Transcript Highlights:

• Legislation to prohibit same-day voter registration in Texas, Legislation authorizing contracts with sheriffs

Bills: SB 2, SB 3, SB 10, SB 16, SB 5, SB 9, SB 7, SB 17, SB 4, SB 19, SB 54, HB23, HB17, HB16, SB19, SB53, SB54, HB16, HB17, HB23, HB27, SB9, SB7, SB17, SB4, SB2, SB3, SB10, SB16, SB5

Keywords: flash flood, flood warning, outdoor warning siren, emergency alert, disaster preparedness, flood mitigation, Hill Country floods, Texas Water Development Board, municipalities, counties, local government mandate, public safety, grant program, backup power, weather siren, emergency management, flood-prone area, warning system, real property theft, real property fraud

Bills: SB 2, SB 3, SB 10, SB 16, SB 5, SB 9, SB 7, SB 17, SB 4, SB 19, SB 54, HB23, HB17, HB16, SB19, SB53, SB54, HB16, HB17, HB23, HB27, SB9, SB7, SB17, SB4, SB2, SB3, SB10, SB16, SB5

Keywords: flash flood, flood warning, outdoor warning siren, emergency alert, disaster preparedness, flood mitigation, Hill Country floods, Texas Water Development Board, municipalities, counties, local government mandate, public safety, grant program, backup power, weather siren, emergency management, flood-prone area, warning system, real property theft, real property fraud

Bills: SB 2, SB 3, SB 10, SB 16, SB 5, SB 9, SB 7, SB 17, SB 4, SB 19, SB 54, HB23, HB17, HB16, SB19, SB53, SB54, HB16, HB17, HB23, HB27, SB9, SB7, SB17, SB4, SB2, SB3, SB10, SB16, SB5

Keywords: flash flood, flood warning, outdoor warning siren, emergency alert, disaster preparedness, flood mitigation, Hill Country floods, Texas Water Development Board, municipalities, counties, local government mandate, public safety, grant program, backup power, weather siren, emergency management, flood-prone area, warning system, real property theft, real property fraud

Bills: SB 10, SB 8, SB 15, SB 12, SB 6, SB 13, SB 9, SB 7, SB 17, SB 4, SB10, SB8, SB15, SB12, SB6, SB13, SB9, SB7, SB17, SB4

Keywords: sex designation, restroom access, civil penalties, private civil right of action, women's privacy, law enforcement, department file, employee records, misconduct, confidentiality, Texas occupations code, election laws, attorney general, prosecution, criminal offenses, criminal prosecution, jurisdiction, hemp, consumable hemp, hemp-derived cannabinoids

Bills: SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5, SB 6, SB 7, SB 8, SB 9, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 14, SB 15, SB 16, SB 17, SB 18, SB 34

Keywords: flash flood, flood warning, outdoor warning siren, emergency alert, disaster preparedness, flood mitigation, Hill Country floods, Texas Water Development Board, municipalities, counties, local government mandate, public safety, grant program, backup power, weather siren, emergency management, flood-prone area, warning system, redistricting, election

Transcript Highlights:

• But Sheriff Coakley is not the only one; Sheriff Coppinger separated, too.
• Sheriffs, even though there are different philosophies with different sheriffs, and some sheriffs do
• Sheriffs, even though there are different philosophies with different sheriffs, and some sheriffs do
• re-entry much better than other sheriffs do, philosophies with different sheriffs, and some sheriffs
• Because the sheriff could collect taxes. The sheriff could do... That's exactly what.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission opened an informal discussion focused on developing recommendations for its September report on correctional consolidation and cooperation. Chairs Dan Hunt and Senator Brownsberger emphasized that the group is still in an information-gathering phase, but should begin putting ideas on the table, including possible written recommendations, further hearings, and additional facility tours. Members discussed whether the commission should seek more input from frontline stakeholders such as sheriffs, probation, parole, reentry centers, unions, and the judiciary, and whether recommendations should be organized around specific issue areas like medical costs, programming, reentry, and facility operations. A major theme was the need for a more integrated and consistent correctional system. Participants raised concerns about fragmentation across DOC, county sheriffs, probation, and parole, and suggested exploring step-down pathways, minimum security, pre-release, day reporting, and regional reentry hubs to improve outcomes and reduce recidivism. Several speakers stressed the importance of uniform standards, evidence-based programming, better data on outcomes and spending, and clearer alignment between custody conditions and rehabilitation goals. There was also discussion of looking to other states and international models, as well as revisiting older reports and plans, including the 2009 commission report and the 2010 corrections master plan. Facility-specific issues were also raised, including the need to examine women’s facilities such as Framingham, Bridgewater, and restrictive housing practices in light of suicide concerns and mental health needs. Members discussed the relationship between correctional custody and behavioral health, the role of the judiciary in sentencing and reentry planning, and whether judges should be better informed about available programming and step-down options. There was broad agreement that collaboration, transparency, and accountability should be strengthened, with some members urging that recommendations be based on firsthand facts and data rather than opinion alone. The meeting also included presentation of a written set of eight high-level recommendations compiled by advocacy and legal organizations, which focused on clearer and more consistent programming, equitable application of rules, and reducing punitive conditions that function like solitary confinement. The chairs said the document would be shared with members and posted online. No formal votes were taken during the discussion, and the meeting ended with plans to continue the conversation at a future session, including possible follow-up on reentry centers, restrictive housing, and other systemwide reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the sheriff in Plymouth County. I've been the sheriff for 20 years.
• Who are the sheriffs?
• I am the sheriff in Plymouth County. I've been the sheriff for 20 years.
• Who are the sheriffs?
• I want to recognize two of the elected sheriffs in the room as well: Sheriff Kutuzia and Sheriff McDermott

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The meeting was the third public session of the Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration. Members introduced themselves, and the commission approved the prior meeting minutes. The main presentation came from the Massachusetts Sheriffs’ Association, led by several sheriffs, who described the role of sheriffs’ offices as independently elected county institutions that operate jails and houses of correction, regional lockups, civil process, 911 communications in some counties, school resource officers, and investigative units. They emphasized that most of their population is pretrial, that admissions and releases are far higher than the Department of Correction’s, and that their facilities now house more people overall than DOC despite having a smaller budget. The sheriffs argued that their work has shifted toward rehabilitation, reentry, and public health, highlighting extensive programming in mental health, substance use treatment, medication-assisted treatment, education, vocational training, and gender-specific, trauma-informed services. They said standardized risk/needs assessments and better funding would help make services more consistent across counties. They also described specialized units and models such as regional evaluation and stabilization units, older-adult housing, emerging adult and gang-intervention programs, and reentry centers that connect people to housing, employment, family support, and community services. Several examples were cited, including Suffolk’s Project Evolve, Middlesex’s older-adult unit, Hampden’s MAGIC program, Worcester’s STOP program, and county reentry centers across the state. A major theme was that these programs are expensive but, in the sheriffs’ view, reduce recidivism and improve safety by stabilizing people before release and supporting them afterward. They pointed to COVID-19 as a period when sheriffs adapted facilities for quarantine and medical care, and said they continue to work with public health partners. They also stressed that their facilities are heavily audited by state and federal agencies and that maintaining humane, safe conditions requires significant staffing and operating costs. Commission members responded favorably at points, noting the importance of the turnover in sheriff populations and the need to understand the different correctional mission compared with DOC. The meeting ended with discussion of future commission dates and a note that the presentation materials would be shared electronically.

Transcript Highlights:

• Happy to answer any questions, members. ...reaffirm the support for county sheriffs and recognize sheriffs
• Our sheriff is their local control.
• Yes, sir, Sheriff. Yes, sir, Sheriff. So what's the case that you're referring to?
• Sheriff Klaus is very tall. Good morning, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Sheriff Klaus is very tall.
• Chair: Sheriff David Klaus.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee heard several public safety measures. HCR 2059, a resolution reaffirming support for county sheriffs and recognizing their constitutional authority, drew debate over language describing sheriffs’ authority as “supreme” or “supreme constitutional.” Supporters said it was a tribute to sheriffs’ work, especially in rural areas, while opponents objected to the phrasing as tied to fringe legal theories. The resolution passed with a do-pass recommendation, 8-3. HB 2811 was presented as closing a gap in Arizona law by making interference with a lawful arrest involving violence or threats of violence a felony under obstructing governmental operations. Supporters said it would clarify the law and align it more closely with federal standards; opponents argued the conduct was already covered by existing resisting-arrest and hindering statutes and that the bill was duplicative and confusing. The bill received a do-pass recommendation, 8-4. HB 4129 would create a Department of Public Safety mental health and wellness program for law enforcement officers and appropriate $15 million for confidential counseling, peer support, family counseling, telehealth, and related services, with some funding reserved for smaller agencies. The sponsor and supporters emphasized officer trauma and suicide prevention, while opponents said similar services already exist and raised cost concerns. Before a final vote, the sponsor requested the bill be held for further work, and the committee agreed. The committee also advanced HB 2270, which expands protections for county seals, logos, insignia, and related identifiers and gives sheriffs exclusive authority over naming and dissolving posses. Sheriffs and county officials said the bill was needed after disputes over posse names and branding; critics warned the language was too broad and could raise First Amendment and due process concerns. The bill passed 12-1. HB 2416, appropriating $20 million for local border support and law enforcement costs related to drug trafficking, smuggling, prosecution, detention, and equipment, also passed after testimony both for and against the funding, 7-5. HB 4018, a strike-everything amendment clarifying sheriffs’ authority over volunteer posses and reserves, passed 10-0 after testimony from sheriffs’ office staff and a member of the public who opposed expanded use of armed volunteers. HB 2253, barring retaliation against employees who testify in law-enforcement disciplinary appeal proceedings, passed unanimously after an amendment removed language voiding restrictive policies. The committee then began hearing HB 4044, which would create a Public Safety Parity Fund using investment earnings from the state rainy day fund to pay DPS and corrections salaries, with the sponsor saying he intended to remove the forfeiture component before floor consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not put the sheriff up any higher. Just puts the sheriff in the Constitution.
• But I have a question about kind of how sheriffs behave sometimes. There was a sheriff.
• But there was a sheriff that pled the fifth. And that person is still sheriff.
• sheriff needs to be removed.
• The sheriff was removed. We got a new sheriff in.

Summary: The House opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then approved the House Journal for the 65th and 66th days, with the first journal approval passing by roll call 124-0. Members then offered several introductions recognizing interns and special guests, including a lengthy tribute to law enforcement officers who were wounded in the line of duty and the presentation of Capitol-flown flags to some of them. The chamber received committee reports from Fiscal Review recommending passage of several measures, including Senate Joint Resolution 87, Senate Bills 878 and 994, conference reports on House Bill 2818 and Senate Bill 973, and Senate Bill 1825. The House then took up House Bill 2818, a conference report dealing with annexation-related language for the St. Joseph Airport and added provisions affecting St. Charles and Jefferson counties. After debate about local control and development, the House approved the conference report 140-7 and then passed the bill 136-7. Members next considered Senate Bill 1825, which updates county salary commission schedules, removes sheriffs and prosecutors from salary commissions, and gives certain fourth-class counties additional time to transition to third-class status. After discussion about county pay, coroners, and local fiscal impacts, the House adopted the Senate substitute 109-35 and finally passed the bill 106-39. The House also approved House Committee Substitute for Senate Joint Resolution 87, the so-called constitutional sheriff resolution, after adopting a St. Louis City amendment clarifying the City of St. Louis sheriff provisions; the resolution passed 100-47. Finally, the House passed Senate Bill 878, which expands pharmacist authority for certain common ailments, emergency waivers, and behind-the-counter access to ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, with a House amendment adding blood pressure cuff and opioid-alternative language; it passed 132-13. Senate Bill 903, addressing theft and vandalism involving telecommunications and critical infrastructure, also passed 137-5. The House then announced upcoming committee meetings, noted additional bills to be considered upon return, and adjourned until May 12, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• Saying nothing about the other sheriff, I know all the sheriffs we had and all of them were good.
• In my studies and research, I read that a sheriff cannot research, I read that a sheriff cannot write
• Is the sheriff available? I think he Share... Is the sheriff available?
• The next Testimony made that, sheriff, the next sheriff will be appointed.
• Sheriff, you... As well, so I'll allow both. Sheriff, do you want to respond first to that? Yes.

Bills: SB287

Keywords: Sheriff, Barbour County, law enforcement, qualifications, training, executive education, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Or just the local sheriff? Should I just go turn myself in? Or just the local sheriff?
• It does not put the sheriff up any higher, just puts the sheriff in the Constitution.
• But there was a sheriff that pled the fifth. And that person is still sheriff.
• sheriff needs to be removed.
• The sheriff was removed. We got a new sheriff in.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Sheriff Nick Cochie, Hampden County, Massachusetts. Sheriff Joe McDonald, from ...
• The sheriff is made an authority for civil process, serves as a working sheriff within the community,
• Thank you, Sheriff.
• If I may just introduce Sheriff James Perlman from Nantucket, Sheriff O’Hanlon from House County, Sheriff
• sheriffs or any specific—” “Toward the sheriffs or any specific facility.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met to continue its review of the county sheriffs’ role in corrections, reentry, and public safety. After approving the prior meeting minutes, the sheriffs completed a lengthy presentation describing how their offices provide regional jail services, women’s programming, mental health and substance use treatment, reentry support, community partnerships, and auxiliary public safety functions such as BCI work, TRIAD, Meals on Wheels, and event support. They emphasized that services are tailored to local needs, that women’s facilities are designed to keep mothers close to family and support reunification, and that programming, housing, and job placement are central to reducing recidivism. They also discussed challenges including K2/synthetic drugs in facilities, gang classification and separation, and the difficulty justice-involved people face obtaining IDs and birth certificates, especially for people from Puerto Rico. Commission members generally praised the sheriffs’ work and asked for more detail on how regional women’s facilities operate, how community-provider cuts might affect reentry services, how no-cost phone/tablet communication is balanced against programming time, and what the most essential programs are if funding is reduced. The sheriffs said programming must come first, identified mental health, substance use treatment, domestic violence programming, and housing/job placement as critical, and explained that community organizations and the Registry of Motor Vehicles are key partners in reentry. They also described their approach to gang management through classification, separation, and information sharing, and noted that the Registry has become more flexible but Real ID requirements have made documentation barriers more significant. The commission chair stressed that the purpose of the study is collaboration and improving system performance, not an adversarial effort against the sheriffs or a decarceration debate. Members noted that future meetings would hear from probation in June and the Department of Correction in July, and that the commission would continue gathering information before deciding on next steps. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, which passed unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then from getting the order posted by the sheriff to the sheriff actually evicting them, there are
• Elected sheriffs do not meet the state definition, and thus elected sheriffs do not currently require
• For training, most but not all elected sheriffs are already certified at the time of election, and sheriffs
• The sheriffs, the overwhelming majority of sheriffs, are elected, and they are specifically addressed
• We recognize the challenges of setting standards for sheriffs; unless given up at the local level, sheriffs

Summary: The committee held a work session in Mill Creek focused first on the eviction process. Judge Michael Scott of King County Superior Court described historic highs in unlawful detainer filings across Washington, especially in urban counties, and said King County has reduced its backlog and average time to resolution to about 60 days by adding two dedicated eviction judges and using more judges when needed. He also described how King County and other counties are implementing the right to counsel for indigent tenants, and noted that additional housing commissioners may help. Office of Civil Legal Aid representatives Philippe Knapp and Jane Paxe said the statewide appointed counsel program has represented more than 30,000 tenants, referred clients to social services, and helped many remain housed, but they warned of a funding shortfall that could eliminate about 17 attorneys and leave roughly 2,000 tenants without representation. A landlord-side panel argued that eviction timelines remain too long and fragmented, creating unpaid rent, safety issues, and uncertainty for both landlords and tenants; they urged more uniform procedures, streamlined rental assistance, and procedural changes to reduce refiling and delays. The second work session addressed theft and vandalism of critical infrastructure, especially copper and telecom cable theft. Committee staff reviewed existing criminal and regulatory laws covering malicious mischief, theft, scrap metal businesses, and metal property deception. Comcast, Mason Public Utility District, and the Recycled Materials Association testified that theft of aerial cable and copper has become a crisis affecting power, internet, 911 service, schools, hospitals, and line-worker safety. Utility representatives described outages, hazards, and rising costs, and asked for stronger audits of scrapyards, tougher penalties for theft affecting critical infrastructure, and tighter rules on payment and identification. Recyclers said they oppose the thefts and already operate under heavy regulation, but acknowledged enforcement gaps and the need for better coordination; committee members discussed possible bill concepts and asked for written recommendations. The final work session covered standards for law enforcement personnel. Criminal Justice Training Commission Executive Director Monica Alexander and Assistant Director Kimberly Bliss explained current certification and decertification rules, including background checks, training requirements, mandatory and discretionary grounds for decertification, and the hearing process. They said elected sheriffs are not currently required to undergo the same pre-election background check as other applicants, though they can still be decertified if already certified, and they reported a backlog of more than 1,000 cases with about 70 to 80 new cases coming in each month. Retired Judge Ann Levinson then outlined ways the legislature could strengthen and align standards for chiefs, sheriffs, and marshals, including requiring certification within a set time, setting a minimum age, requiring recent state background checks, and making loss of certification a vacancy in office. Committee members asked questions about accountability for elected sheriffs, background-check administration, and decertification outcomes.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would introduce Sheriff Kaylan, and I want to say I appreciate you, Sheriff, for coming to all the
• Online I have Sheriff Kochi, Secretary, and Sheriff Emeritus Cabral.
• Yes, Sheriff.
• Thank you, Sheriff.
• Go ahead, Sheriff. Mr. Chairman. With that, go ahead, Sheriff. Mr.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Criminal Justice Reform 3.0 heard a presentation from the Massachusetts Parole Board focused on consolidation, cooperation, and evidence-based supervision across the correctional system. Parole Board Chair Angela Gomez-June described the board’s mission, its coordination with the Department of Correction, houses of correction, courts, probation, law enforcement, victim services, and UMass partners, and outlined 2024 activity including 2,810 institutional release hearings, 18,238 victim notifications, 53 pardon petitions, 70 commutation petitions, 41 early termination applications, and supervision of 2,993 parolees. She emphasized the board’s shift toward individualized, data-driven decision-making, including revised GPS use, graduated sanctions, and more service-oriented community supervision. Members and sheriffs pressed for clearer breakdowns of the board’s data, including the difference between releases, hearings, and active supervision; average length of supervision; the share of lifers in the caseload; and how many people are placed in housing, employment, and treatment. The board said its active supervised population fluctuates around 1,600 to 1,800, with more than 400 lifers, and that about 30 to 36 percent of its population is housed through programs such as MASH, community justice resource centers, and sheriff-run residential programs like Rocky Hill and HOPE. Members also discussed parole refusals, noting that some individuals decline parole to avoid supervision or to serve time inside instead, and asked for a more detailed breakdown of those cases. The board and commission also discussed collaboration with DOC and UMass on risk assessment, reentry planning, and community pathways, including a tablet video explaining the parole process and pharmacist support for medication-related drug test issues. The board reported that after the SJC’s Matus decision, 210 individuals were identified as affected, 144 were immediately eligible for hearings, 100 hearings had been completed, and 10 more were scheduled; it also said clemency and commutation work had been slowed by staffing and Matus-related demands. The meeting ended with a request for follow-up data on outcomes, supervision lengths, housing and employment placements, and other consolidated statistics, and the commission announced its next public hearing for March 9 at 10 a.m. before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've got Sheriff McDonald, Sheriff Kayling.
• I know that's just—look at the sheriffs.
• I yield to you, Sheriff Cochie. Thank you. Great comment. And yield to you, Sheriff Cochie.
• If funding is cut, the sheriffs will continue their main function as sheriffs and then they will secure
• Sheriff Kochi.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The special commission on consolidation and cooperation among public safety agencies held a hearing focused on union and correctional staff testimony. Chair Dan Hunt and Senator Brownsberger opened by noting the commission’s extensive site visits and prior testimony, and they recognized Correctional Officers Week. Union representatives from KOUF, NCEU, AFSCME, and local county correctional unions described the daily realities of correctional work, emphasizing staff safety, staffing shortages, retention problems, mental health impacts, and the need to preserve local sheriff’s offices and collective bargaining agreements. Testimony centered on several recurring concerns: violence inside facilities, the spread of synthetic drugs such as K2, inmate suicides and suicide attempts, and the strain these issues place on officers, EMS, and local resources. Speakers also raised concerns about gender-identity housing policies, arguing they can create safety and workplace issues for staff, and urged more support for officer wellness, debriefing, and programs like OnSide Academy. Several witnesses argued that county facilities should remain locally controlled and that consolidation with the Department of Correction would weaken programming, staffing, and community-based reentry work. One witness described the Norwegian correctional model as a possible source of ideas for more rehabilitative approaches. Commission members responded with support for correctional staff and asked questions about K2 detection, paperless systems, EMS transports, and possible metrics to quantify incidents and facility needs. Members also discussed the importance of individualized assessments of each facility rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. The commission voted to seek an extension of its reporting deadline from September 30 to November 30, and agreed to continue site visits, including the upcoming Barnstable visit and a June 15 hearing. The meeting adjourned after the motion passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sheriff McDonald's here in the room. Sheriff Cochie, are you online? I am. I'm here.
• Sheriff Catalan is here. Good morning.
• There are the 17 sheriffs' facilities; a couple of the sheriffs operate more than one.
• But the sheriff is correct.
• But Sheriff Cochie, we did see your hand, so Sheriff Cochie. Thank you, Senator.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration met on October 17 with members attending in person and virtually. The commission approved the September 15 minutes and then heard a detailed presentation from DCAM Commissioner Adam Bakey on the correctional facilities portfolio, including the age and condition of DOC and sheriff facilities, deferred maintenance, ADA compliance, decarbonization mandates, and how capital funding is allocated. Bakey said the correctional portfolio includes 36 facilities, with average ages over 50 years, and described how older, rapidly built facilities from the tough-on-crime era now face significant maintenance and replacement needs. He also explained the distinction between catch-up deferred maintenance and ongoing keep-up needs, and noted that construction costs and code thresholds have made projects more expensive. Commissioners and sheriffs asked about ADA requirements, aging and overcrowded facilities, hazardous materials, parts availability for obsolete systems, plumbing and health risks, and whether a newer, more modern correctional facility should be considered. Bakey said many projects trigger broader code upgrades, that some dormant facilities remain in the portfolio, and that health-care and correctional construction are among the most expensive building types. He outlined current funding, including annual deferred maintenance allocations for DOC and formula-based five-year commitments for sheriffs, plus a new competitive capital program for larger sheriff projects. He also explained the Designer Selection Board and “house doctor” process used to procure architects and engineers. The commission then shifted to planning its next steps, focusing on public input. Members agreed the next meeting should likely be a public hearing or include public testimony, with possible input from people with lived experience and consideration of facility tours, especially of women’s facilities such as Framingham. Members emphasized the need to define the commission’s scope clearly so testimony stays focused on structural and consolidation issues rather than all correctional policy topics. The meeting ended with plans for the co-chairs to coordinate the public process and a motion to adjourn, which passed without opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair now calls Sheriff Brian Hawkins. 1118 Thank you. Good afternoon, Sheriff.
• become the successful sheriff.
• Obviously, sheriffs are elected.
• I'm a sheriff that receives Operation Lone Star money. and G Sheriff in the jail.
• Thanks to Sheriff Lauterback.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So great to see everybody, and my local sheriff, Sheriff Evangelidis. Good to see you.
• Pat, Sheriff Nick Colchie, Hampden County Sheriff; Joe MacDonnell, Plymouth County Sheriff; Robert Ogden
• The sheriffs received 3%.
• Thank you, Sheriff. Appreciate it.
• Across, there's 14 sheriffs.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Ways and Means held its sixth public hearing on the Governor’s H-2 budget proposal for fiscal year 2026, focused on public safety and judiciary agencies, at the Foxborough Community Center. After opening remarks and local welcomes, the committee heard first from the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, led by Secretary Gina Kwan, who outlined a $1.72 billion budget, up $69.8 million from FY26. She said the proposal emphasizes core operations, readiness, and partnerships with municipalities, and highlighted work on firearms-law implementation, State Police reform, DOC reentry efforts, hate-crimes prevention, emergency response, and planning for major events including the World Cup. Members also raised concerns about DNA backlog reporting, State Police academy boxing and training standards, ICE communication, disaster relief funding, crime lab staffing, EMS placement, and diversity in public safety leadership. Several exchanges focused on specific operational issues. Secretary Kwan and her team said the State Police are tracking the influx of forensic work from local sheriffs, that the boxing program remains suspended pending an IACP review and likely will not return in its prior form, and that EOPS has no direct communication with ICE but supports law-enforcement coordination where appropriate. On disaster preparedness, officials said the new disaster relief fund is being developed with MEMA and A&F, currently capitalized at $14 million with another $14 million expected, though members urged a more permanent funding source. On the crime lab, staff said the roughly $4.5 million increase is intended to cover core operations and a structural funding gap rather than expand services. The secretary also said EOPS is not ready to absorb OEMS from DPH at this time, though she would keep an open mind. The committee then heard from district attorneys, led by Suffolk County DA Kevin Hayden, who said the Massachusetts District Attorneys Association is seeking a 10% increase in operating budgets, including about $16.7 million for staffing salaries, to recruit and retain prosecutors, advocates, and support staff. He said the request reflects rising workload and the need to keep the criminal justice system functioning efficiently and fairly. The hearing was recessed briefly after the district attorneys’ opening remarks, with additional testimony expected to continue afterward.

Transcript Highlights:

• > sheriff's<00:03:17.920> deputies gives sheriffs and sheriff's deputies gives sheriffs
• The sheriff from Madison County is here today. My sheriff supports the bill.
• >> and my sheriff support it too. >> and my sheriff support it too.
• call me complaining about my sheriff call me complaining about my sheriff abusing<00:16:53.759><
• My initial radar by their sheriffs.

Keywords: Highways and Transportation - Room 216, 30 January, 2026; 10:00 AM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 2269, the Mississippi Fully Autonomous Vehicle Enabling Act. The bill was described as simply extending the repealer date to July 1, 2029. A motion was made that the title was sufficient and the bill do pass, and it passed without opposition. The committee then considered Senate Bill 2614, which would authorize county sheriffs and deputies to use radar on county roads, subject to county board approval and population-based limits on the number of radar units. Senator Thompson said the measure was intended to reduce Mississippi’s high rate of speed-related highway fatalities, not to create revenue or speed traps. He explained that fines would be directed to the Mississippi Department of Education to support driver’s education programs, and that the bill includes a 1,000-foot buffer from municipal limits and a definition prohibiting speed traps. Members asked about engineering reviews of speed limits, opt-in/opt-out authority for supervisors, quotas, body cameras, and how the bill would affect counties that already use radar. Thompson said the bill does not require roadway reassessments, that county boards must approve radar use, that he would not oppose a quota-related amendment, and that a body-camera requirement would be beyond the bill’s scope and could burden departments that cannot afford it. Several senators spoke in support, citing public safety and sheriff support, while one senator raised concerns about transparency and public trust. The committee then voted that the title was sufficient and the bill do pass, and the motion carried.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, thank you, Sheriff.
• I'm here today representing Sheriff Dantle's. Sheriff Danyl sends his regards.
• Co-Chairman, and Sheriff.
• Thank you, Sheriff.
• Thank you, Sheriff.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee opened with remarks about moving JLAC to a more frequent monthly schedule and spending more time on each audit. Members also recognized Melanie Chesney of the Auditor General’s office for 32 years of service, with several members praising her work and her role in school safety and other audits. The meeting then turned to the JLAC-directed Arizona School Safety Special Audit on interoperable communication systems, with the Auditor General’s office presenting the December 2025 report. The audit found that the state had allocated nearly $26 million to interoperable communication efforts, but implementation varied widely. Auditors said all 14 law enforcement agencies used the money for interoperable systems, yet four agencies allowed private or tribal schools to participate contrary to statute, and several agencies failed to submit required expenditure reports. The report also found procurement problems: nine of 14 agencies did not follow procurement requirements or lacked documentation, many contracts lacked accountability provisions, and some agencies had not planned for ongoing costs. The audit estimated ongoing annual costs for an average rural county could range from about $16,000 to $382,000, and recommended that agencies document costs, follow procurement rules, monitor vendors, and plan for future funding. It also recommended the legislature clarify whether non-public schools may participate and revisit statutory system requirements that were vague or inconsistently interpreted. Members questioned the Auditor General about vendor licensing, whether systems could be built in-house, why some functions were not configured, and whether the systems were truly usable in emergencies. The presentation explained that some systems met requirements only in part, that Mutualink had a per-user licensing model affecting access to secure text and file sharing, and that some schools were unwilling or unable to install apps or keep devices logged in. The committee also discussed the difference between the separate school safety grant program administered by ADE and this interoperability fund, and several members expressed frustration with sole-source contracting and weak documentation. In the final portion of the presentation, auditors said only two of eight observed systems demonstrated all five critical emergency functions, while four agency systems could not be tested because they were reportedly not functioning. The committee then began hearing responses from county sheriffs, starting with the Arizona Sheriffs’ Association president, who emphasized county commitment to school safety and noted that some counties had implemented systems across multiple districts, including tribal and rural schools. No votes or formal actions were taken during the portion provided.