief, full funding for public education formulas, teacher pay, school safety, border security, Medicaid growth, dementia research, energy and water infrastructure, transportation, wildfire suppression, and other capital and public safety needs. Comptroller Glenn Hager presented the biennial revenue estimate, saying the state has $194.6 billion available for general-purpose spending in 2026-27, with a projected $23.8 billion ending balance from the current biennium. He cautioned that revenue growth is returning to more normal levels and that lawmakers should avoid committing short-term surpluses to ongoing expenses. He also explained that the Economic Stabilization Fund is projected to hit its constitutional cap, meaning an estimated $5.6 billion in severance tax and related revenue would remain in general revenue in the upcoming biennium rather than flow into the fund. Senators discussed whether to raise or rename the fund and the implications of keeping more severance-tax revenue in general revenue. The Legislative Budget Board then gave an overview of SB 1 and the budget’s major funding changes. LBB staff explained that the bill is essentially flat at $332.9 billion in all funds, but includes large method-of-finance shifts and major property tax relief. They detailed how prior property tax relief enacted in the 88th Legislature grew from an estimated $18 billion to $22.7 billion because of higher property values and hold-harmless provisions, and said SB 1 continues that relief with a total of $51 billion in ongoing and new property tax support. Members asked extensive questions about the automatic growth in school tax compression, the constitutional homestead exemption, COVID-era federal funding, Medicaid assumptions, and the sunset of the non-homestead circuit breaker. No additional votes or final budget actions were taken beyond adoption of the committee rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• Judicial branch. All right, we're going to move on to our next issue: Judicial Branch.
• I'm going to—this is Lotko Theodorovich from the Judicial Council.
• That's the brief overview of the May Revision to the Judicial Branch's budget.
• So, in the word 'we,' there is no funding for Prop 36 in the judicial branch budget.
• They've taken money away from a very starving part of our judicial system, and that would be the judicial

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision presentations for the Office of Emergency Services, Judicial Branch, CDCR, and the Department of Justice, with the LAO offering comments and recommendations throughout. For Cal OES, the administration outlined funding for relocating the Red Mountain communications site, increased FEMA reimbursement authority, cybersecurity grants, next-generation 911 support, and a reduction to the Flexible Cash Assistance for Survivors of Crime program. Members raised concerns about VOCA backfill and disaster reimbursement, while the LAO recommended approving the 911 request with reporting, adding contingency planning for cybersecurity grants, clarifying the FEMA reimbursement language, and increasing reporting on emergency spending. For the Judicial Branch, the May Revision included funding for implementation of the Trial Nations Access to Justice Act, reductions tied to court facilities and employee benefits, and General Fund solutions such as a reduction to the pretrial release program, a reversion from the Trial Court Trust Fund, and elimination of the jury duty pilot program. The LAO cautioned that the pretrial reduction could affect detention and release decisions and recommended tighter legislative oversight over the trust fund transfer and reallocation language. Members questioned the impact of the pretrial cut, the lack of Prop. 36 court funding, and the rationale for the jury pilot elimination; the Judicial Branch said it was generally supportive of the budget as proposed. CDCR presented requests for roof repairs, fire alarm replacements, CalAIM-related costs, and trailer bill changes on incarcerated college students, mental health hiring, and tuberculosis testing, along with a planned prison closure by October 2026. The department also proposed reducing or delaying several items, including radio replacement, ADA improvements, COVID mitigation, and some facility upgrades, while adding a $125 million placeholder for consultant-driven operational savings. The LAO recommended rejecting or reducing several San Quentin-related proposals, questioned the staffing and contract medical requests, and urged more transparency on the consultant savings plan; members expressed concern about the realism of the savings targets and the potential legal or operational risks from delaying ADA and radio projects. For DOJ, the May Revision proposed ongoing funding and 44 positions to defend against federal actions, IT and accounting system upgrades, implementation funding for AB 1877, and a special fund loan. The LAO supported the KLETS connection but asked for a contingency plan if the new DMV link is delayed, noted that AB 1877 would not be fully implemented without additional funding, and recommended limiting and reporting on the federal accountability workload. Members questioned the size and permanence of the DOJ request, the use of the earlier $25 million special session appropriation, and the pace of federal litigation; DOJ said the new request would support ongoing litigation, expert assistance, and coordination across multiple cases and states.

Transcript Highlights:

• Christine Russell, DA, 17th Judicial District Court, present in support, does not wish to speak.
• District Attorney, 34th Judicial District. And Debbie Hinton, Feliciana?
• I've heard several times that whether or not you're eligible is a determination by LDH.
• We do a very good screening and vetting process to determine...
• The entire parish is divided up in judicial districts.

Bills: HCR41, HB11, HB227, HB243, HB278, HB335, HB424, HB454, HB455, HB492, HB623, HB641, HB660, HB708, HB719, HB940, HB1029, HB1053, HB1069, HB1077

Keywords: coupons, rebates, alcohol regulation, malt beverages, Louisiana Department of Revenue, remembrance, Charlie Kirk, state recognition, October 14, memorial day, court filings, electronic filing, letter size paper, privacy, legal procedure, recusal, district attorney, substitute attorney, appointment process, legal proceedings

Transcript Highlights:

• With respect to the following appointment to be a member of the Commission on Judicial Conduct: Sylvie
• Members, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct is the commission created to protect the public and
• The joint resolution would also remove the ability of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct to issue
• SJR 27 proposes a constitutional amendment regarding the membership of the State Commission on Judicial
• The state commission on judicial conduct increases public membership to seven, with no more than two

Bills: SJR27, SJR39, SB22, SB33, SB34, SB37, SB209, SB310, SB326, SB505, SB605, SB618, SB732, SB762, SB769, SB783, SB819, SB825, SB870, SB964, SB1030, SB1080, SB1085, SB1099, SB1124, SB1208, SB1233, SB1314, SB1320, SB1333, SB1398, SB1405, SB1541, SB1567, SB1596, SB1598, SB1625, SB1646, SB1662, SB1750, SB1758, SB1791, SB1804, SB1810, SB1818, SB1838, SB1855, SB1869, SB1951, SB2024, SB2077, SB2078, SB2252, SB2253, SB2368, SB2411, SB2420, SB2425, SB2569

Keywords: judicial conduct, state commission, judicial misconduct, commission membership, constitutional amendment, veto override, legislature power, governor, Texas Constitution, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, wildfire, wildfire mitigation, wildfire prevention, volunteer fire department

Transcript Highlights:

• And so it's not until after the institution, in your example, a university, has determined that a code
• in laying out the initial wording of the bill itself and it says relating to the procedure for determining
• those in a classroom, obviously. from by specifying that it was not until the school had first determined
• that a code of conduct violation had occurred, then they would apply the definition to determine if
• Substitute Senate Bill 326 relating to the procedure for determining whether a student's violation of

Bills: SJR27, SJR39, SB22, SB33, SB34, SB37, SB209, SB310, SB326, SB505, SB605, SB618, SB732, SB762, SB769, SB783, SB819, SB825, SB870, SB964, SB1030, SB1080, SB1085, SB1099, SB1124, SB1208, SB1233, SB1314, SB1320, SB1333, SB1398, SB1405, SB1541, SB1567, SB1596, SB1598, SB1625, SB1646, SB1662, SB1750, SB1758, SB1791, SB1804, SB1810, SB1818, SB1838, SB1855, SB1869, SB1951, SB2024, SB2077, SB2078, SB2252, SB2253, SB2368, SB2411, SB2420, SB2425, SB2569

Keywords: judicial conduct, state commission, judicial misconduct, commission membership, constitutional amendment, veto override, legislature power, governor, Texas Constitution, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, wildfire, wildfire mitigation, wildfire prevention, volunteer fire department

Transcript Highlights:

• Judicial pay. That's what I said last week is our top priority.
• I agree or I believe that judicial compensation is beginning.
• of Court of Administration of the Texas Judicial System, the State Law Library, the Texas Judicial Council
• LaVoy on the Judicial Selection Reform Commission.
• The chair calls Jacqueline Haversham and Cyndia Thomas with the State Commission on Judicial Judicial

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Item 6, judicial salaries.
• Moving on to item 2, judicial salaries.
• provides judicial education for the judicial branch, have steadily recovered.
• Um, we appreciate the efforts to increase judicial compensation.
• I'll be presenting the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was trying to determine whether they’re acting as a court.
• Who determines all those heirs?
• The claim does not seek damages for a judicial decision.
• The scope of absolute judicial immunity is limited.
• Absolute judicial immunity applies only to acts that are judicial in nature and acts taken within the

Summary: The committee first reviewed litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing involving wage claims brought under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. Members questioned the department’s authority, jurisdiction, use of attorney fees and costs, and whether defendants had to be licensed. The department explained it has long enforced wage and overtime laws, that the claims were small-dollar cases handled by investigators and counsel, and that one case had been paid and dismissed while others were unresolved or had service issues. The committee voted to review or batch-file the labor cases after discussion. The University of Arkansas System then reported three pending lawsuits: an age- and race-discrimination claim by a tenured professor that was resolved early; an ADA/FMLA retaliation claim by a former employee that survived in part on a motion to dismiss and was moving into discovery; and a Section 1983 claim against a UAMS sergeant arising from a parking-ticket dispute, with the university explaining that only punitive damages could create personal exposure for the officer. The committee reviewed each report and voted to accept them. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000 and waiving interest and penalties, which the committee approved for review. The Claims Commission then presented several claims: an unpaid salary differential for a Department of Health employee, reissued warrants, unpaid DHS bills, and multiple negotiated settlements involving ATRS, UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT. Members approved or affirmed most of these items, including a $65,000 settlement in the Tetronics/ATRS matter, a $150,000 medical-negligence settlement, and several vehicle-accident settlements. The most extended debate involved a tax-delinquent property sale claim by Sharon Greer and relatives. The claimant argued they were not properly notified and sought the $4,200 excess from the 2009 sale. Land Commissioner counsel explained the excess had escheated to the county after the statutory claim period expired, while members debated sovereign immunity, standing, heirs, and whether the committee could or should award money anyway. The committee ultimately chose to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session rather than decide it immediately. The committee also heard appeals from dismissed claims, including a UAMS medical-negligence claim, a land-sale notice claim, a pothole claim against ARDOT, and a judicial-immunity claim against the Court of Appeals; most dismissals were affirmed, and the Simpson matter was held over for additional review after the claimant testified.

Transcript Highlights:

• The following year, the employer would then be assessed a rate determined on their experience.
• on their experience rate so determine on their experience rate so the<00:13:55.519> individuals
• <00:14:08.959> on then be assessed a rate determinant on then be assessed a rate determinant
• Judiciary instead of having one judicial Judiciary instead of having one judicial review<00:24:49.159
• jurisdiction when it goes for judicial jurisdiction when it goes for judicial review<00:28:11.600

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• down plus then you've got to determine down plus then you've got to determine what<00:15:35.199>
• called the Judicial Council, we are not in fact part of the judicial branch.
• um that determination is made Indigent um that determination is made by<01:49:03.800> the<01:
• make those determinations.
• those determinations.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Insurance Commissioner DJ Bettencourt on the New Hampshire Insurance Department budget. He said the department is self-funded through assessments on insurers based on New Hampshire premium volume, with about $8 billion in premiums written in the state and a department budget of roughly $15.5 million. He explained that the department has 88 authorized positions, eight vacancies, and that three full-time positions were unfunded after the governor’s requested 4% reduction exercise. He also said the department is trying to balance staffing needs with not overburdening carriers during a hard insurance market. A major topic was the department’s $2.6 million rebate to industry from the prior fiscal year, which Bettencourt described as a credit against the next assessment rather than a direct cash payment. Members questioned why that credit was not reflected as a reduction in the upcoming budget, and Bettencourt and staff explained that the budget assumes full staffing and full spending, with any year-end surplus returned to insurers. The commissioner said the department had added staff in recent years for succession planning and to preserve institutional expertise, and that the rebate reflects careful budgeting rather than excess spending. Members also asked about staffing changes by division, including positions unfunded in fraud, property and casualty examinations, life and health examinations, and tax. Bettencourt said fraud investigations remain strong and that the department can use outside contractors for examinations, with those costs billed to the company being examined. He also described the department’s examination process, including periodic financial exams and targeted market conduct reviews triggered by consumer complaints or trends. Additional questions covered OIT transfers, the department’s oversight of fully insured health coverage, the insurance premium tax and fines going to the general fund, and the department’s limited role in auto repair reimbursement disputes, where he said complaints have recently declined.

Transcript Highlights:

• Who determines all those heirs?
• , or the exercise of judicial discretion.
• The scope of absolute judicial immunity applies only to acts that are judicial in nature and acts taken
• Failure to enforce a remand order is not a judicial act.
• The enforcement of a remand order is not a judicial act.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• a judicial ambush. a judicial ambush.
• /c><00:50:00.800> judicial judicial animus, excuse me, judicial judicial animus, excuse me, judicial
• determined to be permanently paralyzed. determined to be permanently paralyzed.
• you complain to this judicial commission, and they will investigate and determine whether or not there
• They called it judicial ambush.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He said that yesterday Representative Weyler and he heard from the judicial branch that this has been
• However, he said, the judicial branch has been asked for a 4% cut to try to meet the budget deficits
• Representative Lehman said he was concerned that they were hearing from the judicial branch, which he
• He said that yesterday Representative Weyler and he heard from the judicial branch that this has been
• They were able to recalculate them and determine that they were accurate.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on January 30, 2025, and first organized itself by electing Senator Jim Gray as vice chair, electing Representative F as clerk, appointing Michael Caine as legislative budget assistant, and adopting the committee’s rules and procedures. The committee also adopted an amendment to the rules allowing audits to be automatically released to the public once placed on the Fiscal Committee agenda, with members discussing that the change would improve transparency and reduce paper handling. The minutes from the November 15, 2024 meeting were approved, with members who were absent abstaining. The committee then worked through a consent calendar and several individual items. It removed or noted withdrawals on a few items, including item 25004 for further discussion, item 25016 withdrawn by the Department of Education, item 257 removed by Representative F, and item 25001 removed under Tab 4. Item 25004, concerning the newborn screening program, prompted testimony from the Department of Health and Human Services explaining that the program is mandatory with an opt-out provision; officials said 99.2% of newborns were screened in 2023, meaning the opt-out rate was under 1%. The committee also approved item 25007, related to DHHS community health workers and telework policy, after hearing that the workers are not placed in schools and that DHHS follows statewide telework policy. On the regular calendar, the committee approved a Department of Administrative Services request to extend the release date for fiscal year 2024 numbers to March 31, and approved a Department of Fish and Game item. It also approved winter maintenance funding for the Department of Transportation after hearing that the $5.7 million request might not last through the winter if additional storms occur; DOT said even a small storm can cost more than $1 million and that crews are dispatched based on road conditions and supervisory judgment. The committee then approved items for the Judicial Council and the Office of Legislative Budget Assistant. The final discussion focused on the Health and Human Services dashboard and the Youth Development Center claims. DHHS acknowledged a data error in the APS client line and said Community Mental Health Center caseload data is still not fully accurate because two centers are undergoing EHR conversions. Members also asked about the low census at the Sununu Youth Development Center and about the process for managing future claims related to the YDC settlement fund. Witnesses from the Attorney General’s office said the fund is handled through a unique arrangement involving DOJ appropriations and judicial branch staff, that current judicial budget cuts are not yet affecting the litigation pace, and that the average resolution so far has been about $500,000, though future claims may vary. No votes were taken on the discussion items beyond the approvals noted above.

Transcript Highlights:

• Outlined in the preamble of the judicial conduct, which judges are typically bound by the judicial conduct
• Judicial Conduct.
• The code of judicial conduct. Code of judicial conduct? Right, and that is already in statute.
• Judicial conduct there. Correct. I would just replace ethical standards with judicial conduct.
• Judicial conduct.

Bills: HB1455

Keywords: tribal consultation, Indian Affairs Commission, tribal governments, tribal sovereignty, state-tribal relations, Native American, tribal nations, consultation requirement, legislative process, jurisdiction, sovereignty, North Dakota tribes, government-to-government consultation, tribal chairpersons, 908, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee first heard House Bill 1455, which would require the North Dakota Indian Affairs Commission to review introduced legislation for tribal implications and conduct consultation with affected tribes. Rep. Collette Brown said the bill was intended to formalize and strengthen tribal consultation, and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe representative Ross Bell testified in support. Brad Hawk, executive director of the Indian Affairs Commission, testified neutrally, saying the office already does much of this work but that the bill would add structure; several senators raised concerns about duplication, possible future staffing costs, and whether the bill was necessary. The committee amended the bill to replace “each measure” with “all legislation,” then passed a do-not-pass recommendation on HB 1455 by recorded vote, with Sen. Luick designated as carrier. The committee then took up House Bill 1032, dealing with municipal courts, appeals, and judge qualifications. Legislative Council and court staff walked through proposed amendments, including making municipal courts courts of record on a delayed effective date, clarifying appeal procedures, and adding standards for municipal judges. Members discussed whether to use the term “ethical standards” or “judicial conduct”; after questions about definitions and enforcement, the committee settled on replacing the language with “judicial conduct” in the amended bill. The committee adopted the amendments and then passed HB 1032 as amended on a do-pass vote, with Sen. Cory to carry. Later, the committee heard House Bill 1263, which would make it easier for people with criminal records to seek sealing after a denial by allowing an appeal and reducing the waiting period for a new petition from three years to one year. Rep. Nels Christensen, Christopher Davis, Travis Fink, and Brad Peterson all supported the bill’s goal of giving people a better path to rehabilitation and employment. The main point of disagreement was whether to keep the statutory presumption that the benefit to the petitioner must outweigh the presumption of openness of criminal records; several witnesses urged removing that language, while others said it was part of the compromise that created the current law. The committee closed the hearing without taking final action and said it would review the House discussion before deciding later.

Transcript Highlights:

• voting and elections, because I think that opportunity for judicial review is an important balance to
• Of the ideas that we have around voting and elections, because I think that opportunity for judicial
• Um, the law was not sufficient enough to have anything done about it after judicial review.
• Um, the law was not sufficient enough to have anything done about it after judicial review.
• right to vote, but it is up to each state to determine how, um, those elections are conducted.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Elections Committee met on February 6, 2025, and first considered the reappointment of Steven Swanson to the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board. Swanson described his background in legal aid, lobbying, judging, and international rule-of-law work, and said he wanted to continue serving the public. Committee members praised his experience and discussed the importance of campaign finance oversight, including preventing corporate participation in Minnesota elections. Senator Wosinski moved to recommend Swanson’s confirmation, and the motion was adopted. The committee then heard Senate File 529, a proposed constitutional amendment to state that elections shall be free, fair, and equal, and that no civil or military power may interfere with the free exercise of the right to vote. Senator Dibble presented the bill as a way to strengthen voting rights and provide a constitutional basis to challenge voter suppression, gerrymandering, and unfair campaign practices. Testimony in support came from David Fischer of Clean Elections Minnesota and Jean Massie of Fair Vote Minnesota, both of whom argued the amendment would protect access to voting, increase confidence in elections, and align Minnesota with other states that have similar language. Members discussed whether the amendment’s broad language could invite judicial interpretation or affect future election laws. Senator Koran questioned how the proposal would improve Minnesota’s already high turnout, while Senator Grant raised concerns that the terms “free, fair, and equal” were undefined and could shift power to the courts. Senator Lucero proposed an oral amendment to add “ensuring one eligible citizen, one vote” after the word “equal,” saying it would address concerns about future voter ID laws. The amendment was restated by counsel and discussed, with Senator Dibble saying it did not significantly harm the bill but suggesting it might imply a requirement he did not intend. The transcript ends during discussion of that oral amendment, and no final vote on the bill itself is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• the current judicial evaluation system. the current judicial evaluation system.
• judicial system is at an all-time low. judicial system is at an all-time low.
• judicial branch uh says in determinable judicial branch uh says in determinable increase<01:13:54.639
• was a a a pseudo judicial immunity. was a a a pseudo judicial immunity.
• awarded judicial immunity.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's just given it's given judicial So it's just given it's given judicial difference difference
• Judges determine most everything about a case, allowing them the opportunity to determine whether this
• determine whether bail is appropriate. determine whether bail is appropriate.
• <00:54:49.760> their you'd also have to determine their you'd also have to determine their
• retards judicial discretion? retards judicial discretion?

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• withhold funds, they need to determine withhold funds, they need to determine that<00:28:33.200>
• review a commissioner's determination review a commissioner's determination then then then which
• evidence carefully and acts judiciously evidence carefully and acts judiciously on<00:53:46.560>
• judicial review. judicial review. Senator<00:54:42.200> Cronk.
• <00:56:59.600> The headnote judicial review. The headnote judicial review.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I was trying to determine whether they’re acting as a court.
• Who determines all those heirs?
• The claim does not seek damages for a judicial decision.
• Absolute judicial immunity applies only to acts that are judicial in nature and acts taken within the
• There—the only other judicial—yeah, it sounds like the court is…” “…judicial court is Judge Hickey’s

Summary: The committee first reviewed several wage-claim and labor-related litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing. Members questioned the department’s authority and jurisdiction, whether it was acting like a court, and why it sought attorney’s fees and costs. Department staff explained that the claims arose under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act and related labor statutes, that the department investigates small wage claims and can file suit when informal resolution fails, and that filing fees are waived by statute though service costs may be incurred. The committee reviewed individual cases, including one where the employer had not proven cash payments, another that had already been paid and dismissed, and a third where service could not yet be completed. The committee then voted to review or batch-file the labor items. The University of Arkansas System then reported on three pending lawsuits under the litigation-notification statute. One case involving a tenured professor alleging age and race discrimination had already been resolved and dismissed after the university re-engaged in discussions about a position. A second case involving a former employee alleging ADA and FMLA retaliation was moving forward after partial dismissal and an answer denying liability. A third case involved a former vendor employee alleging retaliation tied to a parking ticket; members asked about individual-capacity exposure for a university police sergeant, and counsel explained that punitive damages could potentially create personal exposure. The committee reviewed each report. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000, with interest and penalties waived, and the committee approved it. The Claims Commission then presented several claims and settlements, including an unpaid salary differential for the Department of Health, reissued warrants, unpaid bills for DHS, and multiple negotiated settlements involving UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT; these were generally approved or batched for approval. The most extensive discussion involved a settlement between the Teacher Retirement System and Tetronics International Limited in liquidation, arising from losses tied to the failed Blue Oak project; members questioned the company’s liquidation status, the prior investment loss, and why the matter was settling for $65,000, and the committee ultimately affirmed the settlement. The committee also heard a disputed tax-sale claim involving the Commissioner of State Lands, where a claimant argued that excess proceeds from a 2009 tax sale should have gone to her family rather than escheating to the county. After testimony from the claimant and counsel, members debated sovereign immunity, heirship, and whether the committee could or should award the $4,200 overage. The motion was amended and then replaced with a motion to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session, which passed. Finally, the committee considered an appeal by Andrew Simpson challenging dismissal of his claim against the Arkansas Court of Appeals; after Simpson and court staff explained the underlying dispute, the committee reviewed the dismissal and the matter was held over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then our judges have judicial performance evaluations.
• So let's talk about the First Judicial Magistrate cases.
• They wanted everything to go to the First Judicial District.
• Um, if the resources are needed, as I did in the First Judicial.
• The judicial ruling is that it is likely unconstitutional.

Keywords: 996, all