Transcript Highlights:

• Within four days of landfall of Debbie, we had 100% of power restoration to all applicable and available
• billion obligated and 22,000 projects through public assistance with more than 1,500 different applicants

Summary: The committee received a program review from the Florida Division of Emergency Management on the 2024 hurricane season and FEMA reimbursement process. Deputy Director Keith Pruitt described the impacts of Hurricanes Debby, Helene, and Milton, including major storm surge, flooding, tornadoes, debris removal, power restoration, flood-control deployments, sheltering, and logistics missions. He emphasized that Florida’s approach is “federally funded, state managed, locally executed,” and said the division has already obligated large amounts of public assistance funding and mitigation dollars while continuing to work on remaining missions and reimbursements. A major focus of the discussion was how local governments can better document and vet debris-removal and other disaster costs so they are eligible for FEMA reimbursement. Chair DiCeglie and other senators raised concerns about local planning, commercial debris collection, and whether counties and municipalities that spend money up front will be reimbursed. Pruitt explained that eligibility depends on documentation, scope of work, insurance, and FEMA rules, and that the state’s FROC process is intended to help counties identify eligible work before costs are incurred. He also said commercial debris may be eligible in some cases but is not guaranteed, and that counties should coordinate early with FDEM and FEMA. Senators also asked about possible FEMA reforms, the age of outstanding reimbursement claims, and a proposed state fund to advance money to fiscally constrained counties while they wait for FEMA payments. Pruitt said Florida’s system is a national best practice, but that more county-level training and clearer coordination would help reduce de-obligations and audit problems. He said the reimbursement-advance idea is still being developed, and that the state continues to look at ways to streamline mitigation through programs like Elevate Florida. The committee took no formal action beyond hearing the presentation, and the meeting adjourned after closing comments from senators praising FDEM’s work.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that eligibility could come into play with the applications.
• So that eligibility could come into play with the applications.
• So that eligibility could come into play with the applications.
• So that eligibility could come into play with the applications.
• So that eligibility could come into play with the applications.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Bills: HJR 1, HB 9, HB 21, HB 26, HB 30, HB 37, HB 116, HB 630, HB 879, HB 913, HB 1151, HB 1318, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 2703, HB 2809, HB 2890, HB 2970, HB 3307, HB 3526, HB 5092, SB 128, SB 203, SB 317, SB 393, SB 397, SB 644, SB 731, SB 801, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1073, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1232, SB 1250, SB 1262, SB 1285, SB 1310, SB 1359, SB 1444, SB 1483, SB 1705, SB 1782, SB 1861, SB 1897, SB 1944, SB 2023, SB 2043, SB 2082, SB 2133, SB 2215, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2309, SB 2532, SB 2549, SB 2566, SB 2617, SB 2619, SB 2639, SB 2688, SB 2696, SB 2717, SB 2790, SB 2841, SB 2847, SB 2850, SB 2857, SB 2891, SB 2919, SB 2928, SB 2972, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 1, SB 260, SB 1506, SB 1637, HB 37, HB 109, HB 334, HB 1130, HB 1238, HB 1327, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 1689, HB 2081, HB 2809, HB 2884, HB 2890, HB 4215, HB 5092, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SB 644, SB 1086, SB 1230, SB 1310, SB 1361, SB 1553, SB 1778, SB 1790, SB 2344, SB 2460, SB 2515, SB 2600, SB 2747, SB 2751, SB 2785, SB 2790, SB 3047, SB 3048, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3056, SB 3058, SB 3061, HJR 1, HB 1130, HB 1689, HB 2884, HB 1393, HB 2559, HB 26, HB 3012, HB 1327, HB 109, HB 1238, HB 2890, HB 9, HB 4215, HB 2970, HB 37, HB 1899, HB 1593, HB 2607, HB 3526, HB 3810, HB 5092, HB 388, HB 2809, HB 1151, HB 913, HB 3307, HB 879, HB 116, HB 12, HB 2703, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 30, HB 21, HB 2712, HB 2692, HB 1633, HB 1318, HB 685, HB 630, HB 4753, HB 2742, HB 303, HB 198, HB 1535, HB 762, HB 148, HB 1520, HB 5061, HB 2286, HB 1606, HB 1041, HB 132, HB 11, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 2023, SB 1310, SB 2972, SB 1073, SB 2847, SB 2532, SB 2619, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 507, SB 1434, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1122, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 1085, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 1200, SB 1845, SB 2458, SB 801, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 2797, SB 2076, SB 2876, SB 1640, SB 1449, SB 1181, SB 1359, SB 1234, SB 2926, SB 2841, SB 1528, SB 2891, SB 1854, SB 317, SB 1250, SB 2082, SB 1285, SB 1237, SB 2819, SB 629, SB 2608, SB 1602, SB 2009, SB 2460, SB 867, SB 640, SB 1698, SB 2680, SB 2994, SB 2747, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1483, SB 1444, SB 1553, SB 1556, SB 1703, SB 2133, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2622, SB 2955, SB 2334, SB 1861, SB 2043, SB 1367, SB 2857, SB 128, SB 3058, SB 2044, SB 2363, SB 2565, SB 1888, SB 3048, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3036, SB 3057, SB 3056, SB 3043, SB 3050, SB 3063, SB 3035, SB 1790, SB 1778, SB 203, SB 3061, SB 2799, SB 2790, SB 2688, SB 2515, SB 1230, SB 2522, SB 2639, SB 2459, SB 3051, SB 2655, SB 2251, SB 1884, SB 2617, SB 2751, SB 2928, SB 2566, SB 1897, SB 1749, SB 1361, SB 2549, SB 2553, SB 2919, SB 1782, SB 1705, SB 2696, SB 1944, SB 2215, SB 644, SB 1232, SB 2850, HB 45, HB 48, HB 1261, HB 1465, HB 1778, HB 2596, HB 5238, HB 33, HB 1188, HB 210, HB 1022, HB 1458, HB 5560, HB 1240, HB 1950, HB 2027, HB 2768, HB 2788, HB 2791, HB 3146, HB 3698, HB 3699, HB 1893, HB 3700, HB 4850, HB 4187, HB 1397, HB 4885, HB 4804, HB 3751, HB 3611, HB 2775, HB 2061, HB 2003, HB 1729, HB 1242, HB 791, HB 2029, HB 647, HB 2522, HB 4738, HB 3033, HB 3594, HB 3474, HB 2563, HB 2802, HCR 90, SJR 87, SB 2969, SB 3073, SB 2497, SB 1798, SB 2603, SB 2607, SB 781, SJR 34, SB 17, SB 314, SB 455, SB 509, SB 529, SB 541, SB 693, SB 761, SB 963, SB 1023, SB 1968, SB 2122, SB 2308, SB 2371, SB 2420, SB 2544, SJR 87, SB 1285, SB 1359, SB 2857, SB 3073, HJR 1, HB 9, HB 21, HB 116, HB 913, HB 1151, HB 1899, HB 2970, HB 3307, SB 1073, SB 1310, SB 2532, SB 2619, SB 2847, SB 2972, SB 128, SB 2043, SR 393, SR 511, SR 518, SR 520, SB 314, SB 455, SB 761, SB 1023, SB 2122, SB 2371, SB 2420, SB 17, SB 509, SB 644, SB 1230, SB 1361, SB 1778, SB 1790, SB 2460, SB 2515, SB 2747, SB 2751, SB 2790, SB 3048, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3056, SB 3058, SB 3061, HB 37, HB 109, HB 1130, HB 1238, HB 1327, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 1689, HB 2809, HB 2884, HB 2890, HB 4215, HB 5092, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SB 1086, SB 1553, HJR 182, HB 4, HB 24, HB 46, HB 101, HB 146, HB 170, HB 214, HB 305, HB 426, HB 549, HB 551, HB 594, HB 722, HB 824, HB 1119, HB 1579, HB 2215, HB 2458, HB 2530, HB 2674, HB 2713, HB 2974, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 3180, HB 3221, HB 3359, HB 3556, HB 4088, HB 4211, HB 4396, HB 4413, HB 4580, HB 4609, HB 4864, HB 5088, HB 5154, HB 5263, HB 2294, HJR 182, HB 4, HB 24, HB 46, HB 101, HB 146, HB 170, HB 214, HB 305, HB 426, HB 549, HB 551, HB 594, HB 722, HB 824, HB 1119, HB 1579, HB 2215, HB 2458, HB 2530, HB 2674, HB 2713, HB 2974, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 3180, HB 3221, HB 3359, HB 3556, HB 4088, HB 4211, HB 4396, HB 4413, HB 4580, HB 4609, HB 4864, HB 5088, HB 5154, HB 5263, HB 2294

Keywords: constitutional amendment, property tax, ad valorem tax, tax exemption, tangible personal property, income-producing property, business personal property, equipment exemption, machinery, local government finance, school district revenue, county taxes, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, tax relief, commercial property, appraisal district, chief appraiser, rendition statement, property tax relief

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, over the past couple months, I've had the honor to review 374 applications totaling $192 million
• Um, over the past couple months, I've had the honor to review 374 applications totaling $192 million
• Um, over the past couple months, I've had the honor to review 374 applications totaling $192 million
• Um, over the past couple months, I've had the honor to review 374 applications totaling $192 million
• statewide<04:58:35.040> since applications have fallen statewide since applications have fallen

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Even if this is not, you know, sort of universally applicable for everybody's situation, there's still
• So the fact that some people have existing setups that are not applicable to this, that's not a particular
• <03:29:39.520> for<03:29:39.800> everybody's universally applicable for everybody's
• universally applicable for everybody's situation<03:29:41.600> there's<03:29:41.800> still
• <04:46:36.798> of often in very nuanced applications of often in very nuanced applications

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met for its first meeting of the new session with opening remarks, member introductions, and a discussion of committee logistics. Members described their backgrounds and priorities, including criminal justice, right-to-know and privacy issues, domestic violence, death-with-dignity legislation, abortion, firearms, landlord-tenant policy, housing, and technology/privacy concerns. The chair noted there were already 34 bills assigned to the committee and expected more, and said the committee would likely continue to have a heavy workload this session. The chair also outlined how the committee would operate: meetings would generally be on Wednesdays, with possible Mondays as needed; hearings would not require a quorum, but executive sessions would; and members were asked to provide updated phone numbers and email addresses, especially cell numbers. He explained that the committee would continue its practice of seating members in a mixed partisan arrangement to encourage communication, and that the new clerk had joined the committee. A significant portion of the meeting focused on procedures for executive sessions and meeting times. The chair said the committee would follow the traditional rule allowing executive sessions on bills heard that day if proper notice was given, but he would avoid taking up controversial matters without full attendance. Members then discussed whether meetings should start at 9, 9:30, or 10 a.m., with concerns raised about long commutes, evening obligations, and winter driving after dark. No formal vote was taken in the portion provided, but the chair indicated he would try to accommodate the committee’s preference while balancing the workload.

Transcript Highlights:

• Contained in those products are requirements for the application of licenses and registrations, imposing

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that through project-based learning, a lot of those applications that you referenced could be
• with a push towards more real realw with a push towards more real realw world<00:40:20.240> application
• <00:40:20.800> vibrant<00:40:21.200> learning world application vibrant learning world
• application vibrant learning experiences.<00:40:22.480> I<00:40:22.800> think<00:40:22.960
• that that you referenced applications that that you referenced could<00:40:28.000> be<00:40:28.160

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to the ombudsman, and so the idea that a medical record is needing to be accompanied with this application
• to the ombudsman, and so the idea that a medical record is needing to be accompanied with this application
• This has created a significant application backlog, with families waiting up to 4 to 6 months for approval
• <01:41:47.080> back created a significant application back created a significant application
• applications disability determinations provider<02:09:45.400> capacity<02:09:46.119> and

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• did issue a bulletin on our website just this last year to try to delineate the codes that are applicable
• <01:11:30.320> codes<01:11:30.760> that<01:11:30.920> are<01:11:31.239> applicable
• the Ser the codes that are applicable the Ser the codes that are applicable for<01:11:32.000>
• So my testimony can be applicable to both, since they're identical.
• <02:35:11.319> you're hccsd and in that application you're hccsd and in that application you're

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, this is a statewide statute with local application for Coleman County only.

Bills: SB25, HB243

Keywords: SB25, community development district, community development districts, alcoholic beverage tax, alcohol sales tax, sales tax proceeds, county treasury, special fund, grant distribution, tourism funding, economic development, local grants, education grants, civic activities, community activities, tourism activities, Alabama Code 35-8B-5, county revenue, legislator recommendation, local government finance

Transcript Highlights:

• The finding section is always an easy one to ask because, again, that's just unnecessary to its application
• >> unnecess unnecessary to its application >> unnecess unnecessary to its application
• So I have an amendment here that would require the establishment license to go to an applicant who is
• So I have an amendment here that would require the establishment license to go to an applicant who is
• Are we requiring that one owner puts their name on the application?

Keywords: 9:00am HB 155 9:30am HB 1102 10:30am HB 1109 11:00am HB 1356 11:30am HB 1469 1:00pm HB 1323 2:00pm HB 1376, 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with unanimous committee approval of amendment 2026-2021S to HB 2. Senator Lang explained the amendment corrected a drafting error so that $2.5 million in state funds, matched with federal money for a total of $5 million, could be spent during the biennium rather than lapse at the end of the fiscal year. The money is intended to stabilize Medicaid per diem rates for county nursing homes, and members agreed without objection to adopt the amendment and continue working from the bill as amended by the Senate. The committee then discussed HB 155 and a proposed amendment, 2026-201H, dealing with the business enterprise tax. The House side described the proposal as a compromise that would raise the filing threshold from $250,000 to $375,000 and create a trigger that would reduce the BET rate by 0.05% for each $100 million in combined business tax surplus, down to a floor of 0.25%. Senate members opposed lowering the rate at this time, arguing that tax relief should focus on the filing threshold, which they said would remove filing burdens for about 3,500 small businesses, and that rate cuts should be considered in a budget cycle rather than an off-year. Concerns were raised that one-time revenues, such as tax amnesty receipts or federal repatriation-related surpluses, could unintentionally trigger reductions. Representative Sweeney later offered a revised approach by moving the effective date of the trigger mechanism to January 1, 2028, and said he was also willing to carve out tax amnesty revenues or adjust the effective date to avoid using one-time funds. The Senate remained unwilling to agree to a rate reduction, though it expressed openness to raising the filing threshold further. The committee ultimately did not resolve the business tax issue and recessed to continue discussions at a later time. The final item discussed was HB 1102, concerning an increase in the research and development tax credit paired with changes to state park fees. House members supported the R&D credit increase but opposed tying it to higher park fees, citing concerns about tourism, especially at border parks, and noting that the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources had said it did not need the increase. Senate members defended the park fee changes as a fairness issue, arguing that New Hampshire residents should pay less than out-of-state visitors and that the department had not raised rates in many years. No vote was taken on this item during the discussion captured here.

Transcript Highlights:

• unless<02:21:59.800> a<02:21:59.880> protection<02:22:00.440> order applicant
• unless a protection order applicant unless a protection order exists. exists. exists.
• Provides clarification that if the governor requests that an application be exempt from a clemency review
• commission hearing, that the application must be heard by the Board of Pardons before a decision is
• And the requirement that the application be heard at the board level in that situation was not clear

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have the Lahaina housing on Maui that's opened up and it's taking applications and rentals.
• that's opened up and it's<00:43:07.280> taking<00:43:07.839> um<00:43:08.160> applications
• it's taking um applications and rentals. it's taking um applications and rentals.
• ,<00:46:09.680> verify<00:46:10.079> ele uh process application, verify ele uh process
• application, verify ele eligibility,<00:46:11.280> administer<00:46:11.920> program,<00

Bills: HB1559, HB2012, HB2297, HB2122, HB2345, HB2398, HB2534, HB2621

Keywords: telecommunication devices, student use, public schools, student engagement, educational outcomes, confiscation policy, mental health, statewide policy, community literacy, education, Title I funding, reading proficiency, underserved communities, family engagement, tutoring, literacy support, adult education, community education, literacy programs, workforce development

Transcript Highlights:

• For businesses, the applications are just nearly endless.
• For businesses,<00:10:46.320> the<00:10:46.480> the<00:10:47.120> applications<00
• :10:47.760> are<00:10:47.920> are businesses, the the applications are are businesses,
• the the applications are are just<00:10:48.640> nearly<00:10:49.040> endless.
• of AI to it hasn't been the application of AI to it hasn't been quite<00:58:06.240> as<00:58:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The billion-dollar number is a comparison with what the utility filed in its application.
• Their initial bid for Excel, by way of an example in its application, they know that they're not going
• The billion-dollar number is a comparison with what the utility filed in its application.
• The billion-dollar number is a comparison with what the utility filed in its application.
• Their initial bid for Excel, by way of an example in its application, they know that they're not going

Bills: HF3298

Keywords: underground storage tanks, petroleum, reimbursement program, environmental regulation, pollution control, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It doesn't state what that application would look like or how much it would cost, but there will be a
• It doesn't state what that application<00:35:16.160> would<00:35:16.400> look<00:35:16.560
• > like<00:35:16.640> or<00:35:16.880> how<00:35:17.040> much application
• would look like or how much application would look like or how much it<00:35:17.280> would<00:
• compliance with applicable law. compliance with applicable law.

Bills: HF3433, HF3402, HF3412, HF3405, HF3404

Keywords: assault weapons, semi-automatic rifle, military-style firearm, gun ban, firearms regulation, gun control, public safety, BCA, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, background check, transferee permit, private gun sale, waiting period, felony possession, gross misdemeanor, AR-15, AK-47, Uzi, TEC-9, high-capacity magazine

Transcript Highlights:

• And I do think that principle is applicable to government as well.
• <00:15:45.760> So applicable to to government as well.
• So applicable to to government as well.
• The use of computers, email, online applications, digital files continues to produce more data than ever
• , computers, email, online applications, computers, email, online applications, digitals,<00:57:15.200

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee approved the October 15, 2025 minutes and then held a broader discussion on current challenges with data retention and government transparency. Judy Randall of the Office of the Legislative Auditor said historical data is essential for post-audits, which often look back three to five years, and that retention decisions must balance audit needs with the burden of separating public and nonpublic data. She described the records-retention panel process as informal and largely based on individual judgment, noting she had objected to a proposed 60-day email retention period and generally uses a three-year guideline, though she said that standard is not grounded in a formal rule. Members discussed whether auditing standards should set retention periods, with Randall saying auditing is a good starting point but other offices, including the attorney general, also have needs, and that some agency discretion is unavoidable because of the gray area between official records and non-records. Representative Elkins raised the related principle of data minimization, arguing that government should not keep data longer than needed and citing a University of Minnesota legacy data warehouse breach as an example of the risks of retaining unnecessary sensitive information. Randall agreed that data no longer needed is a liability and said her office purges workpapers after five years. Representative Scott pressed whether three years is enough for fraud investigations and financial records; Randall responded that a reasonableness standard is needed and that longer retention can produce diminishing returns, though she said she would follow up on whether financial records should be treated differently. Tanya Tacker of the Rum River Special Education Cooperative testified in support of updating Minnesota’s data-retention laws for schools. She said districts want to protect student information and maintain transparency, but the current general retention schedule dates to 1985 and 2000 and does not reflect digital records, modern systems, or the volume of special education data. She urged modernizing the schedule, clarifying what must be kept in paper versus digitized form, aligning state rules with IDEA and other federal requirements, and providing practical guidance and tools. Members praised the specificity of her recommendations. Dr. BB Newman testified that retention failures in St. Anthony Village have made it difficult to obtain routine municipal and police data, with records delayed, missing, or inconsistently produced and no clear explanation of what systems were searched or whether records were destroyed. Newman argued these gaps undermine statutory access rights and force residents into costly litigation, and recommended stronger retention auditing, documentation of destruction, mandatory disclosure of systems searched, and consequences for noncompliance. In response to questions, Senate counsel said there is generally no direct penalty, but affected parties may seek mandamus, Data Practices Act claims, or informal mediation/opinions from the Data Practices Office. The discussion closed with calls for clearer standards and possible legislative updates to improve compliance and transparency.

Transcript Highlights:

• What happened after session is the language was written with the word patient, and patient is applicable
• <00:20:48.200> and<00:20:48.440> patient<00:20:48.799> is<00:20:48.960> applicable
• <00:20:49.400> in patient and patient is applicable in patient and patient is applicable in
• <00:25:59.440> can<00:25:59.559> be<00:25:59.880> submitted be a new application
• can be submitted be a new application can be submitted clarifying<00:26:01.559> that<00:26:01.720

Bills: HF1937, HF2407, HF1678, HF1477, HF2040, HF1840, HF257

Keywords: PACE, elderly, Medicaid, health services, long-term care, community-based services, support person, healthcare, patient rights, assisted living, community support, caregiver respite, financial eligibility, Minnesota Statutes, HF1477, residential program licensing, community residential setting, small group home, licensed capacity six or fewer, rental licensing

Transcript Highlights:

• requires<00:27:07.480> a<00:27:07.679> clear<00:27:08.159> expression application
• requires a clear expression application requires a clear expression of<00:27:09.279> contrary
• <00:45:47.000> of<00:45:47.160> the interpretation and application of the interpretation
• and application of the Minnesota<00:45:47.839> Government<00:45:48.440> data<00:45:48.880
• Uniformity and process and efficacy will undoubtedly suffer, as our ability to vet the applicants, mask

Bills: HF1662, HF1224, HF1836, HF1367, HF1168, HF1999, HF1792, HF102, HF2127, HF104

Keywords: veterans, veterans affairs, State Soldiers Assistance Program, Veterans Stable Housing Initiative, MAXIS, human services data, data sharing, eligibility verification, informed consent, private data, benefits coordination, veteran housing, veteran assistance, Department of Human Services, Children Youth and Families, state benefits, federal benefits, privacy, public assistance, foreclosure

Transcript Highlights:

• bill, by the way, but I think when you talk about doing reports and the report out and even the application
• And so I would just encourage that conversation just to make sure that in that application process we
• /c><00:35:57.319> even<00:35:57.760> the<00:35:58.079> um<00:35:58.359> application
• report out and even the um application report out and even the um application process<00:35:59.960
• process we are not in that application process we are not inadvertently<00:36:37.480> exposing

Keywords: 1183, house