Transcript Highlights:

• proposition in criminal law, as I'm sure Representative Burr knows, that there aren't any summary judgment
• /c> Burch knows that there aren't any Burch knows that there aren't any summary<00:20:38.080> judgment
• <00:20:38.520> motions<00:20:38.880> in<00:20:39.039> criminal summary judgment
• motions in criminal summary judgment motions in criminal cases<00:20:39.840> if<00:20:40.000>
• Chairman, you might have been about to speak there, so I defer to you on the interpretation, but I would

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 313 and, on motion by Representative Perez, voted to retain the bill because members felt it needed further work and was not ready for final action. The motion passed 18-0, and no further action was taken on the bill. House Bill 391, an anti-SLAPP measure, was then discussed; supporters said it addressed a real problem and should move forward, while opponents raised concerns that it was too broad, could affect criminal cases, and might create procedural complications. The committee voted 18-0 to retain HB 391 as well, and it was placed on consent. The committee next considered House Bill 462, establishing a cause of action for unwarranted video imaging of residential properties. Representative McFarland moved OTP, saying the bill raised First Amendment and property-rights concerns. The motion passed 18-0, and the bill was also placed on consent. The committee then turned to House Bill 509, which would require reporting on forfeitures. Supporters argued the information was useful for future legislation, while opponents said the reporting would be costly, duplicative, and potentially split data across fiscal years. The committee voted 11-7 to recommend OTP, with a minority of members opposed. House Bill 520, authorizing Department of Education hearing officers to issue subpoenas, drew the most extended debate. Supporters argued DOE needed the same tools other agencies have, while opponents said DOE already had access to needed information, the Attorney General could handle subpoenas, and the bill would create an unbalanced process and raise due process and student-record concerns. Representative Tur offered Amendment 0842H to shift subpoena power from DOE hearing officers to the Attorney General; after debate, the amendment failed 10-8. The transcript cuts off as the committee begins the roll call on the underlying bill after rejecting the amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Hemmingsen-Jaeger, I will defer to my testifiers. >> Okay.
• it does go to a referendum, a judgment it does go to a referendum, a judgment of<01:31:07.760>
• So with that, Madam Chair, I'd defer to my testifiers.
• So with that, Madam Chair, I'd defer to my testifiers.
• , Madam Chair, I'd defer to my testifiers. testifiers. testifiers.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Deferring maintenance is expensive, as every dollar delayed costs six to ten dollars later.
• Uh, Senator Jasinski, I defer to the testifiers first, and then I'll offer my thoughts. Sure.
• Uh, Senator Jasinski, I defer to the testifiers first, and then I'll offer my thoughts. Sure.
• Uh, Senator Jasinski, I defer to the testifiers first, and then I'll offer my thoughts. Sure.
• account with our engineering judgment. account with our engineering judgment.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:36:55.720> this federal agency I ask that you defer this federal agency I ask that you
• <00:39:02.560> making us to defer if we defer decision making us to defer if we defer decision
• HBA to work with Guam Moto and the HGIA, so we'll be deferring this matter for this one.
• HB 336, relating to condominiums, will also be deferred.
• HB 638 will also be deferring this matter. This is, uh, sorry, HB 336 was relating to condominiums.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on February 5, 2025, and heard testimony on several bills. HB 918, relating to labeling, drew support from the Department of Health, INDA (the nonwoven fabrics industry), and Hawaii Realtors. INDA said the bill aligns with do-not-flush labeling laws in other states but raised a concern about the six-month compliance deadline tied to FIFRA approval. In response to committee questions, witnesses explained that the bill is aimed mainly at disinfecting wipes, that most products are already labeled nationally, and that the proposed timing issue could be addressed by using Oregon’s approach. No vote was taken on the measure during the portion shown. The committee also heard HB 1482, relating to controlled substances. HPD supported the bill, and Aloha Green Holdings and the Department of Health both said they supported the intent but recommended technical amendments. Their testimony focused on clarifying the treatment of Delta-8 THC, distinguishing synthetic or artificially derived cannabinoids from naturally occurring forms, and avoiding confusion in the hemp law. Members asked whether Delta-8 would show up on drug tests; witnesses said it would test positive for THC and would not be distinguished from Delta-9. The bill was then set aside as the committee moved on. HB 981, relating to attorney’s fees, drew opposition from a law firm representing homeowners and associations, which argued the bill would limit access to legal services, favor developers and contractors, and make settlement harder. The witness suggested instead using existing consumer-protection fee-shifting concepts, and committee members explored whether a capped fee award or a broader attorney-fee rule would be more appropriate. The committee then took up HB 807 and HB 336, both relating to condominiums. HB 807 received support from the Green Infrastructure Authority and the Hawaii Bankers Association, while one testifier urged deferral over unresolved questions about commercial PACE financing; the bank association asked for more time to work with HGIA, and the chair indicated decision-making could be deferred to allow that discussion. On HB 336, the Community Associations Institute opposed the bill as removing checks and balances, while the Hawaii Workers Center and others supported it as a step toward clearer enforcement of health and safety issues in condominiums and rental housing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I would defer to them on the underlying rationale, but this package reflects that proposal. So.
• I'll defer to the LAO or my Senate colleagues.
• We would need to defer back to the committee and subchairs on how the amount was arrived at.
• And in Riverside, there is an under-judgment of 22 and San Bernardino 30.
• And we listen to the deferred maintenance that's out there.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 109, the Budget Act of 2026, and related discussion of the legislative budget agreement. Committee staff and the Department of Finance described a two-year balanced plan with about $253 billion in General Fund spending, roughly $5.5 billion in higher assumed revenues than the May Revision, and about $36.5 billion in combined reserves. They said the package preserves or expands funding for schools and community colleges, child care, IHSS, Medi-Cal-related county administration, housing and homelessness programs, public hospitals, courthouse construction, and some criminal justice and prison-closure savings, while delaying or modifying several prior health care reductions and some Medi-Cal changes. Much of the member discussion focused on Medi-Cal, H.R. 1, and the impact on low-income and immigrant Californians. Several Democrats argued the budget protects vulnerable residents by delaying some cuts, funding county eligibility work, indigent care, public hospitals, and food banks, and rejecting the Governor’s IHSS cuts and asset-limit proposal. Republicans criticized the budget for assuming future revenues, relying on new taxes, and not doing enough to address the structural deficit or improve accountability. Members also raised concerns and support around homelessness funding, Prop. 36, judgeships and courthouse funding, transit and GGRF allocations, local journalism, Caltrans fleet spending, and a proposed “fair share” revenue measure that was not yet before the committee. Public testimony was largely supportive of the budget’s health and human services provisions, especially the rejection of IHSS cuts and the asset-limit proposal, and the inclusion of funding for child care, sickle cell centers, domestic violence services, trauma recovery centers, distressed hospitals, county eligibility work, and transit programs. Some witnesses representing hospitals and health plans cautioned about the effects of moving certain Medi-Cal populations to fee-for-service and about proposed tax changes affecting health care providers. The chair said revenue trailer bills were still being finalized and would likely come back later in the week; the committee then moved to public comment, with the chair limiting speakers to about one minute each.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've got to make a judgment, you know, about what I think is in the best interest of the state.
• Our focus on the MBTA has been to, you know... ...really address deferred maintenance, the FTA report
• Our focus on the MBTA has been to, you know, really address deferred maintenance, the FTA report, the
• We also secured the largest consumer protection case or judgment in state history, which, when affirmed
• The bottom line is or judgment in state history, which, when affirmed by the Supreme Judicial Court,

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The joint budget hearing opened the FY27 budget process with remarks from the Senate and House Ways and Means chairs, who described the fiscal outlook as challenging because of slow revenue growth, rising health care and other costs, and uncertainty from federal policy changes. Governor Healey and Secretary of Administration and Finance Matthew Gorzkowicz then presented House 2, a $62.8 billion budget that they said grows by about 1% and does not raise taxes or fees. They emphasized affordability, fiscal discipline, protection of core services, and continued investment in education, transportation, housing, child care, health care, and public safety. The administration also discussed a separate bill to delay and phase in certain federal tax-code changes from the so-called OB3 law, especially research and experimental expense provisions, to reduce immediate budget impacts and preserve competitiveness. A major portion of the hearing focused on education and municipal aid. The administration said House 2 provides about $7.6 billion for Chapter 70 aid, fully funds the final year of the Student Opportunity Act, increases special education circuit breaker funding, and raises rural school aid. Senators and representatives from both parties raised concerns that Chapter 70 and other aid formulas are not equitable for small, rural, and low-wealth communities and are not keeping pace with inflation, and several called for broader review of the formula and related funding streams. The governor and secretary said they are open to further discussion, pointed to additional support through rural aid, special education, transportation reimbursements, and minimum aid, and said total Student Opportunity Act investment would reach about $2.1 billion over the life of the law. Transportation, housing, and fair share spending were also central topics. The administration said fair share revenues are being used holistically, with education-heavy spending in the operating budget and transportation-heavy spending in the supplemental budget, and estimated the overall split to date at roughly 57% education and 43% transportation. They highlighted MBTA stabilization, regional transit authority support, microtransit, fare-free regional transit, and bridge and commuter rail investments, while noting the MBTA remains a major fiscal concern. On housing, the governor stressed production, permitting reform, ADUs, down-payment assistance, and support for public housing authorities, while lawmakers pressed for more funding for local housing authorities and for ways to address out-migration, energy costs, and affordability. The governor also said the administration will not withhold fire safety grants from communities over MBTA Communities Act noncompliance and will handle such issues case by case. No votes were taken at the hearing; it was an informational presentation and question-and-answer session.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will begin with the two audits that were deferred from the prior meeting.
• Yes, this does, I think, show an egregious error in judgment here.

Summary: The committee met to review education audit reports and adopted the minutes. Legislative Audit reported 103 education audits total, with 89 having no findings and 14 containing findings. The committee first heard from Camden Fairview School District, which had findings for spending operating funds on an end-of-year employee banquet and for unauthorized credit card charges. District officials said they had implemented stronger internal controls, stopped using the affected card, and would limit future events to comply with state law and constitutional requirements. Members questioned the district about prior practices, donated funds, and how teacher appreciation could continue without using operating funds; the report was filed as reviewed. The committee then reviewed Forest City School District, which had a finding for spending $33,000 in operating funds on an off-campus end-of-year celebration and entertainment event. District representatives said the money came from a long-standing Pepsi-related donation fund, but acknowledged confusion over whether it should be treated as operational funds and said they would stop using it that way and provide training to staff and the board. Members discussed whether the funds were private donations or operating funds, the lack of a formal board vote, and whether the event was intended to recognize staff and growth; the report was filed as reviewed. The committee also received notice of more serious findings that were referred to the prosecuting attorney and attorney general, including Conway School District for misuse of district funds and resources by former maintenance employees, Magnolia School District for undeposited activity funds, Westside School District for undocumented and personal credit card charges, and Boonville School District for paying a board member’s son in excess of the statutory limit without an approved exemption. The remaining eight reports with findings were filed en masse as reviewed, and the 89 reports with no findings were also filed en masse. The committee adjourned after noting that most districts reviewed had no findings.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will begin with the two audits which were deferred from the prior meeting.
• Yes, this does, I think this does show an egregious error in judgment here.

Summary: The committee met to review education audit reports and heard responses from several school districts with findings. Camden Fairview School District was cited for using operating funds for an end-of-year employee awards banquet and for unauthorized credit card charges that caused a small loss; district officials said the current administration had strengthened controls, stopped the banquet practice, and improved monthly credit card reconciliation. Members questioned whether the prior officials were still employed, whether the credit card issue was an outside hack, and how teacher appreciation could continue without using district funds. Forest City School District was cited for spending about $33,000 on an off-campus staff celebration and entertainment event; district representatives said the money came from long-standing Pepsi-related donation funds, that the event was intended to recognize staff and growth, and that they would change practices and receive training going forward. Members discussed whether those funds were private donations or operational funds, and staff said the district’s accounting treatment made them subject to the constitutional restriction at issue. The committee also reviewed several other findings. Conway School District was referred for an ongoing investigative report involving misuse of district funds and resources by former maintenance employees. Magnolia School District had undeposited activity funds totaling more than $21,000, tied to a resigned high school secretary and sponsor receipts not deposited. Westside School District had about $30,000 in credit card charges lacking documentation or business purpose, including charges by the superintendent, personal purchases, and items shipped to personal addresses; the matter was referred to the prosecuting attorney. Boonville School District was cited for paying a board member’s son more than the statutory limit for seasonal groundskeeping without the required exemption, and DESE later denied the exemption request. After discussing those cases, the committee filed the remaining eight findings en masse and then filed the 89 reports with no findings. Members noted that most school districts audited had clean reports and encouraged districts to continue good practices while learning from the findings discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will begin with the two audits which were deferred from the prior meeting.
• Yes, this does, I think, show an egregious error in judgment here.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The committee met to review education audit reports, beginning with approval of the minutes and then hearing several school districts with findings. Camden Fairview School District addressed two findings: use of operating funds for an end-of-year employee banquet and unauthorized credit card charges that resulted in a small loss. District officials said they had changed credit cards, increased monthly review and reconciliation, stopped using operating funds for off-campus celebrations, and would limit future meals and events to district business. Members questioned whether the prior administration was still involved, whether the charges were from an outside hacker, and how the district would continue teacher appreciation without violating state law. Forest City School District then discussed a $33,000 off-campus staff celebration funded through what the district described as long-standing Pepsi-related funds. The district said it believed the money was discretionary private donation revenue, but audit staff said the funds were treated as operating funds because they were in a general fund account and subject to constitutional limits. The district said it would stop using the fund that way, provide staff and board training, and ensure future expenditures comply with the law. Members also asked about the lack of a formal board vote, the amount remaining in the account, and whether the event was meant to recognize staff growth and service. The committee next reviewed additional findings: Conway School District’s former maintenance employees allegedly misused district funds and resources, with a separate investigative report still pending; Magnolia School District had undeposited activity funds totaling more than $21,000; Westside School District had about $9,500 in credit card charges that could not be substantiated, along with weak internal controls and some personal charges; and Boonville School District paid a board member’s son more than $5,000 for groundskeeping without the required exemption, which DESE later denied. The committee filed the reports as reviewed, including eight other findings not referred for prosecution and 89 audits with no findings, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• presented at the LJAC Standing Committee on State Agencies on Thursday, January 8, 2026, where it was deferred
• And so then we'll just bring a money judgment against the providers.

Summary: The Medicaid Subcommittee of the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee met to receive a primer on the subcommittee’s history and on how Medicaid oversight works in Arkansas. Legislative audit staff reviewed the subcommittee’s origins in response to earlier Medicaid audit concerns and explained that Medicaid is audited every year in the statewide single audit because it is a high-risk, large federal program. Staff summarized recent audit findings, including issues with eligibility controls, data matching, contractor charging, incarcerated juveniles’ coverage handling, provider eligibility support, and the state’s Medicaid recovery audit contractor exception request. They also noted a DHS departmental audit finding involving employees who improperly received benefits, which was referred for possible prosecution. The Department of Human Services gave an overview of the Medicaid program, describing eligibility groups, delivery systems (fee-for-service, managed care/PASSE, and premium assistance for expansion adults), the size of the program, and the agency’s budget and provider base. DHS also outlined the difference between state plan amendments and waivers and said other committee materials would be sent to members. The Office of Medicaid Inspector General described its role in detecting and preventing fraud, waste, and abuse, explaining that it investigates suspected intentional fraud, suspends providers when there is a credible allegation of fraud, recovers improper payments in mistake cases, and recommends policy changes when trends are identified. The Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit explained that it prosecutes provider fraud criminally and civilly, handles neglect, abuse, and exploitation cases in long-term care settings, and works with DHS, OMIG, and federal partners. Members asked about where cases are filed, how provider suspensions work, whether beneficiary fraud is investigated, and how education is provided to providers. DHS confirmed that beneficiary fraud cases are referred to local prosecutors and said the expansion population will move toward community engagement/work requirements under federal changes, with a soft launch planned before full implementation. The meeting ended with no formal votes beyond adoption of the prior minutes and no other committee actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So ultimately, that judgment may go in their favor, and the municipality or the rural community may be
• Wu has any further explanations on that, I would defer to him. Thank you for that.

Keywords: 996, all

Summary: The House Labor, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee began by rolling House Bill 132 at the sponsor’s request because amendment language was still being worked on. The committee then proceeded without quorum as a subcommittee until additional members arrived. House Bill 285, as amended, was heard first. The bill was described as a cleanup measure to clarify New Mexico’s disabled veterans property tax exemption, including that it applies to a veteran’s primary residence and how it works for properties with multiple owners. Testimony from New Mexico counties, the Tax and Revenue Department, and the Department of Veterans Services supported the bill, saying it would reduce confusion for assessors and help veterans access the exemption. One member raised broader concerns about housing insecurity among unhoused and renting veterans and asked for interim data on how many veterans would actually benefit, but the committee noted those issues were outside the bill’s scope. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed HB 285 as amended with a do pass recommendation. The committee then heard House Bill 128, which updates the state’s occupational disease and disablement law for firefighters by expanding the list of covered cancers and related conditions, aligning the state law with newer research and recent federal changes, and standardizing the employment period to five years. The sponsor and supporters said the bill reflects current science, removes outdated age limits for some cancers, and makes it easier for firefighters to receive workers’ compensation without having to prove causation case by case. Firefighters and union representatives gave emotional testimony about personal cancer diagnoses and the burden of fighting insurers while undergoing treatment. The Workers’ Compensation Administration, labor groups, and trial lawyers all supported the measure. Committee members asked about the federal model, the five-year threshold, the impact on rural jurisdictions, and why women’s cancers were not previously included; witnesses explained that the changes reflect updated data and the underrepresentation of women in the fire service. Dr. Dan Wu, speaking online, said firefighter cancer is an epidemic and argued the science supports the bill. The committee then adopted the motion and passed HB 128 with a do pass recommendation before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I guess I'll reserve judgment here until I see Senator Mathern's amendment, but had a lot of questions
• So I'll defer to the, I guess, the majority of the committee, however that goes.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The HR division continued work on the behavioral health budget, with members revisiting several funding items and generally agreeing to hold provider inflation increases until the full division picture is clearer. They tentatively supported additional funding for Community Connect and Free Through Recovery, as well as increases for the drug court program and peer support, while clarifying that some items were already in the House version and others were one-time or grant-related expenditures. The committee spent considerable time on a proposed $2 million behavioral health services program for nursing homes and basic care facilities. Senator Mathern brought revised language to describe a capitated payment model for training, consultation, and direct patient care for residents with medically based behavioral disorders and disruptive behaviors. Some members remained skeptical and wanted to see the amendment before deciding, but the discussion centered on whether the funding would help nursing homes accept patients who otherwise end up in state hospitals or acute care settings. Members also discussed several one-time funding items, including electronic health record and legacy system upgrades, network redundancy for the state hospital, partial hospitalization/intensive day treatment expansion, and a bathroom remodel at the Southeast Human Service Center. The committee restored the bathroom project to the original $972,000 estimate after concerns that the House reduction would not cover the needed ADA and plumbing work. They also debated a $12.96 million behavioral health facility grant for Altru in Grand Forks, with some members opposing it and others supporting it as a regional service expansion, but ultimately set it aside for later consideration. The meeting ended with staff flagging other sections of the bill, including the opioid settlement advisory language, the state hospital steering committee, behavioral health education grants, and the system of care grant. The chair announced that medical services would be taken up the next day, and members agreed to adjourn after planning to revisit unresolved behavioral health items and vote on the held bill later.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I want to make sure when putting that in statute that we have a good one, I will defer to our great
• But in your judgment, is this the appropriate bar or is there?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• No matter how bad the judgments is ridiculous.
• Chairman, of wanting to defer to states, but in the area of drug enforcement and drug definition and

Bills: SB331

Keywords: fentanyl, controlled substances, drug trafficking, public health, research regulations, law enforcement, S-331, Halt All Lethal Trafficking and Fentanyl Act, fentanyl crisis, public testimony, drug legislation, bipartisan support

Summary: In this committee meeting, the focus was primarily on S-331, the Halt All Lethal Trafficking and Fentanyl Act, aimed at addressing the fentanyl crisis. The bill's key components include making permanent the class scheduling of fentanyl-related substances, confirming existing sentencing penalties, and easing registration requirements for scientific research on Schedule I substances. Numerous parents shared heartbreaking testimonies about their losses due to fentanyl, which fueled an urgent call to pass the legislation without alterations. The committee members engaged in passionate discussions highlighting the urgency of the situation as overdoses continue to claim American lives.

Transcript Highlights:

• wrote, 'The public expects accountability, but academic freedom concerns have historically featured deference
• I merely ask that you consider the governor's successes and defer in this case to his prudence in choosing
• And defer in this case to his prudence in choosing Adam Kissel to be on the board of my alma mater.
• mother, a native of Pensacola, an alumna of UWF, and as a Floridian, I, too, trust the governor's judgment

Summary: The committee first took up 127 gubernatorial appointees grouped in blocks and, after brief testimony in favor of several nominees, voted to recommend confirmation of the block nominees to the full Senate. The committee then moved through a series of University of West Florida and other board nominations, hearing from each nominee about their background and priorities, with most emphasizing service, local ties, student success, military partnerships, and university growth. Several nominees also answered questions about governance, faculty hiring, diversity, and the university’s strategic direction. For the University of West Florida Board of Trustees, the committee heard from Paul Bailey, Rebecca Matthews, Rachel Moyah, Ashley Ross, Christopher Young, and Adam Kissel. Bailey stressed his local roots, legal background, and support for UWF’s pre-law program and military connections; Matthews highlighted her education and state-government experience, current role as board chair, enrollment growth, fundraising, and alignment with state directives; Moyah cited her education and school board experience, fiscal discipline, and recent positive financial and enrollment figures; Ross emphasized fundraising, workforce needs, cyber opportunities, and support for the governor’s higher education agenda; and Young focused on business accountability, audit oversight, rural access to education, and expanding military-related opportunities. Each of these nominees was questioned about issues such as diversity, “woke” culture, faculty ideology, and the role of the board, and each was ultimately recommended for confirmation by roll-call vote. Adam Kissel’s nomination drew the most extensive debate and public testimony. Kissel described his background in free speech advocacy, federal education policy, philanthropy, and higher education reform, and said he would support UWF’s growth, free-speech protections, military and veteran engagement, and stronger graduation rates. Senators pressed him on prior writings favoring privatization of public higher education, comments about replacing administrators with AI, his work with the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025, and how his views fit with serving on a public university board; he said his long-term libertarian views did not conflict with his short-term support for UWF receiving more resources. Public testimony was split, with supporters praising his free-speech credentials, military focus, and alignment with the governor’s reforms, while opponents questioned his commitment to public higher education and whether he could be trusted to learn the university from the ground up. After debate, the committee voted to recommend Kissel’s confirmation to the full Senate.

Transcript Highlights:

• wrote, 'The public expects accountability, but academic freedom concerns have historically featured deference
• I merely ask that you consider the governor's successes and defer in this case to his prudence in choosing
• And defer in this case to his prudence in choosing Adam Kissel to be on the board of my alma mater.
• mother, a native of Pensacola, an alumna of UWF, and as a Floridian, I, too, trust the governor's judgment

Summary: The Committee on Ethics and Elections met to consider a large slate of gubernatorial appointees, with 127 nominees on the agenda. The committee first approved the grouped nominees in Tabs 1 through 54 by unanimous roll call vote after brief public testimony in support of several appointees. The committee then took up individual University of West Florida and Pensacola State College-related nominations, including noting that Dr. Joel Rudman had resigned from the Pensacola State College board before appearing, leaving no action to take on that tab. Several UWF trustees were confirmed after testimony focused on their qualifications and priorities for the university. Paul Bailey emphasized his local ties, legal background, and interest in UWF’s military connections and pre-law program; Rebecca Matthews highlighted her education and public service background, current role as UWF board chair, enrollment growth, fundraising, and alignment with state directives; Rachel Moyah discussed her education leadership experience, finance role, and positive enrollment and fundraising trends; Ashley Ross described her fundraising and higher education background and stressed workforce, advancement, cyber, and military partnerships; and Christopher Young spoke about his Panhandle roots, business experience, audit and compliance work, and support for military and student opportunity. Each of these nominees was confirmed by roll call and forwarded to the full Senate. The most contentious nomination was Adam Kissel for the UWF Board of Trustees. Kissel described his background in higher education policy, free speech, philanthropy, and federal education work, and said he would focus on free speech, accreditation, military/veteran support, honors programming, and graduation rates. Committee members questioned him closely about prior writings on privatizing public higher education, his views on free speech versus Senate Bill 266, Project 2025, AI in administration, and his fit for UWF. Public testimony was split, with supporters praising his free-speech credentials and reform views, while opponents, including former UWF leaders, warned he was too ideological and not sufficiently grounded in the university community. After debate, the committee voted 5-4 not to confirm Kissel, so his name will not be forwarded to the full Senate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Harm reduction programs helped me to get free, non-judgmental medical care when I needed it.
• So I will actually defer to my Department of Finance colleague on that one. Yes, so you don't see.
• I'll defer to Adrian Barraza.
• I'm going to actually defer to Susan.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, I would defer. I'd be interested to hear what the director thinks here.
• But the question of appeals is not one that we've discussed, so I defer to the director.
• Can I ask one question about... defer to the director yeah again um defer to the director yeah again
• If he doesn’t think it’s necessary, then I would defer to his judgment.
• then I would defer to his judgment<00:51:03.680> okay<00:51:03.880> just<00:51:04.079>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Solid Waste Subcommittee met to discuss proposed amendments to HB 171 and HB 215. For HB 171, Representative Gerna outlined technical changes to a landfill moratorium bill: DES would be allowed to accept applications only to review them for completeness, a notwithstanding clause would override automatic approval timing rules, the word “fully” would be removed, and an unnecessary reference to perennial water bodies would be deleted. Members raised concern about whether applications deemed complete during the moratorium would still have to comply with later changes in law or rule. Director Mike Whap of DES said applicants would likely need to amend applications if policy changes occurred, and suggested the bill could explicitly state that later changes apply to pending applications. The subcommittee generally supported the revised language and agreed the amended bill could go directly to executive session, though one member said the underlying legislation was ill-advised but preferred the amended version over the original. The committee then turned to HB 215, which would create a two-stage landfill siting review centered on a “net public benefit” determination before full technical review. Representative Gerna explained that the amendment would define net public benefit, require an independent third-party assessment paid for by the applicant, and set up a process for selecting the contractor from a list submitted by the applicant, with DES and the host community involved and the commissioner choosing if no agreement is reached within 60 days. Members asked how “host community” would be defined; DES said it would generally mean the municipal governing body, though that body could appoint others. The amendment also broadened the factors considered in both harms and benefits, including human health, property values, tourism, recreation, wildlife, local economic benefits, and infrastructure improvements. The discussion also added a provision directing DES to consult with the Department of Transportation, the Department of Business and Economic Affairs, and the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources as needed when reviewing the third-party assessment. Director Whap said interdepartmental consultation is normal and that DES would likely adopt rules to guide the process. Members questioned whether the new framework would be too vague or burdensome for applicants, but Whap said it would not be designed to stack the deck against applicants and that the process should provide clearer, more balanced criteria. No votes were taken during the meeting, and the subcommittee appeared to continue refining the amendment language before further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Garron moves to defer the reading and referral of bills until the end of today's business.
• SB 552 by Huffman, relating to changing the eligibility of certain persons to receive deferred adjudication
• So as a politician in Austin, you would supplant your judgment via this amendment for the judgment...
• So just to be clear, you think your judgment on whether a parent should be able to allow their child
• Your judgment will supersede the parent's right to do so?

Bills: SB37, SJR84, SJR87, SJR27, SB8, SB10, SB227, SB261, SB15, SB12, SB25, SB57, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB512, SB241, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2035, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB310, SB1346, SB2753, SB2703, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SCR9, SB2405, SB2406, SB2407, SB2166, SB2148, SB535, SB777, SB827, SB1141, SB1330, SB1352, SB1664, SB1862, SB1936, SB1453, SB1448, SB1398, SB2137, SB2111, SB53, SB226, SB1677, SB1723, SB1839, SB36, SB38, SB815, SB1856, SB552, SB646, SB37, SJR84, SJR87, SJR27, SB8, SB10, SB227, SB261, SB15, SB12, SB25, SB57, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB512, SB241, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2035, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB310, SB1346, SB2753, SB2703, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SCR9, HB5560, HB762, HB 107, HB 114, HB300, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323

Keywords: higher education, curriculum review, governing board, faculty council, ombudsman, tax exemption, property tax, homestead, fire damage, constitutional amendment, bail reform, criminal justice, felony offenses, public safety, judicial conduct, state commission, judicial misconduct, commission membership, immigration enforcement, ICE agreements

Transcript Highlights:

• Automated decisions can be made but should never replace human judgment where lives and liberties are
• If you know the number, I'll defer to you.
• In Senate Bill 1, but beyond that, I'll certainly defer to you on the specific number regarding the records

Bills: SCR46, SB31, SB39, SB227, SB330, SB401, SB407, SB467, SB482, SB500, SB506, SB512, SB527, SB584, SB619, SB636, SB646, SB647, SB648, SB659, SB663, SB715, SB732, SB758, SB801, SB816, SB847, SB870, SB884, SB1020, SB1055, SB1065, SB1137, SB1169, SB1181, SB1283, SB1383, SB1395, SB1410, SB1433, SB1490, SB1558, SB1574, SB1626, SB1666, SB1718, SB1727, SB1756, SB1757, SB1845, SB1924, SB1964, SB1972, SB2018, SB2031, SB2075, SB2076, SB2080, SB2111, SB2117, SB2154, SB2161, SB2173, SB2206, SB2225, SB2253, SB2268, SB2314, SB2322, SB2351, SB2371, SB2476, SB2533, SB2540, SB2570, SB2589, SB2623, SB2658, SB2660, SB2692, SB2693, SB2717, SB2722, SB2753, SB2779, SB2877, SB2880, SB2900, SB2920, SB3031, HJR4, SB5, SB260, SB1786, SJR3, SJR18, SB1, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SJR84, SJR59, SCR12, SCR39, SCR46, SCR48, SCR19, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1433, SB1434, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB261, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB529, SB209, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB510, SB1924, SB2253, SB2018, SB2206, SB584, SB1085, SB1490, SB2314, SB2046, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB1524, SB1137, SB636, SB2056, SB1558, SB884, SB227, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1626, SB1845, SB1863, SB2681, SB2200, SB2199, SB1757, SB2050, SB2458, SB2201, SB1055, SB2660, SB2662, SB1065, SB801, SB2533, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB648, SB647, SB512, SB1721, SB2268, SB2366, SB1013, SB2692, SB2570, SB2797, SB2111, SB2371, SB2383, SB646, SB1169, SB1754, SB1718, SB2779, SB2004, SB1756, SB2119, SB527, SB2322, SB2448, SB1777, SB1283, SB407, SB2392, SB2076, SB2786, SB3031, SB2877, SB2876, SB2284, SB2225, SB1540, SB2920, SB2929, SB1395, SB1972, SB2540, SB2742, SB2595, SB2217, SB2117, SB715, SB2330, SB1964, SB1383, SB500, SB1640, SB2001, SB2080, SB2722, SB506, SB2514, SB2623, SB2658, SB1574, SB2900, SB2753, SB2398, SB401, SB1241, SB2927, SB2173, SB2538, SB898, SB467, SB1449, SB2529, SB1531, SB2846, SB2476, SB2031, SB986, SB1181, SB2075, SB2154, SB2864, SB31, SB2880, SB1359, SB2386, SB771, SB2844, SB2550, SB1351, SB1423, SB1931, SB2245, SB2589, SB2707, SB2807, SB2351, SB410, SB659, SB816, SB2776, SB2693, SB2580, SB1980, SB1886, SB1234, SB739, SB482, SB456, SB127, SB1666, SB2843, SB2801, SB800, SB2055, SB784, SB2986, SB735, SB1012, SB324, SB2926, SB2938, SB2007, SB2138, SB1242, HJR4, HB135, HB1109, SCR30, SCR3, SB2615, SB1049, SB2310, SB1224, SB2972, SB1568, SB2841, SB2885, SB3016, SB2858, SB2610, SB2139, SB1856, SB2035, SB2308, SB2306, SB2041, SB1528, SB1681, SB1141, SB2401, SB2530, SB2375, SB547, SB1266, SB1373, SB1467, SB2069, SB2269, SB2480, SB2544, SB672, SB904, SB2695, SB2891, SB2422, SB2543, SB1854, SB317, SB2539, SB2532, SB2925, SB1250, SB2082, SB2203, SB457, SB2357, HCR35, HCR64

Keywords: Texas beef, cattle industry, agricultural heritage, Texas strip steak, economic growth, SB 31, Life of the Mother Act, Texas abortion law, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment, pregnancy complications, maternal health, life-threatening condition, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, miscarriage, unborn child, abortion exception, abortion ban, physician liability