Transcript Highlights:

• So when my daughter died, it was at 3 a.m., and they confiscated a lot of cash. His dad had died.
• And if I were to ever sold a grain of anything that... and it's gone, but that's not where we're here
• And if I were to ever sold a grain of anything that Present for it.
• And if I were to ever sell a grain of anything that had something that would kill somebody, I wouldn't

Committee: House Special Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2901 in executive session. After a brief explanation from the bill sponsor, the committee adopted a House Committee amendment ending in 0.07 that set a five-year expiration date and clarified where reports must be filed. The committee then rolled the amendment into a substitute and voted the House Committee substitute do pass by a roll call of 13 ayes and 0 noes. The committee then heard House Bill 3000, which would fix the signature threshold for petition-driven audits by tying the required number of signatures to the gubernatorial election in effect when the petition process begins, rather than when signatures are submitted. The sponsor and the State Auditor’s office said the change would prevent the required number from shifting during the petition period and provide consistency. No vote was taken on the bill during the hearing. House Bill 313 was then heard, a fentanyl-poisoning response bill that would require naloxone in public buildings, designate October as Fentanyl Poisoning Awareness Month, require fentanyl education for students in grades 6 through 12, and require training and investigation procedures for law enforcement in drug-related deaths. The sponsor and multiple family members who lost loved ones to fentanyl strongly supported the bill, emphasizing prevention, access to Narcan, and more thorough death investigations. Committee members generally expressed support, raised questions about the definition of public buildings, school implementation, and funding, and testimony suggested opioid settlement money as a possible source. No committee action was taken on HB 313 in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• We were able to reduce the growth in the grain fees, even though those fees overwhelmingly impacted grain
• uh uh grain overwhelmingly impacted uh uh grain companies<00:12:08.160><c> with</c><00:12:08.399><c>
• But the other one is in the grain elevators.
• </c> other one is is in the grain elevators. other one is is in the grain elevators.
• Um recovered on confiscated uh firearms.

Transcript Highlights:

• Vapes confiscated by schools cannot be considered household hazardous waste and cannot be accepted by
• I confiscated them, accumulated an entire wide file. cabinet full of vapes.
• Assembly Bill 998 will address these challenges by allowing schools to safely dispose of confiscated
• Vapes that are confiscated by a school from students should be acceptable at our HHW facilities.
• We should be able to manage them as HHW because the schools are confiscating them in loco parentis so

Committee: House Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials

Transcript Highlights:

• just local farmers selling to customers directly or to their local mom-and-pop store or even at our grain
• Uh, there are two different types of producers. at our grain store um that we have where at our grain

Committee: House Environment and Agriculture

Bills: HB410 , HR310 , HR314 , HR316 , HR317 , HR321 , HR275 , HR276 , HR279 , HR282 , HR286 , HR289 , HR292 , HR295 , HR302 , HR319 , HR307 , HR273 , SCR59 , SCR61 , SCR62 , SCR68 , SCR69 , SCR70 , SCR54 , SCR55 , SCR64 , SCR75 , HCR32 , HB776 , HB42 , HB119 , HB159 , HB302 , HB1017 , HB1028 , SB217 , SB283 , HB953 , SB208 , HR74 , HB998 , HB901 , HR20 , HCR65 , HCR71 , HCR98 , HB284 , HB306 , HB341 , HB366 , HB393 , HB458 , HB577 , HB603 , HB605 , HB614 , HB625 , HB646 , HB733 , HB752 , HB773 , HB798 , HB911 , HB955 , HB996 , HB1035 , HB1069 , HB1113 , HB1140 , HB1180 , HB1191 , HB1240 , HB1255 , SB82 , SB89 , SB97 , SB123 , SB237 , HB36 , HB74 , HB75 , HB258 , HB259 , HB414 , HB459 , HB784 , HB848 , HB956 , HB1095 , HB1220 , HB1252 , SB469 , SB479

Keywords: oil and gas, orphan wells, inactive wells, shut-in wells, marginal wells, plugging and abandonment, well decommissioning, site remediation, site restoration, Oilfield Site Restoration, OSR program, financial security, bonding, taxpayer liability, public liability, offshore wells, onshore wells, coastal erosion, Department of Conservation and Energy, natural resources

Transcript Highlights:

• So when my daughter died, it was at 3 a.m., and they confiscated a lot of cash. His dad had died.
• And if I were ever sold a grain of anything that had something that would kill somebody, I wouldn't ever

Committee: House Special Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• this country and I want each of you to lean in to what it means to say I'm going to go against the grain
• that defends the rights of law-abiding Texas from dangerous and unconstitutional red flag gun confiscation
• Gun confiscation is not a serious means of preventing suicides.
• It's easy for gun confiscation, or easy gun confiscation can leave good law-abiding evidence. people

Bills: SB29 , SB406 , SB447 , SB875 , SB893 , SB1033 , SB1346 , SB1362 , SB1539 , SCR22 , SB 29

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• It seems just as miraculous that law enforcement was tipped off and was able to find him, confiscate
• 00:12:19.920><c> him</c> tipped off and was able to find him tipped off and was able to find him confiscate
• his we weapon stash and throw confiscate his we weapon stash and throw him<00:12:22.959><c> in</c><00
• on his own a certain amount of grain on his own land<03:32:33.439><c> for</c><03:32:33.680><c> his</
• d 31 is the court hearing confiscated d 31 is the court hearing the<04:06:46.199><c> courts</c><04:06

Committee: House Criminal Justice and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• We had them confiscated on the House side, but we are resourceful and we have wrestled them back from
• It can fit into our current rotation, for instance between small grains and soybeans.
• :08:43.120><c> of</c><01:08:43.199><c> those</c><01:08:43.359><c> grains.
• </c><01:08:43.759><c> In</c><01:08:43.920><c> other</c> displace some of those grains.
• In other displace some of those grains.

Committee: Senate Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband, and Rural Development

Transcript Highlights:

• So this just says if something that falls, it has nothing to do with confiscating guns.
• I drive out to Nampa for work at the moment, and so I am against the grain, and I see... ...to Nampa
• And so I am against the grain, and I see the traffic coming into Boise and how bad it is.

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Two, our farmers rely on all birds, not just migratory birds, to take that grain that's lying on the
• field and eat that grain.
• Confiscate the phone?" "Yes, I— that's not in the bill.
• </c><01:29:12.760><c> Confiscate</c><01:29:13.240><c> the</c> take the phone away?
• Confiscate the take the phone away? Confiscate the phone? phone? phone?

Transcript Highlights:

• The lethal dose is merely 2 milligrams, equivalent to 5 grains of sand.
• six months into the year, by July of 2024, the DEA's Rocky Mountain Field Division had already confiscated
• So it's four to five grains of sand that is a lethal dose for an opioid naive patient.

Committee: Senate Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, uh, we're also confiscated.
• ><c> unless</c><01:11:53.360><c> a</c> animal shall be confiscated unless a animal shall be confiscated
• </c> animal should be confiscated. animal should be confiscated.
• So, it it confiscation of animals.
• &gt;&gt; the chance to confiscate. &gt;&gt; the chance to confiscate.

Committee: House Environment and Agriculture

Transcript Highlights:

• I would ask, why are we confiscating funds from these students?
• So you just said confiscate military funds? How is this confiscating military funds? I'm confused.
• That's what you think could confiscate dollars.
• So I want to know why it is okay that dollars might be confiscated from other families? Mr.
• If you want to ask about this program, this measure says you cannot confiscate it.

Bills: HCR2048

Committee: Senate Appropriations, Transportation and Technology

Transcript Highlights:

• I would ask, why are we confiscating funds from these students?
• So you just said confiscate military funds? How is this confiscating military funds? I'm confused.
• That's what you think could confiscate dollars.
• There's nothing else left to confiscate. Oh, Mr. Chairman, Senator Kuby...
• Okay. ...there's nothing else left to confiscate. Oh, Mr. Chairman, Senator Kuby.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Appropriations, Transportation and Technology heard HCR 2048, as amended by a strike-everything amendment. The amendment would constitutionally prohibit the state from confiscating scholarship account monies from children of military families who are eligible for education scholarship accounts (ESAs) and can use the funds for tuition and fees at eligible postsecondary institutions. It also would make any later bill or voter-approved measure that violates that prohibition void in its entirety, with no severability, for measures enacted or approved on or after November 1, 2026. Representative Way, the sponsor, said the measure was intended to protect military families from having education funds taken away and argued that military children face unique disruptions because of deployments and frequent moves. Supporters including Matt Beinberg of the Goldwater Institute, Kevin Beasty of the Arizona Christian Education Coalition, Peter Gentala of the Center for Arizona Policy, and Senator Rogers said the amendment was needed to safeguard military families and preserve their ability to use ESA funds flexibly, including for college savings. Opponents, including Senators Alston, Fernandez, Kuby, and Epstein, argued the proposal was unnecessary, overly broad, and an attempt to preempt or invalidate a pending ESA-related citizen initiative. They also raised concerns about ESA accountability, public school funding, and constitutional issues involving voter initiatives and judicial review. After debate, the committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and then voted on HCR 2048 as amended. The final committee vote was 6 ayes, 4 noes, and 1 not voting, giving the measure a do-pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, what they were concerned with is a confiscation piece, so the entire confiscation piece has
• However, what they were concerned with is a confiscation piece, so the entire confiscation piece has
• However, what they were concerned with is a confiscation piece, so the entire confiscation piece has
• However, what they were concerned with is a confiscation piece, so the entire confiscation piece has
• However, what they were concerned with is a confiscation piece, so the entire confiscation piece has

Committee: House Criminal Justice and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:16:15.399><c> animals</c> alteration of confiscated animals alteration of confiscated animals
• This is only in cases of confiscation.
• This is only in cases of confiscation.
• proof shall be provided by confiscated proof shall be provided by the<00:44:46.319><c> confiscating<
• </c><00:45:48.319><c> is</c> of confiscation is of confiscation is that<00:45:50.200><c> I</c><00:45:

Summary: The committee worked through a draft bill amending animal cruelty and protective custody provisions, focusing on how animals may be seized, cared for, and returned, and on what rights owners have when animals are taken. Members discussed adding language requiring officers to inform a charged person in writing of the right to petition for a veterinarian of their choice, clarifying that any documents presented for signature must be fully and honestly explained, and revising language so confiscated animals cannot be altered without notarized owner authorization. They also considered a new prohibition on using confiscated animals for fundraising or donations, ultimately preferring the term “financial gain” over “profiteering.” The discussion also covered protective custody procedures, including adding “municipal animal control officer” to the list of officers involved, allowing return of animals to the owner or caretaker if no charges have been filed or no warrant establishing probable cause has been sought or issued, and clarifying the distinction between criminal seizure and temporary protective custody. The commissioner’s comments led to several proposed deletions or revisions, including removing language viewed as redundant or inconsistent with protective custody, and striking references to live racing provisions that are no longer relevant. Members further addressed lactating animals, agreeing to add language that confiscated lactating animals should not be separated from their nonweaned offspring. They also discussed a proposed confidentiality provision requiring people assisting in investigations or taking possession of seized animals to sign a binding nondisclosure agreement, though members noted similar protections may need to be duplicated in the temporary custody section as well. The conversation was largely about drafting and legal clarity, with no final vote or formal action recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• When it's not working, they will confiscate it and record that in an incident report or a disposition
• </c> During this pack up staff confiscated During this pack up staff confiscated claimant's<00:53:50.160
• but it was confiscated for being altered. altered. altered.
• were confiscated because they were not on the list, and the headphones were confiscated because they
• The incident report indicates staff confiscated claimant's completed hobby crafts as contraband.

Summary: The Joint House and Senate Subcommittee on Claims convened on April 30, first without quorum and then with quorum, at which point the committee corrected and approved the prior minutes. Members then reviewed several claims held over for informational purposes, including injury claims for Fraser, Larson, Schmidt, Stuart, and Washington, and property claims for Lidberg, Robecky, and Young, with no action taken on those items. The committee dismissed a claim by Ms. Prevally seeking reimbursement for funds liquidated from irrevocable trusts after hearing that the matter had already been litigated in court and that subcommittee rules bar claims for public assistance compensation. The panel then approved two exoneration claims: James Jovan Davis, whose murder conviction was vacated after postconviction proceedings and who settled for $250,000, and Clayton Douglas Groves, whose sexual-conduct convictions were vacated after evidence of prior false accusations was admitted and who settled for $350,000. Testimony from counsel for both claimants emphasized wrongful conviction, the length of incarceration, and negotiated settlement amounts, with members asking about the basis for the compensation and attorney-fee allocations. The final exoneration claim, Marvin Haynes, was also approved. The committee heard that Haynes was convicted as a teenager, later exonerated after new evidence showed false evidence and suggestive eyewitness identification, and that the state and claimant had reached a $4.5 million settlement. The committee then turned to Department of Corrections injury claims, denying Arnold Baker’s claim for lack of evidence of a compensable permanent injury, and approving Mark Carroll’s claim for a $4,570.40 award after he suffered a compensable ankle fracture while working. In property claims, the committee discussed Anthony Edwards’s claim for food, a JPay tablet, and shoes. After testimony from Department of Corrections counsel about property inventory procedures and the lack of a current replacement tablet program, members agreed to compensate Edwards $70 for the missing shoes, deny the food claim, and deny the tablet claim because the tablet had been returned and any malfunction was reported outside the department’s reporting window.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's perfect; I like that language a lot. confiscated was it worded like that in confiscated was it
• Confiscation, so protective custody is a form of confiscation, let's put it that way.
• </c> uh of this section so no confiscated uh of this section so no confiscated animal<01:18:57.280><c
• So, as I see it, in lines 17 to 19 on page two, regarding confiscated animals, no confiscated animal
• </c> no custodian of an animal confiscated no custodian of an animal confiscated under<01:37:24.719><

Summary: The meeting covered two main items. First, the solid waste subcommittee reviewed draft language for HB 707, focusing on landfill siting and permitting standards. Members and the Department of Environmental Services discussed replacing repeated references to “aquifer” with “drinking water well,” clarifying that aquifer is a broad term, and considering whether a statutory definition was needed. They also debated the bill’s setback and time-of-travel provisions, including the 10^-5 standard, a 1,500-foot distance, and whether the bill should rely more on performance-based criteria than prescriptive distances. Another major topic was permit denial language tied to applicants with significant histories of repeated serious violations or landfill-related litigation; the department said it already has related authority in current rules, but noted some wording was still too vague and could be tightened. No vote was taken, and the chair closed the hearing with plans to continue work later. The second item was a work session on HB 424, which would direct the Department of Agriculture, Markets and Food to create forms for businesses to request information about service animals and establish a study committee on fraudulent or untrained service animals. Several members said the problem raised by the bill was real but expressed concern that the legislature may be limited by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. Others argued that a study committee would likely not produce a workable solution and might conflict with leadership’s direction to avoid unnecessary study committees. Members discussed whether the bill should be retained, amended, or instead replaced with a letter or resolution to the federal delegation. The committee appeared to lean toward ITL and possibly pursuing a letter to federal officials, but no final vote is reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's already in place for red flag gun confiscation orders.
• That's already in place for red flag gun confiscation orders.
• That's already in place for red flag gun confiscation orders.
• That's already in place for red flag gun confiscation orders.
• A red flag gun confiscation order is a criminal infraction.

Bills: SF0069 , SF0084 , SF0050 , SF0109 , HB0069 , HB0098

Committee: Senate Agriculture, State and Public Lands & Water Resources