Transcript Highlights:

• states, including which are part-time or full-time, as well as total staff numbers, full-time nonpartisan
• after term limits.
• A couple of times you talked about changes after term limits of decorum, and that—can you explain what
• to term limits, right?
• Of course, not exclusively because of term limits, but coinciding with a time frame when term limits

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee met with a quorum, approved the previous meeting minutes, and heard an update from Garty Consulting on the interim study of legislative term limits. The consultants outlined their research plan and preliminary themes, including loss of institutional knowledge, shifts in power toward executive agencies and lobbyists, reduced long-term policy capacity, faster leadership turnover, and recruitment/support challenges. They also described possible recommendation categories ranging from constitutional and statutory changes to procedural and cultural adjustments. Committee members asked about how other states repealed term limits, how the public survey would address perceptions of term limits, and how stakeholder focus groups would be selected. The committee also heard a presentation from NCSL on term limits in other states, including examples from Nevada, Montana, and Colorado, with discussion of training programs, staffing changes, annual-session debates, bill limits, and impacts on decorum and leadership continuity. Several members requested follow-up data on part-time versus full-time legislatures, taxpayer costs, and nonpartisan staff devoted to oversight. The committee then considered revisions to the legislature’s workplace harassment policy and related forms. Legislative Council explained changes that clarified the definition of harassment, added captions for readability, extended several deadlines, allowed informal resolution before a review panel is appointed, clarified the role of Legislative Council in intake and documentation, and updated confidentiality/open-records language. Members, especially Senator Hogan, said the revisions better formalize the role of counsel and provide a less intimidating path for resolving complaints. The committee adopted the revised policy and forms by roll call vote. Finally, the committee approved a motion to enter executive session at 1:00 p.m. to review the results of a capital threat assessment and discuss legislator security, citing the applicable open-meetings exemptions. Members were instructed to limit discussion to the stated purpose and not take final action until returning to open session.

Transcript Highlights:

• speed limits. speed limits.
• limits for all road users. limits for all road users.
• Well, we do have 15 mph speed limits for school zones at certain times of the day.
• few a few times. few a few times.
• a 15 mph speed limit? a 15 mph speed limit?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: House Transportation opened public hearings on three Senate bills and discussed a fourth scheduling issue. On SB 499, which would change Traffic Safety Commission reporting requirements, the sponsor’s representative said the bill would require annual aggregated data on the causes of traffic collisions in New Hampshire and recommendations to address them. Members asked about the added Trauma Medical Review Committee seat, and a representative explained that it is a longstanding state board of emergency and trauma professionals; the bill had already been amended and passed unanimously earlier in the process. On SB 500, concerning restroom access for certain commercial motor vehicle operators, the sponsor and trucking-industry supporters said the measure arose from concerns raised by female truck drivers and was intended to require larger commercial facilities with available public or employee restrooms to allow truck drivers to use them when there are no public safety concerns. Supporters from the New Hampshire Motor Transport Association said driver shortages make it important to recruit and retain women, and that lack of bathroom access is a significant barrier. Committee members asked about the scope of the problem and whether the issue affected male and female drivers differently. The committee then heard SB 559, which would reduce the minimum allowable speed limit on locally controlled roads. Supporters, including bicyclists and the Bike-Walk Alliance, testified that lower speeds improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers, citing personal crash experiences and national guidance supporting lower urban speed limits where warranted by traffic or engineering studies. They emphasized the bill would not mandate lower limits statewide but would give towns local discretion. Members questioned whether the group would support 15 mph limits and how congestion and travel-time concerns were weighed. A Department of Transportation official testified neutrally, saying the agency had no formal position but had concerns about public perception and possible spillover to unnumbered state roads. The chair also noted an earlier scheduling problem that prevented immediate executive action on a bill until later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• The idea is to save more during good times, so we're better prepared for difficult times.
• They are excluded from the Gann limit, or the state appropriations limit.
• and population over time.
• appropriations limit.
• more in bad times.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• speed limits. speed limits.
• limits for all road users. limits for all road users.
• it's not about travel times. it's not about travel times.
• Well, we do have 15 mph speed limits for school zones at certain times of the day.
• a 15 mph speed limit? a 15 mph speed limit?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, and Senators, we had an additional list if there was time. Time, and we do have time.
• are term limited.
• times.
• So what they're trying to tell me is, you pay us, but only for a limited amount of time and we'll term
• limit you."

Transcript Highlights:

• , meaning there is no statute at any time, meaning there is no statute of<00:20:02.640> limitations
• of limitations. of limitations.
• <00:48:13.520> limits<00:48:14.000> on categories of limitation limits on categories
• the statute of limit uh limitations limitations limitations um<00:48:19.920> we<00:48:20.240>
• long before, wouldn't the statute of limitations toll from the time of the disclosure occurring?

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House convened, suspended its rules to introduce 18 bills by number only, and referred the bills to the appropriate committees. House Bill 647, relating to the Vermont Sister State Program and carrying an appropriation, was referred to Appropriations under House Rule 35A. The chamber also read several resolutions: HR13, concerning support for the people of Palestine and Israel and the end of apartheid, was treated as a bill and referred to Government Operations and Military Affairs; JR88, condemning a U.S. military incursion in Venezuela and calling for withdrawal of U.S. forces, was likewise referred to Government Operations and Military Affairs; and JRS37, supporting gender equality in Nordic combined Olympic competition, was referred to Commerce and Economic Development. JRS39, a weekend adjournment resolution, was adopted in concurrence. On the action calendar, the House passed H541, relating to interference with voters and election officials. It then took up H5, which expands Vermont’s existing hearsay exception for child victims from age 12 and under to age 15 in specified abuse and sexual assault proceedings, with judicial safeguards and a July 1, 2026 effective date. The Judiciary Committee reported the bill favorably 10-1, and the House adopted the committee amendment and ordered third reading. The House also considered H626, a major Judiciary Committee bill on voyeurism, non-consensual disclosure of explicit images, and sexual extortion. Committee members described the bill as updating criminal and civil remedies for image-based abuse, creating a separate sextortion offense, extending criminal statutes of limitation, and clarifying civil recovery for trauma-related harm. During floor debate, members questioned the distinction between the voyeurism and disclosure provisions and the meaning of “reasonable expectation of privacy”; the committee responded with examples and statutory explanations, including that voyeurism covers unlawful recording while the disclosure offense covers later dissemination of images. The bill remained under consideration as the discussion continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• Will the impact of term limits result in the need for interim limits? Was asked to address.
• I mean, there is time.
• It has to be broken up over time.
• We don't have enough time. But some people, I just like a reset in their term limits. Mr.
• I think the frustration with the amount of time, committee time, floor time, that was generally, and

Summary: The Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior minutes, and then took up a draft bill to make legislators’ and candidates’ residential addresses confidential in public records. Legislative Council and the Secretary of State explained the proposal was prompted by security concerns and would protect residential addresses while still allowing election officials to verify residency and keep candidate names and offices public. Members raised concerns about unintended consequences, transparency, and how the change would affect rural districts and residency enforcement. The Secretary of State suggested an amendment to end the confidentiality when a candidate’s term ends, and the committee agreed to hold the bill over for further discussion at the next meeting. The committee also reviewed follow-up materials on legislator security and best practices, including advice on situational awareness, internet hygiene, varying routines, and reporting threats, along with NCSL materials comparing capitol security practices in other states. Members discussed a recent security incident and the need to keep alert contact information current, and staff said they would continue working with the Highway Patrol on legislative-specific notifications. The bulk of the meeting was devoted to Garrity Consulting’s final report on mitigating the effects of legislative term limits. The consultants summarized survey, focus group, and stakeholder input showing concerns about loss of institutional knowledge, leadership turnover, onboarding demands, and workload pressures, while also noting public support for term limits and annual sessions. Recommendations included considering annual sessions or shifting biennial sessions to even-numbered years, restructuring organizational session and interim committee work, creating office hours and more structured orientation and mentorship, expanding ongoing training and staff support, improving public communication and virtual testimony rules, and addressing barriers to service such as employer support and travel costs. Members discussed the tension between making the legislature more effective and preserving a citizen-legislature model, and the report was received as a roadmap for future implementation rather than immediate action.

Transcript Highlights:

• At one time, the advocates stated without any legal support that the convention would be limited to the
• Thank you for your time.
• and time again.
• limiting.
• limiting.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing of the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs was opened by Chair Joe McGonagle and Vice Chair Senator Mike Rush, who noted that Chair John Velis was deployed with the Massachusetts National Guard. The chairs explained the hybrid format, three-minute testimony limit, live streaming, and filing deadlines, and said the committee would hear 11 House bills and eight Senate bills dealing with federal and overseas issues. Much of the hearing centered on competing resolutions about Article 5 constitutional conventions, along with related resolutions on D.C. statehood, child labor, Citizens United, and Cambodia. Supporters of H. 4692 and S. 284, a joint resolution to rescind all prior Massachusetts Article 5 convention applications, argued that old resolutions from the 1930s and 1970s could be used to count Massachusetts toward the 34-state threshold for calling a federal constitutional convention. Testifiers from Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, the ACLU, Reproductive Equity Now, labor groups, and others warned that a convention would have no clear rules, could not be reliably limited to specific topics, and could put civil rights, reproductive rights, labor protections, and other constitutional protections at risk. Several speakers also cited a recent federal lawsuit and said the safest course was to remove outdated applications from the books. A large opposing panel testified in support of H. 3888, a resolution calling for a Convention of States to propose amendments limiting federal power, imposing fiscal restraints, and establishing term limits. Supporters argued that Article 5 provides a lawful way to address federal overreach, debt, and congressional stagnation, and said the process would be limited by state applications and ratification by 38 states. Some committee members and witnesses raised concerns about a runaway convention, broad language in the resolution, and whether Congress could or should set rules for such a convention. Representative Gentile also testified in support of several related resolutions on overturning Citizens United, D.C. statehood, and the child labor amendment, while Representative Howard and Representative Tongue supported a Cambodia resolution condemning political oppression and urging free and fair elections. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are now four that have 12-year term limits. There are now four that have 12-year term limits.
• I think, I believe in term limits. I think that they serve I think I believe in term limits.
• And it takes time.
• Term limits at eight is roughly, depending upon the poll at any time, anywhere between a 76% to 81%..
• question... ...12-year term limits.

Summary: The Committee on Ethics and Elections met with a quorum present and temporarily postponed Senator Yarborough’s bill and Senate Bill 1170 at the sponsor’s request. The committee first considered Senate Bill 982 by Senator Bernard, which was amended to remove language the sponsor said had been declared unconstitutional in 2016. As amended, the bill addresses qualifying fee payment issues, allows qualifying fees to be paid by properly executed checks or debit cards linked to a candidate campaign account, creates a private right of action for qualifying challenges limited to candidates, and addresses campaign expenditures by debit card. Mark Heron testified in support, saying the bill would clarify recent qualifying disputes. The committee adopted the amendment and then reported SB 982 favorably. The committee then took up Senate Joint Resolution 536, a proposed constitutional amendment to impose legislative term limits of eight years in the House and eight years in the Senate, with carve-outs for current officeholders and redistricting. An amendment to change the limits to 12 years in each chamber failed on a tie vote. Public testimony was mixed but largely opposed, with speakers from county and small-county groups arguing the proposal was a one-size-fits-all statewide mandate that would override local choice and reduce institutional knowledge. Several members debated whether the eight-year limit was the right number, with some supporting term limits in principle but questioning a lifetime ban on returning to office. The resolution was ultimately reported favorably. The committee also considered Senate Joint Resolution 802, which would place on the 2026 ballot an eight-year term limit for county commissioners and school board members, with school board limits applied retroactively and county commissioner limits prospectively. An amendment to change the limit to 12 years failed. The Florida Association of Counties, a county commissioner, and representatives of the Small County Coalition testified against the measure, arguing that counties should retain local control through county charters and local referenda. Some senators supported the concept of term limits but raised concerns about imposing a uniform statewide rule on counties and school boards. After debate, the joint resolution was reported favorably. At the end of the meeting, senators who had missed votes were allowed to register their positions on SB 982 and SJR 536, and the committee moved to rise.

Transcript Highlights:

• or the Gann limit.
• or the GAN limit.
• And a key thing with the Gann limit, as it was amended in 1990, is that the Gann limit is designed to
• And so the timing couldn't be worse.
• During boom times, you put some money aside so that when times are hard, you are able to pay out the

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on proposals to reform California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or rainy day fund, ahead of the May Revision. Members and witnesses reviewed how Proposition 2 (2014) changed reserve rules, including mandatory deposits, a 10% cap on the fund, and limits tied to the Governor’s declaration of a budget emergency. LAO staff explained that California’s revenues are highly volatile, that current reserve rules are complicated by interactions with Proposition 98 and the Gann limit, and that under current law reserves would cover only about one-third of funding shortfalls in a benchmark scenario over 50 years. The LAO presented its report recommending a larger reserve target, including raising the cap to 50% by 2055 and pairing that with either broader, more flexible deposit rules or a simpler approach that deposits all excess capital gains. The Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to raise the cap from 10% to 20% and exempt BSA deposits from the state appropriations limit, while Assembly Member Valencia presented ACA 1, which would make similar changes and was described as an evolving proposal. Testimony generally supported saving more during boom years, but differed on how much to hardwire into the Constitution versus leave flexible, and on whether to broaden the deposit formulas beyond capital gains. Public witnesses and committee members raised additional issues, including whether reserve reforms should also address debt repayment, the treatment of unemployment insurance fund debt, and whether the Gann limit should be adjusted to better allow reserve growth. Supporters argued that stronger reserves would protect Californians from cuts during downturns and help the state weather volatility and federal funding threats. Some advocates warned that reforms should not come at the expense of current public needs, while taxpayer representatives cautioned against turning the BSA into a pass-through account that weakens constitutional spending limits. The hearing ended without a vote, with the committee chair noting the complexity of the issue and adjourning after public comment.

Transcript Highlights:

• or a consecutive term limit, where you have a waiting-out period for a time or what have you.
• /c><01:24:29.120> and against term limits for a long time and against term limits for a long time
• I've gone just a little bit over our time limit there. Um, questions. Go ahead.
• <02:31:03.600> limit a little bit over our our our time limit a little bit over our our our
• time limit there. there. there.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or a consecutive term limit, uh, where you have a waiting-out period for a time or what have you.
• /c><01:24:29.120> and against term limits for a long time and against term limits for a long time
• I've gone just a little bit over our time limit there. >> Um, questions. Go ahead.
• <02:31:03.600> limit a little bit over our our our time limit a little bit over our our our
• time limit there. there. there.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first continued its hearing on HB 1287, which concerns the definition of “veteran.” Representative Manion explained that the amendment would adopt the federal-style definition by including a general discharge under honorable conditions, while restoring documentation requirements such as a DD214 and removing a problematic reference to World War II allied veterans. The chair said the committee would close the hearing and take the bill up later in executive session. The committee then moved to HCR 13, a resolution calling for an Article V convention limited to proposing a constitutional amendment imposing term limits on members of Congress. Representative Joe Alexander, the prime sponsor, said the measure is narrowly focused on congressional term limits, that 12 states have already passed similar resolutions, and that broad public support in New Hampshire justifies action. Members asked whether the effort would prompt Congress to act on its own, whether the resolution should also cover Supreme Court justices, and how many states are needed; Alexander said the goal is to pressure Congress, that the Constitution already treats Supreme Court justices differently, and that 34 states are required. Testimony in support came from former Representative Linda Masamela, who gave a history-based argument for Article V conventions as a constitutional check, and from Deborah Childs and Aaron Ducet of U.S. Term Limits. Childs said New Hampshire voters strongly support term limits and argued they would open seats to younger, more diverse candidates. Ducet said the application is single-topic and would allow only one amendment, described Article V applications as historically common, and argued that state pressure can force Congress to act. No vote was taken in the portion provided; the chair continued hearing testimony on HCR 13.

Transcript Highlights:

• At the proper time, I'd like to move it favorably. proper time. Okay. The board is clear.
• Look, I’ve been term-limited out one time already myself. I managed to come back. I ran again.
• Every one of y’all and myself all are term limited. What’s wrong with term limits?
• Not my first time. But we've all waited a long time, too. Go ahead, Representative Knox.
• Not my first time. But we've all waited a long time, too. Go ahead, Representative Knox.

Bills: HR217, HB66, HB204, HB208, HB326, HB472, HB483, HB484, HB793, HB1051, HB1080, HB1087, HB1111, HB1215, SB78, SB148

Keywords: rent stabilization, affordable housing, cost burdened, Louisiana housing, housing policy, emergency rental protections, Alexandria, municipal ordinances, administrative adjudication, code enforcement, housing violations, building codes, zoning, nuisance ordinances, vegetation ordinances, sewerage, drainage, licensing, permits, local government

Summary: The committee met on April 29 and considered a series of local and special bills affecting municipal and parish governance, blight enforcement, development districts, and term limits. Early action included a motion to apply a three-minute rule. House Bill 483, concerning the Fulberg/Marini Security and Improvement District in Orleans Parish, was voluntarily deferred after discussion and no support cards. House Bill 484, which revised the New Orleans Regional Business Park board by reducing membership from 12 to 11 and giving the mayor four direct appointments with removal authority, was adopted as a substitute and reported favorably. Senate Bill 78, dealing with the Shreveport Downtown Development District, was amended to correct a legislative district reference and then reported favorably. The committee also heard announcements that several previously deferred bills would not be heard that day. Several Shreveport-related blight bills were advanced. House Bill 1051, authorizing demolition of certain dilapidated properties in Shreveport, was amended to allow the city to rely on findings from code enforcement, fire, police, or other public safety officials, and then reported favorably. House Bill 1080, addressing condemned commercial property in Shreveport, was also reported favorably, though the author said he would continue consulting with the city attorney before floor consideration. House Bill 66 for Alexandria expanded the city’s administrative adjudication authority to cover a broader range of ordinance violations, including building, zoning, vegetation, nuisance, sewer, drainage, licensing, and permit matters; it was supported by the city and reported favorably. House Bill 326, requiring the Tickfaw police chief candidate to reside within the village, also passed favorably. House Bill 793, a contentious bill concerning recorded subdivision plats and prescription, drew extensive testimony from the author, parish officials, a former appellate judge, and the McCormick family. Supporters said the bill closes a loophole exposed by recent court rulings that could let noncompliant plats become enforceable after five years without actual notice to local governments, while opponents argued the current substitute still creates uncertainty and could burden property owners; the author said the bill was prospective only and would also go to the Law Institute. Despite the debate, the committee moved the substitute favorably. Senate Bill 148, allowing municipalities to pay a modest per diem to planning and zoning commission members by local ordinance, was reported favorably with support from Lake Charles. The committee rejected House Bill 208, which would have let St. Helena Parish voters decide whether to impose term limits on parish governing authority members. The bill’s author argued the people should decide, but the St. Helena Police Jury opposed it and committee members emphasized local control; the final vote was 3 yeas to 10 nays. House Bill 1215, concerning the disposition of historical statues and monuments, was amended to bar the Office of State Parks from placing transferred monuments back in the parish from which they were removed, and then was reported favorably. House Bill 472, authorizing local rent stabilization ordinances during a governor-declared emergency, was amended to limit such ordinances to the emergency period, tie increases to the consumer price index, and cap them at 365 days; discussion continued on whether the measure duplicated existing price-gouging laws and whether a broader study would be preferable.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those include changes to who can claim the standard utility allowance, changes to the ABOD time limit
• I’ll dive deeper into the ABOD time limit and the expected impacts there because there are updates in
• There's a nexus between number 41 and our proposal to impose time limits on some facilities.
• So there's a nexus between number 41 and our proposal to impose time limits on some facilities.
• The absence of time limits in both of those settings, Developmental Center.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major topic was child care and early education, where the Department of Social Services and Department of Finance outlined proposed changes to absorb federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue reductions, shift some funding between child care programs, end funding for prospective pay implementation now that the federal requirement has been rescinded, adjust the alternative payment administration structure, and fund child care infrastructure grants and a Low-Income Investment Fund contract closeout. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the budget makes progress on the structural deficit but recommended maintaining the administration’s solution level, making reserve deposits, and avoiding new ongoing commitments; it also raised concerns about shifting reductions to the California Alternative Payment Program and about the proposed administrative-rate change. Committee members strongly criticized the proposed loss of child care slots and said they would oppose eliminating those slots, while also expressing support for child care as essential infrastructure. The committee then reviewed California State Preschool Program proposals. Finance and CDE described reductions to the preschool COLA from 2.41% to 2.01%, removal of prospective pay funding, and increases for the QRIS block grant, audit support, and rate reform implementation. Trailer bill language would codify age-based rate categories, inclusion-rate documentation, family fee collection rules, portability, and excused absences. CDE supported the QRIS increase and some attendance and family-fee changes, but warned that aligning three- and four-year-old rates could reduce support for three-year-olds and that the budget does not fully cover enrollment growth. Members also questioned whether the preschool and child care slot reductions should be reallocated rather than terminated, and the administration said the reductions were intended to reflect current utilization and avoid harm to currently enrolled families. The hearing then moved to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS said the May Revision includes a one-time CalFood augmentation, funding to cover federal SNAP administrative cost-share pressures, and additional staffing and technical assistance to implement HR 1 changes, including the able-bodied adults without dependents time limit and new non-citizen eligibility rules. The department estimated HR 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people, with roughly 806,000 adults potentially subject to the time limit and about 34,000 non-citizens expected to lose eligibility once fully implemented. Members pressed for stronger harm mitigation, including a $98 million backfill to protect families from losing food benefits, and raised concerns about county workload and the “chilling effect” on immigrant participation. The final portion of the transcript began the IHSS presentation, noting a revised budget of $33.7 billion total funds and $12.8 billion General Fund, with proposed reductions tied to Medi-Cal asset-limit changes and other federal conformity items.

Transcript Highlights:

• speed limit.
• limit.
• So just putting up a speed limit limit.
• people following the speed limit some people following the speed limit sign,<00:26:49.440> that
• or less between 90 and 99% of the time. or less between 90 and 99% of the time.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It has been a long time coming...
• When times are good, responsible individuals save.
• And we have seen that time and time again in our wonderful state.
• The Gann limit would apply in the year of the withdrawal. And Mr.
• So there's a time where that's needed.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It has been a long time coming.
• And we have seen that time and time again in our wonderful state.
• The Gann limit would apply in the year of the withdrawal. And Mr.
• So that time when there is a need, like for Expenses that were setting them aside so that time when there
• So there's a time where that's needed.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight heard ACA 20, the Safe for California Futures Act, a constitutional amendment to strengthen the state’s Budget Stabilization Account (rainy day fund). The authors, Assembly Members Gabriel and Valencia, said the measure would raise the reserve cap from 10% to 20% of General Fund revenues, change how reserve deposits are treated under the Gann limit so deposits would not count against the spending cap until withdrawn, and update eligible debt repayments to include items such as budget loans, Proposition 98 settle-up obligations, and unemployment insurance debt. They emphasized that the proposal was intended to protect schools and core public services and to help California better withstand revenue volatility and future downturns. Committee discussion focused heavily on the technical effects of the measure, especially its interaction with Proposition 98 and the Gann limit. LAO and Department of Finance staff explained that Prop. 98 funding would not be changed directly, that the reserve deposits would be treated as exclusions from the appropriations limit, and that withdrawals would count when spent. Members asked about current reserve levels, mandatory deposits, and whether the measure would create more room for discretionary spending; supporters argued it would simply allow the state to save more in good years, while one member expressed concern that it could function as a slush fund and expand spending opportunities. Several members cited recent budget volatility, record revenues, and the need for stronger reserves, while others stressed that the measure should be understood as a future-oriented savings reform rather than a response to this year’s budget choices. Public testimony was uniformly supportive. California Forward, Elevate California, and the California Chamber of Commerce all backed the proposal, with the Chamber noting support for the policy and highlighting the importance of addressing unemployment insurance debt for small businesses. The chair concluded by thanking the authors, staff, and witnesses, and said ACA 20 was expected to move to the Assembly floor the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• CURRENTLY, THERE ARE 12 COUNTIES THAT HAVE TERM LIMITS.
• THERE ARE NOW FOUR THAT HAVE 12 YEAR TERM LIMITS. THE OTHER EIGHT HAVE EIGHT-YEAR TERM LIMITS.
• I BELIEVE IN TERM LIMITS. I THINK THAT THEY SERVE A PURPOSE.
• IT TAKES TIME.
• POPULAR OF ANY TERM LIMITS.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Now we can take up Senate File 25, landowner license limits in limited quota hunt areas.
• Landowner license limits in limited quota hunt areas.
• this time. this time.
• time to this issue. time to this issue.
• Could I get that one more time?<00:45:45.280> Senator time? Senator time?

Bills: SF0025, SF0027, SF0043, SF0066

Keywords: landowner licenses, hunting, wildlife management, quota hunt areas, game and fish commission, game management, hunting regulations, black bear, tracking dogs, wildlife conservation, conservation, contracting, supervisor, funding, districts, hunting licenses, donated licenses, life-threatening illness, vision impairment, nonprofit organizations

Transcript Highlights:

• it favorably proper time.
• we have term limits?
• Look, I've been term limited out one time already myself. I managed to come back. I ran again.
• Every one of y'all and myself all are term limited. What's wrong with term limits?
• Not my first time. But we've all waited a long time, too. Go ahead, Representative Knox.

Bills: HR217, HB66, HB204, HB208, HB326, HB472, HB483, HB484, HB793, HB1051, HB1080, HB1087, HB1111, HB1215, SB78, SB148

Keywords: rent stabilization, affordable housing, cost burdened, Louisiana housing, housing policy, emergency rental protections, Alexandria, municipal ordinances, administrative adjudication, code enforcement, housing violations, building codes, zoning, nuisance ordinances, vegetation ordinances, sewerage, drainage, licensing, permits, local government

Summary: The committee met on April 29 and heard a series of local bills affecting municipal and parish governance, blight enforcement, planning boards, and other local issues. Early actions included adopting a three-minute rule due to the late hour and deferring several bills that were not to be heard that day. House Bill 483 was voluntarily deferred, while House Bill 484 on the New Orleans Regional Business Park was amended and reported favorably. House Bill 78 on the Shreveport Downtown Development Authority was amended to correct a district reference and then reported favorably. House Bill 66, expanding Alexandria’s administrative adjudication authority for ordinance violations, was supported by the city and reported favorably. House Bill 326, requiring the Tickfaw police chief to reside in the village, was also reported favorably. The committee then took up several Shreveport blight-related bills. House Bill 1051, dealing with demolition of dilapidated residential property, was amended to allow the city to rely on reports from code enforcement, fire, police, or other public safety officials, and was reported favorably. House Bill 1080, a similar measure for condemned commercial property, was also reported favorably, with the sponsor noting he would consult the city attorney before floor debate. Senate Bill 148, allowing Lake Charles to pay a modest per diem to planning commission members by local ordinance, was reported favorably. House Bill 208, which would let St. Helena Parish voters decide whether to impose term limits on parish governing authority members, drew opposition from the police jury and failed on a recorded vote, 3-10. The committee also considered House Bill 1215 on the disposition of historical statues and monuments, adopting an amendment to prevent transferred monuments from being placed back in the parish where they were removed, and then reporting the bill favorably as amended. House Bill 793, a contested bill addressing subdivision plats filed without parish approval and the running of prescription, generated extensive testimony from the author, parish officials, the McCormicks, and a former appellate judge; the committee ultimately reported it favorably, with the author saying he would keep working on the language and send it to the Law Institute. Finally, House Bill 472, authorizing local rent stabilization measures during declared emergencies, was amended to limit any local ordinance to the duration of a governor-declared emergency, tie increases to CPI, and cap the measure at 365 days; the bill remained under discussion with questions about its relationship to existing price-gouging laws and whether the committee should wait for a broader study.