Transcript Highlights:

• It also makes various rules by statute.
• two commissioners agree with the rules.
• this bill says that when the puc rules this bill says that when the puc adopts<00:12:38.760> rules
• must agree to these rules Commissioners must agree to these rules because<00:12:44.600> one<00
• multinationals subject to the same rules multinationals subject to the same rules as<01:13:58.199

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House rules require notices to be posted 48 hours in advance.
• House rules dictate that public testimony has to be posted no later than two hours before the hearing
• > public<00:12:57.600> testimony rules dictate that uh public testimony rules dictate that
• steps to become a recognized interpreter steps to become a recognized interpreter or<00:55:16.559
• translator or an interpreter. translator or an interpreter.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Higher Education met on February 4 and began with announcements about committee protocol, including posting hearing notices and testimony earlier than required and using written HD1 drafts for more complex amendments. The chair also noted the new AV system and asked speakers to be clear because the microphones are sensitive. The committee then took up several University of Hawaiʻi-related measures, with most testimony coming from UH officials, state agencies, and advocacy groups, and no votes were taken in the portion provided. HB 1596, relating to student basic needs support at the University of Hawaiʻi, drew support from UH, the Oʻahu Youth Action Board, and an individual. UH said it stood on its written testimony and could answer questions. HB 1597, relating to Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias research, received support from UH/JABSOM, the Alzheimer’s Association, the Hawaii Medical Association, and others; the Attorney General’s Office offered a procedural reminder about statewide concern. HB 1970, funding the University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center and the Hawaii Tumor Registry, was supported by UH, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the Hawaii Medical Association, and others, with testimony emphasizing the registry’s role in cancer surveillance, prevention, and federal funding. The committee also heard HB 1598, creating a Hawaii Climate Institute. UH testified in support, citing worsening drought, heat, sea level rise, and extreme weather, and said the institute would hire climate modelers and faculty across several schools. Members questioned funding, and UH said it would seek state startup money, possible green-fee support, and federal grants, noting recent federal cuts and the need for permanent positions. HB 1989, on water retention, was supported by UH as a study to slow runoff and improve aquifer recharge. HB 1951, on biosecurity, drew support from UH, DLNR, the Hawaii Farm Bureau, students, and other organizations; testimony stressed invasive species threats, the need for biocontrol research and containment capacity, and possible sites for a statewide facility. HB 1952, funding agricultural research station improvements on Kauaʻi, was supported by UH, the Farm Bureau, and others, with testimony noting aging facilities and the need to modernize stations across the islands. Finally, HB 2005, relating to language access, received UH support, with a UH representative noting that credit programs may fit best in a credit-bearing academic program and that Outreach College could be an option for noncredit programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Move to suspend constitutional three-day rule. rule?
• The rule is suspended.
• Rules are suspended.
• Rules are suspended.
• . to state agency interpretations of laws or rules. suspended.

Bills: SJR57, SCR8, SB8, SB14, SB24, SB108, SB112, SB125, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB318, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB513, SB565, SB621, SB650, SB689, SB707, SB710, SB761, SB763, SB815, SB854, SB875, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1006, SB1018, SB1019, SB1024, SB1026, SB1146, SB1194, SB1198, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1379, SB1497, SB1498, SB1527, SB1532, SB1547, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SJR37, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Transcript Highlights:

• talking about around, well, maybe they can't do this, but maybe they'll do that, and so there's still rules
• and I don't know how we quantify it here, typically, but where the legislature has to do a big interpretation
• And so I've had some conversations with LC about their interpretation about whether or not crabbing is
• correct to say, fair to say, that the committee would like a range of tax impacts from a narrow interpretation
• to... ...of tax impacts from a narrow interpretation to a broad interpretation, for lack of a better

Summary: The Financial Estimate Committee met on July 6, 2026, to begin work on the financial estimate for IP 28, after reviewing the statutory process and confirming that only IP 28 had cleared the signature threshold for consideration. Staff explained the committee’s duties under ORS 250.125 and the timeline for draft statements, public hearing, and final adoption. The committee also designated Carol Moreno C. Fuentes to file the committee’s eventual statements. Staff from the Department of Administrative Services and the Legislative Revenue Office presented preliminary analysis of IP 28, describing major uncertainties in estimating impacts because the measure is not a tax law change and would affect multiple industries and government functions. Preliminary figures discussed included an estimated $56.5 million loss in the current biennium and $6.7 million in reduced expenditures, with larger projected revenue losses of roughly $244.1 million to $258 million and reduced expenditures of $30.7 million to $34.9 million in 2027–29, plus $87.8 million to $88.3 million in increased expenditures. Analysts said the biggest effects would likely involve agriculture, fish and wildlife, hunting and fishing, local government enforcement, and possible shifts in state funding, but many impacts remained difficult to quantify. Committee members raised concerns about local government costs, law enforcement and prosecution burdens, impacts on the hospitality and recreation sectors, possible effects on tribal governments and treaty rights, and whether the measure would affect shellfish and crabbing. They also discussed the Humane Transition Fund, subsidies, possible litigation costs, and whether the statement should include broader uncertainty language and multiple scenarios. Members generally agreed the draft should be revised to better reflect uncertainty, clarify assumptions, and possibly use bullets or other formatting to improve readability. No vote was taken. The committee agreed to treat the current draft as a working version, with staff to revise it based on the discussion and return an updated draft before the next meeting scheduled for July 17 at 2 p.m., with both in-person and virtual participation available.

Transcript Highlights:

• His advisor, his interpreter, his health navigator, his voice. I was his caregiver.
• and care for Steve were profoundly impacted by the times when I was able to be in the room and interpreting
• It's my deepest regrets that I could not do that for my dad because of rigid hospital rules.
• Well, the challenge comes in that the Executive Office of Elder Affairs has traditionally interpreted
• And DPPC has a whole set of rules and regulations and procedures for how they will do those investigations

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Aging and Independence/Elder Affairs Committee heard testimony on several bills, with the main focus on H.769/S.468, an act to improve care and prepare for the new era of Alzheimer’s and dementia. Legislators and advocates described the bill’s provisions, including expanded dementia training for first responders, a dementia services coordinator/director in state government, improved hospital discharge and caregiver access protections, dementia care coordination benefits for certain MassHealth members, public awareness and data collection requirements, and expanded support for geriatric workforce recruitment. Representative Danielle Gregoire and Senator Gomez framed the measure as a zero-cost, bipartisan continuation of the 2018 Alzheimer’s and Dementia Act, while the Alzheimer’s Association, Boston Public Health Commission, police representatives, clinicians, and family caregivers all testified in support, emphasizing public health needs, early diagnosis, caregiver involvement, and safer emergency and hospital care. The committee also heard testimony on H.796/S.476, which would establish an Office of Older Adult Advocate and a special commission on a statewide long-term services and supports benefit program. Representative Steve Ultrino supported an independent older adult advocate to help navigate fragmented state services and improve constituent services, while committee members asked about funding and the office’s relationship to existing secretariats. On the long-term care commission bill, NAFA Massachusetts and LeadingAge Massachusetts supported creating a stakeholder commission to review actuarial findings and explore public-private financing options for long-term care, stressing that neither public nor private coverage alone is sufficient and that middle-income families need more planning tools and options. The committee also took testimony on H.786/S.466, a bill to protect vulnerable elders by expanding the Executive Office of Elder Affairs’ authority to investigate abuse or neglect in non-traditional custodial settings such as prisons, jails, shelters, group homes, and certain treatment facilities. Prisoners Legal Services said the bill would close a jurisdictional gap that leaves some older adults without an investigative agency once they age out of DPPC coverage. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the meeting ended with a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• The second part of the bill about the quality measures really comes into play because of a TDI interpretation
• It is because the Department of Insurance interpreted that provision of code to prevent implementing
• a tiered network or a waiving of a copay or deductible because any sort of incentive they interpreted
• authorization process, we would like that determination to be made as soon as possible, and there are rules
• That, that's the goal for us just to make sure that those rules are followed for the betterment of patient

Bills: HB139

Keywords: ad valorem tax, tax rates, voter-approval, taxing unit, property tax, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• In closing, I urge the committee for a favorable ruling on H. 697.
• What I probably talked too quickly about, but I wanted to adhere to the rules like everybody else, is
• We are seeking relief from DESE's newly imposed interpretation of General Laws Chapter 76, Section 12
• The fastest way to resolve that is not through each district presenting a home rule.
• and Hancock's home rule.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused primarily on H. 517/S. 314, a bill to provide a sustainable future for rural schools, and H. 697, a bill to require full funding of regional school transportation. Witnesses from rural districts, school committees, superintendents, students, and local officials described chronic underfunding, declining enrollment, high fixed costs, special education and transportation burdens, and the loss of programs, staff, and extracurriculars. Several speakers argued that rural aid should be funded at $60 million annually and made non-discretionary, while others emphasized that transportation reimbursement for regional districts has repeatedly fallen short of the state’s promise and is driving budget crises and overrides. A number of students testified in support of rural aid, describing cuts to classes, counselors, and activities, and the impact on their schools and communities. Committee members also discussed whether transportation policy should be revisited to address underlying cost drivers, including bus bidding practices and whether regional districts should have more flexibility in transportation requirements. The committee also heard H. 515, concerning Hancock Elementary School and a school choice-related exemption from a state requirement that has created a large financial burden for the district. Hancock’s superintendent and Rep. John Barrett explained that a decades-old regulation, recently enforced by DESE, would require Hancock to pay tuition for choice-in students through high school graduation even though the district only serves pre-K through grade 6 and sends its own students elsewhere for middle and high school. They said the rule creates a significant per-student shortfall and has forced Hancock to opt out of school choice. Committee members asked for clarification about how the arrangement works and how the costs fall on Hancock. Additional testimony supported related transportation bills for non-regional districts, especially Plymouth/Carver and North Middlesex, describing high and rising bus costs, special education and McKinney-Vento transportation expenses, and the strain on local budgets. Speakers repeatedly said that state reimbursement has not matched actual costs and that communities are being forced to choose between transportation and classroom services. No votes or final actions were taken in the hearing; the committee simply received testimony and closed the hearing on the bills discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Did he follow any rules? No.
• Did he follow any<00:17:50.400> rules?<00:17:50.880> No. any rules? No. any rules?
• uh Supreme Court president interpreting uh Supreme Court president interpreting the<00:25:53.679
• <00:25:59.919> the defines arms as weapons interpreting the defines arms as weapons interpreting
• Maybe try and reintroduce it next year after the ruling.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Senate Bill 433, which would restrict the carrying of “bladed weapons” and related items. The Office of the Public Defender, Honolulu Police Department, the Hawaii Firearms Coalition, Knife Rights, and many individual testifiers opposed the bill, arguing it is overbroad, vague, and likely unconstitutional. Common concerns were that the term “bladed weapon” could sweep in ordinary tools such as pocketknives, Leathermans, multi-tools, fishing and camping gear, and items used by farmers, ranchers, hunters, divers, and martial arts practitioners. Several speakers also warned that the bill could burden lawful self-defense and create an affirmative-defense scheme that shifts costs and proof burdens onto defendants. Supporters and opponents alike focused on the need for a clearer definition, with HPD saying a narrower definition would help distinguish ordinary tools from dangerous weapons used in assaults. Opponents repeatedly urged the committee to defer or kill the measure, citing pending and related court cases and the risk of new constitutional challenges. Some testifiers tied the bill to Native Hawaiian gathering rights and subsistence practices, saying it would interfere with hunting, fishing, and food gathering, while others argued it would do little to deter criminals and instead penalize law-abiding residents and visitors. After finishing testimony on SB 433, the committee moved on to Senate Bill 2575 relating to firearms. The transcript shows the start of that item with the Office of the Public Defender and other agencies being called, but no substantive testimony or action on SB 2575 is included before the excerpt ends. No votes or final committee actions are reflected in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill also aligns the net worth standard for virtual currency licensees with accounting rules, removes
• Right now, the bill is in the possession of the rules committee, was introduced after deadline.
• >> No, it will go back to the front desk and then it will be sent to rules.
• When he says whatever we say we're going to, it gets sidetracked and an off-ramp to rules, and the rules
• And we have 3 members of the task force, 3 different interpretations of what the law currently is in

Bills: HF4881, HF4867, HF4422, HF4223

Keywords: healthcare, insurance, regulation, financial institutions, prescription drug affordability, consumer protection, restitution account, financial compensation, attorney general, distributions, property insurance, homeowners insurance, fire and allied lines, hail insurance, appraisal clause, loss adjustment, alternative dispute resolution, insurance claims, claim valuation, actual cash value

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the administrative director for the Broward County Board of Rules and Appeals.
• It's the exception, not the rule.
• Many associations are well maintained, and it's probably an 80-20 rule like everything else.
• So I appreciate that you guys, all of these interpretations, but like, this is what we meant.
• And I sent them the rule, and I said, you need to follow this rule.

Summary: The committee on Regulated Industries convened with a quorum and began a panel discussion focused on condominium milestone inspections and structural integrity reserve studies (SIRS), with members framing the topic as part of Florida’s post-Surfside condo safety reforms. The chair and panelists reviewed how the state got here, emphasizing that the problems predated Surfside and were driven by long-term deferred maintenance, underfunded reserves, and aging buildings. Panelists included representatives from Florida Realtors, engineering and reserve-study firms, a CPA, a community association attorney, and Broward County’s building safety official, all of whom described their roles in inspections, reserve planning, and code enforcement. Testimony centered on what inspectors are finding in the field. Panelists said the most common problems are not subsidence but wear-and-tear and maintenance failures, especially in stairways, balconies, roofs, parapet walls, waterproofing, and corrosion. They described examples of buildings with hidden deterioration, hurricane-exposed damage, and associations that were underfunded despite prior inspection regimes in Miami-Dade and Broward. Dr. Barbosa explained that Miami-Dade’s recertification program began in the 1970s and Broward’s in 2005, with current timelines generally requiring notice, a first milestone review, and then time to begin substantial repairs; she said the program has improved compliance but that SIRS has added confusion. Members also raised concerns about the cost and implementation of SIRS, including whether reports are being used to generate unnecessary work, whether contractors or firms have conflicts of interest, and whether the law’s use of “fully funded” is being misunderstood. Panelists said the statutory reserve requirement is better understood as baseline funding, not having all money in the bank immediately, and suggested clearer definitions and possibly changing the terminology to “adequately funded.” They also discussed the need to separate required structural items from optional or cosmetic items in reserve reports, improve transparency for buyers and lenders, and ensure associations provide documents through websites and other portals. No votes were taken. The committee used the meeting as an information-gathering session and signaled that more panels and discussion would follow, with members and witnesses agreeing that the state may need further clarification, education, and possible statutory adjustments to reduce confusion while preserving building safety.

Transcript Highlights:

• That was the rule.
• We have rules on domestic violence protection order rules and things like that.
• We had a local rule that didn't allow it. But the reality of it is, Rule 3.2 causes headaches.
• Another rule, when a rule already exists, is not going to make them practice it uniformly.
• But 3.2F1 says this rule does not apply to the extent it conflicts with another rule.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• special language, so just clarify, is that because there was nobody there to testify, or that's the rules
• Is that the rules of special language that nobody is allowed to testify?
• of Joint Budget, then they would adopt those same rules.
• Is that a correct interpretation of the handout? Is that what is occurring?
• Is that a correct interpretation? Let’s say that again. Okay. In 2025–26, we had $478 million, 973.

Summary: The committee first reviewed a long list of House and Senate bills that were ready to be passed out, then heard a special language subcommittee report. The report recommended do pass on six bills, including SB 63, SB 67, SB 73, HB 1089, HB 1090, and HB 1093, and amendments on 11 others. A motion to pull HB 107 out for separate consideration failed, and the special language report was adopted. The committee then took up the Revenue Stabilization Law and schedule. Staff explained the schedule’s differences from the governor’s balanced budget proposal and described several fund transfers, including $100 million for Medicaid sustainability, $70 million for the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom account, $43.7 million for the general discretionary majority vote set-aside, $5 million for the motor vehicle set-aside, and two $150 million transfers related to the Quick Action Closing Fund and public highway improvements. Members asked for clarification on allocations, and the committee adopted the amendment and passed both House Bill 1100 and Senate Bill 75 as amended. Representative McClendon then presented a bill to support expansion of the Bella Vista Veterans Wall of Honor, but withdrew it, saying he would seek other funding sources. The committee then moved through the remaining captioned bills, including House Bills 105, 107, 1008, 1022, 1035, 1036, 1037, 1051, 1052, 1064, 1066, 1068, 1089, 1090, and 1093, and Senate Bills 3, 4, 7, 8, 15, 20, 21, 30, 31, 36, 41, 43, 58, 63, 67, and 77, generally passing them with little or no discussion, some as amended. The chair announced that all prior holds had been released and said the next Joint Budget Committee meeting would be Tuesday for peer issues only, then adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• special language, so just clarify, is that because there was nobody there to testify, or that's the rules
• "Is that the rules of special language that nobody is allowed to testify?"
• of Joint Budget, they would adopt those same rules."
• Is that a correct interpretation of the handout? You're not looking at C2.
• Is that a correct interpretation? Let's say that again. Okay. In 25-26, we had $478,973,000. Right.

Summary: The committee met to consider a long caption of House and Senate bills, first announcing a list of measures ready to be passed out and then taking up a special language subcommittee report. The report covered several bills, including SB 63, SB 67, SB 73, HB 1089, HB 1090, and HB 1093, along with amendments to a larger group of bills. A motion was made to pull HB 107 out separately, but after discussion about the amendment’s impact on school districts and the process for further debate, the substitute motion failed and the special language report was adopted. The committee then considered the revenue stabilization law and schedule. Staff explained that the main changes from the governor’s balanced budget proposal were moving county operations and higher education allocations from category B to category A, and described several fund transfers, including $100 million to Medicaid sustainability, $70 million to the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom account, $43.7 million to discretionary set-asides, $5 million to the motor vehicle set-aside, and two $150 million transfers related to the Quick Action Closing Fund and highway improvements. After questions about the schedule’s funding changes, the committee adopted the amendment and then passed House Bill 1100 and Senate Bill 75 as amended. Representative McClendon then presented a bill to support expansion of the Bella Vista Veterans Wall of Honor, requesting $400,000, but withdrew the bill, saying he would seek alternate funding. The committee then moved through the remaining captioned House and Senate bills, including HB 105, HB 107, HB 1008, HB 1022, HB 1035, HB 1036, HB 1037, HB 1051, HB 1052, HB 1064, HB 1066, HB 1068, HB 1089, HB 1090, HB 1093, and Senate Bills 3, 4, 7, 8, 15, 20, 21, 30, 31, 36, 41, 43, 58, 63, 67, 73, and 77, approving them with or without amendments as noted. The chair also announced that all prior holds had been released and said the next meeting would be a Joint Budget Committee meeting focused only on peer issues before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Rather than stopping that... ...rather than stopping that activity, they tried to introduce a rule change
• A lot of it comes down to interpretation, and we found that with the examiner's office, their interpretation
• No, they had some things that they said were going to be done in their rule.
• They were going to do in their rule-making, and so that just gives us an opportunity for them to do that
• rule-making, and we bring them back to see how that all works.

Bills: HB159, HB110, HB114, HB115, HB116, HB123, HB125

Keywords: U.S. Space and Rocket Center, Alabama Space Science Exhibit Commission, public facilities, space exploration, education programs, bond issuance, Governor involvement, pharmacy, pharmacist licensure, Alabama State Board of Pharmacy, renewal fees, continuing education, disciplinary actions, sessions, 2025-R, 1, 219

Transcript Highlights:

• Federal Trade Commission Supreme Court ruling in 2015.
• These are rules that are currently not going up to the governor to review.
• for pharmacists and controlled substances and stuff, would they have to submit these rules up?
• We don't agree with your position, so we're going to rule this as anti-competitive and now take that
• So I think, at least right now, this is the last Rules Committee meeting.

Keywords: 914, all

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several bills. Senate Bill 419, as amended to update the effective date to 2026, would allow the state treasurer and the Department of Wildlife Conservation/Wildlife Conservation Commission to employ or appoint attorneys. Supporters said the treasurer’s office handles highly specialized financial matters and needs in-house expertise and faster legal advice; questions focused on possible conflicts with the Attorney General, fiscal impact, and why Wildlife was included. After discussion, the bill was reported due pass by a 7-2 vote. Senate Bill 835, also amended to a 2026 effective date, would require qualifying licensing boards and commissions to submit proposed non-rulemaking actions with anti-competitive implications for review by the Secretary of State. The author said the bill responds to antitrust concerns raised by the North Carolina dental board case and is intended to provide state supervision before boards take potentially anti-competitive action. Members questioned whether existing court remedies and Attorney General oversight were sufficient, and whether a single official should have that authority. The bill passed due pass 8-2. Senate Bill 1618 would require courts to conduct pretrial risk assessments early in criminal cases, with the assessments used as one factor in bail decisions but not as the sole basis for granting or denying bail. The author said the bill is modeled on federal practice and is meant to help judges make fact-based decisions and reduce jail overcrowding, especially in Oklahoma County. Members asked about who validates the assessments, county implementation, and costs; the author said counties could choose their own approach and that the fiscal impact would not be significant. The bill was reported due pass 6-4. The committee also considered Senate Bill 262, which was heavily amended and had both the title and enacting clause struck while members continued working on it. The bill concerns moving certain inmates convicted of nonviolent financial crimes out of county jails and into appropriate intake/transport processes, with the author emphasizing the goal of reducing jail overcrowding and inviting further collaboration on the language. Members raised concerns about fairness and possible unequal application based on community ties, and the bill was reported due pass 8-1 despite being acknowledged as a work in progress.

Transcript Highlights:

• rules, but nothing else.
• 12b6 of the civil procedure rules um but nothing else okay all right any other questions okay thank
• I have a motion to affirm the ruling of the Claims Commission, and a second to affirm the ruling of the
• They followed the processes that we laid out for them to follow and promulgated rules based on that,
• We do have a motion on the floor to affirm the ruling, which was a dismissal by the Claims Commission

Summary: The Joint Budget Committee’s Claims Review and Litigation Reports Oversight Subcommittee met to consider two proposed Department of Corrections litigation settlements and one appealed claim from the Claims Commission. The first settlement, Caroline Arnett v. Larry Norris et al., involved allegations of long-term sexual abuse by a corrections employee. Committee members asked about PREA audits, facility practices, and whether the inmate had been placed at the proper facility. The department said audits and other safeguards were underway, and the committee approved the settlement. The second settlement, Latasha Ridgel v. Arkansas Department of Corrections, also involved sexual harassment/assault allegations. Members questioned the seven-year delay in the case and whether the issue was systemic; the department cited attorney turnover, COVID delays, and legislative changes making inmate exposure a felony. The committee approved that settlement as well. The committee then heard an appeal in Sharon Greer and Deanna Hayes v. Commissioner of State Lands, a denied and dismissed claim involving a tax-delinquent sale of family property in Crittenden County. Staff and the Commissioner of State Lands’ office said the property was certified in 2000, sold in 2009 after notice was sent, and that excess proceeds were available for a limited period before escheating to the county. The claimants argued they were not properly notified of the sale or the excess proceeds and only learned of the matter in 2025 after receiving the deed at a family funeral. Committee members discussed the notice process, statute of limitations, and the handling of excess proceeds, with several noting the issue may call for legislative review rather than relief in this case. After debate, the committee voted to affirm the Claims Commission’s dismissal of the Greer/Hayes claim. Members also discussed broader concerns about how excess proceeds from tax sales are handled and whether the current statutory process should be revisited in future legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Malia Madrid with Considerate Dunn Seniors and the Golden Rule Alliance.
• There is a court rule that says they're not supposed to do it.
• The courts have continuously ruled that.
• I ruled that he is done.
• I ruled that he is done. I ruled that he is done.

Bills: SB1067, SB1234, SB1285, SB1295, SB1392, SB1413, SB1436, SB1470, SB1476, SB1489, SB1512, SB1535, SB1540, SB1556, SB1568, SB1569, SB1570, SB1573, SB1585, SB1609, SB1627, SB1634, SB1635, SB1644, SB1647, SB1648, SB1650, SB1653, SB1654, SB1655, SB1656, SB1657, SB1658, SB1661, SB1662, SB1664, SB1666, SB1667, SB1669, SB1709, SB1720, SB1723, SB1725, SB1743, SB1746, SB1748, SB1755, SB1786, SB1820, SB1822, SB1829, SCR1027, SCR1040, SCR1048

Keywords: tax lien, property tax lien, real property tax lien, foreclosure, right of redemption, redeem, excess proceeds, county abatement lien, abatement lien, lien priority, assessment lien, easement, county treasurer, certificate of purchase, tax delinquency, delinquent property taxes, property owner equity, judgment foreclosure, title report, Arizona Revised Statutes

Summary: The committee approved the minutes and then took up a long agenda of election, criminal justice, corrections, and county-government bills. Early election measures included SB 1436, requiring ballot language for certain school override and bond elections to estimate the secondary property tax impact; SB 1568, requiring election systems’ internal clocks to stay within 60 seconds of official time and making violations a misdemeanor; SB 1569, limiting special election board members from collecting or processing voter registration while assisting confined voters; and SB 1746, requiring voting centers to supplement rather than replace precinct polling places, requiring public offices and schools to provide polling space, and closing schools on primary and general election days for in-service training. SB 1436 and SB 1568 were eventually given do-pass recommendations, SB 1569 also passed committee, and SB 1746 passed despite concerns raised about school safety and access. Some bills were held earlier in the meeting and voted on later after testimony concluded. The committee also heard SB 1295, which would allow the Department of Corrections to release certain seriously ill inmates to contracted medical institutions if they qualify for ALTCS, with an amendment replacing disability language with illness-based criteria; the sponsor described it as a cost-saving measure that could shift care costs to federal programs. SB 1067, the so-called Gila County blight bill, would let counties place abatement costs for rubbish, debris, and dilapidated buildings on property tax bills and liens; county officials testified that it would help recover cleanup costs for blighted properties and heirs’ property, and it passed unanimously. SB 1413 would remove the $100,000 cap on restitution for serious injury or death caused by moving violations and passed after the sponsor said the cap had already been found unconstitutional. SB 1476 would make child neglect a class six felony when a custodian exposes a newborn to dangerous or narcotic drugs or causes fetal alcohol syndrome; supporters framed it as accountability and child protection, while opponents warned it could deter treatment and worsen family separation. The bill passed on a split vote. Later, the committee considered several criminal-justice and public-safety bills. SB 1512 would expand the definition of vulnerable adult and broaden “position of trust and confidence” for theft cases involving seniors and other vulnerable adults; testimony highlighted scams and exploitation of grieving or isolated elders, and the bill passed. SB 1585 would regulate sex-offender-specific evaluations, treatment, and polygraph services through the Sex Offender Management Board, add a surcharge fund and assessment on sexual-offense convictions, and appropriate funds to DPS; supporters said it would create uniform standards, while opponents questioned the need for additional fees, and it passed. SB 1662 would require probation conditions to be the least restrictive necessary and tailored to a defendant’s risk and needs; supporters from the Justice Action Network and criminal-defense advocates said it would improve rehabilitation and public safety, and it passed. The committee also began SB 1664, which would change constable petition-signature requirements in Maricopa and Pima counties, but the transcript cuts off before the full discussion and vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Impacts will vary depending on legal interpretation of prohibited... ...be significant.
• Impacts will vary depending on legal interpretation of prohibited or restricted activities and industries
• of shellfish, just to read more smoothly, I thought it would be something more like the legal interpretation
• We haven't adopted rules here or anything. Does anyone want to offer a second?

Keywords: 907, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Report from the Committee on Rules and Legislative Administration. The House will come to order.
• We will now hear the report from the Committee on Rules and Legislative Administration, pursuant to Rules
• I would say that we have the ability through rules to have this discussion.
• That's the sort of attitude that we've seen under the clean car rules that have been adopted straight
• And this has been the rule for a while. So Ben and Jerry's.

Transcript Highlights:

• To wrap it up, miscellaneous: I've noted to please see House Rules 45, as well as House Rules 100 through
• house rules 100 45 as well as rules house rules 100 through1<00:52:49.640> um<00:52:49.760>
• That's my question. interpretation interpretation okay<02:10:39.840> representative<02:10:40.639
• Supreme Court these administrative rules Supreme Court these administrative rules are<02:25:17.359
• there were these administrative rules there were these administrative rules that<02:29:00.800>

Keywords: 1189, house, all