Transcript Highlights:

• Section 3 on R11 would lower the threshold required for a representative to act on behalf of manufactured
• Section<00:08:39.080><c> 3</c><00:08:39.640><c> on</c><00:08:39.880><c> R11</c><00:08:40.640><c> would
• </c><00:08:41.440><c> lower</c><00:08:41.800><c> the</c> Section 3 on R11 would lower the Section 3 on
• </c> 16A section 28. 16A section 28.
• On behalf of the 3% of Minnesotans who live in manufactured housing, please adopt section 3 through 15

Summary: The conference committee on the housing omnibus bill began with member introductions and a staff walk-through comparing House and Senate provisions. House Research staff reviewed major policy differences affecting Minnesota Housing Finance Agency operations, including limits on how much the agency may retain from state appropriations for administrative costs, new reporting requirements, restrictions on transfers between appropriated accounts, and House-only language requiring annual expenditure of investment income from state appropriations. Senate provisions were also summarized, including tighter rules on when appropriations may be placed into Housing Development Fund bookkeeping accounts, updated operating-cost reporting, and Senate-only changes to how investment earnings may be used. Staff also described shared and differing provisions on program-money transfers, a lived-experience earnings exemption, and a long list of Senate-only policy changes, including manufactured home park tenant protections, low-income housing tax credit and bond-related changes, a task force on housing taxes and fees, and repealers affecting Housing Development Fund authority and certain older programs. Fiscal staff then reviewed the budget impacts. The House side included one-time appropriations for workforce housing development, family homeless prevention and assistance, a Minnesota Nice Home Share pilot, and homebuyer education, along with debt service for $100 million in housing infrastructure bonds and transfers/cancellations that produced a net zero general fund impact across the budget window. The Senate side noted a fiscal note for the housing taxes and fees task force and a smaller housing infrastructure bond authorization, with corresponding debt service costs and a total Senate budget-window impact of about $1 million in general fund debt service. After the staff presentations, the committee moved to public testimony. Commissioner Jennifer Ho of Minnesota Housing said the bill’s housing infrastructure bonds and continued support for family homeless prevention were important, and she supported the lived-experience earnings exemption, while noting concerns about the interest-earnings provisions. Testifiers from Greater Minnesota groups praised the workforce housing investments and Senate updates to the state housing tax credit and infrastructure grant program, though they suggested changes to the geographic distribution language. HOME Line urged funding for statewide tenant hotline services, citing rising demand and asking for $1 million if additional money becomes available. The Minnesota Consortium of Community Developers supported the bill’s investments and emphasized the need to pair housing development with supportive services. Housing First Minnesota praised housing infrastructure bonds and other investments but criticized the omission of the Minnesota Starter Homes Act. The Minnesota Multi Housing Association began testimony opposing certain rent-control-related provisions in the House bill. No votes or final actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Page 4, Section 3, returns and payments.
• On the second page of that memorandum, Sections 4 and 5, and Sections 28 and 29, being found on pages
• It is for clarification purposes. collected uh page four section three collected uh page four section
• Are you referencing sections 11 through 14, tourism development, section one?
• one okay tourism development section one okay section section section one<00:53:15.400><c> and</c><00

Summary: The committee met on March 11, 2025, with a quorum present and first adopted a committee substitute for Senate Bill 28. The bill would create a framework for using $5 million previously set aside for agricultural economic development through the Kentucky Department of Agriculture, including loan and grant programs. Members asked about changes in the substitute, and the sponsor explained that it revised the board composition to include members with more experience in finance, lending, and economic development. SB 28 was approved 20-0 and reported favorably. The committee then approved Senate Joint Resolution 26, which directs the Department for Medicaid Services to provide the Legislative Research Commission a report on pharmacist pay parity and the cost of allowing independent pharmacists and pharmacies to be reimbursed by Medicaid for services within their scope of practice. The sponsor and Kentucky Pharmacists Association representative described it as a request for information rather than a policy change. The resolution passed 20-0 and was reported favorably. House Bill 741, relating to public water and wastewater systems, was next. The sponsor said the substitute incorporated Kentucky Infrastructure Authority recommendations, clarified best management practices, and allowed storm water inflow and groundwater infiltration reduction projects to be scored more fairly alongside water projects. Members discussed how the bill narrows eligibility to systems most in need and refines the scoring process for the program created last session. HB 741 passed 20-0, was reported favorably, and received a title amendment. The committee also considered House Bill 544, a branch budget bill amendment creating a new SAFE fund for the most recent Eastern Kentucky flood disaster, indexed to the relevant presidential disaster declaration. The bill would allow state money and other funds to support local governments, utilities, school districts, and other eligible recipients for recovery costs, planning, and short-term liquidity, with reimbursement provisions if FEMA or other sources later pay. Members discussed the amount of available funding, the use of prior SAFE fund balances, and the emergency clause. HB 544 passed 20-0, was reported favorably, and a title amendment was adopted. The committee then began House Bill 775, relating to development areas, and adopted PHS 2 and a committee amendment; the sponsor started explaining the bill’s provisions on development areas, tax increment financing, brewers’ electronic filing, distilled spirits property tax language, income tax reduction conditions, tourism development incentives, and other tax-related sections, but the transcript cuts off before final action on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> next restoration we have is in section next restoration we have is in section two,<00:04:19.919>
• </c> positions are restored in section 328B. positions are restored in section 328B.
• </c><00:09:51.839><c> This</c> resource trust section 39. This resource trust section 39.
• </c> covered under that new section 329. covered under that new section 329.
• </c> community college commission section 57. community college commission section 57.

Bills: SF0032 , SF0010 , SF0001 , HB0001

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• You can look at section 1B.
• Section<00:36:18.400><c> one</c> Section one Section one uh<00:36:19.680><c> modifies</c><00:36:20.200
• In section one. Uh Mr. Chairman, I &gt;&gt; Yes. In section one. Uh Mr.
• </c> 5 years to 3 years. 5 years to 3 years.
• </c> 2 to 3 years. 2 to 3 years. Okay.<00:54:07.040><c> Mr.

Committee: Joint Judiciary, Division B

Transcript Highlights:

• Today is Tuesday, February 3, 2026. It is 9 o'clock in the morning.
• Representative Weber, on page 12, item 3, there is a strikeout of item 5, item 3.
• The language was moved from Section 97 to Section 99 because it fit with the occasional sales section
• So I'm just trying to understand the yard sale section here.
• So I guess it would be Section 99.03.

Committee: House Revenue and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• Our reading of Section 2 is that Rule 412 is disapproved if you keep Section 2 in the bill.
• You see in Section 1... You're adding this section.
• Okay. 3 absent, that's 8, 8-0. So by a vote of 8 with 3 absent, the motion prevails.
• OK, so we have 1, 2, 3. Six 'Ayes', two Present Not Voting, and 1, 2, 3. OK, by 6-3-0 to P&V.
• 15-3. Not moving. 15-3. House Bill 1572. OK.

Bills: SB535 , SB664 , SB1019 , SB1020 , SB1120 , SB1537 , SB1804 , HB3207

Committee: House Criminal Jurisprudence

Keywords: SB 535, Texas criminal procedure, rape shield, victim sexual history, past sexual behavior, sexual assault evidence, trafficking of persons, continuous trafficking, indecency with a child, continuous sexual abuse, aggravated sexual assault, indecent assault, consent defense, in camera hearing, Rule 412, Rule 609, victim protection, evidence admissibility, criminal evidence, sexual offense prosecution

Transcript Highlights:

• The executive branch position on this is that the rest of Article 3, Section 20, cannot be saved.
• 3, Section 20?
• The executive branch position on this is that the rest of Article 3, Section 20 cannot be saved.
• becomes, what about the rest of Article 3, Section 20?
• The executive branch position on this is that the rest of Article 3, Section 20 cannot be saved.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's on page 3 of the log.
• I have an amendment on page 20 of the amendment log, page 3 of the tracker, and in section 2.325, and
• Further discussion on House Bill 3. House Bill 3, Representative Taylor. Mr.
• So you're implying that a lack of $3 million will” “So you're implying that a lack of $3 million will
• And the section is 6.005.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 3 is also referred to as the Dover Amendment.
• Section 3 is also referred to as the Dover Amendment.
• not part of Section 3.
• Called Section 3A, so it's not part of Section 3.
• The exception is Section 3, which limits local zoning on certain matters.

Bills: H5009

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Keywords: collective bargaining, worker rights, labor relations, public counsel services, state employees

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's section one. And then in section two, nothing's changed there.
• Section 3, nothing has changed there, with the exception on page 6, which is basically adding the residency
• On page 10, we updated the title on 9/12 to reflect what that section, section 5, actually does, which
• And then section 6. Thanks.
• cap it at 3%.

Bills: SB241 , SB145 , HB2

Committee: Senate House Appropriations & Finance

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 241 and reviewed a Senate Finance Committee substitute that incorporated several amendments. Staff explained changes related to the child care fund, residency determinations for federally eligible applicants, expanded child care assistance eligibility for grandparents raising grandchildren and foster parents, updated payment-rate rulemaking, tribal child care sovereignty and culturally appropriate services, limits on land grant permanent fund use for nonsectarian/non-denominational services, provider licensure pathways, and reporting clarifications. Members also discussed whether the bill would maximize federal and state child care tax benefits and how the nonsectarian language would apply to faith-based child care providers. The committee adopted the substitute and then passed it on a 7-3 vote. The committee then moved into House Bill 2 budget language review, focusing on budget adjustment authority and other fiscal provisions. Members discussed proposed BAR language for the State Investment Council, State Treasurer, PERA, and the Economic Development Department, with concerns about caps, whether the language was too broad, and whether some items should revert to existing law or be removed. The committee approved some of the BAR language items, but flagged the Treasurer and Economic Development provisions for later review. Members also discussed extending certain appropriations and project timelines, including a Rio Grande Trail Commission item and several IT and public safety projects, generally favoring extensions where work was still underway. The committee then debated proposed public school support language that would bar PED from approving budgets for schools with fewer than 180 instructional days and from approving new moves to four-day school weeks. Several members argued the 180-day language conflicted with existing statute, which is based on instructional hours, and that the four-day-week restriction could have unintended consequences. The committee ultimately voted down both public school support provisions. The meeting ended with a brief discussion of reviewing the rest of House Bill 2 and related supplemental and language items in the next session, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This amendment has to do with Section 27 and only Section 27. In actuality, it strikes Section 27.
• Section 1. A new section to Chapter 34.12 RCW. Section 1, a new section to Chapter 34.12 RCW.
• It's a $3 fee. This would increase it to $6.
• The Secretary will read: On page 3, after line 7, insert the following new section: Section 2, this act
• Substitute Senate Bill 592-3, the Secretary will read.

Summary: The Senate considered and passed a series of tax, economic, judicial, education, and health-related bills, often after adopting technical or clarifying amendments. Major measures included Engrossed Senate Bill 6347, which restores recent estate tax changes while preserving last year’s increase in the exclusion amount and inflation adjustment; Substitute Senate Bill 6289, directing the Department of Commerce to create a statewide economic development and competitiveness strategic plan; and Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6162, expanding and simplifying senior citizen property tax relief. Senators supporting these bills emphasized tax administration, economic growth, and relief for seniors, while opponents raised concerns about regressivity, revenue losses, and tax shifts to other taxpayers. The chamber also passed bills extending or clarifying tax preferences and fees, including Senate Bill 6244 (extending a hazardous substance tax exemption for agricultural crop protection products), Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6113 (technical corrections to Department of Revenue tax law guidance, after removing a disputed section on advertising tax invalidation), Senate Bill 6114 (defining “fixture” and “affixed” for real estate excise tax purposes), Senate Bill 5970 (making a senior citizen center property tax exemption permanent), Senate Bill 5832 (raising the motor vehicle arbitration fee to support the Lemon Law program), and Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6262 (expanding the vehicle weight threshold for transportation benefit district fees). Debate on these measures centered on whether they were modest administrative updates or additional burdens on taxpayers and businesses. Several non-tax bills also advanced. Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6086 strengthened security for judicial officers and court personnel, with amendments clarifying terminology and adding industrial appeals judges to the definition of judicial officers. Substitute Senate Bill 5961 transferred early literacy programs, including Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library and Reach Out and Read, from DCYF to OSPI. Senate Bill 5868 added one superior court judge each in Skagit and Yakima counties, and Substitute Senate Bill 5923 reclassified a Skagit County hospital as a critical access hospital to improve reimbursement and help it remain viable. The Senate also passed Substitute Senate Bill 5520, revising the Wrongly Convicted Persons Act to improve compensation procedures, despite debate over whether to include civil detention-related claims. Most bills passed by constitutional majorities, with a few recorded nays and one division vote on an amendment; the Senate then adjourned until the next scheduled session.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's also for Section 3.
• Right now, Section 3 is repealing that statute where it says if you have the DNA, it doesn't toll until
• Section 3 through 9 amend the Delinquency Act.
• Specifically, Section 3 on page 11 is the amendment to the serious youthful offender, and page 13 divides
• Section 3 through 9 amend the Delinquency Act.

Bills: HB99 , HJR5 , HM39 , HB206 , HB213 , SB41 , SB153 , SB165 , SB261 , SB264

Committee: Senate House Judiciary

Summary: The committee first took up a lengthy informational presentation on the Patient Compensation Fund (PCF) and New Mexico medical malpractice insurance. Teresa Hassey, a plaintiffs’ attorney, described the PCF’s origin in the 1976 Medical Malpractice Act, its role as a state-backed excess coverage system, and her view that it was mismanaged when hospital participation expanded without individualized risk assessments. She argued that hospitals underpaid surcharges, that the fund was depleted by claims, and that the 2021 amendments and later legislative infusions were meant to shore up deficits and phase hospitals out. Superintendent of Insurance Alice Kane and LFC analyst Julia Rodriguez presented a different perspective, emphasizing recent general fund infusions, current surcharge collections, the use of actuarial reviews, and the PCF’s budget and settlement activity. Kane said the market is highly concentrated, New Mexico’s malpractice costs and defense expenses are high, and the fund still provides lower-cost coverage than the open market, while also noting ongoing issues with future medical claims, TPA transition, and investment management. Committee members questioned the presenters at length about why New Mexico malpractice premiums are so high, whether defense costs were being conflated with claim payouts, how the PCF works with primary coverage and excess coverage, and whether hospitals were properly assessed when they entered the fund. Several senators raised concerns about punitive damages, corporate practice of medicine, and whether the state’s legal environment is driving doctors away. Others challenged the data comparisons, noting differences between one-year figures and multi-year averages, and asked why New Mexico’s costs remain far above neighboring states. Kane and Hassey disagreed on the causes, with Kane pointing to high claims and defense costs over time and Hassey arguing that hospital participation and punitive-damage exposure distorted the market. The chair concluded the discussion by saying the committee had not exhausted the topic and that he still wanted a clear path to reducing doctors’ insurance costs. After a break, the committee moved on to Senate Bill 41. Senator Charlie introduced the bill, which would eliminate the statute of limitations for the most serious sexual crimes in New Mexico. He argued that trauma, coercion, fear, and delayed disclosure often prevent survivors from reporting promptly, and said the law should reflect that reality. The bill was presented as a response to survivor testimony heard in a prior hearing, and the sponsor framed it as part of a broader effort to modernize the justice system for sexual violence cases.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm moving to Article 3. The first section in Article 3 is on page 16.
• I'm moving to Article 3. The first section in Article 3 is on page 16.
• The next section is the impersonating a peace officer crime. It starts on page 18 at line 3.
• The next section is the impersonating a peace officer crime. It starts on page 18 at line 3.
• The next section is the impersonating a peace officer crime. It starts on page 18 at line 3.

Summary: The committee took up House File 1082 as a vehicle for the public safety finance bill and laid it over without taking official action. Staff walked through the DE6 amendment, which combines funding and policy provisions from several bills. The spreadsheet and bill summary showed appropriations for non-fatal shooting clearance grants, a domestic violence task force, a first responder uniform ID task force, and an increase to the Philando Castile training reimbursement fund, along with felony-related policy changes involving impersonating a police officer, medical facility security, theft from a vulnerable adult, and grooming offenses. The amendment also includes a $12 million transfer to the Minnesota victims of crime account, bringing the DE6 total to about $15.443 million for the biennium, with additional tail costs. Testimony focused heavily on the need to stabilize crime victim services funding. Katie Kramer of Violence Free Minnesota, speaking for multiple crime victims coalitions, urged support for the $12 million transfer, warning that flat funding and inflation have already forced program cuts, staff reductions, and service limits, and that a 20% cut could eliminate programs in rural areas. Tina Bronson of Alexandra House gave a similar account, describing how years of flat funding had reduced staff and programs and saying another cut would mean fewer advocates, longer waits, and less access for survivors. Both witnesses argued that victim services are an essential part of public safety and asked lawmakers to maintain existing services rather than expand them. In member discussion, the chair said the $12 million was intended as one-time funding to keep victim services at roughly prior-year levels and explained that the money would be distributed through the existing competitive grant process. A member asked about the grooming language and whether it could affect teenage relationships; nonpartisan staff clarified that the school-related offense applies only when there is a position of authority, and that existing criminal sexual conduct law already addresses age-differential situations. Members and the chair closed by describing the package as bipartisan and expressing appreciation for the committee’s work, with the chair noting the bill was being laid over for later consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• In Section B, these are various temporary appropriation requests.
• This is Section F, appropriation and/or fund transfer requests.
• We're in Section G. These are cash fund appropriation requests.
• The actual cost is right there in paragraph 3.
• The reason we chose to move forward with Unit 3, since we can't do both, is that we're doing Unit 3,

Committee: All ALC-PEER

Transcript Highlights:

• Whereas Article III, Section 3(c)(1) of the Florida Constitution permits the Governor to convene the
• 3(c)(1) of the Florida Constitution, do hereby proclaim as follows.
• Wednesday, June 3, 2026.
• Section 2, the Legislature of the State of Florida is convened in special session for the purpose of
• Two, legislation modifying Section 101.161(3)(a), Florida Statutes, for the joint resolution referenced

Summary: The Senate convened in special session with a quorum present, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and then read the Governor’s proclamation calling the session. The special session was called to consider property tax-related legislation, including a proposed constitutional amendment affecting assessment caps, homestead exemptions, and limits on county and municipal ad valorem taxes, along with related implementing measures such as ballot language, taxpayer notices, supermajority requirements for tax increases above the rolled-back rate, and a public website showing estimated savings for homestead properties. The bills filed within the call were read for the first time: Senate Joint Resolution 2F by Senator Avila and Senate Bill 4F by Senator Avila, both referred to Appropriations. The Rules Chair announced the Appropriations Committee would meet later that day, and the Senate adopted motions to waive rules and place both measures on the special order calendar for Tuesday, June 2, with an amendment deadline one hour before convening. The Senate also adopted a motion sending any bills filed outside the call to the Rules Committee for review. The chamber then heard farewell remarks from Senators Hooper and Polsky, who reflected on their service and thanked colleagues, staff, and constituents. Senator Hooper emphasized respect and kindness in public service, while Senator Polsky thanked local officials, staff, caucus members, and family, and noted the importance of bipartisan work. The Senate adjourned until 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 2, or upon the President’s call.

Transcript Highlights:

• He found that section. Sorry, 28-32-48 is appeal, stay of proceedings.
• So what section was that, 42? 30 days? 32? 30 days?
• You could cite that section. Oh, good. Yeah, that's a good idea.
• Got a couple other sections cited here.
• we need it at 3:15.

Committee: House Judiciary

Summary: The subcommittee on Senate Bill 2224 met to reconcile several amendment versions into a single draft, combining changes from multiple members and Legislative Council. The discussion focused mainly on clarifying the Attorney General’s hearing and enforcement process, including whether to keep or remove specific time limits, how the stay of an Attorney General order should operate, and whether the bill needed to expressly reference the appeal period under existing law. Members also noted other incorporated changes, including a quarterly meeting requirement for the commission, executive session authority, and a district court reference on page 7. A key issue was whether the bill should specify that an Attorney General order is stayed during the time to appeal and through the appeal process. After discussion of the Administrative Agencies Practices Act, the subcommittee agreed that the bill should reference the appeal period under Section 28-32-42, rather than restating the number of days in the bill itself. The proposed language was refined to say the order must be stayed pending expiration of the time to appeal under 28-32-42 and pending the judgment or order on appeal. The members moved and seconded the amendment with the clarified stay language, indicating agreement to advance the revised version. They discussed process for final review and agreed to reconvene as needed, with a committee meeting planned for Monday after floor session, pending notice and scheduling. No roll call vote was taken in the transcript, but the subcommittee appeared to approve the amendment by voice vote and prepare it for further committee action.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're in the next section. This is Section C.
• That means to Section E. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're in Section E.
• If you go to page 3 of K-1, page 3 is a ratification for the Division of Emergency Management.
• That takes us to item K-3. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're in K-3. K-3.
• So it's $3 million a year.

Committee: All JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> agricultural lands and to amend Section agricultural lands and to amend Section 8<00:06:46.080><
• /c> talking about that and it cost a$3 talking about that and it cost a$3 billion<00:14:41.920><c> doar
• two, subsection 3.
• two, subsection 3.
• First, delete section three.

Committee: Senate Agriculture and Environment

Summary: The committees heard several agriculture and food-system bills. SB 1562 would create a Combined Housing Operational Agricultural Mobilization Program to help bona fide farmers live and farm on agricultural lands and provide a tax credit for donated land. Testimony generally supported the goal of housing for farmers and farm workers, but raised concerns about placing the program within the Department of Agriculture, possible constitutional and drafting issues, land-quality standards, lease structure, and whether another agency might be better suited. The committees recommended passing SB 1562 with amendments, including clarifying DOA authority to acquire agricultural lands and establishing an advisory committee within the department; the recommendation was adopted. The committees also heard SB 1171 on providing monofilament netting through hardware stores to help slow coconut rhinoceros beetle spread, SB 1186 on creating a statewide interagency food systems coordination team and working group, SB 1250 on a Farm to Families program, SB 1303 on agricultural loans, SB 1395 on a climate mitigation and resiliency special fund, SB 504 on a local agricultural transportation cost reimbursement program, SB 1185 on reviewing and repealing obsolete agricultural laws, and SB 187 on funding permanent agricultural biosecurity positions. Most testimony on these measures was in support, with some suggested refinements: for SB 1186, a youth advisory seat and clearer performance benchmarks; for SB 1250, broader eligibility for food pantries, cold storage, and staffing support; for SB 1303, support for lower interest rates and expanded loan tools; for SB 1395, debate over the fund’s structure and revenue source; for SB 504, clearer eligibility for small and beginning farmers, cooperatives, and food hubs; and for SB 1185, interest in joining the working group but concern about overbroad deregulation. No roll-call votes were taken on the other measures in the excerpt, but the chair reported testimony counts on some bills, including 89 in support and none opposed for SB 1250, 13 in support and one opposed for SB 504, and 14 in support with one comment for SB 1395. SB 1303 and SB 187 also drew supportive testimony from the Department of Agriculture, farm groups, food banks, and industry organizations, with SB 187 emphasizing the need to make Act 231 biosecurity positions permanent and fully funded.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:01:26.120><c> 1</c> after comments version amends section 1 after comments version amends section
• </c><00:02:07.440><c> to</c> The staff amends various sections to The staff amends various sections to
• /c> only requirement to sit for NBEO Part 3 only requirement to sit for NBEO Part 3 is<00:06:45.200><
• </c><00:50:01.200><c> one,</c> updates definitions in section one, updates definitions in section one
• </c> staff amendments amend various sections staff amendments amend various sections to<00:52:24.240>

Summary: The subcommittee considered an emergency regulation from the Kentucky Board of Optometric Examiners, 201 KAR 5021E, along with a staff amendment to conform the text to KRS Chapter 13A. The regulation was described as implementing an Attorney General opinion and a review of optometrists licensed during the 2020–2023 period when alternative testing and waivers were used during the COVID-19 era. The board explained that the rule requires affected licensees to complete specified examinations or an alternative certification before renewing in 2027, and that it now removes the OEBC Canadian exam as a future pathway while preserving recognition of OEBC results submitted during the period when that option was in effect. The staff amendment was approved without objection. Testimony was sharply divided. Board representatives and the Attorney General’s office said the regulation is needed to protect public health and to bring the licensure review into the formal administrative process. They said the NBEO Part 3 exam is the nationally recognized hands-on clinical licensure test, while the American Board of Optometry certification is a post-licensure credential for already licensed practitioners and is not a substitute for initial licensure testing. They also said no other state uses the ABOC certification for licensure, and that the board’s approach balances fairness, due process, and public protection. Opponents argued the regulation would allow individuals who were improperly licensed to continue practicing without meeting the same standards as other Kentucky optometrists. A representative from the Kentucky School for the Blind Charitable Foundation described cases of alleged inadequate care and urged the committee to require full national board passage before independent practice. Representatives from ARBO and NBEO said the emergency regulation is not justified as an emergency, does not adequately address public safety or fiscal impacts, and exceeds the board’s authority by creating a renewal path for licensees whose initial licensure was challenged. They emphasized that NBEO Part 3 is a practical, hands-on exam and that the ABOC certification is not designed or validated for initial licensure. The committee asked several questions about the differences between the exams, and no final vote on the regulation itself was described in the transcript beyond approval of the staff amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• in section 3.
• in section 3.
• Section 3 is from Senator Muhammad's Senate File 1579.
• Um, these sections all appeared in your bill, Madam Chair, Senate File 45, and sections 2, 3, and 7 also
• Um, these sections all appeared in your bill, Madam Chair, Senate File 45, and sections 2, 3, and 7 also

Committee: Senate Taxes