Transcript Highlights:

• DeFontaine to ask if there's any language currently in the bill that would limit a cap per project.
• <01:17:37.000> of wondering if there was like a cap of wondering if there was like a cap of
• <01:18:45.760> per would limit a cap per would limit a cap per project<01:18:48.600> Mr
• control before you look at capping control before you look at capping salaries salaries salaries
• And his commissioners help him run that, and they all have salary caps.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The current cap for court-appointed attorneys is $900.
• The current cap for court-appointed attorneys is $900.
• <00:57:19.720> is raise the the rate if if the cap is raise the the rate if if the cap is
• I also think there's room to even increase the caps even further.
• So, when an attorney hits the cap, does it just walk off, or what happens then?

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs heard House Bill 4000, the Judiciary’s biennium budget bill for FY 2026-2027. Judiciary Director of Policy and Planning Brandon Kimura testified in strong support, outlining operating requests of about $6.17 million in FY 26 and $6.25 million in FY 27, 17 permanent positions and one temporary position, plus $9.9 million in capital improvements. He described funding needs for specialty courts, preparations for the Wahiawa District Court, an additional district court judge and staff for Kona, cybersecurity upgrades, the Criminal Justice Research Institute, statewide priority items, and restoration of several essential staff positions. He also said the Judiciary was seeking an additional $2 million for the Children’s Justice Center relocation lump sum because updated estimates had risen to about $8 million. The committee also discussed potential impacts from uncertain federal funding and asked for written follow-up on those risks and on the capital request, including coordination with Budget and Finance. Several organizations and individuals testified in support of the Judiciary budget, including the Hawaiʻi State Bar Association, Legal Aid Society of Hawaiʻi, and legal service providers. Mioko Eto asked for an additional $1 million for civil legal service providers, explaining that the current funding is spread across multiple providers and that the need remains high. David Copper of Legal Aid supported the request, citing statewide demand, 105 staff, 7,100 cases closed in the past year, and 15,000 calls received, while noting that many people seeking help cannot be served because of capacity limits. He also said recent federal funding disruptions and proposed cuts could affect legal services and related programs. Committee members asked about the Criminal Justice Research Institute’s mission; Kimura said its primary statutory role is to build a database focused on pre-trial reporting and data analysis, though it is also working on probation and mental health-related projects. No vote or final action on HB 4000 was taken in the hearing excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, um, this bill essentially would allow, uh, a cap, would place a cap on the amount of financial
• would allow, uh, a cap would place a cap would allow, uh, a cap would place a cap on<01:50:11.920
• it would to abide by this cap.
• to say let's just increase the EFA caps. to say let's just increase the EFA caps.
• . cap. cap.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , absolute opposition to this school cap, absolute opposition to this school cap, and<01:20:42.320
• the bill 2 seconds ago with the 6% cap the bill 2 seconds ago with the 6% cap added<01:30:48.719
• There is no higher threshold cap on school spending beyond that 6% central office cap.
• But it is like a meaningless cap if there is not that higher threshold cap on overall district spending
• > the local tax cap, effectively erasing the local tax cap, effectively erasing the article's<

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The business complies with the Texas Motor Carrier Laws, and for production cap purposes, the beer is
• When you change what the caps provide them and change...
• How they can use those caps, we feel like you've violated the agreement.
• , but to our knowledge, there's nobody even close to that cap.
• But that does go against the cap on the amount that they're able to sell. Yes, sir.

Bills: HB 1301, HB2278, HB2776, HB2820, HB3848, HB3920, HB4172, HB4215, HB4284, HB4285, HB4463, HB4517, HB4690, HB4765, HB4766, HB4767, HB4768, HB4769, HB4773, HB4830, HB5506

Keywords: alcohol, beverages, winery permit, restaurant, malt beverages, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, alcohol production, home brewing, family use, craft beverages, massage therapy, licensing, criminal offenses, sexually oriented businesses, public safety, bingo, charitable gaming, operating capital, regulation, funding

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for being here. ...law without caps. Thank you.
• Medical negligence is not one-size-fits-all; caps are. Please do the right thing.
• And I ask, politely, to make a clean repeal, no caps.
• without caps.
• Second, the bill repeals a cap on arbitrator compensation rates in court-ordered non-binding arbitration

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee heard three bills. SB 514, by Senator Harrell, clarified that medical quality review committees used by managing entities are treated like other medical review committees for purposes of civil liability and public records protections. The committee adopted a Harrell amendment removing the word “malpractice” from the title, heard support from the Florida Hospital Association, Florida Association of Managing Entities, and Florida Smart Justice Alliance, and then voted 11-0 to report the bill favorably. The committee then took up SB 734, by Senator Yarborough, which would repeal the current wrongful death exception that bars certain parents and adult children from recovering non-economic damages in medical negligence cases. The bill drew extensive testimony from families describing deaths they said were caused by medical negligence and from supporters including AARP and the Florida Justice Association, while opponents from the health care, insurance, and business sectors argued it would raise malpractice premiums, increase litigation, worsen physician shortages, and reduce access to care. After debate, the committee voted 9-2 to report the bill favorably. Finally, SB 538, by Senator Bradley, was presented as the state courts legislative package. It updates court operations by clarifying duty judge requirements, removing a location limit on duty hearings, repealing a cap on arbitrator compensation in court-ordered non-binding arbitration, and allowing alternative judicial authentication of oaths and acknowledgments when a court seal is unavailable. The bill received supportive waiver forms from the Florida Bar ADR section and several judges, and was reported favorably on an 11-0 vote. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Rate increases are now capped at the lesser of 4% or CPI.
• The cap system, the way that it's going to be capped, removes this feature and resembles kind of what
• other source; this is a survey of our members that we a link of service and there isn't due to the cap
• Print pointed to on a prior slide about how they're trying to meet the projected cap issues.
• Print pointed to a prior slide about how they're trying to meet the projected cap issues.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• caps cumulative transactions at $2,000 for customers with fewer than five prior transactions.
• There's a fee protection that caps fees at 3% of the transaction amounts.
• I mean, is your position that there should be no caps and no limits at all?
• The transaction limit and the fee cap are sort of two different questions, right?
• The fee cap, from our standpoint, first of all, is not a consumer protection measure.

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What this amendment does is just put a cap on the number of units.
• , which says that free and fair competition is an inherent right of the people, and a moratorium, a cap
• , which says that free and fair competition is an inherent right of the people, and a moratorium, a cap
• , which says that free and fair competition is an inherent right of the people, and a moratorium, a cap
• , which says that free and fair competition is an inherent right of the people, and a moratorium, a cap

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• property, an initial fee of $250 and each year thereafter the fee shall increase by an additional $100, capped
• property, an initial fee of $500 and each year thereafter the fee shall increase by an additional $250, capped
• 00:11:43.360> an<00:11:43.600> additional<00:11:44.640> $100<00:11:45.920> capped
• property, an initial fee of $500 and each year thereafter the fee shall increase by an additional $250, capped
• an annual fee of $2,000. shall increase by an additional $250 shall increase by an additional $250 capped

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• CAP is 34% of the water. Those are the two biggest chunks.
• They got that benefit of the bargain by capping us.
• We know that CAP is a stakeholder. K-Grid is a stakeholder.
• I also sit on the CAP board as well.
• I also sit on the CAP board as well.

Bills: HB2042, HB2052, HB2055, HB2056, HB2094, HB2098, HB2185, HB2328, HB2758, HB2798

Keywords: solar radiation management, environment, prohibition, Arizona Revised Statutes, public health, complaint process, Attorney General, groundwater management, water conservation, irrigation, water supply, brackish groundwater, water supply development, desalination, water infrastructure, financial assistance, environmental reviews, brackish water, groundwater, water resources

Summary: The committee first received an update from Arizona Department of Water Resources Director Tom Buschatzky on Colorado River negotiations and post-2026 operating rules. He described the legal framework governing Arizona’s allocation, argued that Arizona and the lower basin have already made substantial conservation cuts, and said the upper basin is pressing positions Arizona views as inconsistent with prior Supreme Court rulings. He emphasized the need to move water from upstream reservoirs to Lake Mead, warned of continued shortage risk, and said the state is seeking an equitable deal through ongoing federal and interstate negotiations. Members asked about outside water use, tourism and recreation impacts, and tribal water rights, including the Navajo-Hopi-San Juan Southern Paiute settlement. Buschatzky said the state’s delegation and bipartisan support have been helpful and urged continued public and legislative backing. The committee then heard House Bill 2758, which would expand McMullen Valley groundwater transportation authority and add related requirements and guardrails, including an amendment increasing the La Paz County transportation cap from 10% to 50% of the annual volume and adding conditions for sales or leases from historically irrigated acres. Supporters, including bill sponsor advocates, the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association, and the Home Builders Association, said the bill would create a lawful, regulated transfer option similar to the Harquahala model, support housing growth, and include oversight through hydrologic studies, pumping limits, and monthly reporting to ADWR. Opponents, including La Paz County Supervisor Holly Irwin’s statement, local residents, Sierra Club, and rural advocates, argued the bill would accelerate aquifer depletion, harm private wells and subsidence conditions, and benefit a New York hedge fund at the expense of rural communities. After debate, the committee adopted the Griffin amendment and then passed HB 2758 as amended on a 6-4 due-pass vote. The committee next took up House Bill 2098, which would modify bonding authority and public hearing notice requirements for county water augmentation authorities and allow local repayment agreements with WIFA. Pinal County Supervisor Stephen Miller and other supporters said the bill would clean up statutory language so the Pinal County Water Augmentation Authority can finance future water augmentation and infrastructure projects, including potential Bartlett Dam-related work, and better prepare for future Colorado River uncertainty. The Home Builders Association also supported the bill, saying it included proportionality protections for private utility water charges. The bill was moved for a due-pass recommendation and the committee proceeded to a roll call vote, with the transcript ending before the final vote result was shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have several, and I’m trying to understand: if we remove the income cap, then students who are not
• ><00:23:08.440> remove<00:23:08.960> the<00:23:09.120> income<00:23:10.440> cap
• <00:23:11.880> then Bill if we remove the income cap then Bill if we remove the income cap
• > free There are essentially three tiers: there's free and reduced lunch, there's the income cap
• This bill doesn't raise that cap, but what we've been collecting, well, last year what we collected was

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And they would have caps on what they could charge the consumer for that earned wage access.
• Any interest or fee would be capped.
• the cap overall?
• They keep raising their cap every year.
• They keep raising their cap every year.

Bills: SB1327, SB1372, SB1403, SB1937, SB277, SB2131, SB1749, SB1348, SB1469, SB2018, SB1931, SB1530, SB2155

Keywords: tourism, recreation, economic development, Oklahoma Commission, executive director, probation, credits, educational advancement, Oklahoma Statutes, criminal justice reform, job incentives, tax rebates, Oklahoma Quality Jobs Program, employment growth, wage requirements, labor organization, incentives, employer practices, union neutrality, worker rights

Transcript Highlights:

• disappointed that I can't give you the exact date, but that's when it started, and it had a very low cap
• So then fast forward into the early 2010s, they started pushing for higher caps, and that got up to the
• I think it was a very low cap on it.
• 45.040> got<00:03:45.360> up<00:03:45.599> to<00:03:45.760> the higher caps
• Um and that got up to the higher caps.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Ten years ago, the European Union capped interchange fees in Europe.
• Ten years ago, the European Union capped interchange fees in Europe.
• Or are those, how is the Europe 10-year cap over the last 10 years?
• But debit card fees in the U.S. are capped, correct?
• They were capped, and the reason they were capped was because there is no unsecured credit being issued

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the Future of Payments and Sales Transactions by Credit Card and the Impacts for Small Businesses held a public hearing focused on interchange fees, sales tax and tip processing, chargebacks, fraud, surcharging, and the broader future of payment systems. Chair Paul Feeney and co-chair Rep. Jamie Murphy opened by explaining the commission’s charge and inviting testimony from small businesses, industry groups, banks, and policy experts. Representative Sean Garballey testified first, arguing that Massachusetts tourism depends on universal card acceptance and stable interchange, and urging the commission not to disrupt the current system ahead of major events expected to bring millions of visitors to the Commonwealth. A large portion of the hearing featured independent restaurant owners and advocates describing thin margins and the burden of paying percentage-based processing fees on sales tax and tips that are not business revenue. Jen Ziskin, Kristen Canty, Nancy Cushman, Kerry Colzer, and others said restaurants often operate on very small profits and that processing fees on taxes and gratuities can amount to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Ryan Lotz also urged reforms to chargebacks, including refunding chargeback fees when merchants prevail, requiring consumers to contact businesses before disputing charges, and limiting repeat abuse. Commission members pressed witnesses on whether tax and tip amounts could be separated at the point of sale, and several witnesses said current consumer card systems do not transmit that level of detail. Testimony from credit union, banking, and payments representatives largely opposed state-level changes that would carve out taxes or tips from interchange, warning of compliance burdens, higher costs, reduced rewards, and possible effects on fraud protection and access to credit. Alex Verine of America’s Credit Unions and Deb Peters and Keely McEwen of the Electronic Payments Coalition said the payment system is complex, that interchange funds fraud prevention and network infrastructure, and that new state mandates could create operational and legal uncertainty. Dan Swanson argued states have authority to act and pointed to Illinois litigation and federal court rulings, while Julian Morris and Brad Popolado emphasized the benefits of card acceptance, the decline of cash, and the need to consider other payment methods and check fraud as well. Several witnesses discussed international payment systems, instant payments, and QR standards as possible future directions. The chairs and members engaged in extended back-and-forth with witnesses about whether Massachusetts could exempt sales tax from swipe fees, whether surcharging should be revisited, and whether vendor compensation or other targeted relief might be more workable than broad changes to interchange. No votes were taken. At the close of the hearing, the chairs said the commission would hold one additional public hearing date to be determined, after which members would begin developing next steps and a report.

Transcript Highlights:

• They just had to be within the income cap.
• Also, in the context of caps now on borrowing, total amounts borrowed for parents with their student
• still parents at the public segments that take out Parent PLUS loans and could be impacted by these caps
• Just at a high level, some of these changes include the annual and lifetime caps on parent plus loans
• still parents at the public segments that take out parent plus loans and could be impacted by these caps

Summary: The subcommittee on Education Finance heard an overview of the governor’s budget proposals and higher education financial aid trends, with a major focus on the Middle Class Scholarship (MCS), Cal Grant spending, and the effects of recent federal student aid changes. The Department of Finance said the budget would fully fund Cal Grant at projected levels and reduce MCS coverage from 35% to 17.5% of unmet need in 2026-27, while the Legislative Analyst’s Office supported considering the reduction as a cost-saving measure given out-year deficits. UC and CSU representatives opposed the cut, saying MCS is important to affordability and debt-free degree goals; they estimated average awards would fall substantially and that campuses do not have funds to backfill the loss. The Student Aid Commission said the proposal would reduce aid but simplify administration, and members questioned how lower awards would affect students, borrowing, and work-study options. No vote was taken, and the issue was held open for possible future action. The committee then discussed federal changes to student loans and Pell Grant policy under H.R. 1, including caps on Parent PLUS loans, elimination of Grad PLUS loans, and new proration rules for federal direct loans based on enrollment intensity. The LAO said these changes would likely push some borrowers into the private market, especially graduate and professional students and some parents of students at private institutions. CSU said the changes would affect thousands of graduate and part-time students and could reduce access by about $97 million in loan availability for part-time borrowers, while UC said the new definitions of professional degrees were too restrictive and would reduce access for nursing, teaching, law, dentistry, and other programs. Community colleges said they use relatively little federal loan aid but are monitoring Workforce Pell. Members raised concerns about workforce impacts, social mobility, and whether the state should consider alternative loan programs or other ways to reduce student costs. This issue was also held open. In the segment financial aid update, the LAO reported Cal Grant spending is projected to rise to about $3.2 billion in 2026-27, driven by more recipients and higher awards tied to UC and CSU tuition increases, while CSAC said FAFSA and CADAA applications are up significantly year over year. CSU, community colleges, and UC described their aid packaging and rising aid totals, with CSU reporting over $5.5 billion in aid to 381,000 students, community colleges reporting over $4.3 billion to more than 920,000 students, and UC reporting $3.17 billion in grant aid to undergraduates. Members asked about Cal Grant reform, application trends, and long-term outcomes; UC and community colleges pointed to alumni and wage dashboards, and the LAO noted the state’s Cradle to Career data effort. The committee then took public comment, including testimony on library funding and other education-related priorities, and concluded by holding the issues open without formal action.

Transcript Highlights:

• The difference is this: this takes out the dollar cap, so it was about if you made $40,000 or above and
• The difference is this: this takes out the dollar cap, so it was about if you made $40,000 or above and
• This takes out the dollar cap, so it was about if you made $40,000 or above and $48,000 or $49,000 with
• I'm chair of this, but I'm getting a lot of emails from veterans out there asking why we have that cap
• The cap, it just seemed wrong for that situation.

Bills: SB1047, SB1365, SB1474, SB1618, SB1620

Keywords: National Guard, active duty, combat, Arizona, declaration of war, state law, military service, property tax, exemptions, veterans, disabilities, widows and widowers, Arizona Revised Statutes, immigration enforcement, local law enforcement, federal cooperation, law enforcement training, public safety, military affairs, funding

Summary: The committee first approved the February 9, 2026 minutes and then took up Senate Bill 1618, which would restructure the Military Affairs Commission by changing membership, adding defense and industry expertise, expanding advisory roles, requiring more frequent meetings, and directing the commission to focus on sustaining and attracting military missions and defense-related economic activity. After testimony in support from the Southwest Mission Acceleration Center and a DEMA representative, the committee adopted the Gowan amendment and gave SB 1618 a do-pass recommendation by a 6-1 vote. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1047, the “Defend the Guard” bill, which would bar Arizona National Guard members from being sent into active-duty combat overseas unless Congress has declared war or otherwise expressly authorized the action. Supporters, including veterans and activists, argued it would restore constitutional limits and protect Guard members from unauthorized wars; opponents warned it could harm Guard readiness, federal funding, and the Guard’s role in state missions. After extended debate, the committee passed SB 1047 on a 4-3 vote. Next, Senate Bill 1474 was heard, which would require state and local law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, prohibit restrictions on such cooperation, and require sheriff’s offices to enter 287(g) agreements under the amendment. The bill drew strong opposition from clergy and community members who argued it would increase fear, racial profiling, and unfunded mandates, while supporters said it would improve cooperation and public safety. The committee adopted the amendment and gave SB 1474 a do-pass recommendation by a 4-3 vote. The committee also considered Senate Bill 1620, which would revise the Arizona Space Commission by reducing governor appointments, adding the lieutenant governor as chair, and making legislative and executive leaders nonvoting advisory members. The sponsor said the changes would better align the commission with Arizona’s growing aerospace and space interests. The bill received a do-pass recommendation on a 5-1 vote. Finally, the committee began consideration of Senate Bill 1365, which would remove the income cap for the property tax exemption available to disabled veterans on their primary residence; discussion focused on the fairness of eliminating the cap, and the committee moved to adopt the strike-everything amendment before the transcript cuts off.

Transcript Highlights:

• me understand why we would want to cap me understand why we would want to cap um um um employment
• instead of something like a cap. instead of something like a cap.
• what I could see in the bill is an a cap what I could see in the bill is an a cap at<00:40:25.119
• Um appreciation cap on further resale.
• Now a capped rent coming from housing.

Bills: HB1721, HB1714, HB1718, HB1732, HB1740, HB1777, HB1842, HB1919, HB1701, HB1923, HB1741, HB1734, HB1739

Keywords: housing, expedited permits, insurance, indemnification, construction, affordable housing, executive compensation, Hawaii housing finance, legislative approval, low-income housing, moderate-income housing, mixed-use development, transit-oriented development, TOD, county powers, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, HHFDC, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, DHHL, affordable housing credits

Summary: The House Housing Committee met on February 4 and heard testimony on several housing measures, beginning with HB1721, which clarifies insurance, indemnification, and certificate-of-occupancy requirements for expedited permits. Testimony on HB1721 was uniformly supportive from the American Council of Engineering Companies, the Grassroot Institute, and individual testifiers, who said the bill would fix insurance issues for design professionals and encourage more participation in the expedited-permit program. No opposition was heard and no questions were raised. The committee then heard HB1714, which would raise salary caps for the executive director and deputy executive director positions at the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation and allow more autonomy in personnel matters, including employment contracts. HHFDC supported the bill, saying greater flexibility is needed to recruit and retain staff and that current pay ceilings are not the main issue because the agency lacks operating funds to reach them. The Department of Human Resources Development offered comments and raised concerns about autonomous personnel authority and employment contracts, saying state personnel matters are governed by existing statutes and collective bargaining rules; the Hawaii Public Housing Authority also offered comments, and one board member and one individual opposed the measure. Members questioned whether performance-based pay or existing incentive policies could address retention instead of statutory salary changes. The committee also heard HB1718, which would make permanent county authority to facilitate mixed-use developments and issue county bonds for low- and moderate-income housing projects. Support came from OPSD, HHFDC, the City and County of Honolulu’s Department of Housing and Land Management, and Housing Hawaii’s Future, all emphasizing that permanent authority is needed to finance long-term mixed-use and transit-oriented projects. A member asked whether the sunset provision would make bonding impractical, and the city representative agreed that temporary authority would make financing difficult because development takes time. Later, the committee took up HB1732, establishing the Kamina Homes program to fund counties’ purchase of voluntary deed restrictions from eligible buyers. The Department of Taxation and several groups, including HHFDC, AARP Hawaii, the Tax Foundation of Hawaii, Hawaii Realtors, Holomua Collaborative, and others testified, with most supporting the bill as a way to help local families remain in Hawaii and age in place. Holomua said a recent survey found 75% of 3,200 working families were considering moving, and argued the bill could preserve housing for local residents. Members asked about the bill’s 8% cap on deed-restriction cost and why the program focuses on residency rather than resale restrictions; the bill’s proponents said the cap allows flexibility for county negotiations and that the measure is aimed at workforce preservation rather than land-trust-style appreciation limits. Finally, the committee heard HB1740, which would modify a prior HHFDC housing pathway by reducing the qualified-resident requirement from 100% to 80% and allowing more flexibility for long-term rental instead of owner occupancy. HHFDC and Holomua Collaborative supported the change, saying the earlier 100% requirement had produced no developments or applicants and that the revised standard would make projects more feasible while still preserving housing for local residents. The committee did not take final votes on these measures during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was a school district budget cap.
• <02:12:02.239> So, a school district budget cap. So, a school district budget cap.
• clarify that an an existing budget cap clarify that an an existing budget cap can<02:17:15.040> be
• But it it and obviously the budget cap.
• I understand that there are people that do not like such things as tax caps and budget caps, but that's

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hospitals, so there's the population cap as well as critical access hospitals, which, again, I concur
• Okay, you said there's a cap on rural hospitals. Am I getting...
• You heard the population cap, so we would exclude, like, Pima and Maricopa.
• hospitals so there's the population cap as well as critical access hospitals which again I concur with
• that any further questions or discussions yes representative black okay you said there's a cap on rural

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The meeting was a Republican caucus review of several Senate and House bills, with staff summarizing committee amendments and members indicating whether sponsors concurred with Senate changes. Topics included electronic monitoring in residential rooms (SB 1041), dental school complaint forwarding and licensure exemptions (SB 1168), revitalization district contracts (SB 1189), timeshare salesperson licensing (SB 1274), veterinary telehealth prescribing (SB 1286), insurance zero-estimated-exposure policies (SB 1428), advanced air mobility funds for border security (SB 1457), death benefits for law enforcement pilots (SB 1503), ATV definitions (SB 1519), pet and fowl restrictions in planned communities (SB 1582), and pharmacist independent testing/treatment authority (SB 1713). The caucus also reviewed education-related measures on school district self-insurance procurement (SB 1497) and a strike-everything amendment to SB 1118 that instead allowed duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and townhomes in historic areas if compatible with surrounding character. The group then considered several blue-sheet House bills. HB 2120 made technical changes to align property-tax disability language with updated statute; the sponsor concurred. HB 2174 changed terminology from advisory organization to modeling and data organization and required model filing; the sponsor concurred. HB 2203 directed ADE to review statutory reporting requirements and report recommendations to the legislature; the sponsor concurred. HB 2383’s Senate amendment simply designated a 2014 trampoline court law as “TIE’s law,” with the sponsor concurring. HB 2877 was amended into an alternative education pathway for certified veterinary technicians, and HB 2875 adjusted municipal and county drone restrictions near airports, expanding the relevant airport buffer and preserving some local authority. Additional bills discussed included HB 2428 on voluntary county emissions-reduction credit permits, HB 2176 on DHS health care institution complaint investigations, and HB 2050 on radiologic technology standards and radiologist assistant supervision. Members discussed that HB 2050’s Senate changes narrowed some supervision provisions to rural counties and critical access hospitals, prompting questions about the scope. Finally, HB 2010 on digital goods refunds was amended to shorten the refund window from 10 years to five years, but a sponsor said the amendment contained a drafting error and refused concurrence, meaning a conference committee would be needed. The caucus then concluded.