Bills: SJR36, SJR34, SJR18, SCR9, SB616, SB565, SB384, SB140, SB262, SB370, SB372, SB495, SB627, SB764, SB842, SB971, SB767, SB480, SB1066, SB929, SB765, SB523, SB62, SB19, SB18, SB666, SB688, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB869, SB890, SB992, SB1145, SB494, SB290, SB766, SB11, SB10, SB13, SB263, SB412, SB20, SB441, SB442, SB1621, SCR13, SB569, SB314, SB25, SB293, SB914, SB260, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SJR34, SCR9, SB10, SB11, SB19, SB20, SB25, SB62, SB140, SB260, SB262, SB290, SB293, SB314, SB370, SB384, SB412, SB441, SB442, SB480, SB494, SB495, SB616, SB627, SB706, SB707, SB764, SB767, SB869, SB890, SB929, SB992, SB1145, SB1621, SJR34, SB140, SB262, SB370, SB480, SB627, SB764, SB767, SR224, SB1626, SB1627, SB1628, SB1629, SB1630, SB1631, SB1632, SB1633, SB1634, SB1635, SB1636, SB1637, SB1638, SB1639, SB1640, SB1641, SB1642, SB1643, SB1644, SB1645, SB1646, SB1647, SB1648, SB1649, SB1650, SB1651, SB1652, SB1653, SB1654, SB1656, SB1657, SB1658, SB1659, SB1660, SB1661, SB1662, SB1663, SB1664, SB1665, SB1666, SB1667, SB1668, SB1669, SB1670, SB1671, SB1672, SB1673, SB1674, SB1675, SB1676, SB1677, SB1678, SB1679, SB1680, SB1681, SB1682, SB1683, SB1684, SB1685, SB1686, SB1687, SB1688, SB1689, SB1690, SB1691, SB1692, SB1693, SB1694, SB1695, SB1696, SB1697, SB1698, SB1699, SB1700, SB1626, SB1627, SB1628, SB1629, SB1630, SB1631, SB1632, SB1633, SB1634, SB1635, SB1636, SB1637, SB1638, SB1639, SB1640, SB1641, SB1642, SB1643, SB1644, SB1645, SB1646, SB1647, SB1648, SB1649, SB1650, SB1651, SB1652, SB1653, SB1654, SB1656, SB1657, SB1658, SB1659, SB1660, SB1661, SB1662, SB1663, SB1664, SB1665, SB1666, SB1667, SB1668, SB1669, SB1670, SB1671, SB1672, SB1673, SB1674, SB1675, SB1676, SB1677, SB1678, SB1679, SB1680, SB1681, SB1682, SB1683, SB1684, SB1685, SB1686, SB1687, SB1688, SB1689, SB1690, SB1691, SB1692, SB1693, SB1694, SB1695, SB1696, SB1697, SB1698, SB1699, SB1700

Keywords: parental rights, parents, children, custody, care and control, upbringing, family law, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, child welfare, education policy, medical decisions, parental authority, primary decision makers, family autonomy, capital gains, taxation, state revenue, individual investment, Supreme Court

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 1065 by Hall relates to the creation of an additional judicial district composed of Rockwall

Bills: SJR36, SB26, SJR3, SJR48, SJR50, SJR51, SCR15, SCR17, SB3, SB5, SB12, SB18, SB1001, SB1002, SB1003, SB1004, SB1005, SB1006, SB1007, SB1008, SB1009, SB1010, SB1011, SB1012, SB1013, SB1014, SB1015, SB1016, SB1017, SB1018, SB1019, SB1020, SB1021, SB1022, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1026, SB1027, SB1028, SB1029, SB1030, SB1031, SB1032, SB1033, SB1034, SB1035, SB1036, SB1037, SB1038, SB1039, SB1040, SB1041, SB1042, SB1043, SB1044, SB1045, SB1046, SB1049, SB1050, SB1051, SB1052, SB1053, SB1054, SB1055, SB1056, SB1057, SB1058, SB1059, SB1060, SB1061, SB1062, SB1063, SB1064, SB1065, SB1066, SB1067, SB1068, SB1069, SB1070, SB1071, SB1072, SB1073, SB1074, SB1075, SB1076, SB1077, SB1078, SB1079, SB1080, SB1081, SB1082, SB1083, SB1084, SB1085, SB1086, SB1087, SB1088, SB1089, SB1090, SB1091, SB1092, SB1093, SB1094, SB1095, SB1096, SB1097, SB1098, SB1099, SB1100, SB1101, SB1102, SB1103, SB1104, SB1105, SB1106, SB1107, SB1108, SB1109, SB1110, SB1111, SB1112, SB1113, SB1114, SB1115, SB1116, SB1117, SB1118, SB1119, SB1120, SB1121, SB1122, SB1123, SB1124, SB1125, SB1126, SB1127, SB1128, SB1129, SB1130, SB1131, SB1132, SB1133, SB1134, SB1135, SB1136, SB1137, SB1138, SB1139, SB1140, SB1141, SB1142, SB1143, SB1144, SB1145, SB1146, SB1147, SB1148, SB1149, SB1150, SB1565

Keywords: teacher compensation, education funding, public school educators, teacher retention, teacher designation, dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, research funding, state budget, prevention, healthcare, medical research, Dementia Prevention and Research Institute, severance tax, oil and gas, Texas STRONG fund, economic stabilization, public health, property tax relief

Transcript Highlights:

• person required to report abuse or neglect of child, it's not admissible in the evidence that any judicial
• thing I did want to point out to the committee is under Section 301.151, this issues a mandatory timeline
• This timeline is simply not realistic.
• DFPS cases run on a very tight statutory timeline, and it's not unusual for a CPS adversary hearing to
• of Vital Statistics for whether or not a man has registered his interest in a child mirrors that timeline

Transcript Highlights:

• Abuse does not follow a timeline, and safety should never expire because a certain number of hours have
• <00:57:02.799> out maybe putting a a farther timeline out maybe putting a a farther timeline
• It's also about judicial discretion.
• But if it's some other thing like a discharge, there's no way to get a judicial appeal on that.
• there's no way to uh get a judicial there's no way to uh get a judicial appeal<01:25:38.239>

Bills: HF3465, HF3782, HF4075, HF391, HF3946, HF2976, HF3350

Keywords: theft, vulnerable adults, public safety, penalties, Minnesota statutes, chemical irritants, law enforcement, transparency, building owners, tenant rights, notification, remediation, firearm restrictions, domestic violence, court orders, criminal convictions, firearms prohibition, gun surrender, order for protection, protective order

Transcript Highlights:

• We are in a pretty shortened timeline here so that we can get out in time for our field trip.
• Chana Newell from the Oregon Judicial Department, to give us a 101, and I may ask you to talk faster
• I'm with the Oregon Judicial Department. I'm in the government relations team. Vice Chair.
• I'm with the Oregon Judicial Department. I'm in the government relations team.
• It’s a very tight timeline. This is an interesting graph, I think, to illustrate.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The joint Senate and House Behavioral Health committee met for informational presentations on the Oregon State Hospital and civil commitment, followed by a planned tour of the hospital. Oregon Health Authority and Oregon State Hospital leaders reported that Sean Murphy will become the next permanent superintendent on July 13, with Sarah Castle to follow as permanent chief nursing officer on July 20. They described recent leadership turnover, a major organizational restructure, and efforts to build a culture of safety, transparency, and accountability. Officials said the hospital regained Joint Commission accreditation and CMS compliance, and they highlighted daily safety huddles, incident review processes, stronger escalation procedures, and improved management of seclusion and restraint. Committee members pressed hospital leaders on past prolonged seclusion practices, falls, staffing, and the need for better public reporting; OHA said it is building a public dashboard of key safety and workforce metrics. The committee then heard a civil commitment overview from the Oregon Judicial Department. The presenter explained that civil commitment is a separate legal process from criminal cases, usually beginning with a hospital hold, investigation, court review, appointed counsel, and a hearing within five days. She summarized changes made in House Bill 2005, including revised standards for danger to self, danger to others, and basic-needs commitments, plus a second 14-day diversion option. She cautioned that the new law has only been in effect since January and that it is too early to draw firm conclusions from the data, though there has been a recent uptick in commitments and a decrease in diversions. Testimony from NAMI Oregon and a forensic psychiatrist emphasized that Oregon still relies too heavily on jails and state hospitals because community services, housing, and outpatient supports are insufficient. They argued that the state needs more less-restrictive alternatives, including better use of assisted outpatient treatment or outpatient civil commitment, and more supported housing so people do not cycle between homelessness, incarceration, and hospitalization. A family member described a relative remaining psychotic in jail for more than 120 days before ending up back at the state hospital, urging faster intervention and better collaboration among courts, counties, hospitals, and state agencies. Committee members and witnesses also discussed workforce shortages, the expansion of secure residential treatment beds, and the need for broader system reforms beyond the hospital itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• tribal interests could only watch in anger and frustration as this process continued with no viable judicial
• address the 16% revenue shortfall have, to date, been fruitless, furthering suspicion that the state's judicial
• In 2000, as all of the attempts to negotiate were unsuccessful and as the Administrative and Judicial
• I realize now that my timeline was quite fast compared to others.
• in policy, but everyone else was, you know, we'll get to it when we get to it, and that's on our timeline

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, we authorized a timeline Additionally, we authorized a timeline extension<00:25:56.880
• And my judicial review timeline clarity act, which is included in this vital permitting reform package
• And my judicial review timeline clarity act, which is included in this vital permitting reform package
• <01:20:12.159> and impacts and establishes timelines and impacts and establishes timelines
• > for<01:44:57.040> 401 strengthens judicial review for 401 strengthens judicial review

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, December 11, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, what's the timeline now? So, what's the timeline now?
• And so the timeline to get it going is months.
• where is it What is the timeline on it? where is it What is the timeline on it?
• or their system of their timeline or their system of review. review. review.
• They would check with the judicial They would check with the judicial conduct<02:43:57.800> commission

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• system through title 25 uh the judicial system through title 25 for<00:24:40.720> judges<00:24
• And then they have a timeline where they have to implement that plan of correction.
• where they have to they have a timeline where they have to implement<01:15:16.159> that<01:15
• Members of the committee, I bring you Senate File 122, medical necessity standard timeline amendments
• Give you a brief timeline amendments.

Bills: HB0117, HB0126

Keywords: informed consent, abortion, civil liability, coercion, healthcare rights, fetal heartbeat, termination of pregnancy, medical emergency, Wyoming legislation, rights of minors, healthcare regulations, parental consent, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 1026 specifically refers to application timelines, not energization timelines.
• Those deadlines, or those timelines, were presented in September.
• We just filed our first compliance report with those new timelines last week.
• So, to be clear, there is a timeline on the application process.
• There's not a delay, even including the new timeline that was placed in those bills.

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard a long agenda of housing-related bills, beginning with AB 518 on low-impact camping areas. The author and supporters said the bill would streamline permitting for small rural camping operations on private land, expand outdoor access, and support rural economies, while opponents from campground associations and counties warned it could undermine existing regulation, create enforcement problems, and allow advertising of unpermitted sites. Members raised concerns about fire safety and local control, but the bill was ultimately passed as amended on an 8-0 vote. The committee then approved AB 635, which would require HCD to refer up to 25 of the most serious mobile home residency law complaints to the Attorney General. Supporters said mobile home residents need stronger enforcement against egregious park-owner violations, while opponents argued the existing program is underused, costly, and should remain subject to a sunset. After discussion of the program’s surplus and enforcement role, the bill passed 9-1. AB 893, which expands ministerial approval for mixed-income housing near college campuses and broadens eligibility for affordable units to students, faculty, and staff, also drew strong support from student advocates and housing groups and respectful opposition from the League of California Cities over local control and height limits; it passed 10-0. AB 925, the Mobile Home Emergency Safety Act, would require stronger emergency preparedness measures in mobile home parks, including accessible exits, working fire hydrants, and gas shutoff access, with a fee increase to fund enforcement. Supporters framed it as a life-safety measure in disaster-prone areas, while opponents argued the bill duplicates existing requirements and imposes an unnecessary fee increase. The committee voted 6-1 to send it to Appropriations, with the bill left on call. The consent calendar, including several other housing and local government bills, was approved 8-0. The committee also heard AB 712, which would increase penalties and attorney-fee protections for applicants enforcing state housing laws against public agencies; supporters said it would improve compliance, while special districts opposed the bill as overly broad and unclear. Members discussed indemnification and timing issues, and the bill was advanced with amendments to Judiciary.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I don't know if there's a typical timeline.
• Is it a kind of judicial body that once it's with them, it's out of your hands? >> Correct.
• you say would be the typical timeline you say would be the typical timeline for<01:08:45.920>
• Kind of depends on the timeline.
• is it is that a a kind of a judicial is it is that a a kind of a judicial body<01:09:55.199>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 786 Aragine general plan Judicial challenges do pass as amended to revise the temporary relief provisions
• SB 676, Lamone, CEQA judicial streamlining.
• SB 596 Menjivar, nursing staff ratio penalties do pass with author amendments to remove timelines.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• direct findings from contracts, employee interviews, victim interviews, attorney interviews, and judicial
• The AAG was privy to this and withheld exculpatory information, violating principles of judicial deception
• Rights without enforcement become suggestions, and timelines without escalation become fiction.
• If we want Jacob's Law to protect children in real life, missed timelines must trigger automatic action
• Approaching Jacob's Law deadlines must trigger real-time escalation and tracking because timelines without

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee met for a presentation-only hearing on the Arizona Department of Child Safety, with no bills on the agenda. Chair Blackman opened by emphasizing that the hearing was intended to be data-focused and respectful, and that personal attacks or false accusations would not be tolerated. Director Catherine Patak then presented DCS data on hotline volume, investigations, reunifications, adoptions, guardianships, foster care entries and exits, kinship placement, congregate care, missing youth, and extended foster care. She said the department investigated more than 43,000 cases in 2025, kept the out-of-home care population relatively steady, and had reunified about 3,000 children with parents, while also noting that older youth and behavioral-health-driven removals are creating a mismatch with available foster homes. She also described kinship supports, foster parent recruitment, and the impact of Family First on funding, saying DCS lost federal drawdown for congregate care while waiting on approval for prevention programs. Members questioned the director about kinship caregivers, behavioral health access, reunification services, parental rights terminations, notice and documentation practices, and the effect of increased reimbursement rates. Patak said unlicensed kin can receive support through the kinship supports contract, that behavioral health assessments are done quickly at the welcome center or within 24 hours for kin placements, and that provider capacity remains a major constraint outside DCS control. She explained reunification conditions and services, said the department is working on documentation and notice issues flagged by the Auditor General, and noted that kinship reimbursement increases have helped some families step forward. She also said DCS procurement for group homes is handled internally through an RFP process and that about 10% of kinship caregivers become licensed. Representative Gillette then delivered a lengthy presentation arguing that the child welfare, Medicaid, and disability systems are structurally intertwined and that procurement and funding rules create incentives for volume and congregate care use. He criticized DCS, DES, and AHCCCS/Access oversight structures, argued that the system diffuses accountability, and said the committee’s work and related materials would be referred to special counsel. He also raised concerns about documentation, placement decisions, and the cost of congregate care, while asserting that the system over-relies on large providers and that reforms should focus on structural and financial incentives. Vice Chair Fink followed with a brief slide noting that congregate care costs far more per child than foster or kinship care, reinforcing the committee’s concern about placement costs and the need to shift children toward family-based care when possible.

Transcript Highlights:

• Three courts, two circuits, lots of judicial resources.
• So, they have no not judicial judges.
• standards, procedures, and timelines standards, procedures, and timelines applicable<02:05:45.360
• <02:55:01.520> branch first working with the judicial branch first working with the judicial
• 18-month project with the judicial 18-month project with the judicial branch<02:55:23.920> to

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• final and not subject to judicial final and not subject to judicial review.<00:22:30.559> Any
• That decision also is not subject to judicial review.
• That decision also is not subject to judicial review.
• This would not be an judicial review.
• They could not survive the timeline that was going to take for him to get a hearing.

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 3 February, 2026; 3:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first took up several bills described as vehicles to keep options open for pending rural health issues, especially the rural health transformation fund and the Greenwood Hospital situation. The chair explained that Greenwood Hospital is struggling financially and operationally, including a Medicaid overpayment dispute in which Medicaid planned to recoup $2 million from a December payment, threatening payroll and continued operation. The committee discussed a proposed committee substitute that would delay recoupment until May 1 and preserve legislative flexibility to help Greenwood if a workable plan emerges. The committee adopted motions for title sufficiency and due pass on the block of bills, including the committee substitute and reverse repealer provisions. The committee then turned to two certificate-of-need bills. One bill, 2474, was presented as a rural hospitals measure that would let certain rural hospitals obtain certificates of need for services such as outpatient dialysis units, ambulatory surgical facilities, and geriatric psychiatric units, with definitions aimed largely at Delta and other rural counties. The chair also included a provision making the state health officer’s licensing decision final and not subject to judicial review, with only a short reconsideration process available. Senator Hill objected, arguing the bill concentrated too much power in the health department, eliminated meaningful court review, and unfairly picked winners and losers instead of letting the market work. The chair responded that the goal was to reduce costly, repetitive litigation and preserve access to care in areas where hospitals struggle financially. The committee then considered Senator Blackwell’s broader CO bill, which would address appeals and litigation more generally by shifting costs to the losing party in CO disputes. A reverse repealer was adopted first, and the chair explained that the bill was intended to reduce endless and expensive appeals while still allowing a limited opportunity for reconsideration. Senators Hill and others raised concerns about limiting judicial review and expanding health department power, while the chair said many states have no judicial review in this area and that the committee was exploring the issue further. The chair said he had asked several members to study the matter and contact the National Council of State Legislatures. The committee ultimately adopted the motions on the bills and amendments by voice vote, with the ayes prevailing each time.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, this bill eliminates judicial discretion.
• This judicial flexibility is critical.
• This bill replaces that crucial judicial decision-making with a rigid one-size-fits-all mandate that
• This bill replaces that crucial judicial This bill replaces that crucial judicial decision-making
• It removes judicial discretion.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• determined that the petitioned-for employees of the Massachusetts Defenders Committee were public judicial
• employees, that is, employees in the judicial branch of government, it also determined that the CAJ
• The practical reality is that the number of signatures required in a timeline...
• That the number of signatures required in a timeline for collecting them makes it extremely difficult

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 2522 / H. 5909, which would amend state labor law to treat the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) as a public employer and allow its employees to seek collective bargaining rights. The chair explained the Article 48 initiative process, noted that no opponents or members of the public had signed up to testify, and said written testimony would be accepted through March 20. The hearing focused on whether CPCS staff should be brought within the public-sector bargaining framework and how that would interact with the agency’s statutory duties. Expert testimony began with an NCSL analyst, who gave a national overview of public employee bargaining rights and examples of public defender unions in other states and localities, including Colorado, New York City, Indianapolis, Cook County, Maryland, and Illinois. Department of Labor Relations officials then reviewed prior failed organizing efforts at CPCS and its predecessor, explaining that earlier petitions were dismissed because the agency was not considered a public employer under existing law. They said passage of the initiative would not automatically unionize employees, but would allow a union to petition for an election or written majority authorization, with normal unit-appropriateness and supervisory/confidential employee issues still to be resolved. CPCS Chief Counsel Anthony Benedetti testified that the agency supports providing information to the legislature but is not taking a position for or against unionization. He described CPCS’s statutory responsibilities, size, and current efforts to expand staffing after recent indigent-defense crises, and said any new bargaining framework would need to operate alongside the agency’s obligations to provide counsel. Proponents from SEIU Local 888 and allied labor groups argued that CPCS employees have long been denied the same collective bargaining rights as other public workers, and that a union would provide just-cause protections, a voice on staffing and working conditions, and better support for recruitment and retention. CPCS attorneys and staff testified in favor of the measure, citing heavy caseloads, rapid expansion, inadequate supervision and office support, and the need for representation in disciplinary and workplace disputes. Committee members asked about bargaining-unit composition, the role of the DLR, the effect of unionization on attorneys’ ethical duties, and the use and cost of paid signature gathering. The hearing ended with no votes taken and no opposition testimony presented.

Transcript Highlights:

• In Gormley of judicial discipline.
• <00:43:25.119> Commission, versus the Judicial Conduct Commission, versus the Judicial Conduct
• a judicial ambush. a judicial ambush.
• /c><00:50:00.800> judicial judicial animus, excuse me, judicial judicial animus, excuse me, judicial
• They called it judicial ambush.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative McDonald thanked the witness and said he had a question about the timeline.
• investigation timelines, etc.
• with other timelines that are amendment with other timelines that are already<01:30:47.679> put
• bullying investigation timelines, etc. bullying investigation timelines, etc.
• And I think putting a timeline standard.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Education Policy and Administration Committee met to hear a non-germane amendment to House Bill 131, which concerns bullying and cyberbullying prevention. Representative Glenn Cordelli, the prime sponsor, said the amendment was intended to revise and improve language from last year’s SB 210 and to incorporate measures from a cyberbullying bill previously passed by the House. He described changes to school communication requirements, mandatory reporting of bullying and retaliation, stronger investigation and collaboration requirements for cross-district cases, added safety and remediation language, a required conference with the alleged perpetrator and parents if available, updated reporting deadlines, and disciplinary consequences for harassment, intimidation, retaliation, and false reports. He also noted a later amendment would be needed to insert the words “the perpetrator” in one section, and he explained that some changes were meant to align with prior legislation and legislative drafting suggestions. Committee members raised several concerns. Representative Murray questioned the treatment of private and parochial schools, the change from gross negligence to negligence, and the removal of a definition of bullying based on imbalance of power and perceived characteristics. Representative Damon also objected to deleting that definition, arguing it would narrow the scope of bullying too much. Representative Han spoke in opposition, saying the amendment was too broad, unnecessary in parts, and not ready for final action; he criticized the removal of the imbalance-of-power language, the conference requirement when parents may not participate, and the reporting obligations for bus drivers and others. Cordelli responded that some issues were already addressed in prior law or SB 210 and that private schools have their own policies. Michelle Wongran of New Hampshire Legal Assistance testified in opposition, saying the bill was being heard without enough notice and that it does far more than the committee analysis suggests. She said the amendment adds undefined retaliation language, imposes reporting duties on school vendors and contractors, may conflict with FERPA and other federal privacy rules, and includes provisions that could have serious implications for schools and students. She said she supports parental involvement and some conference provisions in concept, but urged the committee to reject the amendment or at least send it through the normal legislative process for fuller review. No vote was taken during the hearing portion described in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are no milestones, no phasing schedules, and no overall timeline to measure progress.
• 49.760> show<00:17:50.000> phase project timelines that show phase project timelines that
• <00:36:27.200> or um where uh officials from judicial or um where uh officials from judicial
• project completion timelines. project completion timelines.
• There is no plan that says this is the timeline.

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call- 00:00:01 Staff Report on Statewide Emergency Responder Voice System- 00:01:09 Kentucky State Police and Finance and Administration Cabinet Response to Staff Report- 00:48:37 Adjournment-01:34:512, 958, all

Summary: The committee heard a staff report on Kentucky’s statewide emergency responder voice system (SERVS), a multi-phase project intended to improve interoperable radio communications for first responders. Staff said Kentucky State Police did not appear to have violated statutes or regulations, but the project lacked an overall master plan, clear milestones, and consistent documentation, which contributed to delays, spending issues, and deployment problems. The report recommended updating the Kentucky Field Operations Guide to reflect SERVS and noted that the project has been funded in phases since 2018, with appropriations totaling roughly $216 million across 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024, while about $109 million had been spent by the end of fiscal year 2025. The report raised concerns about project sequencing and oversight. Staff said most spending was concentrated in special mobile equipment, with Motorola accounting for about two-thirds of all SERVS expenditures and the top four vendors making up 81 percent of spending. They also said a sample of Motorola payments suggested possible late payments, though they could not confirm whether interest was paid. Staff criticized the use of master agreements for a project of this size, the lack of a centralized ledger, and the absence of a documented timeline or risk mitigation plan. They recommended stronger procurement and planning requirements, including possible legislative changes requiring approved master plans for large capital projects and additional funding conditions tied to SERVS master agreements. Land acquisition and deployment progress were identified as major bottlenecks, especially in Eastern Kentucky. Staff said the project began in western Kentucky using existing tower sites, but the remaining work is concentrated in harder-to-acquire areas, with more than 95 percent of new towers still incomplete. They said the Division of Real Properties did not begin formal contract work on acquisition until October 2024, despite earlier coordination, and recommended earlier consultation on future projects. Staff also noted that the Kentucky Wireless Interoperability Executive Committee had not been active in oversight, and survey results showed limited awareness and involvement among first responders. Committee members agreed that the lack of an initial implementation plan and the continuing need for funding reflected broader planning problems, and they discussed the need for a clearer end-to-end game plan rather than continuing to fund the project without a defined completion path.