Transcript Highlights:

• Committee.
• Seeing no objection, Senator Muñoz to explain the bill. permanent legislative committees and legislative
• It adds an additional annual appropriation for permanent legislative committees and the expenses of the
• , dues for national committees, NCSL, and all the other committees that we attend: $465,000, a new legislative
• To the Legislative Education Committee, 1.9 million for the House and Chief Clerk staff, and and the

Transcript Highlights:

• That is a legislative council function on the size of council-created committees.
• We should put a sunset on those committees, and they have to go back before the legislative council to
• Go to the legislative council to justify their committee.
• Would be to have those committee chairs justify their committee to the legislative council, tell them
• I mean, you could have legislation or bills that would be heard before multiple interim committees.

Committee: House Legislative Interim Committee Working Group

Transcript Highlights:

• permanent legislative committees and the legislative department.
• And then section five addresses the Legislative Finance Committee.
• Section six, the Legislative Education Study Committee.
• Chairman, and Representative Duncan, so I sit on the Legislative Council, which is the oversight committee
• And I'm assuming it's different from the new DFA and Legislative Finance Committee sort of capital outlay

Bills: HB1

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Committee.
• Committee.
• Committee.
• Committee.
• Committee.

Committee: House Workforce, Labor, and Economic Development Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• The 15-member committee would include eight members of the Legislative Assembly—four from the House and
• She explained that the draft was designed to create a legislative interim committee, which would operate
• So what does the committee feel about reducing the Legislative Assembly members from 8 to 6?
• the Legislative Assembly, which would provide the Legislative Assembly with a majority on the committee
• Then you have to go in front of the legislative committee, the rulemaking committee, and have them weigh

Committee: Joint Child Custody Review Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman and members of the committee.
• If this is a legislative directive, we want information given to Legislative Management, it should come
• Chairman, members of the committee. I'm John Bjornson from the Legislative Council.
• Of legislation.
• But my concern is folks that are on different committees hear it, and then they come to this committee

Summary: The task force approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, striking language about contracting with a security vendor. Members then reviewed a draft bill on concessions procurement (LC 27.0161), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, update language for vending and merchandising machines, and clarify where concession proceeds are deposited. OMB explained the bill and said it was open to further changes, including language to address artificial fragmentation, clarify which government entities are covered, and possibly set contract-length limits. Members raised questions about whether the bill would apply to school districts, park districts, airports, and other political subdivisions, and about whether concession agreements could direct proceeds to nonprofits or other secondary recipients; OMB said the statute is intended to require proceeds to go to the government entity’s operating fund or general fund. OMB also reported on other survey suggestions. It said a proposed general authority for agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is best limited to high-volume agencies. On legal notices, OMB said it had made progress with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernizing online notices, improving ADA compliance, and discussing rate and definition changes. On click-through agreements, OMB and the Attorney General’s office concluded no statutory change was needed after revising internal guidance; the $20,000 threshold was described as a practical cutoff for adhesive, nonnegotiable software terms. OMB also said issues raised by the Center for Distance Education on alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures had been resolved through policy clarification. The University System gave a brief update on its collaboration with OMB and said it was continuing to review concessions, surplus property, and capital project statutes with all institutions involved. The task force then discussed a draft bill on requirements for new or expanded spending, intended to require agencies to identify program purpose, needs, alternatives, success measures, and budget details, and to report on outcomes over time. Members and staff debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how much should be real-time versus periodic, and whether the bill should include full implementation costs for pilot programs. Legislative Council staff said the new program evaluation division is still being built out, that staffing remains limited, and that the office plans to continue working with OMB and the executive branch to refine the proposal before the next meeting. No final action was taken on the draft bills beyond directing further work and follow-up for the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would just also say that this legislation has been filed in previous sessions and this committee has
• i would just also say that this legislation has been filed in previous sessions and this committee has
• Over multiple sessions, this legislation has been given a favorable report by this committee and the
• Committee.
• I am a member of the New England Police Benevolent Association's Legislative Committee.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Public Service

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Service heard testimony on a wide range of bills affecting public safety and public sector employees, with most of the discussion focused on expanding occupational presumptions and retirement protections for police, firefighters, correction officers, court officers, and other public employees. Testifiers from the Legislature, police and fire unions, the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, PERAC, and the AFL-CIO generally supported bills covering cancer presumptions, contagious disease presumptions, Parkinson’s disease for firefighters, PTSD-related disability and death, and equity for post-certified police officers under the Heart Law. Several speakers emphasized that these conditions are linked to long-term occupational exposure, that current law leaves out agencies such as UMass police, Environmental Police, DMH police, and other state or campus police, and that the bills would correct gaps in existing benefits and presumptions. Representative Colleen Garry and Senator Joan Lovely spoke in support of expanding the Heart Law and cancer presumption protections, while Representative and Senator sponsors for the firefighter and PTSD bills described the health risks faced by first responders and urged favorable reports. PFFM and MassCOP representatives argued that firefighters and police officers face toxic exposures, infectious disease risks, and chronic stress, and cited studies and other states’ laws in support of the measures. PERAC testified that the PTSD accidental disability bill would clarify confusing case law and update filing requirements so traumatic incidents can be used in applications even when PTSD develops later, while still requiring medical review and retirement board approval. Additional testimony came from correction officers and trial court officers seeking comparable disability and pension protections, including a bill to extend a 100% disability pension to correction officers injured in violent attacks and a bill to treat court officers more like police and firefighters when injured in the line of duty. The committee asked a few clarifying questions, including about whether the PTSD bill would address post-retirement claims and about the impact of excluding “forgotten” police agencies. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the committee ultimately adjourned after hearing all scheduled testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Call the meeting of the Legislative Audit and Fiscal Review Committee to order.
• it was, the Legislative Management Committee.
• One is for the committee either to refer to our tax committee or themselves to develop legislation that
• One is for the committee either to refer to our tax committee or themselves to develop legislation that
• This committee could draft legislation, or they could ask the tax committee to draft legislation.

Summary: The committee was called to order, the Pledge of Allegiance and prayer were offered, and the minutes from the previous meeting were approved. Members then received a memo summarizing major audit items and began hearing audit presentations from the State Auditor’s Office and private auditors on a range of state agencies and organizations. Several audits were reported as clean, including the Bank of North Dakota, the North Dakota Guaranteed Student Loan Program, the Office of the Governor, the Office of the State Treasurer, the Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Transportation’s flexible transportation fund, Lake Region State College, and the Department of Environmental Quality. The North Dakota Stockmen’s Association also received an unmodified opinion, though repeat findings were noted for limited segregation of duties and financial statement preparation due to its small staff. The Council on the Arts audit found two findings: payroll charged to federal awards without adequate timekeeping records, and unallowable expenditures from a restricted cultural endowment fund. The Department of Public Instruction audit identified unsupported scholarship applications in the paraprofessional-to-teacher program, though additional testing showed the funds were used for their intended purpose. The most extensive discussion centered on the North Dakota Racing Commission audit, which identified four findings: overspending the promotion fund’s 25% operating limit, grant conditions not being met, improper Breeders Fund awards, and improper procurement for advertising services. Racing Commission director Bruce Johnson acknowledged complacency and weak controls, said the agency would tighten procedures, and explained that the commission had since worked with procurement and would follow the rules more closely. Auditors also explained that the commission would now be audited every two years because of the findings. Another major discussion involved the University of North Dakota School of Law, where auditors found a lack of documentation supporting admissions decisions for post-baccalaureate programs. UND officials said they remain in good standing with the American Bar Association but agreed better documentation and tools are needed; the committee pressed for more transparency and follow-up on admissions criteria. The committee also received an update on Dakota College at Bottineau, where Minot State University reported that bank reconciliations had been brought current after a significant backlog and would now be maintained through shared services. Members requested a written follow-up report on the issues and corrective actions. Finally, the North Dakota Fair Association explained that its foundation has been dissolved and remaining funds were transferred to another nonprofit for continued support of the state fair, and the Department of Public Instruction provided an update on school meal debt, saying the reported amount was about $1.1 million from a partial district survey and that debt remains a local issue, though it could be revisited if school meal funding changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today the committee will hear testimony on the late-file piece of legislation.
• All were defeated by our legislators.
• It has also been a legislative priority of the Mass Economic Regional School Committee for the past three
• I respectfully ask this committee to give the legislation a favorable recommendation, and thank you,
• and committee staff.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Election Laws

Summary: The committee held a hearing on several late-file local bills, with testimony focused mainly on municipal governance and election-related home rule petitions. Representative Silver supported H.5556 for a Fall River polling place change, saying the locations were reviewed by the Secretary of State’s office and supported locally to improve accessibility, especially for voters with disabilities. Testimony also supported H.5539 for Danvers recall elections and S.3118/H.5542 concerning the Groton-Dunstable Regional School District, where witnesses said a candidate was improperly left off the ballot due to an administrative error and should be allowed to fill the full three-year term. Most of the hearing centered on H.5521, Sudbury’s recall-election petition. Supporters argued the measure was lawfully adopted at a heavily attended special town meeting, reflected local self-government, and provided an accountability tool for elected officials. They emphasized that recall provisions are common in Massachusetts and said the bill’s safeguards, including signature thresholds and election procedures, were reasonable. Several Sudbury residents and former officials described the meeting as well-publicized and broadly participatory, and urged the committee to respect the town vote. Opponents, including the Sudbury League of Women Voters, former officials, and residents, argued the bill was rushed, lacked public review, and should go through a fuller charter process. They objected to the absence of stated grounds for recall, the low 10% signature threshold, the short three-month waiting period, and the simultaneous successor-election feature. One witness asked that the bill be sent for further study rather than approved as written. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair closed by inviting written testimony and then adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are starting the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee. Today is December 3, 2025.
• Audit and Review Committee and the executive committee and the legislative auditor to try to ensure
• Chair, and members of the committee. My name is Susanna Pratt. I'm staff to the committee.
• The legislative auditor recommended that LCB should submit a plan to the appropriate committees of the
• and Review Committee.

Summary: The committee met on December 3, 2025, with a quorum present and approved the September 17 minutes. Members first voted to suspend the 2026 JLARC lodging tax expenditure report for one year, based on staff’s explanation that the report is self-reported, not verified, and less useful than State Auditor accountability audits; the motion passed. The committee also approved renaming the JLARC I-900 subcommittee to the “Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits,” while keeping the opening script noting that the performance audit process exists under Initiative 900. The committee then heard follow-up updates on two prior performance audits. The Department of Health presented a draft strategic management plan in response to findings on hospital inspections, complaints, adverse event review, and hospital data access. JLARC staff reiterated that 72% of hospital inspections were late, that DOH did not verify third-party inspection standards or review adverse event reports, and that complaint data suggested possible language-access barriers. DOH said it concurred with the recommendations, had improved on-time inspection compliance to about 49%, planned annual updates starting in July 2026, and would work on accreditation oversight, complaint-language access, and data accessibility, though members pressed for firmer deadlines and questioned the three-year timeline for language access improvements. The Liquor and Cannabis Board also reported on its cannabis market study recommendation. JLARC staff said the agency’s data were incomplete and unreliable, limiting oversight of production, recalls, tax collection, and diversion. LCB said it had improved its current CCRS system but still relied on self-reported data, and it presented a decision package for a new traceability system estimated at about $9 million over three fiscal years. LCB described a plant-tagging and serialization approach tied to production, processing, testing, and retail, but acknowledged it did not currently have sufficient staff to fully implement the system without additional funding. The committee also received briefings on JLARC’s recommendation-tracking tools and the 2024 public records reporting summary, including a high-level review of agency response rates, request volumes, costs, and litigation. Finally, JLARC presented the proposed final report on the Office of Privacy and Data Protection, concluding that OPDP meets its statutory responsibilities and has high user satisfaction, but that its mandate should be updated to better match its current capacity and focus; the committee adopted the report for distribution. The meeting then moved into the 2025 tax preference performance reviews, where JLARC staff summarized nine reviews and noted that the Citizens Commission on Tax Preference and Performance Measurement endorsed all 17 legislative auditor recommendations, with comments on seven. Early reviews discussed included natural gas transportation fuel preferences, travel agent and tour operator B&O rates, nonprofit low-income housing development, multipurpose senior centers, disabled veteran adaptive housing, and trade convention attendance, with staff and commissioners generally recommending continuation of some preferences, modification of others, and improved objectives or performance measures where needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman and members of the committee.
• If this is a legislative directive, we want information given to Legislative Management; it should come
• If this is a legislative directive, we want information given to Legislative Management; it should come
• Chairman, members of the committee. I'm John Bjornson from the Legislative Council.
• But my concern is folks that are on different committees hear it, and then they come to this committee

Committee: Joint Legislative Task Force on Government Efficiency

Summary: The task force first approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, including a correction removing language that suggested the auditor’s office would contract with a security vendor. Members then moved to a bill draft on concessions (LC 27.0161.00000), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, clarify that proceeds go to the entity’s operating fund or general fund, and make other technical updates. OMB explained the draft and answered questions about scope, fragmentation, vendor restrictions, school districts, and whether concession proceeds could be directed to nonprofits; OMB said the draft could be refined further, including clarifying covered entities and contract length. No vote was taken on the draft during the discussion. OMB also reported on other survey items. It said a proposal to broadly allow agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering/land surveying vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is working well for the agencies that already have it. On legal notices, OMB said it has been working with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernization, including an ADA-compliant online notice system and possible statutory updates to reflect changing technology and notice definitions. On click-through agreements for routine IT purchases, OMB and the Attorney General’s office said policy clarification—not statutory change—was enough, and the $20,000 threshold was intended to distinguish low-dollar adhesive contracts from purchases where terms can be negotiated. The committee also heard that OMB and the Center for Distance Education had resolved questions about alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures through existing policy, so no statutory changes were needed there. North Dakota University System representatives gave a brief update on ongoing collaboration with OMB on statutory efficiency ideas, including concessions and surplus property. Finally, the task force discussed a draft on requirements for new or expanded spending programs, which would require agencies to identify purpose, expected benefits, alternatives, success measures, and full implementation costs, and would require reporting on outcomes over time. Members debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how to use the new program evaluators, whether real-time dashboards should be used, and how to choose which programs to evaluate; staff from Legislative Council said they would work with OMB and the auditor’s office to revise the draft and process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, the announcement of interim committee appointments. Um, we've announced legislative council.
• Legislative Education Study Committee.
• The Legislative Finance Committee. Voting members for the House. Representatives small chair.
• All right, let's go to Legislative ethics Committee.
• To advisory members to the Legislative ethics Committee will be Representatives Grola and Cates.

Committee: House Legislative Council

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair and committee men.
• Chairman, members of the committee. I'm Representative John Blandon, uh, stay the committee.
• The obstructing or impeding of a legislator or legislative employees will be a Class B misdemeanor for
• The obstructing or impeding of a legislator or legislative employees will be a Class B misdemeanor for
• </c> president of the senate or a committee president of the senate or a committee chair<00:08:32.279

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and took up two House bills. House Bill 10, relating to the rights of real property owners, was presented as a response to squatting. The sponsors said it would create a streamlined process to remove unauthorized occupants from real property, define “squatter” in statute, and keep existing criminal mischief penalties aligned for damage to property. After a motion and second, the bill was approved and reported favorably with the expression that it should pass. The committee then heard House Bill 399, relating to interference with legislative proceedings. The sponsor and the Senate Sergeant at Arms said the bill is intended to protect the General Assembly’s ability to conduct business by penalizing obstructing or impeding legislators or legislative employees and disruptive conduct in legislative spaces, while still allowing protest. They emphasized that the measure would give the legislative branch protections similar to those already available to the executive and judicial branches, and that arrests would be made only at the call of leadership or a committee chair. Members voted to advance House Bill 399 after discussion. One senator explained that while he supported moving the bill forward, he was concerned the language could be broad enough to cover peaceful demonstrations, such as teachers rallying at the Capitol, and said he would need more time before deciding how to vote on the floor. The committee ultimately reported the bill favorably with the expression that it should pass, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman and committee.
• legislation with you.
• the amount of legislation.
• the amount of legislation.
• committees.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• :13.839><c> got</c><00:14:14.160><c> to</c> committee that Republicans got to committee that Republicans
• You know, we other committees had?
• budget committees don't have time.
• </c> can't probably take away legislators can't probably take away legislators ability<00:18:51.200><
• So we weren't having committee.

Summary: House Fraud and State Agency Oversight Chair Kristen Robbins and Vice Chair Patti Anderson reviewed the committee’s first session, saying its work focused on exposing fraud, identifying gaps in statute and agency tools, and creating a public whistleblower portal (mnfraud.com). Robbins said the committee helped drive bipartisan opposition to legislatively named grants/earmarks, and that committee testimony from agencies, the Office of Legislative Auditor, and the Office of Grants Management led to late-session committee bills on issues such as a state kickback statute and required grants-management training. She also said the portal received 530 submissions in its first week, which the committee will review over the interim. Members emphasized the need for stronger statewide oversight of grants and fraud prevention. Anderson said existing agency inspector general structures have not worked well and described a bipartisan effort to create a statewide Office of Inspector General with full investigatory authority. Robbins said the Senate version was moving through finance and expected on the floor soon, with the governor indicating he would sign it. Walter Hudson argued that hearings showed agencies often focus on paperwork and compliance checkboxes rather than actually preventing fraud, citing conflict-of-interest attestations and the Feeding Our Future-related testimony as examples. Jim Nash said the state government finance bill includes funding for anti-fraud efforts through the Office of the Auditor and related provisions. In response to questions, Robbins said the committee tried to remain bipartisan despite a 5-3 Republican majority, and that members had handed significant allegations to law enforcement when appropriate. She said the committee did not need subpoena power this session because it is an oversight body, not a law-enforcement body. On legislatively named grants, Robbins said the goal is to change legislative culture rather than impose a formal ban, and she expects future policy to require front-end risk review, 990 review, and capacity checks before such grants are approved. Anderson added that the House and Senate versions of the inspector general bill differ on branch placement and law-enforcement authority, and that the House will decide whether to accept the Senate version once it comes back from finance and the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislation originally reported from the Committee on General Laws with a substitute and subsequently
• Legislation, original reported to Committee on General Laws for the Substitute, the Legislation reported
• That is the only legislative committee meeting that I'm aware of.
• I'm from Alexander. for committees of conference on the previously reported legislation.
• That is the only legislative committee meeting that I'm aware of.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the Assembly Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections.
• Welcome to the Assembly Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections.
• Long before the Legislative Commission had the authority to approve regulations, the legislative committee
• Committee of the Legislature and makes the committee independent of the Legislative Commission.
• The Assembly Committee on Legislative Operations and Elections will come back to order.

Bills: AB534 , AB562 , AB595 , AB597 , AB600 , SB74 , SB226 , SB422 , SB488

Committee: Assembly Legislative Operations and Elections

Transcript Highlights:

• Call the meeting of the Legislative Audit and Fiscal Review Committee to order.
• Our job is Legislative Audit and Fiscal Review Committee to hold...
• One is for the committee either to refer to our tax committee or themselves to develop legislation that
• One is for the committee either to refer to our tax committee or themselves to develop legislation that
• the tax... ...This committee could draft legislation, or they could ask the tax committee to draft legislation

Committee: Joint Legislative Audit and Fiscal Review Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• So we would ask the committee to vote this bill inexpedient to legislate and recognize that municipalities
• So we would ask the committee to vote this bill inexpedient to legislate and recognize that municipalities
• So we would ask the committee to vote this bill inexpedient to legislate and recognize that municipalities
• So we would ask the committee to vote this bill inexpedient to legislate and recognize that municipalities
• So we would ask the committee to vote this bill inexpedient to legislate and recognize that municipalities

Committee: Senate Election Law and Municipal Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• It cuts the legislative committee process out.
• It cuts the legislative committee process out.
• It cuts the legislative committee process out.
• It cuts the<00:10:32.959><c> legislative</c><00:10:33.760><c> committee</c><00:10:34.240><c> process<
• </c> the legislative committee process out. the legislative committee process out.