Transcript Highlights:

• </c> want to be clear, we are discussing want to be clear, we are discussing aggregate<00:12:43.040><
• Any other discussion?
• Any other discussion? second. Any other discussion?
• Any discussion?
• </c> &gt;&gt; Any further discussion? Senator Abbas. &gt;&gt; Any further discussion?

Committee: Senate Education

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Schools and school discuss materials.
• </c> seems to me that much of the discussion seems to me that much of the discussion has<00:39:50.560
• >> Are we discussing? >> Yeah.
• Any discussion? >> Thank you.
• Any discussion? &gt;&gt; Okay. Any discussion? &gt;&gt; Thank<01:50:29.520><c> you.

Committee: Senate Education

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any idea, have you discussed with manufacturers how long it may take them to upgrade their packaging
• Representative Anderson says the discussion will continue if the A1 is laid over.
• He hopes the committee will just discuss the amendment today.
• today and then laying the bill over continues that discussion.
• </c> bill over continues that discussion um bill over continues that discussion um that<01:47:39.000>

Bills: HF44 , HF2102 , HF2279 , HF2280 , HF2281

Committee: House Agriculture Finance and Policy

Keywords: HF44, Casey Jones State Trail, Pipestone Trailhead, Currie Loop, Minnesota bonding bill, capital investment, state bonds, bond proceeds fund, Department of Natural Resources, DNR, trail rehabilitation, trail reconstruction, recreational trail, bike trail, hiking trail, infrastructure, state trail, Pipestone, Currie, bonding authorization

Transcript Highlights:

• Any further member discussion?
• Any further member discussion?
• Any further member discussion?
• Any further member discussion?
• </c> discussion and bringing us all up. discussion and bringing us all up.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The conference committee on House File 3900 met with a quorum, introduced members and staff, and received a nonpartisan walkthrough of the bill. Staff explained that the proposal would change the permanent school fund’s distribution formula from interest and dividends to a statutory payout based on 4.5% of the fund’s average value over the previous three fiscal years, with the Commissioner of Management and Budget responsible for determining and transferring the distributable amount. The Senate version differed by adding language requiring a two-thirds vote of each legislative house to change the distribution policy or apportionment. Members then debated whether a future legislature could increase the payout and whether the constitutional language would sufficiently protect the fund’s purchasing power. Senator Farnsworth argued that a supermajority requirement would help prevent politicization and lock in the fund’s purpose, while Representative Long, Senator Kunesh, Representative Youakim, and Representative O’Driscoll opposed the supermajority as unnecessary and potentially politicizing, emphasizing existing constitutional protections, fiduciary duties, and the legislature’s track record of stewarding school trust lands for students. Staff indicated the language requiring preservation of purchasing power would be a strong safeguard, though the exact legal remedy was unclear. Senator Kunesh moved to adopt the House File 3900 second engrossment as the conference committee report. The committee took a roll call vote and approved the motion 7-1, with Senator Farnsworth voting no. After the vote, Senator Swedzinski offered brief remarks about the historical importance of school trust funds and public education.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? I have a House Committee substitute to offer.
• Is there any discussion? Do I have a motion?
• Any other discussion? Yes. Here's anybody. Miller, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Any discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Voted he passed. Any discussion?
• And we discussed how it's done in Texas.

Committee: House Veterans and Armed Forces

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first went into executive session, where it adopted a House Committee substitute combining House Bills 3078 and 2672 and voted the substitute do pass, with one no vote. It then separately voted House Bill 2362 and House Bill 2588 do pass, each by 16 ayes and one no. During the executive session, one member objected to the combined bill on constitutional equal-protection grounds, while another supported it as a benefit for veterans. In public hearing, Representative Stephanie Boykin presented House Bill 3280, which would create a Missouri specialty license plate for the surviving spouse of a disabled veteran who previously qualified for a disabled veteran plate. She described it as a low-cost way to continue honoring a veteran’s service and family sacrifice. Committee members and a surviving spouse testified in strong support, emphasizing the recognition of spouses’ sacrifices and noting that similar plates exist in other states. No opposition was offered. The committee then heard House Bill 3029, sponsored by Representative Schulte, which would require disclosures and prohibit compensation for referrals in the business of advising or assisting with veterans’ benefits, with penalties for violations. Supporters, including a Missouri veterans service officer, argued the bill was needed to stop unaccredited “claim shark” companies from charging veterans for initial claims and using misleading social media advertising. Opponents, including a representative of Veterans Guardian and a VA-accredited attorney, argued the bill would restrict lawful private-sector assistance, reduce veterans’ choice, and should be narrowed to target bad actors while exempting accredited attorneys and referral arrangements. The hearing also included a presentation on the Missouri Veterans Recognition Program, which provides medals and certificates for veterans of major conflicts, and a presentation on MU Extension’s Veteran REEDS program, which uses literature and discussion to support veterans and first responders through community-based resilience work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today I will be discussing several items as requested by Senator Burckhard.
• 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.
• Any other committee discussion? Okay, so Adam, what have you got for us? Okay.
• I haven't discussed it with them yet.

Summary: The committee met as a study subcommittee on fixed-route public transportation and first approved the December 11 minutes. It then heard detailed presentations from transit leaders in Grand Forks, Bismarck/Mandan, and Fargo about their systems, including route structures, paratransit service, ridership trends, fare changes, funding sources, fleet replacement needs, and operational challenges. Grand Forks described Cities Area Transit’s 17 routes, university shuttle service, expanded paratransit coverage, a 2025 fare increase, and rising costs for labor, fuel, parts, and new buses. Bismarck/Mandan’s Bisman Transit outlined its fixed-route and paratransit operations, recent service expansions approved for April 1, fare structure, ridership recovery since COVID, and major funding streams including mill levies, federal grants, and new local sales tax revenue. Fargo’s MATBUS representative emphasized the importance of continued state support for urban fixed-route transit. Members asked extensive questions about cost per ride, fare increases, school transportation, veteran service partnerships, app-based ticketing, local funding formulas, and whether ride-share or microtransit could replace fixed routes. Transit officials said fixed-route service remains essential because it provides reliable capacity, supports jobs and access to services, and preserves federal funding tied to public transit operations. They also said paratransit is costly but necessary for riders with disabilities, and that vehicle and maintenance costs have risen sharply. Minot’s transit superintendent added context on the state’s existing transit aid formula, explaining that it is weighted more toward rural and paratransit providers and that urban fixed-route systems are seeking a separate, dedicated funding source rather than changes to the current formula. The committee also heard public testimony from North Dakota Protection & Advocacy supporting both fixed-route and paratransit service for disabled riders, and from Minot staff on refurbished buses, CDL driver recruitment, and why the agency is not pursuing full electric buses. Near the end, members discussed whether to recommend additional state funding for the four urban fixed-route systems. A motion passed to have Legislative Council prepare a summary of the subcommittee’s activities for inclusion in the Government Finance Committee’s report to Legislative Management. Members then continued discussing possible recommendations, including a separate funding source for urban fixed-route transit and whether the four urban systems should meet to develop a proposed amount.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? Senator Polsky, I thought it was on the separate vote. You are.
• Is there any other discussion on the appointee?
• Is there any discussion on the balance? No.
• That's a policy discussion. Thank you. That's a policy discussion that I'm happy to have.
• Discussing grievance with whom?

Summary: The committee took up several bills and confirmations. It reported favorably SB 332, as amended, on a narrow public-meetings/public-records exemption for legal strategy and settlement communications during the pre-suit period in Burt Harris claims; SB 464, requiring K-12 schools to formally observe Veterans Day; SB 984, clarifying firefighter cancer/death-benefit provisions and related prevention language; SB 576, expanding and codifying the local government cybersecurity protection program under Florida Digital Service; SB 964, revising how certain gifts and honoraria are reported to the Commission on Ethics; SB 1612, requiring local governments to accept electronic payments with exceptions and a delayed effective date; SB 830, creating public-records exemptions for certain local government administrators and their families; SB 1096, clarifying the filing deadline for Florida Civil Rights Act complaints; and SB 1656, designating the SS American Victory as Florida’s official state flagship. The committee also considered a large confirmation package. Jeffrey Aaron’s appointment to the Public Employees Relations Commission was discussed separately after Senator Polsky raised concerns about his political connections and prior work; the committee still recommended him favorably. The remaining appointees on tabs 12 through 30 were also recommended favorably in one vote. The longest and most contentious item was SB 1296, with a committee substitute, on the Public Employees Relations Commission and public-sector unions. The PCS would change union certification/recertification rules, require a recent showing-of-interest form, create different voting thresholds for public safety and non-public safety employee organizations, limit paid union leave for non-public safety unions unless reimbursed, require equal access to certain employer communication spaces, and speed up impasse procedures for legislatively funded salary increases. Senators raised constitutional concerns, especially about the single-subject rule and collective-bargaining rights, and many speakers opposed the bill as union-busting and harmful to teachers, bus drivers, nurses, utility workers, and other public employees. Supporters argued it would improve accountability, ensure genuine member support, and prevent taxpayer-funded union activity. The committee continued debate on SB 1296 after extensive testimony, but the transcript ends before a final vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Toro, we haven’t had that discussion.
• But we have started having some of those discussions with UNM.
• So, I would encourage those discussions to take place.
• It's a long-term discussion.
• This also shows the other things I did not discuss.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? Hearing none, those in favor... Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion? Conference Committee on each of these measures. Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion? Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is there any discussion? Representative Twight?
• So there should be no discussion about consecutive sentence at all.
• Is there any discussion? Representative Twight. Thank you, Mr.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a quorum present. Representative Hoverson offered remarks recognizing World Autism Day, and the House then handled conference committee motions on several bills, including House Bills 1460 and 1248 and Senate Bills 2262, 2070, 2294, and 2297, with the Speaker appointing members to each conference committee. The chamber also set aside Senate Bill 2200 for re-referral to Appropriations and moved to amendments on Senate Bill 2128, which was the main subject of the day. Senate Bill 2128, a major criminal justice and corrections bill, drew extensive debate over truth-in-sentencing, mandatory minimums, parole, transitional facilities, work release, electronic monitoring, and the fiscal impact of longer incarceration. Division A of the amendments removed mandatory minimums for resisting arrest and felony simple assault while keeping consecutive-sentence language; supporters said this preserved judicial discretion and reduced costs, while opponents argued it weakened public safety. Division A was adopted 70-23. Division B proposed broader changes to preserve transitional programming, add penalties for tampering with electronic monitoring and escape, limit some work-release restrictions, create a parole board study, and fund electronic monitoring with a $600,000 appropriation. Supporters framed it as a compromise that balanced rehabilitation and public safety; opponents said it undercut the bill’s intent and left dangerous offenders with too much access to transitional release. Division B failed on a 46-46 tie. The House then took up the bill itself, with the Judiciary Committee reporting a do-not-pass recommendation as amended, and debate continued over whether the amended bill should advance, with members split between concerns about victims and public safety versus rehabilitation, prison capacity, and recidivism.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, any discussion? Okay, thank you.
• Members, any discussion? Okay, thank you.
• Members, any discussion?
• Members, any discussion?
• Members, any discussion?

Committee: House Higher Education

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Higher Education met on March 14, 2025, and heard five University of Hawaii-related bills. SB 741 would create an external audit committee for the UH system and Board of Regents; UH and UHPA opposed it, saying existing internal and external audits already provide robust oversight, and the committee later recommended deferring the bill indefinitely as duplicative. SB 1252 SD2 would create a dementia training program for health care providers; the Alzheimer’s Association and other supporters said broader training is needed across the care workforce, while the university discussed using JABSOM as a coordinator. The committee deferred the bill to March 19 for an HD1 reflecting JABSOM’s suggestions and removing the appropriations/FTE language. SB 1502 SD1 would fund faculty positions, student programs, and facilities at UH Manoa and West Oahu for defense-sector workforce development. UH and Chamber of Commerce Hawaii supported the measure, describing a pipeline for students into intelligence, cybersecurity, and related fields, while one individual opposed it as too closely tied to military contracting and urged investment in other sectors instead. The committee amended the bill to remove FTE references and advanced it; the vote to pass with amendments was adopted, with several members voting aye and some excused. SB 1530 would require performance-based allocation of UH general funds and efficiency reporting. UH and the Attorney General’s office raised concerns, saying the bill’s metrics would apply across the entire general fund budget and were not practical as drafted; the committee also noted opposition from the Budget and Finance Department and individuals. SB 1624 SD1 would restrict RIM funds to renewing, improving, or modernizing existing facilities and require annual reports. UH opposed the bill and explained that RIM is a lump-sum approach used to address deferred maintenance and capital needs, with Board of Regents approval and quarterly reporting already in place; the Attorney General suggested constitutional amendments. The transcript ends during discussion of SB 1624, with no final action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know you have spent a lot of time and effort discussing agency needs and operations.
• I ask you to be prepared to have a thorough discussion in week two.
• We will now move on to wrapping up our vacancy discussion from a few weeks ago.
• We will now move on to wrapping up our vacancy discussion from a few weeks ago.
• A lot of it is the reasons that get discussed all the time.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard a lengthy Auditor General presentation on the Department of Management Services’ fleet management operations. The audit found major problems with oversight, recordkeeping, policies, fee-setting, purchase and disposal approvals, public auction controls, and FleetWave system access and processing. Key findings included that 2,279 vehicles valued at more than $57 million could not be matched between FleetWave and FLAIR, disposal records were missing or incomplete, user access remained active long after employees separated, and the department had not documented a reasonable basis for its $1.75 per-vehicle monthly fee. Members expressed strong concern about the accuracy of the state’s fleet inventory and the risk of waste or misuse. DMS Secretary Allende said the department concurred with the findings, was working with the Auditor General, and planned corrective actions, including better training, clearer guidance, improved reconciliation, and possible centralization or pilot programs for fleet purchasing and management. The committee then returned to vacancy discussions with several agencies. The Division of Administrative Hearings said its two long-vacant judges of compensation claims positions had been hard to fill because of low pay and short reappointment terms, but the chief judge said the division could operate without them and offered those positions up as part of a reduction exercise. The Public Service Commission reported 42 vacancies but said statutory deadlines were still being met, though staff workloads and depth of analysis were affected. The commission also said vacancies help it manage salaries within its trust-fund budget. Members questioned whether some of those positions were truly needed given the lack of delays. The Florida Gaming Control Commission reported 29 vacancies, including a vacant chair that prevented appointment of an inspector general, and said the chair vacancy was a gubernatorial appointment issue. The acting executive director also said the commission’s compulsive gambling prevention program had lapsed after no responsive bids were received for a new contract, but an invitation to negotiate was nearly complete and a new provider was expected soon. The Public Employee Relations Commission reported that its caseload had more than doubled after Senate Bill 256, which increased union recertification work; it said it was meeting deadlines only with overtime and that the workload had not fallen despite decertifications. Members asked for follow-up data on union cases, vacancy needs, and whether some positions across agencies could be reallocated to better match workload.

Transcript Highlights:

• I also want to briefly point out two important priorities for this year's budget discussions: our funding
• I think we can discuss that through spring with the Legislature. Okay. Thank you.
• And when are we going to start to discuss that and put that variable into the discussion all around what's
• But of course, through the spring process as well, that is an important topic for discussion.
• But yes, the last time we were discussing SB 525 with the legislature, we did not...

Committee: House Budget

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. No discussion.
• Any discussion? Vice Chair Cook, you are recognized. I have a House Committee substitute.
• Any discussion? Vice Chair Cook, please proceed.
• Any discussion? Yes, proceed, gentlemen.
• Any other discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Chairman Mayhew?

Committee: House Corrections and Public Institutions

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 3154, which was explained as a background-check and fingerprinting measure for sports wagering and fantasy sports betting license applicants. Testimony indicated the bill would ensure applicants submit fingerprints to the Missouri State Highway Patrol for FBI criminal-history checks, bringing the licensing process into compliance with federal requirements and cleaning up language for these newer forms of licensure. After brief discussion and support from Representative Veit, the committee adopted House Committee Amendment No. 1, rolled it into a substitute, and then voted the House Committee Substitute do pass by a 13-1 vote. The committee then took up House Bill 3535, with a House Committee Substitute ending in .02C. Members explained that the substitute added a statutory definition related to fireworks, which was the only change from the bill. After a brief discussion, including comments from the ranking member that the bill now made sense and would not do harm, the committee adopted the substitute and then voted the House Committee Substitute do pass by a 13-1 vote. The meeting concluded with no further business and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I'll be glad to entertain any questions or discussion. Mr. Chairman, I thank you.
• Any discussion? All those in favor say "aye." Aye. Any opposed?
• Any discussion? ...second. Any discussion? All those in favor say "aye." Aye. Any opposed?
• Any further discussion? Discussion report as amended? Yes. Okay.
• Any further discussion? All those in favor say "aye." Aye. Any opposed?

Bills: HB422

Committee: House Local Legislation

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> discussion of the committee substitute? discussion of the committee substitute?
• Whitley for discussion of the matter. Whitley for discussion of the matter.
• </c> 37 for discussion of the matter. 37 for discussion of the matter.
• </c> for discussion of the floor amendment. for discussion of the floor amendment.
• Is there any discussion?

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• doing that in rural areas, but let's have that discussion.
• There was considerable discussion about the Hattiesburg study.
• The second topic I'd like to discuss is this discussion about delegation and supervision.
• In this case, we're discussing APRNs.
• I know we've had a lot of discussion on that.

Bills: SB1888 , SB3003 , SB2417 , SB2459 , SB3055 , HB1393 , HB2884 , SB2943

Committee: Senate State Affairs

Keywords: grand jury, jury qualifications, jury wheel, small counties, Texas legislation, age verification, obscene devices, online sales, juvenile protection, penalties, antitrust, attorney general, Texas Free Enterprise, business regulations, legal confidentiality, personal identifying information, data brokers, judicial safety, civil rights, data privacy

Transcript Highlights:

• The next part of our agenda is discussing a bit about the legislative update.
• that we're going to be. opened up the discussion and spoke about some of the more recent events that
• The next part of our agenda is discussing a bit about the legislative update.
• So as The next part of our agenda is discussing a bit about the legislative update.
• Can you actually describe which ones we discussed at our last meeting?

Summary: The commission met to approve the May 11 minutes and review progress on its work plan. Members recapped prior discussions about commission structure, summer engagement, data collection methods, and limited funding. The minutes were approved after a motion and second. The group then received a legislative update: Senator Miranda’s FY27 budget amendment securing $125,000 for the commission was partially adopted, pending final conference committee and gubernatorial action, while a separate provision to allow commissioner appointments at any time was not adopted and may be pursued through another vehicle. A major focus was finalizing subcommittees. The commission agreed by vote to create four subcommittees: Communications and Outreach, Survey and Data Collection, Organizational Development, and History and Culture. Members discussed possible ethics issues around legislator participation in fundraising, prompting a suggestion to rename that group to Organizational Development. Several members volunteered for multiple committees, and the chair asked commissioners to confirm assignments within about two weeks, with a June 22 deadline mentioned for responses. Staff support for the summer was also noted. The meeting also covered an upcoming visit by Cabo Verde’s president, José Neves, including a commissioner-only session and a larger community event, with encouragement to invite guests and use the opportunity to build support for the proposed cultural center. In public comment, members discussed gathering best practices from other community centers and cultural institutions, and the need to connect with existing Cape Verdean organizations and historical resources. Commissioners also shared updates on summer and July events, including Cape Verdean Independence celebrations, and the meeting ended with a motion to adjourn that passed unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• The next part of our agenda is discussing a bit about the legislative update.
• So as The next part of our agenda is discussing a bit about the legislative update.
• The next part of our agenda is discussing a bit about the legislative update.
• So as The next part of our agenda is discussing a bit about the legislative update.
• So I guess first—I'm so sorry—can you actually describe which ones we discussed at our last meeting?

Keywords: 1212, all

Summary: The commission met to approve the May 11 minutes, review a legislative funding update, finalize subcommittees, and plan for an upcoming visit by President José Neves of Cabo Verde. The minutes were approved after a motion and second. The chair reported that Senator Miranda’s FY27 budget amendment was partially adopted, securing $125,000 for the commission, pending final conference committee and gubernatorial approval; the portion allowing new commissioners to be added later was not adopted, leaving one vacancy unresolved for now. Members discussed organizing the work into subcommittees. The commission ultimately voted to create four subcommittees: Communications and Outreach, Survey and Data Collection, Organizational Development, and History and Culture. There was discussion about whether legislators should serve on the fundraising-related group, with concerns raised about ethics and a suggestion to rename it Organizational Development. Several members volunteered for multiple committees, and the chair asked members to confirm assignments within about two weeks so subcommittees could begin meeting before the next full commission meeting. The commission also planned for President Neves’s visit on Friday, with a smaller commissioner-only meeting at 10:30 a.m. followed by a larger community gathering from 11 a.m. to noon. Members were encouraged to attend, bring guests to the public event, and help identify commissioners who could speak at the smaller meeting. In public comment, members suggested meeting with leaders of other cultural institutions to learn from their experience, discussed compiling a fuller calendar of Cape Verdean events across Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and noted that the commission’s website and public meeting materials are already available online. The meeting adjourned by motion and vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussions? Hearing uh as is. Okay. Any discussions?
• </c><00:48:12.880><c> Vice</c> Any discussions? Hearing none. Vice Any discussions? Hearing none.
• This has to do during our discussions.
• Any discussion? Hearing none, Vice Chair, for the vote.
• </c> I'm happy that um with the discussions I'm happy that um with the discussions we<01:17:54.159><c

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Transportation heard several bills, beginning with SB 2010, which would authorize impoundment of motor vehicles for certain alleged or committed traffic violations. The Department of Transportation supported the bill, while the Department of the Attorney General asked for clarification in section 4 on who could seek remedies and what remedies would be available. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the measure, citing unclear officer-initiated impound criteria, potential strain on judicial or administrative resources, and concerns about hardship for families and indigent owners; the Honolulu Prosecutor’s Office supported the bill with amendments, saying it should be limited to traffic offenses and could serve as an alternative to fines or imprisonment. The chair then recessed before moving to the next items. The committee next heard SB 2527 on commercial driver licensing, which would require state and county firefighters exempt from CDL requirements to be subject to an alcohol and substance abuse policy equivalent to or stronger than federal DOT standards. DOT, the Department of Human Resources Development, county officials, and the Hawaiʻi Firefighters Association all indicated support. SB 2697, which would prohibit driving on roadway shoulders except in limited circumstances, also drew DOT support, with the Attorney General, judiciary, and others submitting comments. SB 2812, requiring driver license applicants to be tested on the dangers larger vehicles pose to pedestrians and bicyclists, was supported by DOT but opposed by the Public Defender, who argued the excessive-speeding portion was too broad for first offenses and that the DUI-related language was unnecessary because DUI relicensing already requires re-examination. SB 291, clarifying that drivers whose licenses were revoked for certain alcohol-related offenses must undergo re-examination before relicensing, received DOT support. The committee then took up SB 3044, which would remove references to pedestrian countdown timers and the requirement that pedestrians begin crossing before the timer starts. DOT opposed the bill, but Hawaiʻi Appleseed supported it, arguing the current rule is confusing and can lead to citations even when pedestrians can safely cross. The Department of Health submitted late comments emphasizing the importance of pedestrian-friendly infrastructure and physical activity, and the chair noted the split in testimony. Finally, SB 2995 proposed a zero-emissions rideshare rebate program funded by a rideshare fee and administered by DOT. Earthjustice strongly supported the bill, describing it as a fee-and-rebate structure to help rideshare drivers transition to zero-emissions vehicles. A witness for Tom Yamachika suggested that if the state wants to tax ridesharing, it should amend existing tax law instead of creating a new chapter, but the bill’s supporters said DOT was better suited to administer the rebate program and that similar models exist in California and Washington. The committee also heard SB 3153, which would authorize DOT to designate airport special district zones at airports statewide to improve security and enforcement; DOT’s airports deputy director supported the measure, saying it would clarify jurisdiction and help address trespassing and hazards, and senators asked about boundaries, mapping, and coordination with the Attorney General. No votes were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? That House Bill 1882 be voted due pass. Is there any discussion? Yes, Mr.
• I have a copy of the bill with me to discuss.
• Any further discussion on the amendment? Seeing none.
• Any discussion on the amendment? Seeing none.
• Any discussion on the amendment? Seeing none.

Committee: House Crime and Public Safety

Summary: The Committee on Crime and Public Safety met with a quorum and first took up several bills in executive session. House Bill 2323, relating to a domestic violence registry, was discussed as a private law-enforcement database for domestic abuse offenders; members noted it was similar to other registry bills already advanced, though some said it differed in details. House Bill 2530, described as the scrap metal bill, was also voted do pass without discussion. House Bill 1882 was withdrawn from consideration after members noted it had been rolled with another bill and had been sent back from fiscal review and Rules. The committee then adopted a House committee substitute and two amendments for House Bill 3332, which concerns public safety personnel recruitment and retention and employment benefits for first responders; the substitute removed additional degree programs from scholarship eligibility and the amendments fixed scholarship prioritization language and removed a sunset from the line-of-duty death benefit. HB 3332 was voted do pass. In public hearing, Representative Justice presented House Bill 3174, Missouri’s version of Alyssa’s Law, requiring each school employee to have access to a wearable panic alert system tied to local emergency responders and school personnel. He said the bill is subject to appropriations and would use a qualified vendor list; members questioned cost, funding, liability, and whether schools could already implement such systems. Support testimony came from Lori Alhadeff, Alyssa’s mother, who described the Parkland shooting and argued that faster alerts save lives, including in medical emergencies, and from a teacher who said the system would help in both active shooter and non-shooter emergencies. No opposition testimony was offered. Representative Williams then presented House Bill 3434, which would create a Missouri statewide sexual assault response task force to examine reporting, investigation, medical response, advocacy, and prosecution and report recommendations by December 31, 2028. She said the task force would build on progress made reducing the sexual assault kit backlog but address ongoing inconsistencies across jurisdictions. Members asked about overlap with a prior expired task force, appointment structure, and whether the group should include more medical or law-enforcement representatives. Support testimony from the Missouri Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence described the history of the kit backlog, the Telesane program, uneven services across the state, and the need for continued coordination and accountability; the Missouri Emergency Nurses Association also supported the bill, citing the need to address both rural and urban response challenges.