Transcript Highlights:

• God, we thank you for this wonderful day and this time of work and discussion.
• It just needs a little further discussion on that one. So, um we will call HB 27.
• It just needs a little further discussion on that one. So, we'll call HB 27.
• It just needs a little further discussion on that one. So, um we will call HB 27.
• So, um we discussion uh on that one.

Bills: SB19, HB40, HB27, HB40, HB27, HB40, HB27

Keywords: contraceptive rights, healthcare access, civil action, Attorney General, contraception enforcement, prostate cancer, health insurance, screening, high risk, cost-sharing, African American men, savings accounts, catastrophe, emergency funds, financial security, state laws, criminal justice, parole, Board of Pardons and Paroles, risk assessment

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion to the A7 amendment? Seeing no discussion, all those in favor say aye. Opposed?
• </c> questions and discussion to the bill. questions and discussion to the bill.
• Seeing no further discussion. Oh, Chair. Seeing no further discussion.
• Further discussion? Seeing no further discussion, we'll move to closing comments.
• </c><01:13:04.800><c> Discussion.</c> Discussion to the bill. Discussion. Discussion to the bill.

Bills: HF2300, HF2432, HF2445, HF2443, HF2439, HF3023, HF1615, HF2563

Keywords: HF2432, judiciary finance bill, public safety finance bill, corrections policy, crime victims, victim services, Minnesota victims of crime account, court fees, marriage license fee, financial crimes, fraud investigations, insurance fraud, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, BCA, Commerce Fraud Bureau, wage theft, automobile theft prevention, nonprofit security grants, 911 funding, POST Board

Transcript Highlights:

• In prior discussions, policymakers In prior discussions, policymakers have deemed this to help those
• So, I use that just as a frame-up for today's discussion.
• And so I hope what comes out of all of these discussions is an honest discussion about the decision between
• discussion.
• Is that maybe some of the discussion we had?

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? I have an amendment ending in 10H.
• Further discussion? I would just make a comment.
• Any discussion? Okay. Seeing none.
• Any discussion? Okay. Seeing none.
• Chair, to comment on that discussion.

Summary: The Special Committee on Property Tax Reform met in executive session with a quorum present and took up a House Committee substitute for Senate Substitute for Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bills 1066 and 1088. Members discussed several amendments that bundled multiple property tax provisions, including clarification of the 15% commercial ownership threshold, school levy language, senior property tax freeze language, no-tax-increase bond wording, ballot language requirements, and a severability clause. One proposed amendment to preserve a comparison to a single-rate calculation in the auditor’s multi-rate tax form drew extended discussion about whether the current siloing approach could reduce projected revenue for taxing districts; the sponsor ultimately withdrew that amendment after noting the issue would need further study. The committee then adopted another amendment shortening ballot language requirements, and later adopted the underlying committee amendment and rolled the changes into a new substitute. Members also discussed a tax abatement provision added to the bill, with concerns raised that large abatements, such as those tied to a data center project, could affect levy calculations; supporters argued the language would apply to cities and counties rather than school districts. After debate, the committee voted to adopt the substitute and then voted the House Committee substitute for the Senate substitute for Senate Committee Substitute for Senate Bills 1066 and 1088 do pass by a roll call vote of 11 ayes and 5 noes. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We had a very good discussion yesterday. I think we discussed the bill for about two hours.
• And we did have amendments to discuss yesterday that would have made some changes.
• There's already some discussion about those areas that we had some conversations about.
• Thank you for the discussion, committee.
• Discussion on that motion. Hearing none, I'll ask the clerk to take the roll on that motion.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Health Care Task Force reconvened to hear reports from its divisions. The Appropriations Division reviewed a draft bill appropriating $198 million in federal grant funds for the current year and another $198 million for the next grant year, authorizing DHS to transfer funds within its budget, allowing OMB to adjust federal fund authority for related grants, speeding procurement and bulk purchasing, requiring grant recipients to acknowledge the temporary nature of the funding, and mandating periodic reporting. After questions were answered to the division’s satisfaction, the committee voted to forward the appropriations bill draft to Legislative Management. The Policy Division then reviewed four bills. One would require the presidential physical fitness test to be included in high school physical education; another would require physicians to complete one hour of continuing education on nutrition and metabolic health each renewal cycle; a third would add physician assistants to the interstate licensure compact framework; and a fourth would authorize limited pharmacist prescriptive authority and therapeutic substitution. Members generally supported the first three measures and noted that the pharmacist bill had been amended in discussion but was left in its current form so stakeholders could comment before the special session. The division also discussed that all four policy bills were tied to the federal grant funding and that failure to pass them, or changing them in a way that reduced CMS scoring, could reduce or eliminate funding. Department officials confirmed that if any of the bills failed or were altered in a way that lowered the score, the state could lose money and could not make up the points elsewhere. Members raised concerns about the physical fitness bill, including possible exemptions for students with severe illnesses or physical limitations, and noted the need for DPI input. Leadership indicated the special session hearings would likely begin Wednesday morning. The committee then approved a motion for Legislative Council to prepare a committee report for Legislative Management and adjourned, noting the task force may need to remain available during the special session.

Transcript Highlights:

• As we had discussed earlier, as well as yesterday, Ms.
• And did you discuss Antoine at that meeting? I did.
• And did you discuss Antoine at that meeting? I did.
• Was anyone else present when you discussed, when you had discussions with Chris Stanley about EEC and
• We took a brief recess to discuss..." It is 4:48.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The hearing resumed on day two of the Legislative Ethics Board fact-finding matter involving Representative Tara Simmons. After opening remarks and confirmation that board members had not engaged in outside research or ex parte communications, Simmons’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she improperly combined a legislative proviso for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and private conduct were intertwined and that the board had enough evidence to require a defense. After deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss and proceeded to hear defense testimony. The first defense witness, Sharon Navas, testified that she met Simmons through advocacy work, later hired her at the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), and maintained written employment policies intended to separate Simmons’s legislative role from her work for EEC. Navas said Simmons was never compensated for lobbying or legislative acts, that EEC paid her from unrestricted funds, and that Simmons did not work on the AEJG dashboard project or participate in the contract dispute with Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley. Navas described the proviso request and later contract issues as separate from Simmons’s legislative duties, and said she continued to pay invoices while the project was being completed. Simmons then testified about her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics advice before taking outside employment or pursuing provisos. She said she repeatedly consulted House ethics counsel and reviewed prior board decisions to ensure her outside work and legislative actions were separated. Simmons described her relationship with Anthony Powers, the dashboard project, the proviso process, and her understanding that the work was distinct from her legislative role. The hearing paused for lunch after part of Simmons’s direct examination, with testimony set to continue after the break.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our organization's discussion started in the summer on this.
• Is there further discussion? Okay, there are no amendments. Is there further discussion?
• We're going to discuss it. We are going to vote today.
• So this is just opening up the discussion.
• If there's no further discussion, Secretary, If there's no further discussion, Secretary, please call

Summary: The committee first took up SB 1114, which would appropriate $1 million to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office to investigate patient brokering in behavioral health and substance abuse treatment. Sponsor Sen. Werner described patient brokering as a continuing abuse tied to the state’s Medicaid fraud crisis, especially affecting Native Americans, and said the county attorney had the capacity to handle statewide oversight. The bill was moved and received a do pass recommendation on a 9-0-1 vote. The committee then considered SB 1111, as amended by a strike-everything amendment, to create statewide rules for automated license plate readers. Supporters from law enforcement said ALPRs are important for investigations, missing persons, stolen vehicles, and violent crimes, and argued the bill adds needed guardrails and training requirements. Opponents, including the ACLU, Institute for Justice, and private citizens, warned the systems enable mass surveillance, can be inaccurate, and raise Fourth Amendment and privacy concerns; they also objected to broad terms like “legitimate” law enforcement purposes and the lack of a clear retention limit. The committee adopted the amendment and then gave SB 1111, as amended, a do pass recommendation by a 7-2-1 vote. Next, SB 1116, as amended, was heard to require behavioral health claim denials and appeals at AHCCCS to be reviewed by someone with relevant clinical experience. Sen. Werner said the bill responds to improper denials and appeals handled by staff without behavioral health expertise; AHCCCS was neutral but said the bill could create compliance and staffing issues because “relevant clinical experience” is not well defined. The committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill 10-0. SB 1122, also as amended, would bar AHCCCS from requiring prior authorization or 100% prepayment review for certain behavioral health services under the American Indian Health Plan unless a provider is on a corrective action plan; Werner said it was aimed at ensuring providers are paid and reducing patient brokering. The committee adopted the amendment and passed SB 1122 10-0. Finally, the committee heard SB 1072, which would appropriate ongoing state and Medicaid funds to DES for rate increases for home- and community-based services and room-and-board services for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, with reporting on workforce outcomes. Supporters from APAD and providers said the direct care workforce is in crisis, with large numbers of vacancies, overtime costs, and unassigned authorizations, and argued the funding is needed to retain staff and maintain care. Members discussed wage disparities, whether funds would reach caregivers, and the limits of legislative control over private provider pay, but no vote on SB 1072 was reached before the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we can have some committee discussion.
• and discuss and take a vote.
• No further discussion on the motion. Okay. Seeing no further discussion... Okay.
• Typically, the committee will have discussion about this recommendation.
• We can discuss that.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The Economic Outlook and Revenue Assessment Committee met to review members’ homework projections and choose revenue estimates for the remainder of fiscal year 2026 and fiscal year 2027. Staff presented the compiled results, noted the average and median were close, and corrected a spreadsheet formula error after Senator Zuiderveld flagged that her submitted numbers had been copied incorrectly. The committee briefly went at ease while staff fixed the worksheet and then resumed with updated figures. Members debated several possible revenue projections, with discussion focused on how to account for possible tax conformity changes, the risk of overestimating revenues, and broader economic uncertainty. Some members argued for lower estimates to avoid future budget shortfalls, while others said the state’s economy remained relatively strong and that the committee should not be overly pessimistic. After debate, the committee adopted a substitute motion setting general fund revenue projections at $5,665.1 million for FY 2026 and $5,816.6 million for FY 2027 by a vote of 10-8. The committee then reviewed a letter/report for JFAC that incorporated the adopted projections and allowed for additional committee comments. Representative Van Orden moved to adopt the report language, Representative Monks seconded, and the motion passed 17-1. The committee concluded its work and planned to present the recommendation to JFAC the following morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Will there be discussion or debate?
• Will there be discussion or debate?
• Will there be discussion or debate?
• Will there be discussion or debate?
• Will there be discussion or debate? Will there be discussion or debate?

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We had the discussion on the bill.
• So, anyway, that we could certainly discuss.
• Second from Representative Nathie, further discussion.
• Any discussion? Representative O'Brien? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• Any discussion? Okay. Seeing none, we'll take the roll. Chairman Vigesaa. Yes.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to work on three remaining policy bills. On HB 2225, members discussed an amendment reducing the Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund housing grant program from $50 million to $30 million, lowering the maximum grant amount, and clarifying that existing lots can qualify after a certificate of occupancy is issued so the program can help communities like Watford City and Williston use prepared lots. Members also discussed the matching requirements, tribal eligibility, and how Commerce would score applications to ensure the money lowers lot costs rather than being absorbed by political subdivisions. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Murphy was assigned to carry the bill. The committee then took up SB 2200, which funds the 988 crisis hotline. After discussion, members agreed to strip out the proposed phone-line charge approach and instead provide a $500,000 appropriation from the Community Health Care Trust Fund, consistent with the Senate version, to supplement existing funding for increased staffing and texting-related demand. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Nelson will carry the bill. Finally, the committee considered SB 2342, which creates a value-added milk processing facility incentive program. The amendment reduced the proposed line of credit from $10 million to $5 million, with the program intended to support dairy-related processing infrastructure such as utilities, roads, water, wastewater, and rail access. Members noted the program would be administered through the Agriculture Diversification and Development Committee, could potentially support one or multiple facilities, and sunsets June 30, 2027. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Brandenburg will carry the bill. The committee then adjourned, planning to reconvene the next morning to take up additional bills and budget adjustments.

Transcript Highlights:

• . discussion. discussion.
• Discussion group topics, uh, May 12th, 2026.
• And And we again, we've this discussion.
• </c><01:00:29.000><c> and</c> a house bill or that was discussed and a house bill or that was discussed
• ,</c> need when we talk about more discussion, need when we talk about more discussion, we<01:04:07.120

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Discussion to the bill. &gt;&gt; Third reading. Discussion to the bill.
• Third reading discussion.
• </c><00:38:23.119><c> so</c> yet to hear in any of our discussions so yet to hear in any of our discussions
• </c> &gt;&gt; Further discussion to the bill. &gt;&gt; Further discussion to the bill.
• Discussion. Discussion. Discussion.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, any discussion?
• Members, any discussion?
• Members, any discussion?
• Members, any discussion?
• Members, any discussion? All forward. Members, any discussion?

Bills: HB644, HB1802, HB1569, HB1619, HB1620, HB1730, HB1749

Keywords: PFAS, single-use plastics, environmental health, food ware, pollution reduction, HB1802, conservation banking, conservation bank, mitigation banking, compensatory mitigation, incidental take permit, incidental take license, habitat conservation plan, HCP, DLNR, BLNR, Board of Land and Natural Resources, endangered species recovery committee, threatened species, endangered species

Summary: The committee heard several environmental and energy bills, beginning with HB 644 on single-use plastics. DLNR and DOH supported the measure, and environmental advocates said it would reduce plastic waste in oceans and landfills. Testifiers urged the bill to avoid weakening existing county ordinances, and some supported delaying implementation to use up inventory, while Upstream opposed compostable-plastic exemptions and urged prompt passage. Committee members asked whether reusable and refillable foodware could be added to the PFAS prohibition, and Upstream said that would be consistent with the bill’s goals. The committee then took up HB 1802 on conservation mitigation banks, HB 1569 on microfiber filters for newly manufactured washing machines, and HB 1619 on electric vehicle infrastructure. HB 1802 drew mostly agency testimony from DLNR, with opposition testimony noted from environmental groups, and members discussed whether suggested amendments would address concerns. HB 1569 received limited testimony, with support from the Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition and opposition from the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers. HB 1619 was supported by the PUC, Hawaiian Electric, the Department of Transportation, and several advocacy groups; Earthjustice said the bill was needed to address a widening EV charging shortfall and described the funding increase as relatively small compared with the benefits. The committee also heard HB 1620, which would increase the barrel tax to fund the EV charging rebate program. The State Energy Office and PUC offered comments, while the Tax Foundation of Hawaii opposed the special-fund approach and said the bill should also address the non-petroleum fossil-fuel portion of the barrel tax. Earthjustice and youth transportation advocates supported the measure, and the chair asked for information on unused hydrogen fueling subaccount funds; PUC said no hydrogen program funds had been deployed and estimated the balance was likely around $2 million, with exact figures to be provided later. Finally, the committee heard HB 1730 on wastewater systems, which would create a wastewater technical advisory group and fund positions at DOH. DLNR, DOH, OPSD, UH, and several environmental groups supported the bill, emphasizing cesspool pollution, affordability, and the need for more staffing and technical assistance. Testifiers suggested amendments to create a separate cesspool conversion implementation working group and debated the size and composition of the advisory group, including whether to include outside engineers and whether SHIP should be on the panel. No votes were taken during the hearing segment provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Further discussion or debate. Seeing none, please open the queue.
• So, unless there's further discussion or debate, opening queue.
• Further discussion or debate? Second and a second. Further discussion or debate.
• Whether there be discussion or debate? Seeing none, open the queue.
• Further discussion or debate? Seeing none, open the queue. Thank you.

Bills: HB1784, HB1245, HB1268, HB2116, HB2193, HB2206, HB1739, HB1889, HB1904, HB3172, HB4225, HB4352, HB3625, HB4263

Keywords: education reform, local control, student outcomes, curriculum changes, school funding, retirement, pension, public employees, Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System, benefits, survivorship, contribution rates, disability retirement, deferred option plan, service credit, contributions, distributions, HB2116, Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System, OLERS

Transcript Highlights:

• Any questions or discussion?
• Any questions or discussion?
• We will discuss this.
• Any questions or discussion?
• Any questions or discussion?

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Housing, Construction and Community Development Committee met with quorum present and considered a full agenda of housing, code enforcement, and rent regulation bills, many of which had passed the Senate in prior years. Early measures included a statewide residential rental registry (S.912), penalties and reporting for vacant and abandoned properties (S.925), and extending tenant response time for major capital improvement rent increase applications (S.1461). The committee also advanced several code-enforcement and fire/building-code bills, including measures to expand remedies for Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code violations (S.3406), increase the Secretary of State’s code enforcement powers (S.4165 and S.4534), and authorize investigations into code administration and enforcement (S.4535). Members raised concerns about local fiscal impacts, the scope of state authority, contractor use, and whether the bills adequately define or limit “imminent threat” and related enforcement powers. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on S.4852, which would require the Codes Council to review and act on updates to international model codes within 18 months. Senators debated whether the bill would speed up code adoption or, as some feared, weaken economic reasonableness considerations by striking the word “economically” from the statutory standard. Supporters said the bill was intended to ensure prompt review of widely used model codes and noted other statutory safeguards remain in place; opponents worried about reduced attention to cost and practical impacts, especially amid housing and utility capacity constraints. The committee also discussed S.6368A, requiring complainants to receive copies of compliance orders issued after code complaints, and S.6600B, mandating inspections of certain non-fireproof buildings in New York City. Additional bills advanced included standards for all-gender bathroom design and construction (S.7131A), compensation for required code-enforcement personnel training (S.7159), and audits of individual apartment improvements in rent-regulated units (S.8046A). Several measures were reported to Finance, while others were reported to the floor. Throughout the meeting, votes were largely along expected lines, with some members voting negative or “without recommendation” on the more expansive code-enforcement bills. No bill was defeated, and all items on the agenda were reported out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? Members will be taking a voice vote. All those in favor say I.
• ><c> measures</c><00:23:00.640><c> in</c> discussion of companion measures in discussion of companion
• Members, any discussion on Standing Committee Report 1715?
• Okay, seeing no further discussion, Okay, seeing no further discussion, we'll<00:35:24.960><c> be</c>
• Any discussion on Senate Bill 112? Discussion on Senate Bill 289.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House met with 47 members present and 4 excused, approved deferral of the journal reading, and received no messages from the governor. In Senate communications, the chamber received a Senate concurrent resolution and several House bills returned from the Senate with amendments; Representative Todd moved to disagree with the Senate amendments, and that motion carried by voice vote. The main business was adoption of large groups of standing committee reports. The House adopted reports 1662 through 1696, then 1697 through 1714, and later report 1715, with several members noting “no vote” or “with reservations” on specific measures. One extended floor exchange centered on a measure concerning emergency access in West Oahu, where Representative Souza argued for a second access point for Makakilo residents and referenced wildfire evacuation concerns; other members raised points of order under Rule 287, and the Speaker ruled on the debate. The House also suspended the rules to consider certain Senate bills on third reading by consent calendar. On third reading, the House passed Senate bills listed on page 18, including SB 100 and SB 112, with recorded no votes from several members and support with reservations from Representative Iwamoto, who said SB 100 was a home rule issue better handled at the county level. The chamber then heard announcements, including Representative Takayama’s request for donations of new or gently used women’s business attire for the YWCA Dress for Success program. The House adjourned until 12:00 noon Monday.

Transcript Highlights:

• Anyone curious to discuss that one?
• </c> discussion about this one? Mis- Mr. discussion about this one? Mis- Mr.
• </c> curious to discuss that one? curious to discuss that one? Representative<00:08:13.720><c> Lean.
• </c> Any discussion about that? Any discussion about that? Senator<00:25:19.480><c> Driskill.
• Any discussion? Public comments?

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The joint Minerals Committee met to select interim topics and announced its meeting dates for April 27-28 in Casper, June 4-5 in Casper, and August 27-28 in Cheyenne. Members heard public testimony on several economic development and minerals-related topics and were asked to identify their top priorities for later ranking and consensus. No formal votes were taken during this portion of the meeting. A major topic was removing obstacles to energy development in Wyoming, including possible regulatory, bonding, and permitting barriers. Testimony from the Mining Association and Energy Capital Economic Development supported revisiting barriers to development, similar to the earlier Regulatory Reduction Task Force. Another related topic was industrial siting exemptions on coal mine property, with testimony arguing that mineral-related projects such as rare earths, uranium conversion, and ferroalloys should not have to go through the full industrial siting process when communities have already dealt with similar development. Members also discussed industrial siting bonding requirements, including whether bonding or advance payments should be used to cover impacts on local services and emergency response, especially for projects like solar farms or battery storage. The committee also discussed coal bed methane industrial sovereign zones, tied to House Bill 120, with testimony seeking to include coal bed methane in value-added manufacturing zones. The sponsor said the goal was to create industrial zones that support economic development while protecting scenic values and limiting industrial sprawl. Another topic was sourcing curling stones in Wyoming, which was presented as a lighthearted but potentially useful way to promote Wyoming stone and broader dimension-stone quarrying; a state geologist testified that Wyoming has granite with similar mineralogy to stone used for curling stones elsewhere. Child care as an economic driver was withdrawn. The committee also heard support for a Business Council restructure review, though several members said the Minerals Committee should do the substantive review because the Business Council falls within its jurisdiction, while still coordinating with Appropriations. Finally, the committee heard a proposal for a domestic preference in residential general service contracts, extending Wyoming preference concepts beyond construction into goods and services, with testimony emphasizing local economic multipliers and possible exceptions for federal funding or other procurement limits.

Transcript Highlights:

• Here to discuss this.
• Any further discussion? approve 2510. Any further discussion?
• any further discussion?
• </c> bigger discussion on that. Um DNCR. bigger discussion on that. Um DNCR.
• &gt;&gt; The<01:09:48.239><c> discussion</c> &gt;&gt; The discussion &gt;&gt; The discussion Seeing<01

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened with routine business, including the Pledge of Allegiance, seating alternates, and approval of the minutes and consent calendar. Both were approved without opposition. The committee then moved to the regular calendar, beginning with Department of Environmental Services drinking water rules (2532). Staff noted that the final proposal deleted requirements that had been in the initial proposal, making the published notice technically inaccurate because it said there were no substantive changes. The agency responded that the requirements still exist in other rules, that regulated entities and the Water Council were notified, and that the public had notice through related hearings. After discussion about whether a new noticed hearing was needed, the committee approved the rule. The next item was Department of Administrative Services personnel rule 2510 on seniority and employee performance evaluation. Staff raised informational comments and one unclear comment about language that appeared to require a checkbox even though no form exists, and about evaluation categories that could overlap. The agency said the checkbox language should be removed, but defended the overlapping categories as part of a long-standing template used by agencies for the past 10 years. Members discussed whether the language was too ambiguous or could lead to inconsistent application, but the committee ultimately approved the rule with a condition striking the checkbox language in the affected sections. The committee then considered personnel rule 25109 on investigations, discipline, non-disciplinary communications, and non-disciplinary removal. Staff recommended clarifying language distinguishing license suspension from termination for cause, and questioned whether the sexual-harassment discipline language was too broad because the same conduct could fit multiple discipline levels. The agency agreed to add the suggested clarification for the license-suspension provision, but argued the sexual-harassment language should remain because another rule already provides the factors for determining the appropriate discipline and the agency needs discretion for fact-specific cases. The discussion included concerns about how non-verbal conduct might be treated, but the committee moved toward conditional approval with the agreed clarification and approval of the rest of the rule as written.

Transcript Highlights:

• No problem having the discussion.
• </c> this before you for discussion. this before you for discussion.
• </c> any discussion questions? any discussion questions?
• Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion? discussion? discussion? Tom Members starting with number one on our list.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council met on May 27, 2026, approved the January 7 minutes and the day’s agenda, and reported no conflicts of interest. The executive director gave staff updates, including introductions of new staff member Cara Castanza and DNR liaison Jason Co., both of whom were welcomed by the council. Members were also informed about three minor easement/conveyance matters in the packet, including a small Bowser easement impact with about $1,600 returned to the Outdoor Heritage Fund, a Minnesota Land Trust easement request involving a DNR trout stream easement, and an access easement revision in Itasca County. The council also noted several upcoming dedication events and a June field tour in southeast Minnesota beginning in Winona on June 16, with visits to Whitewater WMA, bluff prairie and stream sites, and a river segment if a boat is secured. A major agenda item was a legislative session recap on the Outdoor Heritage Fund portion of Senate File 2077, the omnibus Outdoor Heritage Fund, Legacy, and Lands bill. Staff reported that all council recommendations were incorporated into the bill, which passed both chambers on May 17 and was expected to be signed by the governor. The fiscal year 2027 Outdoor Heritage Fund recommendations covered 53 programs totaling about $188.9 million, with the February forecast increasing the appropriation slightly so the final total was about $191.16 million; eligible programs were proportionately increased. Staff also highlighted a few changes made during the legislative process, including adjustments to the Roso Lake rehabilitation phase three project, the conservation partners legacy grant language, and statutory provisions affecting the council. The recap also covered policy changes in the bill: a public member term limit of eight years, with a short vacancy exception and transition rules for current members; a revised executive director hiring process allowing the Legislative Coordinating Commission to provide support while preserving the council’s final hiring authority and permitting closed meetings for candidate discussions; and an extension of the Upper Mississippi River invasive carp deterrent design deadline to June 30, 2027. Members discussed the Roso Lake amendment at length, with Senator Lang and Representative Burkel explaining that the added delay and injunction-related language were intended to address local concerns and preserve the council’s process while litigation proceeds. The meeting ended without any additional formal action beyond receiving the updates and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Further discussion.
• Further discussion.
• Further discussion.
• Further discussion.
• Further discussion.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 66, a right-to-know measure that would broaden access from “citizen” to “person,” including out-of-state requesters. Members also adopted an amendment removing the current no-filing-fee provision for appeals of unfavorable right-to-know ombudsman rulings, citing budget concerns. The bill was then reported ought to pass as amended on a 16-9 vote, with a minority report requested. House Bill 187, which would let a parent or guardian seek a protective order on behalf of a minor alleging abuse by someone outside the family or household, was described as a narrow fix with little fiscal impact. It passed unanimously, 25-0, and was placed on the consent calendar. House Bill 215, requiring landfill permit applicants to submit a report on potential harms and benefits, was retained because its policy had been folded into House Bill 2; the committee voted 25-0 to retain it. House Bill 219, dealing with renewable portfolio standard changes and lower renewable energy certificate values, drew opposition from members who said it would weaken renewable energy development and raise concerns about energy costs, but the motion to retain was adopted 14-11, allowing the bill to be moved into House Bill 2. The committee then retained House Bills 365, 552, 566, 572, 607, 611, and 624, all by unanimous or near-unanimous votes, generally because the relevant policy or funding had been incorporated into House Bill 2 or because the bills were viewed as technical or low-impact. HB 566 was described as a landfill leach-management bill with a fiscal note under $10,000 annually and was sent to consent. HB 572 and HB 607 were retained because their money components were moved into HB 2, though one member objected that HB 607 represented an unfunded mandate for the Hampton Beach Area Commission. House Bill 511, concerning ICE detainers and county detention practices, generated the most debate. Supporters said the amendment clarified how long counties may hold detainees without a federal contract and compared the detention period to existing bail rules; opponents argued the bill could sanction detention of people not charged with crimes and raised due-process concerns. The committee adopted the amendment 14-11 and then reported the bill ought to pass as amended on another 14-11 vote, with a minority report requested. House Bill 639, involving securities and digital currency issues, was also reported ought to pass after members noted unresolved concerns but said the Secretary of State’s Securities Division was willing to continue working on it in the other body; the vote was 16-10.