Transcript Highlights:

• So I believe, Commissioner Forsyth, that you will recuse yourself for this? I will. Thank you.
• Because I do not believe he needs to recuse himself for the second testimony.
• whether to endorse or not endorse, as well as provide a comment or elect not to provide a comment or recuse

Summary: The Citizens Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on September 22, 2025, confirmed a quorum, and unanimously approved the August 6, 2025 meeting minutes. The main business of the meeting was public testimony on the 2025 tax preference reviews, with Commissioner Forsyth recusing himself for the first witness, Joey Halverson of Tote Maritime Alaska, who testified in support of the tax preference for natural gas as a transportation fuel. He argued that LNG has enabled major emissions reductions, supported infrastructure at the Port of Tacoma, and should continue to receive tax preferences to encourage further clean maritime fuel adoption. The second witness, Michelle Preston of Habitat for Humanity of Washington State, testified in support of the tax preference for low-income homeownership developers. She said the preference helps Habitat affiliates advance homeownership and sustain operations, but noted that reporting has been inconsistent across independent affiliates and that JLARC’s metrics may not fully capture the program’s benefits. Commissioners asked questions about affiliate accounting, the distinction between benefits to nonprofits versus homebuyers, and whether the reporting/renewal period should be shorter than the current seven years; Preston said the preference benefits the nonprofit developer, not the homebuyer, and suggested shorter renewal periods might improve compliance and awareness. JLARC staff then outlined the process for the commission’s upcoming comments on the 2025 tax preference reviews. Commissioners will receive a web-based comment form, with responses due September 30, the chair will compile consolidated comments, and those materials will be distributed for the October 21, 2025 meeting. The chair noted that only voting members will complete the comment forms, though individual members may also submit minority reports. The meeting ended with a reminder that written testimony could still be submitted to JLARC and that the next commission meeting is scheduled for October 21, 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• committee to craft that recusal section. committee to craft that recusal section.
• Recusal, however, was set aside as a safe harbor.
• <01:17:12.560> from Um we therefore looked at recusal from Um we therefore looked at recusal
• Um would be to recuse yourself on that.
• <01:17:56.640> Recusal someone else. That's all. Recusal someone else. That's all.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're on about our fourth visiting judge because he files judicial conduct complaints motions to recuse
• tried to recuse the judge of the administrative region, the The motion to recuse is now pending before
• the Texas Supreme Court because there's a procedure where you can actually take take a motion to recuse
• I've had retired judges recused off of a family law case where it started off . . . where the judge was
• And these other retired judges. that have been recused, I don't see that this bill changes.

Bills: HB 1181, HB3704, HB1363, HB1610, HB1615, HB1620, HB3223, HB1317, HB2884, HB2176, HB4027, HB1664, HB933, HB2613, HB3353, HB2086, HB4101, HB3441, HB4145, HB3455

Keywords: judiciary, judges, justices, retired, legal assignments, judicial conduct, notary public, criminal offense, education requirements, official documents, record retention, implicit bias, bias training, judicial training, judge education, court personnel, continuing legal education, CLE, state bar, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

Transcript Highlights:

• does have a settlement in this bill, um, which creates a conflict, and for that reason I request a recusal
• You'll be recused from voting on House Bill 2250.
• 45.760> for disclosing a conflict and a request for disclosing a conflict and a request for recusal
• 02:47.359> matter<01:02:47.599> and<01:02:47.839> on<01:02:48.000> all recusal
• uh on this matter and on all recusal uh on this matter and on all proceedings<01:02:49.040> moving

Bills: HB1952, HB1951, HB1929, HB2497, HB2208, HB2572, HB1953, HB2551, HB2549, HB1737, HB1628, HB1769, HB2493, HB2264, HB1997, HB2168, HB2427, HB1805, HB2180, HB2184, HB2219, HB2469, HB2233, HB2519, HB2141, HB1904, HB2201, HB2410, HB2007, HB2385, HB2444, HB2349, HB2235, HB1872, HB2416, HB2291, HB2292, HB2263, HB2359, HB2455, HB1509, HB1514, HB1515, HB1648, HB2164, HB2323, HB1825, HB2172, HB1888, HB2005, HB2387, HB2358, HB2119, HB2276, HB2472, HB1714, HB2325, HB1541, HB1960, HB2140, HB2315, HB2367, HB2388, HB1696, HB2333, HB2138, HB2332, HB2283, HB2059, HB2057, HB2589, HB2417, HB2337, HB1588, HB2217, HB2020, HB1915, HB1742, HB2026, HB1965, HB1546, HB2360, HB1563, HB1749, HB2614, HB1511, HB1753, HB1849, HB1641, HB2161, HB2194, HB1721, HB2284, HB2188, HB1897, HB1880, HB1573, HB1876, HB20, HB2137

Keywords: HB1952, Hawaii agriculture, University of Hawaii, CTAHR, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resilience, Kauai, agricultural research station, extension station, capital improvements, general obligation bonds, GO bonds, appropriation, ADA compliance, Americans with Disabilities Act, certified kitchen, greenhouse, laboratory, field research, cesspool decommissioning, invasive species

Transcript Highlights:

• I guess I just wanted to ask you a little bit further here, would you agree to recuse yourself from matters
• not something you were required to do, though I do think you should have been. would you consider recusing
• Senator, I have signed to agree to recuse myself. as defined by the Office of Government Ethics in any
• area where they perceived a conflict could occur and so I have already agreed to the recusals required
• The recusals that I will be taking are 100% in line with the office of government. ethics recommendations

Keywords: nominations, labor, health, veterans, Social Security, Elon Musk, transparency, government accountability

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on various executive nominations and their implications on labor and health affairs. Significant discussions surrounded the nomination of Mr. Sonderling as the Deputy Secretary of Labor, with members expressing concerns about workforce cuts affecting veterans and Social Security employees. There was also a debate led by a member regarding the authority and influence of private individuals, specifically citing Elon Musk's involvement in government decisions. Such discussions raised questions about transparency and accountability within governmental agencies, leading to a proposal for Mr. Musk to provide testimony before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• company during its state service without violating section 572.069 of the government code if he or she recuses
• Wait, hang on, I just need the record to reflect that I have to recuse, but go ahead. OK.
• You have to recuse yourself.
• All right, let the record reflect that Vice Chairman Maisel has to recuse himself from this, um, proceeding

Transcript Highlights:

• It was also noted and clarified that the landowner council member would recuse themselves if the project
• 42:18.800> council<00:42:19.280> member<00:42:20.280> would<00:42:20.680> recuse
• landowner council member would recuse landowner council member would recuse themselves<00:42:22.400

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition to just the issue of recusal, just the question of whether those qualifications were met.
• If I have a conflict on a case, I have to recuse myself from that case.
• If I have a conflict on a case, I have to recuse myself from that case.
• I have to recuse myself if I was involved with one of the parties.
• If I was involved with one of the parties, I would have to recuse myself financially.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed House Bill 1, focusing on the legislative branch budget, especially the Senate and House lines. Members discussed that the Senate’s fiscal year 2025 adjusted authorized amount was higher than 2024 actual spending, largely due to personnel, benefits, and travel, and one member proposed a $500,000 annual cut. Staff explained that any reduction would need to be allocated across specific line items such as personnel, benefits, and travel, and noted that the Senate budget is entirely General Funds. After discussion of how the adjusted authorized figures were calculated and why the branch no longer staffs some joint committees as it once did, the committee moved on without taking a vote on that section. The committee then heard a detailed presentation from the New Hampshire Retirement System. NHRS officials described their statutory administrative budget, which is funded through the retirement trust rather than the General Fund, and said the FY 2026-2027 increase is driven by IT modernization, cybersecurity, a new strategic plan, and additional staff positions. They also reviewed the system’s funding progress, clean audit opinions, investment performance, and changes to asset allocation, while noting that several recent pension-related laws required major database changes. Members questioned the large increase in salaries and benefits, the need for new employees versus contractors, the purpose of training costs, and the source of the Group Two benefit funding. NHRS said the governor’s budget includes General Funds for Group Two benefit changes, with $5 million in FY 2026 and $27.9 million in FY 2027, and that the figures reflect the governor’s recommendation and related HB 2 provisions. Committee members also asked about employer and employee contribution rates for Group Two police and fire members, which NHRS said were not included in the budget document but were about 31.2% for police and 30.35% for fire, with employee shares around 11.55% and 11.8%. The committee did not make a decision on the NHRS budget during this exchange and indicated it would review the details further before returning to it later. The committee then heard from the Community Development Finance Authority on the State Treasury Department budget line for the required state match to administer the federal Community Development Block Grant program. CDFA explained that its $280,000 annual request for FY 2026 and FY 2027, totaling $560,000, supports administration, technical assistance, contracting, and monitoring of roughly $19 million in annual federal CDBG funds. Members asked about the leverage of the state match, oversight of projects, staffing, and grant prioritization. CDFA said it has 18 employees, uses public hearings and a scoring system to prioritize awards, and conducts both desk and on-site monitoring, with annual audits to ensure compliance. No vote was taken on the CDFA item in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Although I appreciate this kind sentiment, I'm forced to recuse myself from the vote for this bill that
• Although I appreciate this kind sentiment, I'm forced to recuse myself from the vote for this bill that
• Although I appreciate this kind sentiment, I'm forced to recuse myself from the vote for this bill that
• Seeing none, Vice Chair, for the vote, please, noting a recusal. Voting on SB 865 SD1.
• Seeing none, Vice Chair, for the vote, please, noting a recusal. Voting on SB 865 SD1.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Higher Education heard five bills and later took up one joint Housing/Higher Education measure. On SB 1146 SD1, relating to the Alaw Canal, testimony from DLNR and UH was in support of funding an action plan and pre-engineering concept plan to address debris management and water quality in the watershed; members discussed the cost burden on DLNR and the possibility of identifying upstream sources of debris. On SB 1232 SD2, relating to wastewater systems, the Department of Health, DHHL, and several advocacy groups supported a three-year pilot program at UH’s Water Resources Research Center to test new wastewater technologies, with witnesses saying it could help certify cheaper alternatives and reduce cesspool upgrade costs. On SB 119 SD1, relating to nursing, witnesses supported funding a Bachelor of Science in Nursing program at Maui College. On SB 865 SD1, relating to agriculture, UH CTAHR, the Hawaii Farm Bureau, and many island agricultural groups supported funding for a Kona Cooperative Extension position, with testimony and committee discussion favoring an extension agent over an administrative support role. On SB 1487 SD1, relating to UH revenue bonds, UH supported authorizing revenue bonds for priority capital projects, and members asked for clarification that the measure was a preliminary authorization rather than a specific spending plan. In decision-making, the committee recommended passing SB 1146 SD1, SB 1232 SD2, SB 119 SD1, SB 865 SD1, and SB 1487 SD1 with House Draft 1 amendments, mainly to change defective dates to 7/1/3000 and, for SB 865, to upgrade the position to an extension agent. Votes were unanimous in favor on the measures, with one recusal noted on SB 865 and some members excused on other votes. The committee then recessed and later reconvened for a joint House Housing/Higher Education hearing on SB 1553 SD2, relating to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. DHHL asked that the bill be deferred because due diligence was incomplete and more discussion was needed with UH and other stakeholders; UH said it was coordinating access to the property and described its current and future use. Both committees agreed to defer the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• And just to be clear, this is limiting what would trigger you from having to recuse yourself from taking
• Right, but don't they have to recuse themselves, right? Don't they?
• They have to, well, and that's, they would have to recuse themselves if they gave, received over the
• And that's why we think it's important not to raise that threshold for recusal above $500.

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on April 30, 2025, beginning as a subcommittee until a quorum was established. The committee first approved six bills on consent, including AB 950, AB 953, AB 1214, and three committee bills. It then heard several measures dealing with election administration, ballot transparency, and campaign finance, with most authors accepting committee amendments and several bills being held on call for absent members. AB 930 by Assembly Member Ward would extend the deadline for counting timely postmarked vote-by-mail ballots from three to seven days after Election Day and update recount procedures, including online posting of recount results and clearer rules for recount requests. The bill was supported by county election officials and passed out of committee with a due-pass recommendation, though it was initially held on call. AB 459 by Assembly Member DeMaio proposed allowing electronic signatures for initiatives, referenda, and recalls; the Secretary of State and labor groups opposed it over security, implementation, and cost concerns, and the committee ultimately rejected the bill after reconsideration. AB 699 by Assembly Member Stephanie would change how local tiered tax and bond measures are described on ballots by allowing more detail to be placed in the voter guide; housing, school, and local government groups supported it, while taxpayer and realtor groups opposed it as reducing ballot transparency. AB 1188, presented on behalf of Assembly Member Ortega, would list the top three funders supporting and opposing statewide initiatives and referenda directly on the ballot; transparency advocates and labor supported it, while county election officials and business groups raised concerns about ballot length and processing costs. Both AB 699 and AB 1188 passed out of committee with amendments and were held on call. The committee also heard AB 827 by Assembly Member Berman, which would standardize and extend the deadline for curing vote-by-mail signature problems, add a link to cure forms in ballot-tracking notifications, and make other changes to improve ballot curing. It drew no opposition in the hearing and passed with a due-pass recommendation. AB 351 by Assembly Member McKenna would raise the Levine Act contribution threshold for local officials to $1,500 and add CPI adjustments; supporters said it would reduce administrative burdens and reflect modern campaign finance realities, while good-government groups and the League of Women Voters opposed it as weakening anti-corruption protections. The committee initially failed AB 351, then granted reconsideration, but the transcript ends before a final disposition is clearly completed. Finally, AB 1079 by Assembly Member Farías would eliminate the automatic appellate stay in California Voting Rights Act and Fair Maps Act cases; it was supported as a way to prevent delayed remedies in voting rights cases, opposed by the City of Santa Monica over impacts on ongoing litigation, and passed with amendments. After taking up the held items, the committee recorded final votes on the bills, including passage of AB 930, AB 699, AB 1188, AB 827, and AB 1079, and rejection of AB 459.

Transcript Highlights:

• Should I recuse myself from this vote? Mr.
• Chair, decisions on recusal are always in the power of the member.
• Should I recuse myself from this vote? Mr.
• Chair, decisions on recusal are always in the power of the member.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Committee on Rules and Legislative Administration met with a quorum and took up a series of annual housekeeping resolutions governing House operations and member/staff policies. The committee heard brief explanations from House Controller Pete Squa and HR Director Kelly Knight on each item, including the 2025 P1 service award policy, donated time policy, compensatory time and time card policy, interim/per diem classification, legal fees policy, staff photo/digital image fees, chaplain compensation, leadership compensation, member expense reimbursement, member stationery allocation, postage and digital constituent communications, member communication reimbursement, alcohol consumption policy, remote work policy, drug use policy, and the high school page/internship program reimbursement policy. Most resolutions were adopted without controversy, often with only minor clarifications or no changes from prior years. Notable changes included clarifying donated time limits, refining compensatory time language, updating leadership compensation positions to reflect the new organization, adding a Greater Minnesota mileage option in the member expense reimbursement policy, removing obsolete long-distance reimbursement language from member communication reimbursements, updating the alcohol policy location reference to the Centennial Office Building, and increasing high school page reimbursement from $10 to $15 per day. The committee also noted the House roster staff roster is on file with the controller as required by House Rule 8.20. Two items were set aside for further review: the P5 legal fees resolution was tabled after members raised questions about prior use of the policy and whether the language should be revised in light of past circumstances, and the R5 postage/digital constituent communications resolution was also tabled after Representative Schultz proposed allowing members to choose either 100% digital communications or a 70% digital/30% postage split. The R9 drug use policy was likewise tabled after Representative Engen asked whether changes in state marijuana law affected the policy. All other resolutions brought to a vote were approved and adopted, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's only one thing that caught my eye, and that's because I'm always standing up to recuse myself
• I've had, you know, I stand up to recuse myself, and it says that it must occur before the vote. vote
• President saying, OK, you can recuse yourself. There's no provision for what happens.
• I think it's just, it's always been procedure that you've been required to try to... to recuse yourself
• Once the vote starts, you can't really stop it to let someone recuse themselves.

Transcript Highlights:

• the process of getting a divorce. and did so very quietly, but nevertheless, As is proper, the D.A. recuse
• All of the judges recused themselves, I knew every one of them, but it was only after extreme goading
• wrongful death. inside of that, and over the next period of time, Of course, again, the local judges recused
• know if you know the individual if you have you know a connection to the individual it, you should recuse

Bills: HB170, HB865, HB748, HJR112, HB 1110, HB1495, HB786, HB 1130, HB170

Keywords: civil liability, self-defense, force, deadly force, legal immunity, attorney's fees, criminal justice, firearms, liability, veterans, gun ownership, immunity, firearm hold agreement, sexual abuse, nondisclosure, confidentiality, public policy, Trey's Law, parental rights, child upbringing

Transcript Highlights:

• Anything about her business in front of Texas courts that at some future date would cause you to have to recuse
• yourself. self or she recused herself is that circumstance it didn't give a specific of the relationship
• Right, so on our court, the justices... can be marked as recused or as not sitting.
• else's robe, but there were ten cases that week and some of them I didn't participate in for real. recusal

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The question is, I believe you'd have to recuse yourself on voting on your projects.
• /c><00:32:41.840> you'd<00:32:42.039> have<00:32:42.159> to<00:32:42.320> recuse
• I believe you'd have to recuse I believe you'd have to recuse yourself<00:32:44.279> on<00
• <00:38:13.079> those<00:38:13.319> cases<00:38:14.079> they<00:38:14.240> recuse
• that apply in those cases they recuse that apply in those cases they recuse themselves<00:38:16.040

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 834, which would change restrictions on transfers of real property under chapter 201H, HRS, and was discussed in the context of Hawaiian homelands and HHFDC-funded projects. Supporters, including HHFDC, DHHL, and individual testifiers, said the bill would clarify that Hawaiian homelands should not be subject to the 201H buyback and appreciation restrictions, while preserving affordability requirements tied to federal mortgage and tax credit programs. HHFDC explained that the main concern was the buyback/share-appreciation provisions, especially for DHHL projects using LIHTC or similar financing, and said aligning the statute with DHHL’s program goals would not be a problem. Members questioned whether removing the restrictions could weaken affordability protections, and whether the state could still prioritize beneficiaries and workforce housing, but no vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up SB 759, which would add the DHHL chairperson or designee to the HHFDC board of directors and adjust quorum requirements. DHHL and several supporters argued the measure would give Hawaiian Homes a seat at the table, improve access to HHFDC funding sources such as tax credits, private activity bonds, and revolving funds, and help leverage limited resources to reduce the Hawaiian Homes waitlist. One testifier supported the bill but urged safeguards to prevent favoritism or abuse of power, and another raised concerns about whether a DHHL representative would need to recuse from voting on projects involving DHHL. HHFDC testified that DHHL projects still must compete under the same criteria and set-asides as other applicants, and that the board already includes multiple public and executive representatives. Members pressed on whether DHHL could achieve the same informational goals without a voting seat, and whether the added board role would create leverage or conflicts. The DHHL witness said a nonvoting role could provide information, but a voting seat would be more useful for decision-making and advocacy. The discussion also covered DHHL’s use of LIHTC, rent-to-own models, transitional housing, and other layered financing, as well as the broader need to coordinate state housing resources. The transcript ends during continued questioning, with no final committee action or vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And what would trigger you from having to recuse yourself from taking a vote on a matter?
• They have to want that and that's they would have to recuse himself if they gave received over the Levine
• Act threshold right and that's why we think it's important to not raise is that threshold for recusal

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The grievance process will also be refined, requiring those reviewing a grievance to recuse themselves
• instance, if there's a principal That is involved in a grievance request, then that principal would recuse

Summary: The Senate Education K-16 Committee considered and advanced several education-related measures. SB 57, on emergency safety accommodations for students with disabilities during drills or emergencies, was amended by a committee substitute requested by TEA to require accommodations be explicitly included in IEPs or Section 504 plans, documented and communicated to administrators, and to allow TEA rules on preparedness guidelines; it was reported favorably. The committee also reported SB 24, on adding study of communist regimes and ideologies to social studies standards, and SB 112, on parental rights and public education, both favorably. SB 204, requiring a parental rights handbook and trustee training, and SB 371, on parental approval for human sexuality instruction, were also advanced. SB 400, requiring parental consent for psychological or psychiatric examination, testing, or treatment by school employees, was reported favorably as substituted. Members discussed SB 609, which would require school districts and charter schools to comply with legally required policies, with questions about whether districts must still comply absent additional state resources; it was reported favorably with two members voting present-not-voting. SB 686, on student transfers between public schools, and SB 1447, on TEA standards for school use of electronic devices and software, were both reported favorably, with SB 686 noted as having a fiscal note. SCR 5, directing the Texas School for the Deaf to name a gymnasium after a former alumnus, was also advanced. The committee approved SJR 12, proposing a constitutional amendment affirming a parent’s right to direct a child’s education, on a 9-1 vote. It then considered SB 12, a broad bill on parental rights, public education, and restrictions on DEI-related duties and funding consequences for noncompliance. The committee substitute expanded the DEI definition, limited discipline to intentional or knowing violations, required notice to employees, restricted student clubs focused solely on sexual orientation or gender identity, clarified limits on DEI duties, required annual capacity reporting for transfer requests, refined grievance procedures, shortened the grievance filing window to six weeks, and added parent-notice provisions regarding special education, bilingual education, and uncertified teachers. After discussion on the grievance timeline and terminology in the DEI provisions, the substitute was adopted and SB 12 was reported favorably on an 8-2 vote. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• be voting on a decision that he or she had previously voted on as a planning board member and must recuse
• board<00:20:19.440> member<00:20:20.320> and<00:20:20.640> must<00:20:20.960> recuse
• <00:20:21.760> from board member and must recuse from board member and must recuse from participation
• Instead, it provides a simple bright-line rule requiring recusal in limited circumstances to avoid conflicts
• offices. >> I think that member probably ought to be given the choice of which one so that it can recuse

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• what was proposed, and that is this amendment, which states that the labor seat in the board must recuse
• I move L028. seat in the board must recuse themselves seat in the board must recuse themselves if<00:
• What this amendment would do would not just be to recognize that and recuse that member from voting,
• What this amendment would do would not just be to recognize that and recuse that member from voting,

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the prior journal, and received messages from the House on several bills and conference committee matters. The House concurred in Senate amendments to House Bills 1305, 1373, and 1406, repassing them as amended, and requested conference committees on a number of other bills. The Senate also noted several bills and resolutions as correctly engrossed or revised. On the consent calendar, the Senate passed House Bill 1110 on protecting vulnerable adults from financial exploitation, Senate Bill 78 on higher education administration and data-sharing changes, and Senate Bill 151 on PERA modifications. Senators Carson, Seymour Wilson, Baisley, Rich, and Liston asked to be recorded as no votes on SB 151, which passed 29-5. The chamber then took up Senate Bill 6 on parity for non-opioid pain management drugs; Senator Mallicoat opposed it as costly and too restrictive, while Senator Weisman and Senator Baisley supported it as a response to the opioid crisis. SB 6 passed 29-5. Senate Bill 15 on commercial sexual activity with a child and Senate Bill 101 on landfill methane emission compliance both passed unanimously. The Senate also passed Senate Bill 159 on early parole procedures for youthful offenders by a 22-12 vote, and Senate Bill 158 on youthful offender parole procedures by a 23-11 vote. The chamber then moved into Committee of the Whole for second reading of bills, beginning with House Bill 1071 on local governments placing automated vehicle identification systems on interstate highways. Amendments addressing privacy and local safety concerns were adopted, and the bill was approved. The committee then considered Senate Bill 150, a major RTD governance reform bill. Supporters said it would reduce the board size, add expertise, preserve elected representation, and respond to long-standing RTD performance problems; opponents raised concerns about appointed members, labor-seat conflicts, and whether voters should approve the changes. Multiple amendments were adopted, including changes to board term limits, public finance expertise, conflict-of-interest recusal, a future review after 15 years, and districting/petition provisions. One amendment requiring a ballot referral before the board changes was debated, with the sponsor urging a no vote and another senator arguing for asking the voters first.

Transcript Highlights:

• of the governor or the lieutenant governor be the chief justice of the Supreme Court or, if they recuse
• If either recuses or is otherwise unavailable, the chief justice of the Supreme Court shall assign a
• both the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and the presiding judge of the Court of Criminal Appeals recuse
• that that would be a more appropriate person if, for some reason, the 15th Court Chief Justice also recused
• So if they did recuse themselves or were unavailable, a current or former appellate judge is chosen by

Summary: The Senate opened with an invocation by Pastor Jim Harris of Tilden Baptist Church, followed by remarks from Senator Zaffirini recognizing his service and retirement as an agricultural teacher. The chamber also received a message from the governor on appointments to the Coastal Water Authority Board of Directors. Senators then adopted SR 434 honoring Goodwill Industries of San Antonio’s 80th anniversary, with Senators Gutierrez, Menendez, and Zaffirini praising its workforce training and second-chance employment mission; SR 435 recognizing Dr. Christine Ramos Camacho as Doctor of the Day; and a group of additional resolutions adopted by voice vote. Senator Zaffirini also introduced the McMullen County Day delegation, and Senator Gutierrez introduced the Doctor of the Day. The Senate then took up and passed several bills. SB 1951 addressed penalties for late property rendition filings and removed a financial incentive for appraisal districts; SB 1261 related to financing water supply projects in the state water plan; SB 1620 created a Texas Forensic Analyst Apprenticeship Pilot Program; SB 530 updated higher-education accreditation rules; SB 2183 standardized fireworks sales periods statewide; SB 2368 strengthened the Lone Star Infrastructure Protection Act and added foreign-affiliation safeguards for electricity market participants; SB 1398 limited children without placement (CWOP) practices and added community-based care transparency; and SB 1960 established digital replication rights for voice and visual likenesses. Each of these bills advanced through suspension of the regular order, passage to engrossment, suspension of the three-day rule, and final passage, with recorded votes generally showing strong support and some opposition on a few measures. The chamber also debated SB 825, which would require an annual study of the economic, environmental, and financial impacts of illegal immigration. Senators Middleton, Hinojosa, Gutierrez, and Eckhardt debated whether the study should include positive as well as negative impacts; an amendment to require that broader analysis failed, and the bill was left pending after passage to engrossment. Other measures passed included SB 2010, prohibiting political subdivisions from operating guaranteed income programs; SB 546, requiring reporting and continued implementation of school bus seat belts; SB 586, establishing the Historical Texas Cemetery designation program; SB 1150, requiring inactive oil and gas wells to be plugged or returned to production under a compliance plan; SB 1184, lowering the minimum age of wine eligible for sale by wine collection sellers; SB 2185, clarifying bilingual education allotment funding; SB 1923, making child support follow the child in certain temporary placements; SB 2252, expanding early literacy and numeracy supports and screening tools; SB 1870, barring local decriminalization of drugs; and SB 2405, the major TDCJ sunset bill, which included facility planning, parole and rehabilitation reforms, and an amendment protecting parole board discretion. Most of these bills were adopted after floor amendments and passed with recorded votes, often along party-line or near-party-line divisions.