Transcript Highlights:

• system results.
• voting, and in-person voting.
• , or early voting.
• system.
• The system works.

Bills: HB311, SB447, SB505, SB2217, SB2753

Keywords: voter registration, electronic, Texas election law, Signature verification, DPS, internet application, Texas Election Code, signature verification, online application, data security, electronic application, Department of Public Safety, information security, electronic voter registration, voting technology, voter access, state election laws, digital signature, election irregularities, audit

Summary: The committee heard several election-related bills. SB 447 would let the City of Mission in Hidalgo County permanently move its municipal elections from May to the uniform November election date if it chooses. The bill was described as permissive and intended to increase turnout and reduce costs. Mission’s mayor testified in support, saying voters had already approved the change by a wide margin in a charter amendment election. The bill was left pending after no objection. SB 2217 focused on standardizing election data reporting and reconciliation across counties to improve transparency and comparability. Testimony was generally supportive of the goal, but Dr. Laura Presley and others flagged technical issues, including a discrepancy between a three-ballot mismatch threshold in existing law and a 1% threshold in part of the bill, plus a definition issue involving central accumulators. Supporters said consistent auditing and reconciliation would help election integrity, while the bill was also left pending. The committee then took up SB 2753, a major proposal to create a continuous in-person voting period that would combine early voting and Election Day into one uninterrupted process, with precinct consolidation and other changes. Supporters said it could simplify administration, reduce equipment changes, and improve security by using one set of machines. Opponents and neutral witnesses raised concerns about cost, staffing, ballot security, reporting changes, weekend voting, and whether the bill was ready for implementation; several urged a pilot or study instead. The committee substitute was withdrawn and the bill was left pending. SB 505 would create a process for election workers, candidates, party officials, and measure proponents or opponents to request explanations of election irregularities, with escalation to the Secretary of State for audit or enforcement if responses were unsatisfactory. Supporters said it would provide a way to resolve irregularities and restore confidence, while opponents argued it was too broad, lacked guardrails against abuse, and could be used by partisan actors to pressure counties. The bill was left pending. Finally, HB 311 would expand Texas’s online voter registration system to first-time registrants and others, with supporters citing efficiency, lower costs, and broader access, and opponents raising concerns about signature verification and implementation details. Testimony was cut short because of the session deadline, and the bill had not been disposed of in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• system results.
• voting, and in-person voting.
• or early voting.
• system.
• The system works.

Bills: HB311, SB447, SB505, SB2217, SB2753

Keywords: voter registration, electronic, Texas election law, Signature verification, DPS, internet application, Texas Election Code, signature verification, online application, data security, electronic application, Department of Public Safety, information security, electronic voter registration, voting technology, voter access, state election laws, digital signature, election irregularities, audit

Summary: The House Committee on Elections met with a quorum present and heard several election-related bills, with public testimony limited to two minutes per witness. The first measure, SB 447, would allow the City of Mission to move its municipal elections from May to November on a one-time, permanent basis. Supporters, including Mission’s mayor, said voters had already approved the change by a wide margin and argued it would improve turnout and reduce costs. The bill was left pending after no objection. The committee then heard SB 2217, which was described as a transparency measure to standardize election data reporting and reconciliation across counties. Testimony focused on a technical issue involving discrepancy thresholds for electronic voting system reconciliation, with one witness urging the bill be aligned with existing law’s “more than 3” standard rather than a 1% threshold, and another suggesting a definition fix. The bill was left pending. Members also heard SB 2753, a major proposal to create a continuous in-person voting period by combining early voting and election day into one uninterrupted period, with a committee substitute making it a pilot and permissive. Supporters said it could simplify administration and improve security, while opponents warned it would increase costs, require more staffing and equipment, delay results, and create logistical problems for counties. The committee substitute was withdrawn and the bill was left pending. Finally, SB 505 would let certain election stakeholders request explanations of irregularities from election officials and, if unresolved, escalate the matter to the Secretary of State for audit or possible conservatorship. Supporters framed it as a tool for accountability and transparency, while opponents called it overly broad and vulnerable to abuse. The bill was left pending. The committee also took up HB 311, which would expand online voter registration to first-time registrants and direct state agencies to develop a pathway for Texans without a driver’s license to register online. Supporters argued it would modernize the process, reduce errors, and save money, while opponents said first-time applicants still need a wet signature and raised concerns about signature verification and implementation. Due to the late hour and floor deadline, testimony was cut off, the names of remaining witnesses were read into the record, and the bill was left pending before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So please do not vote this way. Vote favorably. Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
• An early voter, someone who voted during the early voting period, told us they had voted, and we found
• We do not now fund and reimburse for systems like that where the votes are recorded electronically and
• Security seals on each unit of voting system equipment must be placed to prevent unauthorized access.
• That executive order is a ...mandate to the Election Assistance Commission to modify their voting system

Bills: SB801, SB1200, SB1410, SB1717, SB1862, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB506, SB2626, SJR63, SB 3

Keywords: SB 801, birth certificate, birth record, certified copy, homeless, homelessness, unhoused, vital records, state registrar, local registrar, county clerk, fee waiver, identity documents, ID access, housing insecurity, shelter, transitional housing, Health and Safety Code, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• We can reconsider the vote; it's easy.
• We can show you as a no vote.
• He wants to vote no. Is there objection to the motion to reconsider the vote?
• We're going to vote again so that we can... ...and record everyone's vote properly.
• He can vote present, not voting, or he can turn around.

Bills: SB801, SB1200, SB1410, SB1717, SB1862, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB506, SB2626, SJR63, SB 3

Keywords: SB 801, birth certificate, birth record, certified copy, homeless, homelessness, unhoused, vital records, state registrar, local registrar, county clerk, fee waiver, identity documents, ID access, housing insecurity, shelter, transitional housing, Health and Safety Code, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• County-wide voting, vote centers as they are.
• Since we started voting, you know, on this system, there's always the chance you're going to have some
• Code section 127.306 for testing tabulating equipment, section 129.003 for voting system standards, section
• are voting. voting or not voting.
• We certify our voting systems. We prescribe official forms.

Bills: HB569, HB766, HB1638, HB2316, HB2773, HB2785, HB3113, HB3709, HB3775, HB4275

Keywords: early voting, ballot correction, voting rights, election integrity, mail-in voting, voter notification, HB 766, precinct chair, precinct chair candidate, ballot application, Texas Election Code, Section 172.021, election administration, candidate filing, party precinct chair, county party, political party office, email address, telephone number, confidential candidate information

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, this bill requires our retirement systems to cast votes in line with their fiduciary duties,
• voting.
• For our pension systems? Thank you.
• They make recommendations on how to vote shares. A lot of Retirement systems.
• Representative Dempsey, you'd like to vote. Please close the queue.

Bills: HB1739, HB1784, HB1889, HB2116, HB2206, HB3625, HB2939, HB3028, HB3265, HB3313, HB3413, HB3414, HB3415, HB3416, HB3417, HB3418, HB3420, HB3588, HB3748, HB3721, HB3852, HB4132, HB4263, HB4303, HB4311, HB4428, HB4429, HB4434

Keywords: retirement, law enforcement, disability benefits, pension system, Oklahoma, education reform, local control, student outcomes, curriculum changes, school funding, public retirement systems, pension, retirement benefits, cost-of-living adjustment, COLA, inflation adjustment, CPI-U, Consumer Price Index, firefighters pension, police pension

Transcript Highlights:

• Um we did submit written system.
• >> voting on House Bill 1805. Chair's >> voting on House Bill 1805.
• Chair, vice chair, vote I. amendments. Chair, vice chair, vote I. Rep.<00:26:55.760> Kahaloa.
• voting boards. voting boards.
• Voting on House Bill 2184. chair. Voting on House Bill 2184.

Bills: HB1805, HB2110, HB2180, HB2184, HB2219, HB2469

Keywords: child welfare, advocacy, oversight, independent office, foster care, child advocate, child safety, nepotism, ethics, government transparency, accountability, legislative standards, electronic voting, legislative transparency, Hawaii House, voting system, appropriation, lawmaker safety, political violence, confidentiality

Summary: The House Committee on Legislative Management heard testimony on several measures. HB 1805, relating to child welfare, drew support from the University of Hawaii and concerns from the Attorney General about the bill’s definition of state agency and possible separation-of-powers and supremacy clause issues. During decision-making, the committee opted to move the child advocate function to the Attorney General’s office, accepted the Attorney General’s suggested scope and jurisdiction amendments, set the salary at 90% of the Department of Health deputy director’s salary, and passed the bill with amendments. HB 2110, relating to nepotism, received support from the Hawaii State Ethics Commission, which said the bill would apply the rule consistently and noted the existing good-cause exception process. The committee later deferred the bill, saying existing House rules on nepotism were already strict and that the proposal would be duplicative in statute. HB 2180, relating to voting boards, had no oral testimony in the room during the hearing, but the committee later amended it into a blank appropriations vehicle for the House of Representatives and passed it with amendments. HB 2184, relating to lawmaker safety, drew concerns from the Campaign Spending Commission that the bill would require redaction of address information and could create implementation issues, and the Attorney General noted missing language regarding appointed officials and an internal cross-reference issue. The committee adopted amendments to address those concerns and passed the bill with amendments. HB 2219, relating to disclosure of privileged communications to the Ombudsman, was clarified by the Ombudsman’s office as not requiring disclosure of privileged material, only preserving privilege if such material is voluntarily provided; the bill passed with amendments. HB 2469, relating to a regular session review working group, received testimony from the State Procurement Office, the Legislative Reference Bureau, and others in support and opposition, and the committee passed it with amendments after changing references and funding language.

Transcript Highlights:

• became very evident during the floods, that swing bridges are a vital component of a transportation system
• Uh, would any member like to record a vote on Senate Bill 261?
• I would like to record an I vote on Senate Bill 261. Okay. It is recorded.
• vote on Senate Bill 261? vote on Senate Bill 261? Representative<00:14:06.040> Elliott.
• <00:14:11.120> on would like to record an I vote on would like to record an I vote on Senate

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:32 SB 261 Discussion: 01:40 SB 261 Voting: 05:37 SB 324 Discussion: 06:23 SB 324 Voting: 12:56, 958, all

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:33 SB 136 Discussion: 01:47 SB 136 Voting: 09:17 SB 249 Discussion: 11:05 SB 249 Voting: 12:57, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, one of the things about that makes a system so effective is it has an independent funding mechanism
• I vote I.
• <00:02:44.160> I<00:02:44.440> vote<00:02:44.960> I. Senator Wise.
• I vote I. Senator Wise. Chair Wheeler. I vote I.
• for this to be the new state vote for this to be the new state mushroom.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:26 SB 343 Discussion: 01:00 SB 343 Voting: 02:25 SB 19 Discussion: 03:25 SB 19 Voting: 20:10, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Economic Development, Tourism, and Labor met with a roll call showing members present, then first took up Senate Bill 343, which would extend the Workers' Compensation Funding Commission and preserve the independent funding mechanism for the Kentucky Department of Workers' Claims. The chair explained that the bill would keep the current assessment structure in place beyond its scheduled 2029 expiration and support the department’s independence and budgeting flexibility. The committee voted 11-0 to report the bill favorably. The committee then heard a presentation on Senate Bill 19, relating to a state mushroom. Senator Scott Madon and Representative Mitch Whitaker introduced students and a biology teacher from Letcher County Central High School, who presented research supporting the indigo milk cap (Lactarius indigo) as Kentucky’s state mushroom. The students described the mushroom’s blue color, ecological role, edible qualities, and possible educational and scientific value, and tied the proposal to Kentucky’s identity as the Bluegrass State. Senators praised the students’ presentation and the effort to involve young people in the legislative process, and one senator asked how to identify edible mushrooms, prompting advice that experience is important and that local mushroom groups can help. The committee then voted 11-0 to report Senate Bill 19 favorably. Before adjourning, members briefly discussed the presentation and the educational value of involving students, with comments noting the strong participation of young women in science. Senate Bill 324 was on the agenda but was passed over and held for one week. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:13:01.680> And water, wastewater and gas systems.
• And water, wastewater and gas systems.
• the operation of the system so that if the operation of the system so that if you<00:15:11.199> know
• I'm going to vote I.
• [clears throat] >> I vote yes, ma'am. And Representative... >> I vote yes, ma'am.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:38 HB 576 discussion: 01:56 HB 576 voting: 06:54 HB 593 discussion: 08:25 HB 593 voting: 21:58, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Economic Development and Workforce Investment met with a quorum and first considered House Bill 576, which would create the Kentucky Talent Recruitment Grant Program. Representative Robert Duvall said the bill is intended to address Kentucky’s workforce shortage by funding local recruitment efforts for out-of-state talent, with grants of up to $500,000 to cities, counties, and nonprofits, a required 20% local match, and performance-based payments. He said the program is modeled on existing efforts already operating in Kentucky and cited projected economic and tax benefits. The committee substitute removed an appropriation and emergency clause so funding would go through the regular budget process, and members approved the committee substitute, the bill, and a title amendment with favorable expression. The committee then took up House Bill 593, sponsored by Representative Josh Bray, which addresses data centers and utility costs. Bray said the bill is designed to protect ratepayers from subsidizing data center infrastructure and to ensure projects either bring their own generation, use power purchase agreements, or pay upfront for any needed transmission or generation upgrades. He explained that the committee substitute made mostly technical changes, including giving municipal utilities more time to set tariffs, clarifying terms, adding exemptions for certain TVA- and DOE-related projects, and preserving existing contracts and net metering arrangements. Members asked about local control, the $75,000 prepayment, and TVA authority; Bray said the prepayment covers utility due diligence and screens speculative projects, local requirements must be certified before incentives apply, and TVA is federally regulated. The bill received supportive comments from several members, who emphasized protecting utility bills and ratepayers, and it passed the committee with favorable expression.

Transcript Highlights:

• The statute currently that's in the code with regard to processing electronic voting system results.
• event, including early voting, mail-in voting, and in-person voting.
• You need to have the whole state go to countywide voting or early voting.
• , all early votes twice.
• The system works.

Bills: HB311, SB447, SB505, SB2217, SB2753, HB311

Keywords: voter registration, electronic, Texas election law, Signature verification, DPS, internet application, Texas Election Code, signature verification, online application, data security, electronic application, Department of Public Safety, information security, electronic voter registration, voting technology, voter access, state election laws, digital signature, election irregularities, audit

Transcript Highlights:

• voting system is a ballot Vote universal voting system is a ballot marking<00:51:15.680> device
• <00:57:44.960> system facilities and the entire voting system facilities and the entire voting
• <01:16:38.640> We used uh the heart voting systems. We used uh the heart voting systems.
• We perform that on the entire voting system.
• We also on the entire voting system.

Keywords: Discussion of BR 25 (2026 RS) 04:15 Presentation on voting systems by ES&S 48:14 Presentation on voting systems by Hart InterCivic and Harp Enterprises 01:13:07, 958, all

Summary: The committee met to approve the October 21 minutes and then took up BR 25 for the 2026 regular session, a proposal relating to prohibited uses of tax dollars and public resources. The sponsors said the bill is intended to strengthen existing law by adding civil and criminal penalties for taxpayer-funded advocacy on ballot questions, especially in light of controversies during the 2024 election over school officials and districts using public resources to oppose a constitutional amendment. They also described related concerns about school districts hiring third-party lobbyists and public relations firms, particularly in Fayette County, and said the proposal was meant to keep tax dollars focused on public services rather than political persuasion. Committee members raised several concerns about scope and drafting. Some asked whether the bill should specifically mention schools, school boards, and school employees, and the sponsors said they would add that language. Others questioned whether the measure would also affect local government lobbying through groups like KLC and KCO, and the sponsors said they intended to focus narrowly on schools while exempting certain advocacy organizations and internal government lobbyists. Members also asked whether public employees could still speak as private individuals, and the sponsors said yes. Several members suggested splitting the lobbying and ballot-advocacy issues into separate bills, and the sponsors said they would consider that. Members also pressed for clarification on how the bill would apply in practice, including whether it would cover legal challenges to petition drives or only advocacy after a question is on the ballot. Counsel for the sponsors said the bill would not cover some petition-related litigation as drafted, though they believed it should. The sponsors and supporters argued the proposal was needed to give the existing prohibition real enforcement, while some members warned that the language could unintentionally limit legitimate public representation or be too broad if not carefully drafted. No final vote was taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:57:48.960> system facilities and the entire voting system facilities and the entire voting
• But there are so many other aspects to a secure voting system and voting ecosystem.
• system and voting secure voting system and voting ecosystem. ecosystem. ecosystem.
• <01:16:42.640> We used uh the heart voting systems. We used uh the heart voting systems.
• development process of the voting development process of the voting system. system. system.

Keywords: Discussion of BR 25 (2026 RS) 04:15 Presentation on voting systems by ES&S 48:14 Presentation on voting systems by Hart InterCivic and Harp Enterprises 01:13:07, 958, all

Summary: The committee met, approved the October 21 minutes, and then took up BR 25 for the 2026 regular session, a proposal to prohibit the use of tax dollars and public resources to advocate for or against ballot questions, including constitutional amendments. Senator Rawlings and the other presenters argued the current law already bars such advocacy but lacks meaningful enforcement, citing the 2024 school choice amendment campaign and other examples where public officials and school systems allegedly used taxpayer-funded resources to influence voters. They said the bill would add civil and criminal penalties, while preserving First Amendment rights for public employees acting in their personal capacities. Much of the discussion focused on whether the bill should be limited to school districts or broadened to cover other public entities, and on how to define terms such as “advocating in impartial terms.” Members raised concerns about possible effects on county and city lobbying through groups like KLC and KCO, on legitimate factual explanations by public officials, and on whether the bill could unintentionally restrict needed representation for local governments. The sponsors said the measure was intended to be narrow, would be vetted further, and would not bar individuals from speaking on their own behalf. Several members suggested revisions. Representative Lockett asked that schools and school employees be specifically named, and suggested separating the lobbying restrictions from the ballot-measure provisions into different bills. Representative Layman questioned the meaning of the bill’s language and whether it would cover factual testimony by officials. Representative Heen asked about a Jefferson County example involving legal fees used to challenge petition signatures; counsel said that situation would likely be allowable under the bill as drafted, though some members thought it should be covered. No final vote was taken on BR 25 during this discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• May is an i Schreiber, you're and I to clear the vote by vote 81.
• Seeing none, please open the vote. May votes. Eaves votes. Clear the vote. 90 vote.
• Saying none, please open the vote. Vice Chair May Sriberi: Declare the vote by a vote of 7 to 0.
• You remember wishing to change their vote. Close the vote.
• You remember wishing to change their vote. Close the vote.

Bills: HB3041, HB4428, HB4429, HB1064, HB3265, HB3721, HB3028, HB3313, HB3588, HB3020

Keywords: credit card transactions, payment methods, service charge, consumer rights, financial regulation, public finance, pension, pension fund, retirement system, board of trustees, proxy voting, proxy proposal, shareholder vote, shareholder activism, fiduciary duty, pecuniary factors, nonpecuniary factors, ESG, environmental social governance, social goals

Transcript Highlights:

• I often say that Hawaii's child welfare system operates as a system of luck.
• there any no votes or reservations? there any no votes or reservations?
• we'll vote on them together. we'll vote on them together.
• present any no votes or reservations? present any no votes or reservations?
• <01:12:18.400> Um, welfare system. Um, welfare system.

Bills: SB2444, SB2446, SB2450, SB2453, SB2461, SB2457, SB2462, SB2313, SB2528, SB2532, SB2571, SB2678, SB2529

Keywords: real property, exemption, attachment, execution, consumer protection, financial security, inflation adjustment, head of family, senior citizens, Intermediate Court of Appeals, judges, Hawaii judiciary, court membership, legal system, presidential preference primary, elections, political parties, Hawaii voting, 2028 election, voting

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on several bills. SB 2444 would raise the real property exemption amount for attachment or execution, which the Attorney General said could create vague retroactivity language and litigation risk; the committee noted the exemption had last been adjusted around 1978. SB 2446 would add a seventh associate judge to the Intermediate Court of Appeals. Judiciary staff testified in opposition, saying recent internal restructuring and a pending vacancy had improved output and that it would be prudent to wait and see the effect before adding another judge. The Public Defender supported the goal of faster appellate resolution but said it would defer to the court’s assessment and had no objection to revisiting the issue later. The committee also discussed current appellate timelines, with staff saying at least 225 days is built into the process before a case reaches a merit panel, and that a two-year delay from panel assignment was realistic under the current structure. The committee then heard SB 2450, which would establish a presidential preference primary for the 2028 cycle. The Chief Election Officer said the election would cost about $4 million, less if combined with the regular primary. Several opponents argued the bill would add bureaucracy, duplicate or undermine party-run processes, and waste taxpayer money; one speaker estimated the total cost could be closer to $6 million when county costs are included. Supporters and committee members discussed that the measure would not require parties to use the results and that Hawaii remains one of the few states still using caucuses. The committee also asked whether counties could staff the election and whether the results would be useful given Hawaii’s current primary timing. SB 2453 would require the Office of Elections to include a notice with each ballot that a digital and printed voter information guide is available, with the notice in 32-point font as a separate insert. The Chief Election Officer said the insert would cost about $90,000 and asked for an effective date of January 1, 2027 because mailing preparations for the primary would already be underway. The Disability and Communications Access Board, League of Women Voters, National Federation of the Blind of Hawaii, and others supported the bill. The committee also began hearing SB 2461, which would have the Office of Elections prepare a questionnaire for candidates and publish responses online and in the voter guide; the Chief Election Officer said the office did not think it should be the agency to shape campaign questions, though he said it could work if the questions were specified in statute. Finally, the committee heard SB 2457, which would require a criminal conviction before seized property could be forfeited. The Attorney General and Honolulu Police Department opposed the bill, arguing it would prolong cases, increase storage costs, and make forfeiture less effective against crime, especially where owners flee, die, or hide assets through shell companies. The Public Defender strongly supported the measure, saying forfeiture should be tied to convictions and that people challenging forfeiture often lack counsel. The Honolulu Prosecutor also opposed the bill, but said it supported transparency, due process, and even a right to counsel; it argued conviction-only forfeiture would fail in cases involving fugitives, deceased suspects, or hidden ownership structures. The committee questioned what would happen to property if an owner could not be found, and the prosecutor said the outcome would depend on the type of property and could involve abandonment or interpleader proceedings.

Bills: HB4

Keywords: district composition, congressional election, Texas, legislature, voting districts

Bills: HB4

Keywords: district composition, congressional election, Texas, legislature, voting districts

Transcript Highlights:

• But this would not be on election day or in person absentee voting or regular absentee voting.
• Please open the queue for a vote. Right, declare the vote. Seeing a vote of six to zero, nay.
• Seeing none, please open the cue for a vote. Declare the vote. The vote is five to one, nay.
• and have the right to vote?
• Seeing none, please open the queue for a vote. Blur the vote. Seeing a vote of six to zero, nay.

Bills: HB2938, HB2939, HB3306, HB3722, HB4113, HB4123

Keywords: elections, national elections, state elections, voter intent, election reform, absentee voting, electronic communication, facsimile device, voting materials, military voters, campaign finance, ethics, political contributions, candidate committee, Oklahoma legislation, voter registration, political party affiliation, Independent designation, Oklahoma, voter eligibility

Transcript Highlights:

• Haven't we had a precinct voting system in the past? Oh, Mr.
• voting locations.
• That's all this bill does for voting, for... The whole Eric system was supposed to solve that.
• For voting, for—I hate to use the word access, because our system is called ACCESS—but entitlements and
• Collin would know exactly how that system works, but we'll skip it for today and just vote on it.

Bills: HB2006, HB2165, HB2245, HB2348, HB2806, HB2901, HB2902, HCR2016

Keywords: sample ballots, elections, primary election, general election, mailing deadline, ballot mailing, county election officials, board of supervisors, secretary of state, early voting list, election administration, voter information, postal service, USPS processing center, city elections, town elections, special district elections, Arizona election law, ballot proofing, party chair

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2348, which would appropriate state general fund money in FY 2027 for Arizona Department of Emergency and Military Affairs projects including wireless networking at training centers, a reimbursement program for service members without government computers, lodging and kind for service members, and HVAC upgrades and maintenance. Two amendments were considered: the Marquez Amendment, which filled in dollar amounts for the appropriations, failed; and the Gillette Amendment, which restricted certain networking equipment for national security reasons, removed the reimbursement program, revised the lodging language, and tied some funding intentions to compliance, passed. After extensive testimony from the sponsor and several Army Reserve and National Guard witnesses about lack of Wi-Fi, inadequate lodging, safety concerns from long drives, and poor HVAC at joint facilities, the committee approved HB 2348 as amended on a 4-3 vote. The committee then considered HCR 2016, a ballot referral that would cap precinct size at 2,500 voters and eliminate county authority to use vote centers, emergency voting centers, and certain on-site early voting options. The sponsor said the measure was intended to restore precinct-based voting and let voters decide. County officials and election advocates opposed it, arguing that vote centers and early voting provide flexibility, are more cost-effective in many counties, and are necessary where geography, staffing, and facility availability make precinct voting difficult. After debate over local control, voter choice, and the practicality of precincting, the committee gave HCR 2016 a 4-3 do-pass recommendation. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2165, which exempts veterans from Arizona State Parks admission fees, and adopted the Marquez Amendment to extend the exemption to active military members, National Guard members, and reserve-unit members, with alternative ID options. Arizona State Parks testified in neutral, saying it supports veterans but is concerned about revenue losses; it estimated that even a modest share of veteran visits could reduce revenue by about $1.8 million annually. The sponsor said the bill was prompted by constituent requests and was meant to help veterans enjoy outdoor recreation and therapeutic opportunities. The committee then approved HB 2165 as amended on a vote of 4-0, with some members absent or not voting.