Transcript Highlights:

• I remember well Bishop Ogui's smiling face.
• Today, I share this lesson that I learned well.
• They're now claiming our wellness checks.
• We need to explore for more wells.
• Not repeating the same old tired talk. points that resonate well that resonate well publicly at times

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, I thought she was going to TRA."
• Um and to so well and so eloquently.
• President, and I I Well, thank you, Mr.
• She was the symbol Hermantown very well.
• A wellness center for our community.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those practices are well documented.
• Well, I had a long day.
• Well, the Chair calls Rebecca. Young. Rebecca Young. Well, we respectfully thank you for that.
• Well, they have agents like Mr.
• Well, we've discussed those.

Bills: HB1464 , HB1635 , HB2516 , HB3317 , HB3502 , HB4012 , HB4268 , HB4386 , HB4877 , SB916

Committee: House Insurance

Keywords: prescription drugs, drug pricing, pharmacy benefits, health insurance, health benefit plan, insurer, HMO, self-insured employer, public employer, school district, county, municipality, university system, higher education, retirees, dependent coverage, stop-loss coverage, bulk purchasing, group purchasing, purchasing pool

Transcript Highlights:

• We've got, we can shore that up and protect other transit employees as well.
• Your point is well taken, Assembly Member Harabedian.
• I also am a rehab specialist as well. I understand the other side as well as I see kids.”
• Yeah, well, clearly I'm very committed to avoiding wrongful convictions.
• Lackey's comments as well.

Summary: The Assembly Public Safety Committee met to consider several bills, with six measures approved on consent, including bills on background checks, female offender prison facilities, a juvenile justice hunger survey, protective orders and firearms, a youth offender camp pilot, and peace officer behavioral health training. AB 710 and AB 848 were pulled by the authors. The committee also took up AB 458, AB 394, AB 1094, AB 1092, and AB 1036, with extensive testimony on each. AB 458, by Assembly Member Stephanie, would require state agencies purchasing firearms, ammunition, or accessories to vet vendors for compliance with firearms laws and procurement standards. Supporters, including Brady and the California Police Chiefs Association, said taxpayer funds should not go to dealers with serious violations; opponents argued the bill added burdens and vague standards. The committee approved the bill as amended and sent it to Appropriations. AB 394, by Assembly Member Wilson, would expand protections for transit workers and riders by broadening enhanced battery penalties, clarifying who may seek temporary restraining orders in the transit context, and making those orders system-wide. Transit agencies, labor groups, and law enforcement supported the bill, while public defender and civil liberties groups raised concerns about vagueness, duration, and impacts on access to transit. The committee passed AB 394 to Judiciary as amended. AB 1094, by Assembly Member Baines, would raise the minimum parole eligibility term for child torture convictions involving a child under 14 in the perpetrator’s care or custody from seven years to 20 years. Prosecutors, sheriffs, and police groups supported the bill, citing the severity of the abuse and the need to protect child victims; opponents argued the parole system already screens for risk and that harsher sentences do not improve public safety. The committee approved the bill as amended to Appropriations. AB 1092, by Assembly Member Castillo, would extend concealed carry weapon license renewals from two years to four years; supporters said it would reduce costs and administrative burdens, while the chair and others opposed it as unnecessary. The committee ultimately voted the bill down. AB 1036, by Assembly Member Schultz, would expand post-conviction discovery access for people convicted of felonies with sentences of one year or more, including Brady materials and jury selection notes. Innocence organizations and defense groups supported it, while district attorneys opposed the broader discovery obligations; the committee passed it to Appropriations as amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• In early 2020, we began, Well as our construction manager.
• Well, you can have three.
• Thank you for coming, and hope to have you as a part of these conversations as well.
• And do we know, because I think that rate was set well over 20 years ago?
• Well, I, for one, have found it very interesting.

Summary: The committee first heard an update from the Florida Department of Corrections on the proposed Lake Correctional Institution mental health project in Clermont. Tim Fitzgerald explained the project’s history, including the 2016 Disability Rights Florida litigation, the 2018 consent decree, and the original plan for a 550-bed inpatient mental health facility. He said inflation and design changes pushed the project above the bond amount, leading the department to shift to a “continuum of care” alternative with 572 beds total: 92 inpatient beds and 480 residential treatment beds in three special housing units. Fitzgerald said the project is currently paused pending House concurrence, while the Senate has already agreed to the alternate plan, and noted the bond balance, prior expenditures, and the need to spend down the tax-exempt bond by August 2026. Members questioned how the new plan differs from the original facility, whether it satisfies the consent decree, and what caused the cost increases. Fitzgerald said the department believes it has already met the consent decree through systemwide improvements to housing, staffing, programming, and out-of-cell time, though he said he would confirm the court documentation. He also said the original scope grew from 275,000 to 350,000 square feet as treatment, nursing, security, and programming needs were refined, and that inflation, fees, permitting, and contingencies contributed to the higher cost. Several members asked for follow-up information on Senate approval, consent decree documentation, and the project’s impact on crisis-stabilization capacity. The committee then received a joint court-system presentation from State Courts Administrator Eric McClure and Clerks Corporation Executive Director Jason Welty on caseload trends, case tracking, and staffing. McClure described statewide filing trends, the use of weighted caseload studies to certify judicial need, and recent Supreme Court rule changes aimed at active civil case management, including differentiated case tracks, stricter deadlines, and proportional discovery. He said the latest workload study led the Supreme Court to certify a need for 23 circuit judges and 25 county judges. Welty reviewed clerk workload trends, the statewide case maintenance and CCIS systems, and declining clerk FTE despite rising case volumes, and said clerks are seeking additional funding for injunctions, Baker Act/Marchman Act/sexually violent predator work, and juror management. In questions, members pressed both presenters on data quality, case-weight calculations, filing fees, and whether current resources are enough to reduce delays. McClure clarified that the workload weights are based on judge time studies and that a capital murder case averaged 3,177 minutes, while other examples such as auto negligence and dissolution cases were much lower. Welty said the Legislature could help by increasing funding or potentially revisiting filing fees, and noted that many clerk services are unfunded or underfunded, especially indigent and protective filings. The chair and members also raised concerns about backlog, inconsistent case reporting across circuits, and enforcement of judicial time standards; McClure said there is no direct sanction in the rules, and compliance is largely managed through chief judges and the Supreme Court. The meeting ended with no votes taken and adjournment by motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• We had several those in the last election as well.
• Well, you never know what you're going to be sick on Election Day.
• Well, the clerk goes and send that to us.
• Well, well, well, No, I'm a citizen to do.
• Time Warner, Milton, Florida, and I got some very well.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> environmental services septic and well environmental services septic and well regulations<00:19:
• </c> private property rights well of others. private property rights well of others.
• ,</c><02:34:31.200><c> they</c> fight in court to say, "Well, they fight in court to say, "Well, they
• Um, my state is money well spent.
• Well worth reading. travel 199 pages. Well worth reading.

Committee: House Housing

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, of course. It goes without saying.
• Well, most of the time. That's very important.
• Well, most of the time. That's, that's very important.
• Well, Representative, I was not prepared for that question.
• I appreciate everything the chair does as well.

Committee: House Special Committee on Tourism

Summary: The Special Committee on Tourism met in executive session with a quorum present and first took up House Concurrent Resolution 52, which concerns Missouri’s participation in America’s 250th birthday celebration. After a brief procedural discussion about whether the resolution could go to consent, the committee voted 11-0 to give HCR 52 a do pass recommendation. The committee then opened a public hearing on Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1000, sponsored by Sen. Brad Hudson. Hudson said the bill would reestablish the tourism supplemental revenue fund in statute after it was inadvertently sunset, and he described the measure as a continuation of previously discussed policy that had already passed the House companion committee unanimously. Members from both parties voiced support for tourism as an important statewide economic driver and asked for continued advocacy to move the bill through the process. During questioning and comments, members discussed the importance of tourism funding for regions across Missouri, including Branson, the lake area, St. Charles, Texas County, and the 138th District. The chair emphasized that the bill should move cleanly and quickly, noting tourism’s major economic impact. No witnesses testified in opposition or for informational purposes, and the hearing on SB 1000 concluded with no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• Let them not fear controversy, and may their legacy echo as faithfulness well lived.
• It's meant to clarify changes that we made last year to the domestic well exemption.
• under the old domestic well exemption to pump water out and water the grass.
• under the old domestic well exemption to pump water out and water the grass.
• Well, that's going to cramp the way that that subdivision was and Well, that's going to cramp the way

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:32:34.159><c> you're</c> second it yeah let's see well you're second it yeah let's see well you're
• </c> Bill thank you representative Ames well Bill thank you representative Ames well the<01:02:40.640
• Well, exactly what I was thinking.
• </c> but there there are children who do well but there there are children who do well on<03:37:09.000
• Well, what did you do? Share that.

Summary: The Education Funding Committee met in executive session and first took up HB 193, which clarifies that dual and concurrent enrollment courses may not exceed four credits. Members said the bill came from the community college system and was intended to preserve the program’s high school-to-college pathway. An amendment changing the effective date to passage was adopted 18-0, and the committee then voted 18-0 to recommend OTPA on the bill as amended, with the bill placed on the consent calendar. The committee then retained HB 295 and HB 366, both related to school building aid, after members said the issues were complex and needed more work. Both motions to retain passed 18-0, leaving the bills in committee without reports. The chair also said HB 354 would not be taken up that day because of possible changes from the Department of Education and others. HB 494, funding the math learning communities program, was then amended to flat-fund the program rather than increase it, with members citing budget uncertainty. The amendment passed unanimously, and the committee then voted 18-0 for OTPA on the bill as amended, placing it on consent. Finally, HB 515, which would repeal charter public school eligibility for state school building aid, drew debate over whether charter schools should be treated differently from traditional public schools. The committee voted 10-8 for inexpedient to legislate, sending the bill to the regular calendar; Representative Damon was assigned the minority report and Representative Popovic the majority report. The committee then began HB 716, an appropriation for the dual and concurrent enrollment program, where members discussed flat-funding the program at $2.5 million per year and the potential impact on course availability, but the transcript cuts off before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Well, it needs some work. Well, it needs some work.
• . well. well.
• Well, Mr.
• Well, Mr.
• Well, thank you. &gt;&gt; Okay. Well, thank you.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> &gt;&gt; Well, that's right. That, yeah. &gt;&gt; Well, that's right. That, yeah.
• </c> I I might be clear cutting as well I I might be clear cutting as well again. again. again.
• </c> well of that, so to speak, okay? well of that, so to speak, okay?
• I'm talking about that as well.
• I'm talking about that as well.

Summary: The meeting opened with a quorum present and approval of the April 17 minutes. The commission then heard a presentation from attorney Jacob Rhodes of Cleveland, Waters and Bass on the history and legal basis of New Hampshire’s timber tax, explaining that timber was historically treated as part of real property, that a 1913 case confirmed that view, and that a 1949 constitutional amendment created a separate timber yield tax to discourage clear-cutting and support forest conservation. He described the tax as a tax on the yield when timber is severed, not an income tax, and noted that towns are reimbursed through a system based on Department of Revenue Administration market data and local reports of cut. Members and guests asked how “yield” is defined, how the timber tax interacts with current use, and whether carbon sequestration could be treated similarly. Testimony explained that current use generally is not affected by harvesting timber, that towns can tax standing timber under RSA 79:5 but rarely do because it is labor-intensive, and that carbon credits might be valued using a similar market-data approach. Several speakers discussed a prior bill drafted with DRA input that would have treated carbon more like timber, but noted it never fully advanced in the General Court and that the version ultimately discussed by the House differed from the earlier DRA-comfortable draft. The discussion also covered whether carbon sequestration agreements are effectively long-term leases or transfers of timber rights, with Rhodes suggesting that 99-year arrangements could be taxable transfers of real property under DRA rules, though he had not reviewed specific agreements. DRA staff said they do not currently have a timber-like survey mechanism for carbon and would likely need access to proprietary market data or a subscription service to build one. No formal vote was taken beyond approving the minutes; the commission appeared to agree to revisit the carbon/timber valuation issue and the draft bill at a future meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, thank you, Mr. Chair.
• </c><00:19:45.880><c> as</c> specifically Eric Simonson as well as specifically Eric Simonson as well
• </c> a chance to have the last words well a chance to have the last words well thank<00:30:02.480><c>
• So I think it fits in well.
• So I think it fits in well.

Committee: Senate Jobs and Economic Development

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> because that would be an option as well because that would be an option as well the<00:43:13.680
• Well, sure.
• Well, thank you.
• Well, thank you.
• Well, thank you.

Committee: House Housing

Summary: The House Committee on Housing held a public hearing and moved quickly through a long agenda, beginning with HB 606 on the Department of Hawaiian Homelands. DHHL and several community testifiers strongly supported the bill, describing it as a way to fulfill long-standing promises to Native Hawaiians, reduce the DHHL waitlist, keep families in Hawaii, and support housing production and the broader economy. Testifiers emphasized the cultural and economic importance of stable housing and noted the large number of people still waiting for DHHL homes. The committee then heard HB 1086, also relating to DHHL, which would allow the department to use a $75 million appropriation from the dwelling unit revolving fund as collateral for loans. DHHL, HHFDC, and other supporters said the measure would help DHHL obtain better loan terms and preserve trust funds for other uses. Members asked detailed questions about how the collateral would work, whether other agencies use similar structures, and what would happen if the collateral were drawn upon; staff explained that the funds would be encumbered for the loan and that a similar model had been used for a HUD-backed project. The committee also heard HB 739, which would create the COM homes program to fund counties to buy voluntary deed restrictions from eligible homeowners or buyers. Supporters said the program could help keep local workers in Hawaii by using existing housing stock and cited examples from places like Aspen and Vail. The Attorney General’s office recommended amendments to remove duration requirements to avoid right-to-travel concerns, and the Tax Foundation suggested clarifying the conveyance tax exemption so it also covers the instrument imposing the restriction. Members asked whether tax dollars would be used to buy homes, who would be eligible, and how enforcement would work; supporters said the program is voluntary and income-blind, with restrictions tied to living and working in the state. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, they could qualify for any. More common, yeah.
• Well, there's multiple hits, as you're well aware.
• I'm here with Empower, well, Empower Poverty Children.
• Well, the data would still be the federal BLS.
• The federal block grant is a set dollar amount as well.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on Health and Human Services heard an overview of the expected California budget and program impacts from H.R. 1, including changes to Medi-Cal and CalFresh eligibility, redeterminations, work requirements, immigration-related coverage rules, retroactive coverage limits, and reductions in federal matching for certain services and provider financing mechanisms. DHCS and CDSS described implementation plans focused on automation, data matching, clearer communications, county training, and outreach, while noting that many federal details are still pending. The Legislative Analyst’s Office also reviewed how H.R. 1 could increase pressure on county indigent care systems, explaining the history of county responsibility under Section 17000, 1991 realignment, and AB 85, and warning that counties may face large increases in uninsured residents seeking care without corresponding funding flexibility. An independent policy expert urged consideration of a more standardized statewide approach to indigent care and raised questions about governance, benefits, and financing. Department witnesses estimated substantial coverage losses and fiscal effects: DHCS projected major Medi-Cal disenrollment tied to work requirements, six-month renewals, narrowed immigrant eligibility, and reduced retroactive coverage, while CDSS estimated large CalFresh benefit losses and a significant increase in administrative workload and payment accuracy pressure. Members questioned how exemptions would work for older adults, people experiencing homelessness, undocumented residents, and cash workers, and asked about the effect on the CalFresh Minimum Nutrition Benefit Pilot and on county administrative funding. Officials said they would use available data and self-attestation where possible, but acknowledged that many cases would require manual screening and that the county workload estimates remain in dispute. They also said the state is still evaluating the impact of H.R. 1 on provider taxes and state-directed payments, which could create additional budget pressure. County representatives from Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Tulare, and San Bernardino described major local consequences if H.R. 1 is implemented as written. They warned of higher uninsured rates, more strain on emergency rooms and public hospitals, increased homelessness and food insecurity, and a likely need to rebuild or expand county indigent care programs that were largely scaled back after the ACA. Counties said they are already freezing hiring, cutting positions, reducing overtime, deferring spending, and launching outreach and coordination efforts with managed care plans and community partners, but argued that these steps are not enough without additional state support. Several counties backed the California County Welfare Directors Association’s request for $373 million in General Fund support for eligibility work and asked for a CalFresh match waiver to soften the new county share of administrative costs; Los Angeles and Santa Clara also emphasized that their local revenue measures would not close the projected gaps. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> Well, uh, my name is Andrew Okave.
• </c> side as well. side as well.
• I mean over were disapproved as well.
• </c> conflict just with that setup as well. conflict just with that setup as well.
• </c> with reservations as well. with reservations as well. &gt;&gt; So<01:16:24.480><c> noted.

Bills: SB2033 , SB2487 , SB2497 , SB2471 , SB2829

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Summary: The committee first reconvened on SB 2471 and SB 2829, both relating to the powers of artificial persons. After discussion with the Attorney General’s office and a prior Q&A period, the chair said the committee would defer decision-making again, with the intent to return with amended versions of both bills that could gain support from the administration and its lawyers. The measures were deferred to Tuesday, February 10, 2026, in Conference Room 229 at 9:30 a.m. The committee then took up SB 2180, relating to deposits of public funds. Members noted late testimony from the prior day’s joint hearing with the Housing Committee and moved to pass the bill out with amendments, including a defective effective date. The motion carried unanimously among those voting: the chair, vice chair, Senator Lamosao, and Senator Awa voted aye; Senator McKelvey was excused. The measure was adopted. A joint hearing followed on SB 2033, relating to renewable energy and a streamlined grid-ready homes interconnection process. The PUC supported the bill’s intent but raised concerns about the time, resources, and stakeholder input needed to establish the proposed process, and asked for clarification of terms such as “grid-ready homes” and the role of HERA. Hawaiian Electric said it supported the intent but opposed the proposed process and HERA funding use. The Hawaii Solar Energy Association strongly supported the bill, arguing that faster interconnection is needed to meet rooftop solar goals and lower costs over time. Testimony totaled 27 in support, two in opposition, and four with comments. Members questioned costs, consumer protections, and whether the bill would burden low- and moderate-income households; the bill’s supporters said amendments could clarify the definition of grid-ready homes and add guardrails, while acknowledging that upfront costs and interconnection costs would still need to be addressed.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:02:24.000><c> as</c> Senator putam uh as well as Senator putam uh as well as um um um aruo<00
• Bank, as well as others that are listed on the handout that you have.
• The first is in the area of health and wellness for our athletes.
• </c> inside the classroom and outside as well inside the classroom and outside as well after<01:05:12.839
• Senator Pratt, well thank you, Mr. Chair, and I share your concern.

Committee: Senate Jobs and Economic Development

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> switch over to to the chair as well switch over to to the chair as well thank<00:05:23.919><c> you
• So we have a Min-SHARP program as well as a MINSTAR program.
• </c> so we have a Min sharp program as well so we have a Min sharp program as well as<00:31:54.080><c
• </c> trying to you know trying to stay well trying to you know trying to stay well um<01:16:43.440><c
• Well, thank you so much, Commissioner Bach.

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, once again, thank you all for being here, and I'm glad that you're able to hear us now as well.
• Well, obviously too much.
• Well, obviously too much.
• Firefighters are often there first on the scene as well, as well as our friends on the other side of
• But do you see that as well? Yes.

Committee: House Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• c> cases</c><00:13:40.240><c> for</c> &gt;&gt; well well juvenile juvenile cases for &gt;&gt; well well
• I mean, the opponent or the press might very well say, 'Well, wait a minute.
• </c><00:15:09.519><c> There's</c><00:15:09.680><c> a</c> well say Well, wait a minute.
• There's a well say Well, wait a minute.
• </c> Roughly, so we were well below. Roughly, so we were well below.

Summary: The conference committee first met on HB 1260, a bill requested by municipal clerks to allow certain divorce-related records to be kept confidential. House members argued the Senate amendment would reverse the presumption of openness established in the Keene Sentinel case and raise constitutional issues under the state constitution’s privacy and open-government provisions. Senate members responded that the 2018 privacy amendment, the limited scope of the proposal, and modern internet risks justified the change, but the House maintained the issue needed a full hearing in a separate bill. The committee ultimately voted unanimously for the Senate to recede and adopt the House version, preserving the underlying bill without the Senate amendment, and both sides said they would revisit the topic in a future session. The committee then took up HB 1574, which extends free and reduced-price breakfast and lunch programs and provides funding for SNAP administrative costs. The main dispute was the Senate’s addition of $4.4 million for SNAP administration, which DHHS said was needed because federal law would shift more administrative costs to the state and could increase the state’s SNAP error rate, potentially triggering much larger future penalties. DHHS officials reported the current error rate was 7.57% for federal fiscal year 2024, below the national average, and estimated that if the rate rose above 8%, the state could owe about 10% of SNAP benefits, or roughly $12 million for a partial year and nearly $16 million for a full year. Some House members supported the added funding as a preventive measure, while others objected that the underlying bill was modest and the amendment resembled a previously rejected proposal. The discussion ended with the committee moving toward the House position and the bill’s future depending on the chamber’s vote on the Senate amendment.