Video & Transcript : 'sensitive discussions' :
Page 386 of 500
ID
Transcript Highlights:
- Any other discussion?
- They were discussing this and they said, 'Why hasn't this happened?'
- All right, I don't see any other discussion.
- Any discussion on the motion? Mr. Chairman. Go ahead, Senator.
- Any further discussion on the motion?" "Thank you."
Committee:
Senate Judiciary and Rules
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Corrections and Public Institutions Feb 26th, 2026 at 08:00 am
Corrections and Public Institutions
Transcript Highlights:
- Any discussion? Well, I got a little discussion.
- Any discussion? Seeing none. Well, Representative Terry, you are recognized.
- Any discussion? Seeing none. I do have, I'm sorry, I do have a little discussion.
- Any other discussion? Seeing none.
- Any discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. None.
Committee:
House Corrections and Public Institutions
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Corrections and Public Institutions Feb 26th, 2026
Corrections and Public Institutions
Transcript Highlights:
- Any discussion? Well, I got a little discussion.
- Any discussion? Seeing none. I do have, I'm sorry, I do have a little discussion.
- I have an amendment ending in 0.01H and I move Have a little discussion.
- Any other discussion? Seeing none.
- Any discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. None.
Committee:
House Corrections and Public Institutions
Summary:
The committee first took up several bills in executive session. House Committee Amendment No. 1 was adopted and rolled into a substitute for House Bills 3292 and 2171, which then received a do pass recommendation by a 10-2 vote. House Bill 2753 also received a committee substitute and was voted do pass 10-2. House Bill 2912 was voted do pass by an 11-1 vote. During this portion, one member criticized the Department of Corrections for not responding to inquiries or attending earlier hearings, and the chair acknowledged the concern.
The committee then heard testimony on House Bills 1616 and 2832, sponsored by Representatives Allen and Collins, which would create an independent corrections oversight structure, including an Office of Corrections and Transparency or ombudsman-style advocate with authority to inspect facilities, investigate complaints, access records, and report publicly. The sponsors argued that DOC currently lacks independent oversight and that internal review is insufficient. They cited deaths, unsafe conditions, medical neglect, and the need for confidential reporting by staff and incarcerated people. Committee members questioned whether the bills would duplicate existing processes, what the fiscal impact would be, and whether the proposal had enough enforcement power; the sponsors said the office would be small, likely around $300,000, and were open to amendments.
Supporters testified that independent oversight is needed because of repeated deaths in custody, lack of trust in internal complaint systems, retaliation concerns for staff, and large taxpayer costs from lawsuits and settlements. Witnesses from Empower Missouri, Missouri Justice Coalition, the NAACP, ACLU of Missouri, and FAMM all supported the bills, with several emphasizing that prisons are closed institutions with inherent power imbalances and that external oversight would improve transparency, safety, and accountability for both incarcerated people and staff. The hearing ended after testimony in support, with no opposition presented and the committee adjourning without taking final action on the oversight bills.
ID
Transcript Highlights:
- And I'm here to discuss Senate Bill 1284, the Dietitian Compact.
- I believe it discusses that. And so that's not part of this discussion today.
- Any discussion on the motion? Senator Burt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
- Senator Burt: For a motion, if no more discussion is necessary? Motion.
- Seeing none, committee, Chair will entertain further discussion. Seeing none.
Committee:
Senate Commerce and Human Resources
NH
New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session
House Resources, Recreation and Development (02/18/2026)
Resources, Recreation and Development
Transcript Highlights:
- I do recognize however the discussion.
- So there are no further discussions on this. investigations if they deem to do so.
- So there<00:14:55.199><c> no</c><00:14:55.519><c> further</c><00:14:56.079><c> discussions</c><00:14:
- >> Any<00:22:42.799><c> other</c><00:22:43.039><c> discussion</c><00:22:43.440><c> on</c><00:22
- </c> >> Any other discussion on the amendment?
Committee:
House Resources, Recreation and Development
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Judiciary Feb 11th, 2026
Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence
Transcript Highlights:
- Is there any discussion? Chair, or Representative Dolan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
- There is further discussion on this amendment?
- Is there any discussion in regard to this? Yeah, Representative Smith.
- Further discussion.
- Further discussion?
Summary:
The Judiciary Committee first met in executive session and took up House Bill 2699, which concerns offenses involving the judiciary. The committee adopted a House Committee substitute and two amendments: one adding circuit clerks, deputy circuit clerks, court administrators, division clerks, and municipal clerks, and another adding court reporters who are active participants in courtroom activities. The substitute bill was then voted do pass by a roll call of six ayes, two noes, and two present; one member stated a personal interest and voted present.
The committee then held a public hearing on House Bill 2848, the so-called “mask intimidation” bill sponsored by Representative Dolan. The bill would create a Class C misdemeanor for intentionally harassing, intimidating, or threatening another person while concealing one’s identity with a mask or similar covering, with exceptions for legitimate uses such as medical, religious, holiday, and First Amendment-related activity. Supporters, including the Anti-Defamation League, said the bill would address masked intimidation by extremist groups and protect targeted communities; there was no opposition testimony.
A public hearing followed on House Bill 2765, sponsored by Representative Justice, which would regulate intoxicating hemp beverages through a framework modeled on alcohol’s three-tier system. The bill would set licensing, testing, labeling, packaging, age-21 sales restrictions, and THC limits, and assign oversight to the Department of Health and Senior Services and the Division of Alcohol and Tobacco Control. Support came from the Missouri Beer Wholesalers Association, Hemp Beverage Alliance, Missouri Petroleum and Convenience Association, Torch Drinks, Total Wine, and others, who argued the bill would create needed guardrails, keep products away from minors, and preserve a regulated retail market; some witnesses also urged broader regulation of other hemp-derived products. There was no opposition testimony, and the committee concluded its hearing without taking final action on HB 2765.
ID
Transcript Highlights:
- Discussion on that motion. Senator Anthon. I'll speak to the motion.
- I don't see any other discussion.
- We were blamed, and our sexual histories examined, We were not discussed openly.
- Discussion on that motion, Senator Shippy. Oh, Mr.
- I don't see any other discussion.
Committee:
Senate State Affairs
Summary:
The Senate State Affairs Committee approved the February 4, 2026 minutes and advanced the gubernatorial appointment of Ryan Lanham as State Athletic Commissioner to the Senate floor with a recommendation for confirmation. The committee also sent RS 33249 to print, a resolution covering reviewed and approved rules for several state agencies, including Idaho State Police, the Public Safety and Public Utilities Commissions, the Secretary of State, the Department of Administration, and the State Lottery.
Members then considered RS 33252, a joint memorial urging Idaho’s congressional delegation to pursue greater state autonomy over election laws and campaign finance, including possible constitutional changes. The memorial was introduced and sent to print without opposition. The committee next heard SB 1247, which would require E-Verify for state and local government employers and certain larger contractors. Supporters said it would protect taxpayer dollars and align with other states, while opponents argued it was too narrow, left subcontracting loopholes, and could burden employers without fully addressing illegal hiring. After debate, the bill was sent to the floor with a do pass recommendation on a 6-3 vote.
Finally, the committee heard SB 1236, a code cleanup bill to remove the obsolete Idaho Women’s Commission from statute. The sponsor said the commission was defunded years ago and the bill simply removed unused code. Testimony from women’s advocacy groups opposed the bill, arguing the commission could still be reactivated and could address ongoing issues affecting women. Committee members split over whether the commission was still needed, but the bill was ultimately sent to the floor with a do pass recommendation, with Senators Ruchti and Bernt recorded as voting no.
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Utilities -continued- Feb 4th, 2026 at 12:15 pm
Transcript Highlights:
- Both of the Dakotas have had discussions on this, Indiana.
- I think this is an important discussion for you all to have.
- I think this is an important discussion for you all to have.
- Tuesday night, I've had the exact discussion. So I understand. I've talked to both sides.
- The ones that we'd like to have further discussions on is the setback provided in there.
Summary:
The House Utilities Committee resumed hearing on House Bills 2402 and 2816, which address utility-scale solar development. The chair asked witnesses to keep comments to informational purposes, and testimony focused on setbacks, taxation, land conversion caps, county authority, decommissioning, and impacts on neighboring landowners and rural communities. Several witnesses said they supported solar in limited settings such as rooftops or industrial sites, but opposed or wanted changes to the bills’ treatment of agricultural land, especially the proposed 4% cap on cropland conversion and the 500-foot setback from homes.
Testimony from landowners and farm groups emphasized concerns about property rights, viewshed impacts, fire risk, drainage and floodplain issues, and the loss of agricultural tax base and local economic activity. They argued the proposed $2,500 per megawatt tax was too low and suggested higher rates, with some recommending $6,000 per megawatt or more, along with decommissioning requirements and stronger county-level protections. A Renew Missouri representative supported much of the bill but preferred a smaller setback and raised constitutional concerns about changing solar land from agricultural to commercial assessment. Other witnesses, including a county commissioner, described local regulations already in place in some counties and asked for clearer statewide standards.
Industry and utility representatives said the legislation was generally workable but needed further discussion on setbacks and property tax treatment. Clean Grid Alliance and related witnesses argued that tax comparisons with other states should account for total tax burden, not just nameplate taxes, and said higher taxes would raise electricity costs for consumers. Ameren Missouri said it was acceptable with most provisions, but cautioned against overly aggressive real-property assessments and noted its current and planned solar buildout. The hearing ended without a vote; the committee adjourned after taking testimony on both bills.
FL
Florida 2026 5th Special Session
Environment and Natural Resources Oct 7th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- Permission for a follow-up was requested, and he was recognized for back-and-forth discussion.
- Kellam owns Discussion is the primary land that Garcia and Mr.
- I know that we discussed some of that during our conversation.
- I know that we discussed some of that during our conversation.
- All right, and is there a discussion? I think we've discussed everything. Okay, very good.
Summary:
The Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee first took up the appointment of Joshua Kellum to the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). Kellum described his background in diversified land, agricultural, materials, and real estate operations and said he views himself as a conservationist. Senators questioned him closely about his development background, the balance of perspectives on the commission, his vote supporting the black bear hunt, and the use of Fish and Wildlife Foundation funds for the “Yes on 2” campaign. Supporters argued he is primarily a land steward and conservation-minded landowner, while opponents said the commission is already dominated by developers and lacks scientific or conservation expertise. After debate, the committee voted to recommend Kellum’s confirmation, with Senator Smith voting no and the rest of the voting members in favor.
The committee then received a presentation from FWC on implementation of recently enacted boating and vessel laws. Bill Holcomb outlined changes under SB 1388 (the Boater Freedom Act), including limits on vessel stops and boarding, a new Florida Freedom Boater Safety Inspection decal, and revised rules for Springs Protection Zones. He also reviewed SB 164 on derelict and at-risk vessels, including new enforcement tools, a long-term anchoring permit, and updated penalties; HB 289, Lucy’s Law, which strengthens boating safety penalties and education requirements; SB 830 on the disposition of migrant vessels; and HB 735 on water access facilities and boating infrastructure. Holcomb said FWC is in rulemaking, training officers, and updating forms and permitting systems to implement the laws.
Members asked follow-up questions about derelict vessel cost recovery and whether penalties go back to the state, and about the Springs Protection Zone standard. Holcomb said the state can recover removal costs from responsible owners and that the new springs standard requires “significant harm” and that vessel activity be the predominant cause, with subject matter experts and partner agencies helping make those determinations. He said Silver Glen Springs remains a proposed zone but was paused pending the new criteria and rulemaking. The committee took no further action on the presentation and adjourned after completing the agenda.
NM
New Mexico 2025 Regular Session
IC - Public School Capital Outlay Council Jul 31st, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- So we had that discussion. Since that time, Mr. Salih, Ms.
- With further discussion, I may not be thinking about that correctly.
- Very good discussion. Some comments that I'd like to make.
- All right, further discussion. Yeah, just for clarification.
- Great discussion.
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Appropriations Apr 15th, 2025 at 02:00 pm
Appropriations
Transcript Highlights:
- We had pretty good discussion.
- All right, any discussion on the amendment?
- Page one, line 17, discusses the eligible student.
- Okay, now we'll have discussions. Senator, no. Clary, I guess.
- But so that was discussions with that.
Committee:
Senate Appropriations
Summary:
The committee first took up House Bill 1012, the Department of Health and Human Services budget. Senator Dever walked through the amended budget, highlighting a roughly $5.85 billion all-funds total, major one-time items for IT, child care, housing, behavioral health, juvenile justice, rural EMS, and supportive housing, along with funding for Medicaid expansion, CCBHCs, opioid settlement uses, and several studies and reporting requirements. Members discussed the provider inflation increase, with Senator Mathern urging a 2%/2% rate instead of 2%/1.5%, but the committee adopted the subcommittee amendment and then passed the amended bill 15-0 with a do-pass recommendation. Senator Dever was named as carrier.
The committee then considered House Bill 1540, a school choice/education savings account-style bill. Senator Shibley explained the subcommittee amendments, including clarifying the Bank of North Dakota as administrator, adding a means test at 400% of the federal poverty guideline, and adjusting the fiscal note to about $21.7 million for the second year. In debate, members raised concerns about the bank being assigned duties outside its normal role, the lack of DPI involvement, and whether the means test should be tiered rather than a hard cutoff. The committee rejected a do-not-pass motion 5-10-1, then approved a do-pass motion on the amended bill 9-6-1, with Senator Wobama noted as the likely carrier.
The meeting ended with the chair announcing the committee would adjourn and reconvene the next morning.
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
House Appropriations - Human Resources Division Apr 10th, 2025 at 02:30 pm
Appropriations - Human Resources Division
Transcript Highlights:
- I had it cut off before floor session, or we just discussed and wanted just clarity for the committee
- because we had discussed this at length yesterday on the commissioner's salary equity.
- So we're just discussing which funds were used to offset the Commissioner's salary equity increase.
- So we're just discussing which funds were used to offset the Commissioner's salary equity increase.
- Committee discussion.
Summary:
The committee reconvened to work through the amended version of Senate Bill 2025, beginning with a clarification from the Department of Veterans Affairs on the source of funds used to cover the commissioner’s salary equity increase. Commissioner Lonnie Wong explained that the money came from federal highly rural transportation grant administrative/salary funds, within the allowable 10% administrative cap, and that the department had not exceeded that limit. The committee then reviewed the major House changes to the veterans budget, including funding for a veterans benefits specialist FTE, salary equity increases for veterans service officers, additional operating funds, one-time funding for homeless veteran services and the Veterans Post-War Trust Fund, carryover authority for Fisher House and veterans transportation projects, accrued leave, and a document scanning project. Members also discussed a section changing governance authority for veterans affairs and the veterans home, with questions about the ACOVA board and the governor’s appointment authority.
The committee debated the appropriateness of using federal grant administrative funds for salary adjustments and the broader shift in authority over veterans affairs, with some members emphasizing legislative control over salaries and budget decisions and others supporting the reorganization as a way to improve administration. After discussion, Amendment 25.092.0203 was moved, seconded, and adopted on an 8-0 roll call. The committee then moved SB 2025 as amended, and that motion also passed 8-0.
The meeting then shifted to Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation budget issues, where members reviewed FTE reductions, salary equity funding for correctional officers and parole/probation officers, and the status of federal ARPA dollars that had previously been used to backfill salaries and bonuses. DOCR officials described pay levels for correctional officers and compared them with county jail wages, arguing that the proposed equity funding was needed for retention and competitiveness. Members also discussed transitional facility costs, women’s treatment unit funding, and county jail overflow housing, including new or planned bed capacity in Grand Forks, Burleigh-Morton, Rugby, and other facilities. The committee agreed to continue refining the budget through a new long sheet and planned to request amendments for consideration in the following days before adjourning.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
- Any discussion on the A1 amendment?
- Any discussion on the A1 body members. Any discussion on the A1 amendment?
- Any discussion on House File 1058 as amended?
- Any additional discussion on House File 1058 as amended?
- On that motion, any additional discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.
ND
North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session
Government Finance Transportation Study Subcommittee Mar 19th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- "Today I will be discussing several items as requested by Senator Burkhard.
- And you're just getting into the fleet discussion. Sorry to interrupt that.
- The last item I would like to discuss today is our operational challenges.
- The last item I would like to discuss today is our operational challenges.
- I haven't discussed it with them yet.
Summary:
The Government Finance Transportation Study committee heard detailed presentations from transit officials in Grand Forks, Bismarck/Mandan (Bisman Transit), and Fargo about fixed-route and paratransit service. Grand Forks described Cities Area Transit’s routes, fare structure, ridership recovery after COVID, fleet replacement needs, and rising costs, noting fares cover only a portion of expenses and that the system relies on local, state, federal, and university funding. Bisman Transit outlined its history, service hours, route structure, recent expansion of hours, fare levels, ridership growth, funding sources including mill levies, federal grants, and new local sales tax revenue, and major challenges such as aging buses, driver recruitment, and the need for more stable operating support. Fargo’s representative briefly reinforced the importance of public transit and asked the committee to consider additional funding for urban fixed-route systems.
ID
Transcript Highlights:
- Any discussion on the motion?
- Any discussion on the motion? Mr. Chairman. Senator Ward-Engelking.
- Any discussion on that motion?
- Man, this is an important discussion.
- Committee, any further discussion on the original motion?
Committee:
Senate Commerce and Human Resources
AR
Arkansas 2026 Regular Session
EDUCATION COMMITTEE - SENATE AND HOUSE Mar 10th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- I'm going to briefly discuss some methodology. We're going to go through some quick terminology.
- Yes, the results that we were discussing earlier, those are all survey results from superintendents,
- Maybe we can certainly discuss that offline and determine the best course of action, whether it be in
- I appreciate the discussion. I appreciate the discussion. I think that's an important discussion.
- I appreciate the discussion. I think that's an important discussion.
Summary:
The joint education committee continued its adequacy study with a detailed Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on resource allocation, covering how Arkansas school districts and charters spend foundation and other funds on matrix and non-matrix items. Staff explained the methodology for mapping expenditures, the district and school categories used in the analysis, and key findings showing that districts spend more per student from all fund sources than the foundation amount alone. The presentation highlighted that classroom teachers account for the largest share of matrix spending, while operations and maintenance, student support staff, nurses, and other lines also drew significant attention. Members asked for additional breakdowns by district type, size, rural/urban status, and trend data, and several questions focused on how waivers affect funding and spending, especially for library media specialists and other positions.
The committee then discussed non-matrix spending, including instructional aids, non-technology-related facilities, school safety, mental health services, dyslexia support, food service, gifted and talented, career and technical education, and other items not explicitly defined in the matrix. Staff reported that non-matrix spending exceeded $2 billion in 2025, with most of it coming from other fund sources, and that the top superintendent-identified unmet needs over recent surveys were mental health services, school safety, and dyslexia support. Members raised concerns about dyslexia identification and funding, possible over-identification, and whether some support costs are being coded in ways that obscure the true spending picture. There was also discussion of facilities funding, the building fund, and the Department of Education’s partnership program for school construction and maintenance, with staff agreeing to provide more information and potentially bring department officials back for a future meeting.
Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly requested more granular data and clarifications, including waiver counts and funding impacts, trend lines for superintendent-reported needs, district-by-district spending spreadsheets, and definitions for certain matrix and accounting terms such as salary enhancement, LEA indebtedness, and other employee health insurance. The chair noted that the committee would continue the adequacy process over the coming months and use the worksheet in the binder to develop recommendations for the next biennium. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting; instead, the committee received the report, asked for follow-up data, and agreed to continue the discussion at future meetings.
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Commerce Mar 4th, 2026
Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment
Transcript Highlights:
- Any discussion?
- So any additional discussion?
- Any discussion? To do pass or be adopted. Any discussion? Seeing none—oh, Rep. Ony, please proceed.
- Any discussion? 7 yes and 3-0.
- Any discussion? Any discussion? All right.
Summary:
The committee first met in executive session on House Joint Resolution 173 and 174, which would put a tax-reform proposal before voters. Members debated a failed amendment to change the ballot language, with supporters saying it would more honestly describe the measure as a tax replacement that could expand sales taxes, and opponents saying it would be misleading and overly restrictive. The committee then adopted a House committee substitute that clarified the proposal, including a phased reduction in the individual income tax tied to revenue growth, and voted the substitute do pass by a 7-3 roll call.
The committee next took up House Bills 321 and 2531 under a new committee substitute. The substitute made a series of technical and policy changes involving redevelopment, tax increment financing, public safety funding, Missouri Opportunity Zones, baseline revenue calculations, and local property tax diversion, including reducing one diversion requirement from 50% to 25%. Members and the sponsor described the changes as clarifying agency roles and addressing constitutional and administrative concerns. The committee adopted the substitute and then voted the combined bill do pass by a 9-0-1 vote.
In public hearing, House Bill 3230 by Rep. Hardwick would bar cities and counties from outright banning modular or qualified manufactured homes in areas where single-family homes are allowed, while still allowing reasonable safety, zoning, and compatibility standards. The sponsor and supporters from the Missouri Manufactured Housing Association argued the bill would expand affordable housing and prevent discriminatory local restrictions; the Missouri Municipal League said it supported the goal but wanted more work on language to preserve local flexibility. The committee also heard House Bill 2888 by Rep. Deal, which would limit standalone medical-monitoring claims without present physical injury. The sponsor and a civil justice coalition supporter said the bill would align Missouri law with court precedent and require an actual injury, while opponents and affected residents argued it would block needed monitoring for exposure to PFAS and other contaminants and could leave exposed communities without a remedy.
AZ
Arizona 2026 Regular Session
02/24/2026 - House Republican Caucus Calendar #7
Transcript Highlights:
- Any further discussion? Seeing none, House Bill 2782.
- Any further discussion? Seeing none, 27-57. Perfect. Thank you. Any further discussion?
- Any further discussion? Seeing none...
- Any further discussion? Seeing none...
- Any further discussion? Seeing none... ...we do appreciate it. Any further discussion?
Summary:
The meeting was a caucus-style run-through of many bills and resolutions across Appropriations, Commerce, Education, Federalism/Military Affairs/Elections, Government, Health and Human Services, Judiciary, ENRU, Public Safety, and Rural Economic Development. Measures discussed included housing and HOA rules, school policy and funding, health care licensing and records timelines, public safety and corrections funding, election and campaign rules, water and environmental policy, and several criminal justice and juvenile justice changes. Many items were described as being on third-read consent or consent calendars, with staff often noting that no questions were raised and no sponsor was present.
Several bills drew sponsor explanation or member discussion. In education, members reviewed bills on teacher strikes, school safety, math placement, student outcomes, free school meals, parent permission for clubs, and school bond ballot disclosures. In health, bills covered prior authorization data reporting, nursing board rules and complaint procedures, pharmacist testing/treatment authority, opioid antagonist expiration dates, board continuations, and a constitutional amendment on refusing medical mandates. In government and public safety, members discussed DCS legal representation, inmate medical records, public safety parity funding, sheriff authority, border support funding, and a resolution supporting county sheriffs. In commerce and housing, bills addressed condominium and HOA authority, shade structures, pet restrictions, insurance certificates, apprenticeship definitions, automatic renewal contracts, and a state housing affordability district.
There was notable discussion on House Bill 4044, which would create a Public Safety Parity Fund for DPS and DOC salaries using interest from the state rainy day fund and other revenue sources. The sponsor argued it would provide a reliable way to fund public safety pay, while others objected that it would consume interest needed to preserve the fund’s value and that a general fund appropriation would be more appropriate. The bill prompted extended back-and-forth, with some members supporting the concept and others saying it was fiscally irresponsible. Another point of discussion came on House Bill 2775, where staff noted a possible misprint in the bill history, and on House Bill 467, where staff clarified that the inactive voter list changes related to e-poll book status categories. No formal votes were recorded in the transcript, and the meeting appears to have been a review of measures before floor action.
OK
Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session
Appropriations and Budget Education Subcommittee Feb 16th, 2026 at 10:00 am
A&B Education Subcommittee
Transcript Highlights:
- Will there be any discussion or debate? Seeing none, open the roll.
- Will there be discussion, further discussion, or debate? Seeing none, open the roll.
- Will there be discussion or debate? Seeing none, open the roll.
- Will there be discussion or debate? Seeing none, open the roll.
- Will there be discussion or debate? Seeing no discussion or debate, staff please open the vote.
Committee:
House A&B Education Subcommittee
FL
Florida 2025 Regular Session
March 5, 2025 - 10:15 AM
Transcript Highlights:
- So we're going to have a general outline of this discussion.
- I appreciate the discussion.
- How does this impact the discussion we're having right now?
- Chair, and thanks for this panel discussion. It's very insightful for me.
- Okay, one final question, then we're going to have another topic to discuss.
Summary:
The Economic Infrastructure Subcommittee met with a quorum present and first heard HB 11 from Representative Robinson. The bill would address an unintended consequence in Florida’s municipal utility surcharge law by requiring the same water/utility rate for residents when a utility facility is physically located within one municipality but owned by another, rather than allowing the owning municipality to impose a 25% surcharge. The sponsor and several members described it as a fairness issue affecting residents who do not receive local tax support for the facility but still bear the surcharge. Public testimony included support from AARP and Miami-Dade County and opposition from North Miami Beach. The bill was reported favorably on an 18-0 vote.
The committee then held a panel discussion on utility use of public rights-of-way and utility relocation. Panelists from FDOT, county government, gas, water, electric, and communications sectors described the permitting process, noting that FDOT uses a detailed utility accommodation manual and that local governments may use permits, franchise agreements, or ordinances depending on the utility type. They emphasized that utilities often must coordinate early with agencies using long-range work programs and project plans, and that the process differs by utility and jurisdiction. Communications witnesses discussed Chapter 337 and the 60-day local permitting shot clock, while others noted the role of Sunshine State One Call in locating facilities before excavation.
A major focus was who pays for relocations when road or infrastructure projects require utilities to move. FDOT and several panelists said utilities generally bear the cost when they are in public right-of-way, with exceptions such as certain interstate/interchange projects and easement impacts. Utility representatives said relocations are often effectively new builds, can be costly, and are ultimately reflected in rates or customer costs. Members also asked about easements versus right-of-way, damage and disputes during construction, broadband workforce needs, and whether legislation could improve coordination. Panelists largely said the existing process works best when agencies, contractors, and utilities communicate early and continuously, and that more legislation may not be necessary compared with better planning, staffing, and use of technology.