Transcript Highlights:

• So we did want to hear from the sponsor and then if appropriate time I'll get a motion to continue to
• we</c><00:02:43.519><c> did</c><00:02:43.680><c> want</c><00:02:43.760><c> to</c><00:02:43.840><c> hear
• from the sponsor So we did want to hear from the sponsor and<00:02:45.040><c> then</c><00:02:45.280>
• I hear what you're saying. Transparency is what we need. >> And that's exactly what the bill does.
• I hear what happen in that manner. I hear what you're<00:07:59.360><c> saying.

Bills: HB358 , HB358

Committee: House Ethics and Campaign Finance

Keywords: juvenile justice, detention, age of majority, jurisdiction, child welfare, foreign influence, political activity, transparency, registration, civil penalties, hostile foreign principals, state ethics

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't live in city limits, but I did hear one city gave their mayor insurance for life.
• Representative Scott, I am surprised to hear that.
• So I absolutely think this is something we need to at least go forward and have hearings on.
• Chairman and committee for bringing me back for a full hearing.
• Tom, I can see you, but I can't hear you, so I'm assuming you possibly have your microphone muted.

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it's not so good the week that we're hearing it, which is a red flag alert for most of the state
• I think it's not so good the week that we're hearing it, which is a red flag alert for most of the state
• Chairman, and I'm happy to do that, and my request to hear a full A&B committee on that form, which I
• With no objection, the committee agreed to hear the amendment with the bill.
• We're going to reopen and hear from Emergency Management as a budget hearing bill.

Committee: House A&B General Government Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, Senator Nichols, you're recognized to close the debate. Thank you, Mr. President.
• Hearing none, Senator Den Hartog, will you please stand and close the debate? Thank you, Mr.
• Hearing none, the committee report has been adopted.
• Hearing none, Senator Lakey, you are recognized to open the debate. Thank you, Mr. President.
• Hearing no objection, it is so ordered.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, the committee substitute is adopted.
• Hearing no objections, the committee substitute is adopted.
• Hearing no objections, the committee substitute is adopted.
• Hearing none, so ordered. The Chair lays out House Bill 52.
• Hearing none. What? Senator Bettencourt.

Committees: Senate Education , Senate Education K-16

Transcript Highlights:

• If there's no objection, the Chair hears none, and the bill is left pending.
• If there's no objection, the chair hears none, and the bill is left pending.
• The Chair hears none, and the bill is left. We're going to do a few quick votes.
• The Chair hears none, and the substitute is adopted.
• The Chair hears none. The substitute is adopted.

Bills: SB840 , HB2025 , HB2512 , HB3139 , HB3798 , HB3892 , HB4373 , HB4398 , HB4582 , HB4689 , HB5187 , HB5658 , HB5666

Committee: House Land & Resource Management

Keywords: HB 2025, Texas Property Code, plat filing, replat, amended plat, condominium plat, subdivision, county clerk, tax certificate, ad valorem taxes, delinquent taxes, property records, real property, land use, local government, property development, subdivision recording, condominium recording, tax receipt, eminent domain

Transcript Highlights:

• And, you know, this process, even in the hearing, you continue to develop things and improve the bill
• Can you hear me? Yes, thank you, Chair Hughes. My name is Taryn Champagne.
• There's a lot of county court laws and some even county judges that hear probate cases.
• Seeing and hearing none, public testimony is closed. The bill is left pending at this time.
• Seeing and hearing none, public testimony is closed. The bill is left pending at this time.

Bills: SB629 , SB1015 , SB2501 , SB2933

Committee: Senate Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:

• You might like to hear from them.
• Hearing none, testimony is now closed. Senate Bill 2926 will be left pending.
• Hearing none, public testimony is now closed. Senate Bill 2938 will be left pending.
• All right, not seeing or hearing any. Does anyone else wish to testify?
• Hearing none, public testimony is now closed. Senate Bill 2543 will be left pending.

Bills: SB2007 , SB2104 , SB2543 , SB2545 , SB2926 , SB2938

Committee: Senate Veteran Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair hears none and the substitute is adopted.
• The chair hears none, and the bill is left pending. Thank you.
• The chair hears none. The bill is left pending.
• I thank you for hearing this bill today, House Bill... 6561.
• We may not answer it, but we'll hear it if there's something in the middle of the agenda.

Bills: HB1835 , HB2561 , HB3630

Committee: House Land & Resource Management

Keywords: manufactured housing, HUD-code, zoning, local government regulations, installation permits, municipal utility district, board meetings, public access, meeting location, transparency, fire prevention, agriculture, local government, fire safety, regulations

Transcript Highlights:

• I hear what you're saying.
• I hear what you're saying.
• I hear what you're saying.
• I hear what you're saying.
• I hear what you're saying.

Committee: House Housing

Transcript Highlights:

• So please keep that in mind when you're hearing about some of these numbers.
• It's something, and that's really what you need to hear from me is, can we do that?
• So often we hear the question of why. And in general, Often we hear the question of why.
• I think should be a part of the robust reporting that we hear and see.
• And so you hear that very often.

Committee: Joint Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee

Summary: The Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee met with a quorum and approved the prior minutes. Staff reviewed the interim work schedule, noting that most assigned studies were complete and that the final meeting would be September 29, with remaining work focused on economic development tax incentives, the stripper well exemption, and property tax reform items such as the primary residence credit. The committee then took up a referral on political subdivision compliance with state law, especially reserve limits and levy calculations. State Auditor Josh Gallion explained the audit standards used for local governments, the state auditor’s limited authority to force compliance, and the practical challenges created by a shortage of auditors. He used Stark County and Mountrail County examples to show how reserve balances affect levy calculations, including Stark County’s 2023 general fund levy issue and Mountrail County’s zero-levy approach. Stark County Commission Chair Neil Messer defended his county’s decision to keep reserves for major projects and volatility in oil-related revenues, while acknowledging the county remained out of compliance with the 75% reserve rule. Committee members and staff discussed possible enforcement mechanisms, the role of county auditors, and whether the law should be changed to better fit current fiscal conditions. Linda from the Association of Counties and Matt Gardner from the League of Cities said both organizations have been heavily training local officials on the new tax cap and reserve rules. Linda said counties and cities are using standardized worksheets for the 3% cap and levy limitations, and suggested that an affidavit certifying compliance could be attached to levy submissions. She also clarified that the primary residence credit does not reduce mill levies; it only reduces the taxpayer’s bill. Gardner said city auditors receive required finance training and that his organization was unaware of current city reserve noncompliance. The committee did not take action on the issue and planned to revisit it at the September 29 meeting. The final portion of the meeting moved into a subcommittee report on the property tax statement, where Representative Headland introduced a bill draft to remove the legislative property tax relief line from the statement for further committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the Tuesday, February 10th, 2026, 9:28 a.m. joint hearing agenda.
• Hearing none, your recommendation is adopted. Thank you very much.
• Hearing none, your recommendation is adopted.
• Hearing none, your objections?
• Hearing none, recommendation objections? Hearing none, recommendation is<00:14:11.760><c> adopted.

Bills: SB3326 , SB2911

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Summary: The committees heard SB 3001 on artificial intelligence in a joint Commerce and Consumer Protection/Labor and Technology hearing. Testimony included support from the Department of Education and Google, comments from the Office of Consumer Protection and the Attorney General’s office, and late opposition from Agentic LLC. The Attorney General raised constitutional and vagueness concerns and suggested clarifying amendments, while Google said the bill’s risk-based approach and proposed amendments could help establish industry-wide safety standards for minors. The committees recessed and then voted to pass SB 3001 with amendments, adopting DCCA/OCP recommendations on data minimization for minors and UDAP clarity, the Attorney General’s proposed clarifications and deletions, and Google’s nonconflicting amendments; the effective date was deferred to July 1, 2050. The vote passed unanimously among members present, with some members excused. The Commerce and Consumer Protection committee then took up several previously heard measures in decision-making. SB 2045 on combat sports passed with amendments reflecting DCCA and boxing commission recommendations, including clarifying the on-site medical professional requirement, reporting duties, promoter payment, removal of the combat sports registry and ambulance requirement, and other technical changes; the effective date was deferred to July 1, 2050. SP 2347 on the residential landlord-tenant code passed with amendments striking landlord requirements so OCP could work on a multilingual tenant-rights notice, and SP 2495 on consumer protection passed with amendments requiring OCP to publish an annual report on potential code violations. SB 2777 on insurance was deferred to February 17, 2026 for further decision-making. At a later CPN decision-making agenda, SB 2471 and SB 2829, both relating to the powers of artificial persons, passed with amendments clarifying the preamble, removing language about foreign artificial persons, and making other consistency and non-substantive changes; both effective dates were moved to January 1, 2027. SP 2033 on renewable energy also passed with amendments clarifying the definition of grid-ready homes, cost-sharing provisions, applicability to interconnecting customers, and safety/certification compliance, with the effective date deferred to July 1, 2050. In each case, the committee voted to adopt the recommendations without objections from members present. The committees also heard SB 3000 on insurance, which would authorize the Attorney General to bring civil actions to recover costs and losses tied to climate-attributable harm and future climate risk, including costs incurred by state insurance-related entities. The Insurance Division and Attorney General’s office offered comments seeking clarification and warning about redundancy, implementation issues, possible representation of private insurers, and concurrent litigation concerns. Supporters, including the Center for Climate Integrity, a resident testifier, Sierra Club, and Green America, argued the bill would help shift insurance costs to fossil fuel companies responsible for climate harms and address rising premiums and nonrenewals in Hawaii. Opponents, including the American Petroleum Institute, argued the bill singled out one industry, raised constitutional concerns, and should be deferred because related climate litigation is already pending. The transcript ends with the committee continuing testimony and discussion on SB 3000 and then moving into SB 3326 on energy, where the consumer advocate and Hawaiian Electric opposed the bill’s proposed separation of generation from transmission and distribution, while the PUC stood on written testimony, Retail Merchants of Hawaii supported it, and Life of the Land raised concerns about assumptions and the need for more substance.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing room is open for in-person attendance in this hearing, but all are encouraged to watch the
• The hearing room is open for in-person attendance in this hearing, but all are encouraged to watch the
• And we hear about that. So I want to flag that.
• I'm hearing.
• I'm hearing.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1157, the Affordable Rent Act, which would lower California’s annual rent cap, remove the single-family home exemption, and eliminate the sunset on existing tenant protections. The author and supporters argued that renters are facing severe affordability pressures, especially in single-family rentals, and that stronger statewide rent stabilization is needed to prevent displacement and homelessness. Opponents, including apartment, building, and property-owner groups, said the bill would discourage housing production, harm small landlords, and override a deal they said was intended to be temporary while the state focused on building more housing. Public testimony on AB 1157 was extensive, with many renters, tenant advocates, labor groups, and community organizations speaking in support, while many landlords, business groups, and property-owner representatives spoke in opposition. Committee members were split: some praised the bill as a necessary response to the rent crisis, while others warned it could reduce investment and worsen the housing shortage. The committee ultimately voted 7-5 to pass AB 1157 to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The committee then approved the consent calendar, including AB 413, AB 1152, and AB 1275, on a 9-0 vote. It also heard ACA 3, which would require the University of California to make available a limited number of down payment loans for eligible long-term support staff who are first-time homebuyers. Supporters said the measure would help lower-wage UC workers afford homeownership and improve retention, while UC and other opponents argued the proposal was duplicative of existing state programs, unnecessary, and potentially harmful to UC finances. The discussion focused on financing mechanics and the relationship to CalHFA, but no final vote on ACA 3 was included in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> to make sure everyone on YouTube hears to make sure everyone on YouTube hears you<00:34:01.000><
• </c> cuz I really don't have time to hear cuz I really don't have time to hear what<00:40:28.359><c>
• </c> chance to to to to launch um we do hear chance to to to to launch um we do hear prioritizing<01:
• </c><01:40:05.800><c> the</c> on that I'm not sure and I do hear the on that I'm not sure and I do hear
• I hear there's insurance costs that are tough.

Transcript Highlights:

• So unless I I I hear I I consent.
• </c> it's here, I'd just like to hear him. it's here, I'd just like to hear him.
• </c><01:31:47.199><c> Good</c> you for hearing my testimony. Good you for hearing my testimony.
• </c> taking the time to hear from us today. taking the time to hear from us today.
• </c><02:18:14.800><c> was</c><02:18:15.040><c> about</c> hearing said that that hearing was about hearing

Committee: Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> 71 seeing none we'll close the hearing 71 seeing none we'll close the hearing and<00:40:07.880><
• hear, and I may have missed it because I miss a lot, I may have missed it, I didn't hear you say what
• <02:21:50.880><c> on</c><02:21:51.319><c> House</c><02:21:51.600><c> Bill</c> hearing on House Bill hearing
• We have two hearings and then an exec session.
• Okay, we're going to close the hearing on HB 4155.

Summary: The House Education Policy and Administration Committee heard testimony on House Bill 71, which would bar public elementary and secondary schools and higher education facilities from being used as shelters for certain non-citizens, with a stated exception for short-term emergency sheltering of up to 72 hours and for community-wide emergency use. Prime sponsor Rep. Juliet Harvey-Bolia said the bill was modeled on federal and out-of-state proposals and was prompted by examples in New York and Massachusetts where schools or other facilities were used as shelters, causing disruption. She argued the bill does not truly “ban” anything, but instead places a condition on receipt of state funds, and said the fiscal note’s projected loss of federal funding was unsupported and should have been described as undeterminable. Committee members questioned the bill’s scope and practical effects, including whether it would apply to vacant school-owned buildings, schools used during summer, charter schools, and situations where other states send people without advance notice. Harvey-Bolia said vacant buildings not functioning as schools would not be covered, and that the bill would still allow short-term emergency sheltering and community-wide use during weather events. She also said the bill would not prevent remote learning, and that its purpose was to avoid displacing students. Several members pressed her on the fiscal note and whether any federal or state program would actually be at risk; she said she found no evidence that funding would be lost and that DHHS had not identified a real threat. A witness from the New Hampshire Association of School Administrators, Jerry FW, raised practical concerns about who would determine eligibility at a shelter site, how the 72-hour limit would be enforced, and whether the bill would apply to charter schools. He also noted that remote learning is no longer an option in New Hampshire, making one of the bill’s stated concerns less relevant. The discussion also included clarification of the terms “refugee” and “asylum seeker,” with members and the sponsor debating the distinction and whether refugees are vetted. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:23:58.000><c> no</c> hearing no hearing no jeez<00:24:00.120><c> it's</c><00:24:00.320><c> like</
• our our community we did the hearings our our community we did the public<01:50:18.320><c> hearings<
• </c> going to continue with the next hearing going to continue with the next hearing after<02:33:09.680
• </c> 203 seeing none I'll close the hearing 203 seeing none I'll close the hearing on<04:05:59.199><c
• Next week's committee hearing is on six bills.

Summary: The meeting was an orientation for the Resources, Recreation and Development Committee, led by Chair Bob Harb. He reviewed committee procedures, including pink cards for witnesses, blue sheets for counts, use of drawers in the committee room, scheduling practices, and how bills would be posted and distributed. Members briefly introduced themselves and explained why they wanted to serve on the committee, with several citing interests in conservation, water quality, outdoor recreation, land use, and related local issues. The committee then opened a hearing on HB 1113, relative to OHRV operation on certain highways within the town of Windsor. Representative Ré Colcombe, the sponsor, explained that the bill would allow local OHV/UTV access across a short section of state road in Windsor so residents on divided portions of town could travel legally between areas. He said the town selectmen were already allowing OHRV use on town roads, the route was paved, traffic impacts were expected to be minimal, and local police had no objections. He also said the town would hold public hearings and notify abutters as required, and that if the select board ultimately opposed the proposal he would recommend killing the bill. Members asked about the legal authority for the change, speed limits, traffic volume, winter maintenance, and whether the Department of Transportation or select board had to approve the route. Colcombe said the town must hold a public hearing and that the change would need to be incorporated into RSA 258:10, section 4. He said the road is maintained by the town in winter and by the state in summer. An opponent, Anne Davis, testified that she opposed the bill, saying ATV use should be treated as a tool for forest management rather than recreation, that law enforcement capacity in Windsor was a concern, and that she believed affected residents should be fully notified before any approval. No vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing no objection the chief clerk.
• As a result, competency hearings.
• </c> we don't have to hear it." we don't have to hear it."
• So, from our first couple hearings in the housing committee hearing about this stuff, the task force
• Hearing no objection, the motions prevail. Hearing no objection, the motions prevail.

Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Cole. public hearing on HB1405 and I'm going public hearing on HB1405 and I'm going to
• All right, I will close the hearing on that and we'll open the hearing right away on HB 1523 and I'll
• </c> in favor of the landlord after hearing. in favor of the landlord after hearing.
• </c> hours to notice a hear notice a meeting. hours to notice a hear notice a meeting.
• </c> hearing until 1:15. hearing until 1:15. Enjoy. All right.

Committee: House Housing

Summary: The Housing Committee opened with a public hearing on HB 196, which would repeal the Housing Champion program. Representative Matt Drew, the prime sponsor, argued the program is an unnecessary and poorly targeted subsidy, saying it rewards municipalities after projects are completed and may not be limited to new housing production. He questioned the transparency of the program, cited difficulty finding required annual reports, and noted a fiscal note suggesting the state could recover up to $3 million if obligations are terminated. Committee members and witnesses debated whether the program’s criteria amount to political favoritism or a standard grant process; supporters said the rubric is specific and that municipalities are evaluated against objective requirements. Representative Priest, Nick Taylor of Housing Action New Hampshire, and Karen Benfield of Stay Work Play New Hampshire all opposed repeal, saying the program encourages local zoning and regulatory changes, helps smaller communities participate, and supports housing supply and young people’s ability to stay in the state. The hearing on HB 196 was then closed. The committee then opened a hearing on HB 1405, a bill establishing an affordable housing guarantee program within the Housing Finance Authority. Prime sponsor Representative Chris Muns said the bill would reduce lender risk by guaranteeing up to 80% of principal on qualifying loans for affordable housing, with a cap of $30 million per lender per year and $300 million outstanding at any time. He described the measure as a low-cost public-private partnership backed by the full faith and credit of the state, and said it was identical to a prior Senate bill that had received unanimous bipartisan committee support before dying later in the process. He framed the bill as one part of a broader housing package aimed at financing, infrastructure, workforce, zoning reform, and other housing-related issues. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided. The only formal actions were opening and closing the public hearing on HB 196 and opening the public hearing on HB 1405, with testimony continuing on HB 1405 at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• I didn't see the microphone there, but I can hear it. Can you hear me? Yeah. Good morning.
• I didn't see the microphone there, but I can hear it. Can you hear me? Yeah, I can hear you.
• And I think, you know, having an understanding, because oftentimes we hear one-off stories: you hear
• That's why we hear bills: to hear testimony, to hear opposition, to hear those in support, and to think
• But that's why we hear bills.

Committee: House Judiciary