Transcript Highlights:

• One key issue is that some municipalities use the City of El Paso versus Heinrich case to claim they
• So when someone brings a mandamus or a DEC action now, they claim they're immune from suit, every time
• historical, and they decide to do something with the property and then someone from the outside comes and claims
• after he bought it, then he's trying to do something, then either the city or someone comes in and claims

Bills: SB2215 , SB2639

Committee: House Land & Resource Management

Keywords: zoning, municipality, municipal immunity, governmental immunity, local government, Chapter 211, Texas Local Government Code, land use, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, mandamus, attorney's fees, court costs, property rights, home rule city, code enforcement, planning and zoning, land development, municipal ordinance, historic landmark

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 2215, which would clarify that property owners may challenge municipal zoning ordinances that are adopted without following Chapter 211 procedures, and would expressly waive municipal sovereign immunity for declaratory, injunctive, and mandamus actions in those cases. The bill sponsor and witnesses argued it would simply enforce existing notice, hearing, and due process requirements and give landowners a practical remedy when cities fail to comply. Testimony in support came from attorneys and a landowner describing alleged zoning actions in Selma that they said occurred without proper notice or hearings and caused significant financial harm. After questions, the committee substitute was withdrawn and the bill was left pending. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2639, which would add disclosure and compensation requirements for local historic designations, including compensation based on the greater of repair/restoration costs or the difference in appraised value with and without the designation. The bill author said it was intended to address situations where historic designation delays or blocks redevelopment and to ensure property owners are fairly compensated. A property owner testified in support, describing an Austin case in which a demolition permit led to historic designation and what he said was a costly forced rehabilitation. Opponents, including a preservation advocate and an East Austin resident, argued the current process is already rigorous, rare, and balanced, and that the bill would undermine cities’ ability to preserve historic places and community heritage. During closing on SB 2639, the chair raised a concern that Section 3B appeared to apply retroactively to pending cases, which he said could be unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution’s prohibition on retroactive laws. The committee did not resolve that issue during the hearing, and the bill was left pending. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• to veterans and their families by removing a provision in the Constitution that prevents veterans claiming
• the homeowners exemption from also claiming the disabled veterans' or veterans' exemption.
• The homeowners exemption from also claiming the disabled veterans' or veterans' exemption, thereby allowing

Summary: The committee met with one item on the agenda: Senate Bill 623 by Senator Arreguín. The bill would implement SCA 4 by providing property tax relief to veterans and their families, including allowing eligible veterans to combine the homeowners’ exemption with the disabled veterans’ or veterans’ exemption and removing certain property limitations tied to qualification. The author described the measure as a way to recognize veterans and improve access to tax benefits. The bill received broad support in testimony from veterans and veterans’ advocates, including disabled veterans, combat veterans, and representatives of veterans organizations and health advocacy groups. Supporters said the measure would better honor service members and provide meaningful financial relief. No opposition testimony was offered, and no committee member raised objections during the hearing. The committee voted 3-0 to pass SB 623 as a due pass recommendation to the Committee on Appropriations. The vote was initially held open for Senator Menjivar, and the chair later noted that the committee had established a quorum and the bill had been moved out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill is being adjusted, but there is no need to worry about that.
• The bill is being adjusted, but there is no need to worry about that.
• The bill is being adjusted, but there is no need to worry about that.
• It was adjusted, but there is no need to worry. There is only one footnote, and that is all.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What they're focused on is really rebuilding their life and getting adjusted to the climate of being
• And I want answers so that I can validate whatever the claim is or invalidate the claim.

Summary: The commission held an open discussion on how to develop recommendations for its report due at the end of September, with chairs Dan Hunt and Senator Brownsberger emphasizing that the group is moving from information-gathering into idea-sharing. Members discussed the need for more testimony from stakeholders such as reentry centers, correctional officers, unions, and the judiciary, and several participants urged the commission to use prior reports and existing data as a starting point. There was broad agreement that the work should focus on outcomes, transparency, and identifying gaps across the correctional and community supervision systems. A major theme was whether Massachusetts should move toward a more integrated, step-down model that better connects DOC, county sheriffs, probation, parole, reentry centers, and community-based services. Participants raised the possibility of expanding use of minimum security, pre-release, day reporting, and community justice support centers, and some suggested exploring whether sheriffs should have jurisdiction over people with longer remaining sentences, or whether judges should have more discretion to place people in county facilities. Others stressed the importance of involving the judiciary earlier, improving sentencing information, and aligning programming across agencies so reentry planning begins at sentencing and continues through release. The discussion also focused on facility conditions, women’s housing, Bridgewater, Framingham, restrictive housing, and the relationship between correctional settings and mental health needs. Several members called for more consistent standards, better data on spending and program effectiveness, and stronger accountability for evidence-based practices. The group also raised concerns about contraband K2, the need for cultural change inside institutions, and the importance of trust, staff training, and soft handoffs to the community. No votes were taken; the meeting was primarily a working discussion, and the chairs said they would circulate a written set of recommendations and continue the conversation at future meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• What they're focused on is really rebuilding their life, adjusting to the climate of being released,
• And I want answers so that I can validate whatever the claim is or invalidate the claim.

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The commission met for an open discussion focused on developing recommendations for its report on correctional consolidation and collaboration. Chairs Dan Hunt and Senator Brownsberger said the group is moving from information-gathering into idea generation, with a report due to the legislature by the end of September. Members discussed whether recommendations should be broad “guardrails” or more specific proposals, and several urged that future recommendations be grounded in firsthand experience, data, and written submissions from agencies and stakeholders. A major theme was how to create a more integrated correctional and reentry system. Participants raised the need to hear more from reentry centers, minimum-security and pre-release facilities, probation and parole, and the judiciary. Ideas included expanding step-down pathways, improving coordination among DOC, sheriffs, probation, and parole, standardizing programming and outcomes data, and better educating judges about available programs at sentencing. There was also discussion of whether the sheriff’s role should be expanded beyond the current two-and-a-half-year House of Correction limit, with questions about sentence structure, good-time credits, and how such a change would affect security and reentry outcomes. Members also emphasized the importance of consistency, transparency, and minimum standards across facilities. Several speakers said the system remains fragmented and that different counties use different definitions, practices, and program models. Suggestions included reviewing prior commission reports, looking at other states and even European models for best practices, and considering regional hubs or specialized facilities for behavioral health, workforce development, and reentry. The chairs noted that the commission has already toured several facilities and plans more visits, including Framingham and Bridgewater, and that future hearings will include unions and other stakeholders. The discussion also touched on restrictive housing, mental health, and contraband K2. Members cited recent suicide concerns and expert reports suggesting some units function like restrictive housing even if not labeled that way. There was broad agreement that custody conditions, programming access, and institutional culture affect trust and rehabilitation. No formal votes were taken; the meeting was primarily a working session to surface ideas and frame possible recommendations for later drafting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was just explaining to Representative Henson how I have to adjust my hearing aids between all.
• But then if we're going to drive the behavior, they need to make the adjustments.
• Does it need to be changed or adjusted?
• But I guess I've sat at the table and we've adjusted these to get the...
• But I guess I've sat at the table and we've adjusted these to get the outcomes that we want. Mr.

Committee: Joint Higher Education Funding Review Committee

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review a proposed process for identifying and addressing low-producing academic programs, then moved into discussion of draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the ND University System described how other states and systems define low-producing programs, emphasizing multi-year enrollment and completion thresholds, cost and workforce review, and the role of governing boards. She reported that North Dakota institutions already review programs in varying cycles, often use shared resources and stackable credentials to keep low-enrollment programs viable, and cited recent system actions over five years: 100 programs placed on inactivation, 75 terminated, and 384 new programs created. Committee members raised concerns about workforce-critical programs, duplication, exemptions, and whether the legislature or the State Board of Higher Education should drive the process. The chair said he wanted the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting and suggested the legislature may use funding leverage, including a possible holdback, to encourage the review process. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft funding formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal used fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder rate of $7,000 per undergraduate FTE and $10,500 per graduate/professional FTE, plus incentives for completions in high-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council explained that the formula also included separate treatment for research funding, external grants, and capital building tiers, and that the MD program at UND would remain fixed funding outside the formula. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the in-demand program list, the treatment of external grants, and how the proposal compared with current appropriations. The chair noted that the formula numbers were illustrative and not final budget amounts. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. It used fall census FTE with no weighted economic factor, a higher undergraduate rate of $8,750 per FTE, and completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other credentials. Members noted that the proposal would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and questioned whether the same structure should apply across institutions with very different missions and sizes. Committee discussion focused on fairness, hold-harmless concerns, and whether the nine institutions should be grouped differently. The committee did not take formal action, but the chair indicated the formulas would continue to be discussed later in the meeting and in future work.

Transcript Highlights:

• And 4172 makes some adjustments to who's eligible to be buried in the state veterans cemetery.
• And 4172 makes<00:04:20.040><c> some</c><00:04:20.239><c> adjustments</c><00:04:20.799><c> to</c><00:
• 04:20.920><c> who's</c><00:04:21.200><c> eligible</c> makes some adjustments to who's eligible makes
• In the next two slides, I'm going to demonstrate the requested pay adjustments.
• We ask you legislative adjustments.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard an introductory presentation from Sam Daily of Believe It Canine Service Partners, a nonprofit that trains service dogs free of charge for disabled veterans. Daily described the organization’s work with veterans, including placements with MACV and a service dog at Veteran Village in Eagan, and said the group has placed 80 teams so far. Senator Howe asked whether the organization had pursued Support Our Troops grants, and Daily said it had received two SOS grants. The first bill taken up was Senate File 4172, as amended, which would expand eligibility for burial in Minnesota state veterans cemeteries to honorably discharged reservists, National Guard members, and Air National Guard members, and would allow some honor guard use for eligible people. Senator Howe said the bill corrects an inequity for Guard and reserve members who served honorably but are not currently eligible. Glenn Pence testified in support, saying the bill recognizes National Guard service and should allow those veterans to be buried with others they served alongside. MDVA’s David Swantek supported the concept but warned that expanded eligibility would increase demand, especially at Little Falls, and could shorten its projected capacity timeline from about 48 years to about 30 years. The committee adopted the A1 amendment and then laid the bill over for inclusion in the Veterans and Military Affairs Finance Omnibus Bill. The committee then heard Senate File 4026, which sets standards for MDVA competitive grants and adds accountability and residency requirements. Senator Koran said the bill would help the department review grants and ensure funds serve Minnesota veterans and families. MDVA chief of staff Dave Belfi supported the bill, saying it reflects agency feedback, aligns with existing residency rules, and does not affect CVSO, VSO, or Support Our Troops grants. The A1 amendment was adopted, and the bill was laid over for inclusion in the omnibus bill. Next, Senate File 4807 was heard, a bill to update pay for National Guard soldiers and airmen called to state active duty. MDVA and National Guard officials said the bill would simplify statute language and raise the minimum base pay for lower ranks to the E5 level, with future adjustments tied to federal pay tables. Senator Kunesh asked about funding, and staff explained the cost would come through an open general-fund emergency appropriation, estimated at about $30,000 annually but varying with activations. The committee adopted amendments to incorporate SF 4172 and SF 4026 into SF 4807, made technical corrections, and then recommended SF 4807, as amended, to pass and be referred to the full committee. Finally, the committee heard Senate File 3603, which would create a program allowing school districts to issue high school diplomas to Minnesota veterans who left school to serve during the Korean conflict or Vietnam War. Senator Rasmussen said the bill recognizes veterans who interrupted their education for service. MDVA’s John Kelly supported the bill, noting it reflects input from MDVA and the Department of Education and that similar programs exist in other states. The committee voted to recommend the bill to pass and refer it to the full committee. The meeting also began discussion of Senate File 4560, which would formalize the Commander's Task Force, but the transcript cuts off before that bill was acted on.

Transcript Highlights:

• Lastly, the increase in personnel services is for standard statewide adjustments.
• Lastly, the increase in personnel services is for standard statewide adjustments, as well as the addition
• State general fund is also seeing a minor increase for standard statewide adjustments and additional
• This is largely due to the standard statewide adjustments, the reduction of 36 vacant positions, and
• The One Door system makes up the entire professional services adjustment and is also included in the

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• doing a lot of deep thinking and analysis about how to best help Vermont and its education system adjust
• c><00:01:45.000><c> to</c><00:01:45.080><c> declining</c><00:01:45.560><c> enrollment,</c> system adjust
• to declining enrollment, system adjust to declining enrollment, enormous<00:01:47.000><c> school</c>
• based on what the facilitators adjust based on what the facilitators learn<00:05:10.320><c> on</c><00
• The facilitator has the flexibility to adjust those groups based on information like this.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• we take a look to see if they're still suitable for projecting future member behavior or if some adjustments
• And I stress the word adjustments there because we're not making any sweeping changes here.
• So based on these takeaways and these observations, we made adjustments to our assumptions, and those
• The MVA makes no adjustment to annual investment returns.
• Starting off with Plan 3 includes an employer-funded guaranteed pension with a cost-of-living adjustment

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Pension Policy

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Buzwa, Secretary of Louisiana Economic Development: As Representative McMakin described, this purely adjusts
• We have not adjusted our fees inside of the department, the self-generated fees that we charge when we
• The agency are not being adjusted.
• The fee adjustments are between $5 and at most $35, and not all fees have been adjusted.
• We would note that these fees have not been comprehensively adjusted since 2013.

Bills: HB214 , HB217 , HB514 , HB593 , HB618 , HB732 , HB908 , HB961 , HB1010

Committee: Senate Revenue & Fiscal Affairs

Keywords: property tax, blighted properties, urban rehabilitation, tax exemption, local government, financial incentives, blighted property, derelict property, property tax exemption, local redevelopment plans, rehabilitation standards, ad valorem tax, community development, senior citizens, homestead exemption, Louisiana Constitution, motor vehicles, local fees, transaction fees, funding

Transcript Highlights:

• Employees, and typically we get cost-of-living adjustments every year.
• Departments don't always receive inflation adjustments, so they, you know, if there's... now CDCR gets
• an inflation adjustment for food costs, but for years it was kind of like they just absorbed increased
• And we're working now to make that. ...to make the necessary adjustments for May revision to include
• So to the extent that something isn't captured in the Governor's budget in that population adjustment

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We look at national inflation, and then we look at a regional adjustment.
• So, yeah, that forecast for real salary growth, not necessarily, but it's the inflationary adjustment
• And so with that in mind, we then considered whether OSA should be making any adjustments to those SIB
• At the end of the day, though, we found that the adjustments were largely unneeded or offsetting.”
• They included a one-time 3% cost-of-living adjustment in the first year, and this is along the lines

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Pension Policy

Summary: The committee approved the July minutes and then received an informational presentation from the Office of the State Actuary on the financial condition of the state retirement systems. The actuary reported that employer contribution rates are generally declining, helped by strong investment returns and reduced funding for PERS 1 and TERS 1, while funded ratios have continued to improve; on a combined basis the plans were reported at 100% funded in 2024, with open plans above 95% and legacy plans varying by system. The presentation also reviewed projected rates and funded ratios under current assumptions, noted that pension costs are taking a smaller share of the state general fund, and discussed risks from investment volatility, policy changes, and demographic experience. Committee members asked about savings from lower rates, deferred asset smoothing, and how Washington compares with other states. The committee then considered the state actuary’s recommendation on long-term economic assumptions and adopted all four recommendations by roll call votes: inflation at 3.0%, general salary growth at 3.5%, membership growth for Plan 1 funding at 1.0%, and investment rate of return at 7.25%. The actuaries explained that the inflation and salary growth increases were driven largely by higher long-term inflation expectations, while the investment return recommendation matched the current statutory assumption. Members discussed the timing of the Pension Funding Council’s decision, the effect of tariffs and inflation uncertainty, and how assumption changes would affect future contribution rates and budgets, particularly for open plans. Staff then gave an update on the LEOFF 1 study, explaining the difference between being “ahead of schedule” and truly overfunded, and summarizing responses received from DRS, the State Treasurer, and the State Investment Board on the merger and restatement proposals. DRS said both bills could be administered, though the merger bill’s COLA banking provision would be challenging until its new system is ready; the Treasurer urged caution, especially about the restatement bill and the use of one-time funds; and the Investment Board said removing assets from the trust would have some transaction costs but likely small impacts. The committee discussed whether to invite additional agencies and local government groups to testify, and staff said more responses, including from Ice Miller and the State Actuary, were expected for the October meeting. Finally, the committee heard a briefing on PERS 1/TERS 1 COLA policy and related bills from the last session. Staff reviewed the committee’s prior ongoing COLA recommendation, the SCPP-endorsed bills that would have created a one-time 3% COLA followed by an ongoing COLA, the Senate merger bill, and a separate ad hoc COLA bill. Public testimony largely supported Plan 1 COLAs and stable contribution rates, while several speakers urged caution about transferring LEOFF 1 surplus assets or merging legacy plans, and others raised concerns about climate risk and the pension fund’s investments. No further committee action was taken on the COLA item during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The operating adjustment is critical to provide for the rising costs at our agency due to the various
• Adopting the governor's recommended operating adjustment will reflect this in the Senate position and
• will reflect this reflected adjustment will reflect this reflected in<00:27:04.400><c> the</c><00:27
• Demand for the agency's general fund services has grown over time, and without any operating adjustment
• We sincerely appreciate the governor's recommendation for a modest operating adjustment, and we urge

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• if you turn to page number 6, we will kind of get into one of the first things that we made an adjustment
• could both... ...setback and a setback that might be potentially adjusted because of a screening could
• And there wasn't, that I know of, any significant adjustments to this part of the bill that dealt with
• So kind of looking at it from an all-in perspective where we've adjusted. Their solar project.
• I think it's time that we set some parameters, and we can always make an adjustment if need be.

Committee: House Utilities

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to direct my comments to three main areas: adjustments that were made from the original House
• The first adjustment deals with page 24 and 6 of the original bill in the House Committee substitute.
• We have removed the sections of the bill that make adjustments to both the extension of the no-excuse
• I mean, the people that are in charge of both parties in our state, they welcome this adjustment.
• an adjustment on this allocation, it has to conform as closely as possible to the primary results.

Committee: House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Summary: The Elections Committee met in executive session first and adopted a House Committee substitute for House Bill 2387, which combined HB 2387 and HB 2480. The substitute removed provisions on extending no-excuse in-person absentee voting and shortening the absentee voting window, shifted the presidential candidate filing fee to be set by state party committees, and added language to bind presidential delegates to primary results while allowing national party rules to control where required. Members discussed the legal basis for delegate binding, party input on the substitute, and the role of closed primaries, then the committee voted 10-2-1 to do pass HB 2387 as substituted. The committee also passed House Bill 1987 and House Concurrent Resolution 23 without opposition, and passed House Bill 1802 after members discussed election transparency and concerns about applying the measure uniformly across counties; the vote was 11-2. In public hearing, the committee heard House Bill 2605, which would update election notice requirements, especially for bond elections. Sponsor Rep. McGaugh and the State Auditor’s office said the bill would address technical publication errors that had jeopardized voter-approved bond issues by allowing notice defects to be cured if no election contest is filed within 30 days, while also allowing one newspaper publication and one direct mailing notice. Testimony from county clerks, school administrators, a fire district, the Missouri Press Association, and others generally supported the bill as a practical fix, though one witness urged broader website posting of notices. The hearing also covered House Bill 2301, a campaign finance cleanup bill that would clarify definitions and reporting rules in Chapter 130, especially for continuing committees and indirect political spending; the sponsor said it was intended to fix ambiguity from prior law, and the only testimony in favor called for additional restrictions on recurring donations and more transparency. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1787, which would require schools used as polling places to treat election days as school holidays beginning in the 2026-27 school year. The sponsor said the bill was intended to improve child safety and could also help with staffing and voter participation, while members raised concerns about school calendars already being set and whether the mandate should instead be optional or delayed to a later school year. A witness in favor supported the safety goal but asked for local control and a later effective date. No opposition testimony was presented, and the committee adjourned after the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Good thing we have those adjustable tables. Yes, sir. Yes, yes.
• By way of background, the JLBC is annually required to adjust the By way of background, the JLBC is annually
• required to adjust the school facilities division cost per square foot factors for new school facilities
• If the committee does approve this adjustment, it would need to be made retroactive to December 10, 2025
• If the committee does approve this adjustment, it would need to be made retroactive to December 10, 2025

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative Budget Committee

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The next change item is on line 52 and this is the operating adjustment for the petroleum tank release
• The next change item is on line 52 and this is the operating adjustment for the petroleum tank release
• The first one is operating adjustment. proposal that was in the Senate bill. proposal that was in the
• for the petroleum tank adjustment for the petroleum tank release<00:05:01.360><c> compensation</c><00
• ><c> are</c><00:05:30.000><c> operating</c> Operating adjustments are contained in numerous agencies

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• the House agrees to the Senate's proposal for the modification of this item and also proposes to adjust
• to ensure that any amounts reserved for administrative costs for those grant programs um will be adjusted
• </c><00:04:22.240><c> OHEI's</c> proposes to uh adjust OHEI's proposes to uh adjust OHEI's appropriations
• programs<00:04:34.800><c> um</c><00:04:35.440><c> will</c><00:04:35.759><c> be</c><00:04:36.000><c> adjusted
• </c><00:04:36.720><c> to</c><00:04:37.040><c> these</c> programs um will be adjusted to these programs

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The meeting focused on a House counteroffer to a higher education budget and policy agreement, with Ken Savory walking members through spreadsheet changes and Mr. Hopkins reviewing policy items. On the budget side, the House adjusted several appropriations and savings targets, including state grants, child care grants, student teacher and shortage area grants, student parent support, spinal cord injury and traumatic brain injury research grants, dual training grants for legal cannabis employers, and University of Minnesota cannabis research. The House also noted no change to Minnesota State, alignment with the Senate on the summer academic enrichment program, and that remaining state grant parameters would continue to be negotiated. On policy, the House said some items were agreed to and grayed out, including campus sexual misconduct policy and treatment of appropriations. The House kept its original position on the NN Mayo Clinic Partnership and did not include K-12 direct admissions or the College Financing Literacy Act. It also proposed adjusting OHEI appropriations for competitively and legislatively named grant programs so administrative cost reserves would conform to 10% and 5% parameters when current law is below those levels. The committee then heard testimony in support of continuing the spinal cord injury/traumatic brain injury grant program at its current level. Joey Carlson described his spinal cord injury, his career path, and how the program helped advance research and industry connections, while Matthew Broadick argued the program has produced clinical trials, FDA approval-related progress, jobs, and strong return on investment. He also said the program belongs at the Office of Higher Education rather than the Department of Health because its mission better fits research and innovation. Members asked about the program’s long-term home, and the witnesses defended OHE’s role. No votes were taken; the chair thanked the House for the offer, said it would be reviewed, and recessed the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also make adjustments to these loss percentages to account for planting and harvesting progress.
• But again, we may make further adjustments as we collect more of that in case we learn about more delayed
• We also make adjustments to these loss percentages to account for planting and harvesting progress.
• But again, we may make further adjustments as we collect more of that in case we learn about more delayed
• They can utilize it for a baseline and then go from there and then, you know, make adjustments as needed

Committee: Senate Agriculture

Summary: The Florida Senate Committee on Agriculture convened with a quorum present and heard two presentations. Commissioner Wilton Simpson, head of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, outlined department accomplishments and funding needs, including IT modernization, expansion of the Rural and Family Lands program, updated best management practice manuals, growth of the Fresh From Florida marketing campaign, hurricane recovery loans for farmers, clearing concealed-weapons permit backlogs, construction of the Conner Complex headquarters, forestry equipment upgrades, and youth agriculture programs such as FFA and 4-H. Senators asked about water policy, citrus greening, FAMU partnerships, staffing efficiencies, and interdiction stations used to stop invasive species, stolen goods, and diseased or banned agricultural products from entering the state. Dr. Krista Court of the University of Florida/IFAS presented a preliminary economic assessment of the 2024 hurricane season’s agricultural impacts from Hurricanes Debby, Helene, and Milton. She explained that the estimates are based on wind, rainfall, flooding, crop location, and survey data from extension agents, industry groups, FDACS, and producers, and that the figures do not include many asset losses, supply-chain effects, forestry losses, or some insurance-covered damages. Her preliminary estimates placed total 2024 agricultural production losses between about $402.3 million and $975.8 million, with the hardest-hit commodity groups including field and row crops, vegetables, melons, potatoes, greenhouse/nursery products, and animals and animal products. Members discussed the importance of accurate survey participation and baseline data, including use of USDA Farm Service Agency information, to improve future disaster estimates and federal relief decisions. Several senators emphasized agriculture’s importance in their districts and statewide. No bills were considered and no formal votes were taken; the only action was adjournment by motion of Senator Burton.