Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Davis, could you refer to the specific section of the bill that talks about that, please?
• As any law enforcement officer as defined in section 942.1010. And therefore, Mr.
• And the folks that are going to represent people on those sections of the state actually live in those
• me what the section is, I'm happy to answer questions about that section.
• If you want to tell me what the section is, I'm happy to answer questions about that section.

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, opened with prayer and the Pledge, and heard several member introductions and recognitions. The Rules Chair moved CS/CS/SB 622 to the end of the special order calendar, which was adopted without objection. SB 80 on state land management was temporarily postponed, as were later bills SB 716 and CS/CS/CS/SB 1348. The chamber then took up a series of bills, often substituting House companions and adopting amendments before final passage. Measures approved included a comprehensive waste reduction and recycling plan (HB 295, 38-0), mitigation banking and land development changes with a phosphate mining lands amendment (CS/CS/SB 492, 35-3), aggravated animal cruelty with a searchable FDLE database and sentencing multiplier (HB 255, 37-0), the Spectrum Alert for missing children with autism and related training/funding (HB 711, 37-0), newborn screening for Duchenne muscular dystrophy (CS/CS/HB 1089, 36-0), and revisions to the My Safe Florida Condominium Pilot Program to expand eligible mitigation projects and adjust approval thresholds (CS/CS/HB 393, 37-0). The Senate also passed workforce education legislation allowing charter schools access to grant funding and expanding money-back guarantees (HB 1145, 37-0), a statewide study on automation and workforce impact (HB 827, 35-0), parole guideline revisions (HB 181, 37-0), court-appointed psychologist procedures in family law cases (HB 901, 37-0), sexual cyber harassment protections covering digitally forged intimate images (HB 1451, 37-0), a home health aide program for medically fragile children with training and reimbursement provisions (CS/CS/SB 1156, 37-0), substance abuse and mental health care changes including 988 oversight and involuntary examination procedures (HB 1091, 37-0), a feasibility study for a statewide pond data database (HB 1359, 37-0), and Department of Law Enforcement housekeeping changes and retired police dog reimbursements (HB 1053, 37-0). The most extensive debate centered on the charter schools bill (HB 443), which expanded charter autonomy, reporting parity, enrollment flexibility, and governance rules; after a delete-all amendment and a friendly amendment, it was placed on the third-reading calendar rather than immediately voted on. Several bills were briefly discussed with concerns about transparency, accountability, funding, and constitutional issues, but all bills brought to a vote during this segment passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• 9228 and subdivision 5 requires that the governor shall post any compact entered into under this section
• engage in compact discussions about jurisdictional issues related to cannabis. at uh I think it's section
• I always get at uh I think it's section I always get wrong<00:47:24.160><c> but</c><00:47:24.280><c>
• Am I reading that section correctly? Thank you, Senator Lang, or Mr. Proc. Mr. Proc: Thank you, Mr.
• of of law stayed the same in the section of of law stayed the same in the amendment<01:01:55.720><c>

Committee: Senate State and Local Government

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They can, on their own, correct it, but the HRS section that you cited could still exist after that 24
• They can, on their own, correct it, but the HRS section that you cited could still exist after that 24
• that you cited could still exist section that you cited could still exist after<00:36:09.359><c> that
• Also, amend section 2 so that this bill will only apply to contracts entered into on or after October
• two such that this bill will section two such that this bill will only<01:28:04.440><c> apply</c><01

Committee: House Consumer Protection & Commerce

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills related to consumer protection, liquor regulation, construction procurement, and state contracting. On House Bill 565, DCCA and the Office of Consumer Protection stood on written testimony, and a committee member raised a question about whether creators of remains would have to hold them indefinitely if family members did not respond; the member indicated language would be fixed to address that issue. No vote was taken. House Bill 208, dealing with liquor law changes, drew strong support from Scarlet Honolulu and Maui Brewing Company, who said the measure would modernize liquor rules and add guardrails, while the Wine Institute and Anheuser-Busch opposed it as a special tax break or unnecessary expansion of liquor-related authority. Members questioned whether anonymous complaints should be allowed and whether the bill could lead to retaliation; the supporter said complaints should not be anonymous and suggested the Liquor Commission had been accused of writing complaints to target licenses. No action was taken. House Bill 939, concerning taxation of low-ABV spirits-based beverages, received support from Maui Brewing Company and Johnson Brothers, who said it would align tax treatment with existing categories and reduce confusion, while the Wine Institute and Anheuser-Busch opposed it as a narrow tax break that could reduce revenue and should instead be considered in a broader alcohol tax review. House Bill 808, on construction defect insurance or related protections for state projects, drew comments from DAGS, the State Procurement Office, and the Subcontractors Association, with the latter warning it would make state contracting harder and shrink the contractor base; the chair questioned what recourse the state has when defects appear after a project is completed. House Bill 809, addressing procurement and subcontractor-listing corrections, drew opposition from SPO, DAGS, and the Subcontractors Association, while the General Contractors Association supported it; members debated whether a 24-hour correction window would create abuse or simply allow minor ministerial fixes, and the bill’s sponsor said the goal was to reduce bid protests and procurement discretion. No votes or final committee actions were recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Code Section 1326 is if you remain in the country illegally, you have committed a crime.
• Section 13, 20,... Why? Well, if you can't follow with U.S.
• She removed Section 3 with the concerns that many of us raised.
• statutory to intent language in Section 1.
• Judges do not decide if someone is charged pursuant to Section 666.1.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to briefly have Representative Ray Brower and Ree discuss sections 1, 2, and 3 of the bill
• I'm going to briefly have Representative Ray Brower and Ree discuss sections 1, 2, and 3 of the bill
• ><c> about</c><00:37:09.119><c> um</c><00:37:09.359><c> section</c><00:37:09.920><c> uh</c> in section
• two talk about um section uh in section two talk about um section uh school<00:37:10.320><c> safety<
• So, Representative Green will talk about her bill that's in section five. Thank you, Chair.

Bills: HF4893

Committee: House Education Finance

Keywords: education finance, student support, aid allowances, appropriation, school funding, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, so, section one deals with data practices.
• Uh, so, section one deals with data practices.
• Section six starts the new law, section 169.355.
• And then section eight, there's a blank.
• </c> out of that section of law. out of that section of law.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• >> Um, I believe that's earlier in the section.
• >> Um, I believe that's earlier in the section.
• It's not uh section or paragraph three.
• </c> I believe that's earlier in the section. I believe that's earlier in the section.
• </c> section that impacts municipalities. section that impacts municipalities.

Committee: House Election Law

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's section 14 of the Senate language.
• It's section 14 of the Senate language.
• the next section discussing the negative the next section discussing the negative student<00:40:00.160
• It's Senate section 16. This was a governor's provision.
• the section of the state changes to the section of the state grant<01:35:47.440><c> program</c><01:35

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Higher Education Conference Committee reviewed differences among the Governor’s, House, and Senate proposals for state grant parameter changes and their effects on state grant spending, North Star Promise spending, and average student awards. Nonpartisan staff explained that the proposals use different combinations of parameter changes, with the Governor’s and Senate plans modeled to avoid or minimize rationing, while the House plan would require rationing to balance the program. Staff reported projected biennium balances of a positive $29.836 million for the Governor’s proposal, a negative $60.758 million for the House proposal without rationing, a positive $994,000 for the House proposal with rationing, and a positive $3.623 million for the Senate proposal; North Star Promise balances also varied, with the Senate showing a positive balance and the Governor and House with rationing showing negative balances. Staff also said the Senate proposal would extend availability of the state grant appropriation and suspend surplus procedures through fiscal year 2029, allowing the balance to carry forward. The committee then focused on the House-only tuition and fee cap provision, which would limit the tuition recognized for state grant purposes for four-year programs to the University of Minnesota Twin Cities level, with 1% annual increases in fiscal years 2026 and 2027. House members said the cap was intended to address rising tuition, especially at the University of Minnesota, and to produce savings in the state grant program. The governor’s office confirmed the provision was not included in the Governor’s bill. Representatives from the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Private College Council opposed the cap, arguing it would reduce awards for low-income students and shift costs to students rather than address underlying tuition pressures; they also said it could discourage enrollment at higher-cost institutions. Supporters from Minnesota State argued the cap would improve fairness because students at lower-tuition institutions are effectively capped lower, while students at more expensive institutions receive larger awards, and they said the legislature should intervene in a variable that has grown substantially over time. Committee members questioned how the cap would work and whether it was tied to the Twin Cities campus rate. Testifiers clarified that the state grant formula is tied to the University of Minnesota level, but because Minnesota State institutions are below that level, the cap effectively limits their students to their own lower tuition while allowing higher awards at the University of Minnesota and private colleges. No formal vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the chair indicated the committee would continue with item-by-item review of the remaining parameter changes and hear additional testimony from agencies and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then we repeat a lot of this in section four. Mr.
• Greenfield said that is correct: section 16209 is municipal state aid streets.
• </c><00:15:23.360><c> Greenfield,</c><00:15:23.839><c> can</c><00:15:23.920><c> you</c> section four.
• Greenfield, can you section four. Mr.
• Greenfield, can you remind<00:15:24.320><c> me</c><00:15:25.040><c> section</c><00:15:25.360><c> four

Committee: Senate Transportation

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1457 may be subject to challenge under article 8, section 3.
• </c><01:26:32.280><c> 215</c> limit of 50% as outlining in section 215 limit of 50% as outlining in section
• Okay, so which is different from the other section.
• Okay, so which is different from the other section.
• Okay, so which is different from the other section.

Committee: House Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 410, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ biennium operating budget. OHA asked for a modest increase over its base budget, including $1.2 million to fund 13 new full-time positions for a strategy and implementation team tied to its long-term plan, with emphasis on housing, education, health, and economic resilience. OHA also described a broader effort to work directly with executive branch departments to improve outcomes for Native Hawaiians. Testimony was largely supportive, with several individuals speaking in favor and one testifier expressing strong frustration about Native Hawaiian rights and access to resources. The chair noted there were 38 additional written/supporting testimonies and three in opposition. Members asked about OHA’s funding sources and public land trust revenues; OHA said it is not receiving the full 20 percent share, described a public land trust working group and system issues, and said a related bill would seek funding to begin an inventory. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then considered House Bill 304, which would make the Hawaiian version of a law binding when the law was originally drafted in Hawaiian and later translated into English. The Judiciary supported the bill, saying it reinforces Hawaiian as an official language and looks to the original language for legislative intent. The Attorney General supported the intent but recommended narrowing the bill with a proviso to avoid ambiguities, limiting it to laws originally drafted in Hawaiian that were not later amended, codified, recodified, or reenacted in English. Public testimony was generally supportive, though one speaker raised broader sovereignty concerns. Members questioned how many laws would be affected and whether the proposed amendment would undercut the bill; the Attorney General said the amendment was meant to address uncertainty in interpretation. No final action was reported. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 603, which would direct OHA to administer a Native Hawaiian business marketing program to promote Native Hawaiian-owned businesses through marketing and technical assistance. OHA supported the concept, saying a label or branding program could help consumers identify and support Native Hawaiian-owned businesses, but requested that funding be redirected to a working group to study program design, implementation, enforcement, and long-term viability. The chair noted four supportive testimonies had been received, and a member asked OHA to confirm that its programs serve all Hawaiians, not only those eligible for homelands; OHA said it serves all Hawaiians in the state. The transcript ends before any vote or further action on HB 603.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> miles uh we received section 16 and 36. miles uh we received section 16 and 36.
• And uh us received only one section.
• So, I think what section two really does, and there are some changes in section one that I had a reporting
• </c> I'll just move straight to section two. I'll just move straight to section two.
• </c><01:20:18.719><c> two</c> So, um I think what what section two So, um I think what what section two

Committee: Senate Education Policy

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:34:29.599><c> or</c> separate stat a separate section or separate stat a separate section or
• We will take out section 4.
• We will take out section 4.
• Uh we will take out the section<02:57:47.279><c> 4.
• This is with regards to section 4.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Education heard testimony on HB 1895, which would add education-worker protections by expanding harassment-related offenses. The Department of Education, HSTA, HGA, and several school employees and principals testified in support, describing increased harassment and threats toward teachers and staff, especially since COVID, and saying the bill would help deter bad actors. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the measure, saying the language was vague and overbroad, could criminalize ordinary parental advocacy or speech, and might not survive constitutional scrutiny. In response to questions, the public defender said existing statutes already cover threatening or assaultive conduct against educational workers, while DOE representatives said the bill was aimed at excessive and repetitive disruptive behavior. No vote or final action was taken in the excerpt. The committee then took up HB 1592, concerning protections for educational workers and sports officials. DOE, the Charter School Commission, HGA, HSTA, school principals, athletic programs, and many individual testifiers supported the bill, with several describing threats, harassment, and aggressive behavior at schools and athletic events. One principal said he had repeatedly involved law enforcement after threats and incidents on campus, and a teacher testified about the need to keep school environments safe and orderly. The Office of the Public Defender again opposed the bill, arguing that current law already enhances penalties for assaults and terroristic threatening against educational workers and sports officials, and that new offenses would have little deterrent effect. Committee members questioned whether the bill should be a separate statute and how to distinguish passionate advocacy from harassment; DOE said the line was crossed when conduct became excessive and repetitive, while the public defender urged clearer drafting and more emphasis on prevention, education, security, and de-escalation. No vote or final action was announced in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:31:10.240><c> setbacks</c> described by this section setbacks described by this section setbacks
• </c><00:37:55.680><c> that</c><00:37:55.920><c> changes</c><00:37:56.320><c> the</c> the the section
• </c><04:08:38.239><c> 674.81</c> does is in section 674.81 does is in section 674.81 81<04:08:40.960>
• Uh, the main meat of the bill that I want to talk to you about today is sections 2, 3, and 4.
• Uh, with sections 2 and 3 being the housing infrastructure municipal grant program.

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In this section, we are amending in 16.
• </c><00:48:40.880><c> 17</c> I'm I'm I think that your section 17 I'm I'm I think that your section 17
• The other section is again in section 5XE, drug checking packaging. but we're here in opposition um to
• Um the other section is again in down.
• Um the other section is again in section<00:56:14.440><c> 5XE</c><00:56:15.440><c> drug</c><00:56:16.079

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think we have one more budget section.
• So I think we have one more budget section meeting before organizational session, so we will take it
• state funding involved with this, when you get down to the furniture and equipment line, in the HR section
• The first spreadsheet just shows every single major division of our department in each section that falls
• And then you can see what was actually spent for July through May in every section and division of our

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee was called to order, the roll was taken, and the March 18 minutes were approved. Members then received several project and program updates, beginning with CHI St. Alexius’s behavioral health buildouts in Bismarck, Williston, and Grand Forks. St. Alexius reported that the Bismarck project remains on track for June 2027 completion, with demolition underway and final design work nearing completion. Williston reported construction is progressing, staffing recruitment is underway for psychiatrists and other staff, and an air handler replacement is creating a roughly $750,000 unbudgeted barrier that will slightly delay the timeline. Grand Forks reported its expansion is about 30% complete, with no major barriers beyond weather, and leaders said the project should be substantially complete in the first quarter of 2027. The Department of Health and Human Services then presented a series of budget and program updates. Donna Ockland explained several recent line-item transfers as technical corrections that net to zero and do not require new spending, then reviewed salaries, wages, and FTE counts, noting the department remains within its authorized staffing levels. Pat Rainer followed with an update on the Rural Health Transformation Program, saying 12 opportunities have been posted, 422 applications received, and $8.4 million obligated so far, with a goal of obligating the full $199 million by September. He described grants for workforce retention, rural rotations and housing, community gardens, school wellness, behavioral health promotion, safety net services, equipment, technology, EMS, and other initiatives, emphasizing that the program is intended to be transformational and tied to metrics. Members asked extensive questions about how rural eligibility is defined, how grants will support both rural facilities and hub hospitals, and how future years of funding will build on current awards. The committee also heard an update on certified community behavioral health clinics from Elena Zeller, who said North Dakota has been accepted as a demonstration state, implementation is underway in Williston, North Central/Minot, Fargo, and Dickinson, and care coordination and service counts are increasing. Rebecca Askins then reviewed SNAP payment error rates, saying the 2025 rate was finalized at 9.89%, with the state aiming to get below 6% through policy updates, training, data tools, and a quality assurance team. Members pressed her on the causes of the error rate, the role of the SPACES software system, and the need for accountability and improvements. Finally, Dirk Wilkie reported the state laboratory project reached substantial completion on June 12 and is on budget at about $69.95 million, though a service elevator had to be redesigned because it was too small for equipment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think we have one more budget section. Agenda.
• So I think we have one more budget section meeting before organizational session, so we will take it
• state funding involved with this, when you get down to the furniture and equipment line, in the HR section
• The first spreadsheet just shows every single major division of our department in each section that falls
• And then you can see what was actually spent for July through May in every section and division of our

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the March 18 minutes, and then received a series of updates on major health-related projects and programs. CHI St. Alexius representatives reported progress on behavioral health buildouts in Bismarck, Williston, and Grand Forks, including demolition and construction milestones, staffing plans, and timelines. The Bismarck project remains on track for completion in June 2027 with about $346,500 spent to date. Williston reported construction underway, a $750,000 unbudgeted air handler replacement, active recruitment for psychiatrists and other staff, and a projected substantial completion in early 2027. Grand Forks reported about 30% completion, weather-tight status expected in August, and continued staffing ramp-up as the facility expands from its current 24-bed operation. The Department of Health and Human Services then reviewed a set of technical line-item transfers, emphasizing that they were administrative corrections with no net change in funding. The department also walked through the Salaries and Wages Block Grant and FTE counts, noting overall staffing remained within appropriated limits and that behavioral health staffing had increased. Members asked about vacancies, consultant use, and the mix of in-state versus out-of-state expertise for the Rural Health Transformation Program. HHS said it had posted 12 funding opportunities, received 422 applications, obligated $8.4 million so far, hired 26 people, and was preparing additional grant rounds and a CMS budget submission. The department said the program is structured around workforce, prevention/healthy living, care closer to home, and technology/data, with ongoing stakeholder engagement and community forums. The committee also heard on the certified community behavioral health clinic implementation plan, SNAP payment error rates, and the state laboratory project. HHS said CCBHC certification is being implemented in four regions—Williston, Minot/North Central, Fargo/Southeast, and Dickinson/Badlands—with care coordination expanding and baseline data still being collected. On SNAP, the department reported a 2025 payment error rate of 9.89%, acknowledged cost impacts under HR1, and said it is using training, system changes, and pre-authorization quality checks to reduce errors toward a 6% target over the next 6 to 12 months. Finally, Public Health reported the state laboratory reached substantial completion on June 12, with total costs at $69.95 million of the $70 million budget, though a service elevator issue will require a new lift to be added using contingency funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• Penal Code Section 20,... California law currently reflects these constitutional principles.
• Penal Code Section 2960 explains that the purpose of the law is to protect the public from individuals
• notary, if you're claiming to be someone that you're not, that would be a violation of Penal Code Section
• Instead, this bill adds to the list of offenses under California Welfare and Institutions Code, Section
• 707B, ...of offenses under California Welfare and Institutions Code, Section 707B, exposing youth to

Summary: The committee heard several public safety and privacy bills, with extensive testimony on each. AB 1872 by Assembly Member Ta would make repeat swatting a wobbler and require offenders to compensate victims for property damage. Supporters, including civil liberties, sheriff, and district attorney representatives, said swatting is a serious and growing threat to first responders, schools, and public officials. Opponents argued existing law already covers false emergency reports and warned the bill could worsen penalties for people with mental illness. The committee approved the bill on a do pass motion to Appropriations. AB 1727, also by Assembly Member Ta, would make it a misdemeanor to transfer or sell a person’s genetic data without consent. Supporters framed the bill as a needed privacy protection in light of advances in genetic technology and AI, citing examples such as HeLa cells and concerns about unauthorized DNA collection. Opponents, including ACLU Cal Action, said civil penalties already exist under current law and objected to creating a new carceral offense for nonviolent conduct. The committee accepted amendments and moved the bill forward as amended to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. The committee then took up AB 1782 by Assembly Member DeMaio, which would lower the threshold for retaining certain offenders with mental health disorders in state hospital custody and broaden the conduct considered in dangerousness determinations. Supporters said the bill responds to a recent release case and would help prevent dangerous releases; opponents, including disability rights and public defender groups, said it would weaken due process and expand involuntary confinement. The chair recommended a no vote, and the bill remained on call after a split roll. AB 1632 by Assembly Member Johnson, which removes the notarization requirement for trespass authorization letters, passed as amended despite opposition from homelessness advocates and public defenders who said it could increase arrests of unhoused people; supporters said it would reduce bureaucracy and help property owners and police respond to trespassing. The committee also heard AB 1968 by Assembly Member Gallagher, which would add conspiracy to commit murder to the list of offenses eligible for heightened juvenile court handling; supporters cited a foiled school attack in Tehama County, while opponents warned of overbroad punishment and racial disparities. The bill was discussed but not yet voted on in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• This hearing will be divided into four sections. This hearing will be divided into four sections.
• First section: experienced professionals and subject matter experts in the field.
• Second section: the proponents of the initiative petition, as documented by the attorney general.
• Third section: opponents of the initiative petition, also receiving 30 minutes to testify.
• This final section of the hearing is reserved for testimony from the public.

Bills: H5008

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Keywords: rent control, housing stability, tenants rights, affordability crisis, consumer protection, 1212, all

Transcript Highlights:

• too vague and they were worried when they read subsection 6, referencing subsection 5, that this section
• Testifying in support of House Bill 752, I'd like to start by saying that in Idaho Code Section 73-114
• Why was this particular section picked for this bill? Mr. Skaug? Mr.
• Chairman, Representative Gannon, it seems most appropriate, but I didn't choose the section. Mr.
• Chairman, Representative Gannon, it seems most appropriate, but I didn't choose the section.

Committee: House Judiciary, Rules and Administration

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's talk about other sections. Let's talk about other sections of these bills then.
• Let's talk about other section. Correct. Okay, great.
• Okay, let's talk about other sections of these bills then. Let's talk about the redetermination.
• I'm still having... ...in violation of the section, then they're punished.
• In Representative Cook's bill, he has a section, and you're talking to Representative Veit about, you

Committee: House General Laws

Keywords: 959, house, all