Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a debate or discussion? If not, call it. Yes, ma'am.
• Is there further debate or discussion? If not, please call the roll. Senator Avila? Yes.
• Further in discussion and debate? If not, a motion would be in order to confirm.
• Is there a debate or discussion? If not, call the roll. Senator Avila? Yes. Senator Bradley? Yes.
• Is there a debate or discussion? If not, call the roll. Senator Avala? Yes. Senator Bradley? Yes.

Committee: Senate Ethics and Elections

Summary: The Committee on Ethics and Elections met to consider several gubernatorial appointees, beginning with Matthew Walsh, Secretary of Juvenile Justice, for confirmation. Walsh outlined his law enforcement background, social work training, and priorities at DJJ, including staff wellness, seeking statutory recognition and training standards for juvenile detention and probation officers, and increasing bed capacity so adjudicated youth can move from detention into residential programming sooner. Members asked about the impact of detention “dead time” and the need for more beds; Walsh said DJJ is evaluating ways to let youth begin programming earlier while in detention. Public support was noted, and the committee voted unanimously to confirm Walsh and forward his nomination to the full Senate. The committee then heard from Tina Vidal-Duarte, nominee to the Florida Atlantic University Board of Trustees. She described her business background, service on multiple boards, and prior service on FAU’s board pending confirmation, emphasizing governance, accountability, and strategic planning. Senators questioned her about FAU’s handling of faculty social media controversies, the university’s relationship with its new president, student and faculty engagement, AI planning, diversity, and her role on the Hope Florida board and with CDR Health’s state contracts, including work related to the Everglades detention center. Public testimony included strong opposition from one speaker who criticized her ties to state contracts and Hope Florida, while another senator spoke in support, citing her community service and business experience. The committee voted 5-2 to confirm her, with Senators Polsky and Bernard voting no. Afterward, the committee considered the remaining nominees in Tabs 2 through 15, excluding Tab 10, en bloc. No separate votes were requested, and the committee approved the group of nominees by voice roll call to be forwarded to the full Senate. The meeting then concluded with no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? Any objections? If not, the motion is carried.
• any objections if not the discussion any objections if not the motion<00:07:04.599><c> is</c><00:07:
• Is there any discussion? Any objections? If not, the motion is carried.
• Is there any discussion?
• there any discussion there any discussion any<00:08:00.919><c> objections</c><00:08:01.560><c> if</c>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion? Seeing none, I should call the roll. Representative Belling? Yes.
• If there's no further discussion, Sasha, please call the roll.
• If there's no further discussion, Sasha, please call the roll. Thank you, Representative Gentry.
• If there's no further discussion, Sasha, please call the roll. Representative Bowling? Yes.
• If there's no further discussion, Sasha, please call the roll. Representative Bowling? Yes.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Roll Call 00:36 HB 808 Discussion 01:31 HB 808 Vote 03:44 HB 775 Discussion 05:11 HB 775 Vote 10:05, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Economic Development and Workforce Investment met with a quorum and first took up House Bill 808, sponsored by Rep. Ken Upchurch. The bill, as explained by the sponsor and his guests, would support a public-private partnership process for developing Burnside Island State Park in Pulaski County into a tourism destination with possible lodging and restaurants. Members asked questions about the proposal, and one lighthearted objection was raised during questioning. The committee adopted the committee substitute and then passed HB 808 with favorable expression. The committee then considered House Bill 775, sponsored by Rep. Jason Nemes, which would allow a new TIF within the existing Yum Center TIF in Louisville. Nemes said the measure was requested by Louisville officials, would not cost the state money, and was intended to spur development and strengthen the broader TIF area. Members asked about the purpose and scope of the bill, including whether it would apply elsewhere in the state and how a nested TIF would help; Nemes said it was narrowly tailored and designed to encourage growth through added activity and tourism. The committee adopted the committee substitute and passed HB 775 with favorable expression.

Transcript Highlights:

• afternoon on this bitterly cold day here in Minnesota, would allow us to at least take a look at and discuss
• Representative Anderson says the bill would allow Minnesota to at least take a look at and discuss another
• So until we would lift this so-called moratorium on large hydro, there's really no point in discussing
• There are no plants or any nuclear discussions or plants because we can't right now in Minnesota.
• It just allows the discussion to continue.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I look forward to discussing these issues and more with you today and over the months ahead.
• I recognize, as you said, this isn't a K-12 discussion, but we recognize that all of these things are
• So appreciate the point that you're raising and would love to continue to discuss that as we continue
• Many of them were already on their own, and there's been discussion within the last decade or so of a
• Oh, wait, before I move on, DOF, Elio, did you have any comments on the last discussion? Okay.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They were discussing in the hallway amongst themselves. Are we back? Okay.
• Is there any further discussion?” “Yes, Madam Chair, I have a point for discussion.
• We’re not agendized to discuss that bill.
• We're not agendized to discuss that bill.
• Further discussion? Seeing none, will the secretary please call the roll?

Bills: SB1015 , SB1049 , SB1066 , SB1081 , SB1092 , SB1133 , SB1134 , SB1139 , SB1147 , SB1148 , SB1168 , SB1189 , SCR1001 , SCR1002 , SCR1005 , SCR1010

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Elections

Keywords: gender transition, detransition, healthcare liability, medical malpractice, youth protection, legal action, Arizona law, spousal maintenance, court guidelines, self-sufficiency, financial support, marriage dissolution, child safety, dependency cases, attorney regulation, foster care, legal representation, probation, dangerous crimes, children

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh I know this is has some discussion. So I I know this is has some discussion.
• And so, just a little bit of discussion explaining the bit of discussion explaining the bit of discussion
• Is there any discussion? Mr. Chairman, I there any discussion? Mr.
• Unfortunately, these discussions have turned from future discussions have turned from future discussions
• Is there any discussion on the Hovie. Is there any discussion on the Hovie.

Bills: HB258 , HB324 , HB333 , SB270 , HB258 , HB324 , HB333 , SB270

Committee: Senate County and Municipal Government

Keywords: primary election, election calendar, off-presidential year, May primary, second Tuesday in May, fourth Tuesday in May, runoff primary, special primary, presidential primary, election administration, candidate filing, ballot access, political parties, county election officials, state election law, Alabama elections, sheriffs, term of office, Alabama law, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• Um but we also don't want to discussion.
• 00:31:12.559><c> marketing</c> many discussions with the marketing many discussions with the marketing
• Any discussion that's in the report or the amendment?
• Any discussion that's in the report or the amendment?
• Any discussion that's in the report or the amendment?

Committee: Senate Economic Development and Tourism

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 449 relating to economic development, HB 1006 relating to the Agribusiness Development Corporation, and then began HB 1467 relating to housing resiliency. On HB 449, Director Wayne Enoy of the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation and several business groups, including the Chamber of Commerce and Hawaii Food Industry Association, testified in strong support. They said the measure would help local manufacturers and tech-focused businesses adapt to uncertainty around tariffs and federal funding pauses, diversify Hawaiʻi’s economy, and expand workforce training and apprenticeship efforts tied to innovation and manufacturing. The bulk of the discussion focused on HB 1006 and proposed agritourism authority for ADC. ADC, the Hawaii Farm Bureau, and other supporters said agritourism can be a value-added tool that helps farmers diversify income while keeping agriculture as the primary use of the land. One testifier opposed the bill’s direction without stronger guardrails, urging that a high percentage of revenue or land use remain tied to actual agricultural production. Committee members questioned ADC and Farm Bureau witnesses about how much land should remain in production, whether agritourism could expand on public lands, how enforcement would work, and whether responsibilities should be shifted from the Department of Agriculture’s marketing functions to ADC. Witnesses said ADC currently has no tenants engaged in agritourism, but would support standards, annual reporting, site visits, and the ability to reclaim land if production requirements are not met. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided. After concluding HB 1006 testimony and questions, the committee moved on to HB 1467 and called the first witness, Luke Meyers, before the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> make sure as we continue discussions make sure as we continue discussions about<00:02:31.440><c>
• </c><00:47:40.480><c> on</c> because you had a lot of discussion on because you had a lot of discussion
• So, I appreciate the discussion changes.
• </c><00:58:51.119><c> I</c> appreciate the discussion today. I appreciate the discussion today.
• </c><00:58:54.240><c> and</c> think it is an important discussion and think it is an important discussion

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, we will be discussing the historic and enormous challenges facing CalFresh and efforts to fight
• In closing, we thank you for engaging on this important discussion and for your partnership as we work
• So I think just happy to continue these discussions. the feds considerate income.
• Okay, Department of Finance, do you agree to participate in these discussions?
• Yes, we've been participating in the discussions with the counties and with DSS.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Have you discussed this similar to this.
• I practiced in &gt;&gt; I I've discussed it.
• </c><00:34:55.839><c> So</c> purpose of the discussions here. So purpose of the discussions here.
• Also, there was discussion made whole.
• </c> overlap there that we've had discussions overlap there that we've had discussions uh<00:47:54.640

Committee: Joint Judiciary, Division A

Keywords: Judiciary, Division A - Room 409, 3 February, 2026; 2:00 P.M., 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• are discussions Um there are discussions um<00:19:38.000><c> committee</c><00:19:38.400><c> members<
• Any discussion?
• Any discussion? discussion? discussion?
• Any discussion?
• Any discussion?

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 302, which would expand access to medical cannabis by removing the in-person provider-patient relationship requirement and related restrictions. The Department of Health supported the bill, and multiple advocates and organizations testified in support, including the ACLU of Hawaii, Hawaii Alliance for Cannabis Reform, Marijuana Policy Project, and others. Supporters said the measure would improve access for patients, especially on outer islands, and some urged broader amendments allowing providers to certify cannabis for any medical condition and to speed registration and treat in-state and out-of-state patients equally. No opposition was heard, and the bill was left with no questions after testimony. The committee also heard HB 1052 HD1, which clarifies that the Public Utilities Commission may use universal service fund monies to provide free telecommunications access for individuals with print disabilities. Testimony was uniformly supportive from the DCCA Division of Consumer Advocacy, the State Council on Developmental Disabilities, the Department of Human Services, the Public Utilities Commission, and the National Federation of the Blind of Hawaii. Witnesses described the program as an important accessibility service that has been operating under prior appropriations and should continue under the universal service program. HB 1482, relating to controlled substances and hemp/synthetic cannabinoids, drew support from the Department of Law Enforcement, Department of Health, Honolulu Police Department, and others, with some comments from the Attorney General’s office. Supporters said the bill would clarify that delta-8 THC is a controlled substance and help enforcement against illegal hemp products and synthetic cannabinoids. Testimony and questioning focused on the need for better lab testing capacity, retail registry and age-gating, seizure authority, nuisance abatement, and possible use of special funds or appropriations to support enforcement. Members also discussed enforcement of illegal hemp businesses and whether additional funding or statutory changes would be needed. Finally, the committee took up HB 712, a 340B drug-discount measure affecting safety-net providers and contract pharmacies. Hospitals, health centers, and provider groups testified in support, saying the bill would protect access to discounted drugs and preserve funding for services such as chronic disease management, transportation, and specialty care. Pharmaceutical-industry representatives opposed the bill or sought amendments, arguing the 340B program has expanded beyond its original intent and lacks transparency, and they requested reporting or audit-like provisions to verify claims and revenues. Members questioned both sides about alleged abuse, the growth of contract pharmacies, and whether the bill should include transparency requirements before moving forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any discussion on the motion? Senator Wintrow, thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Okay, committee, I don't see any other discussion. We do have a motion.
• Any discussion? Hearing none, all in favor indicate by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed?
• Discussion, Senators? Senator Ruchti, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• Discussion, Senators? Sunder Rutty. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Rules

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any other discussion?
• Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion? Senator Christian. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• The folks of Yakima are no longer being a part of the discussion.
• Any further discussion?

Bills: HB2464

Committee: Senate Human Services

Keywords: detention facilities, law enforcement, reporting requirements, incidents, private detention, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I we just had different discussions about what we did and what was our purpose.
• And I we just had different discussions about what we did and what was our purpose.
• what we did and what discussions about what we did and what was<00:11:36.800><c> our</c><00:11:37.040
• Uh, any discussion? Seeing none, use the previous roll for the amendment. >> All right.
• Uh any discussion? discussion? discussion?

Bills: HB66 , HB110 , HB114 , SB210 , SB228 , SB231 , HB66 , HB110 , HB114 , SB210 , SB228 , SB231

Committee: Senate State Governmental Affairs

Keywords: elder abuse, financial exploitation, inheritance, joint tenancy, conviction effects, HB110, sunset bill, Alabama Sunset Law, State Board of Medical Examiners, Medical Licensure Commission, medical licensing, physician regulation, healthcare regulation, professional licensing, ethics law, state ethics code, public servants, board members, agency continuation, sunset review

Transcript Highlights:

• All those in— is there any discussion on the matter? Do we have to repeal it?
• Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Say nay.
• Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Any opposed say nay.
• Senator Nichols: Any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all those in favor, say aye. Aye.
• I would just note tomorrow committee, we have some very important discussions about the budget.

Committee: Senate Education

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm hoping this morning that as part of this discussion, and even subsequently as we discuss and deliberate
• You know, the whole idea of telemedicine is a good discussion that we've had, and we should continue
• My hope is that as part of this discussion. ...day and going forward, that we can lock arms together
• You're not aware of that discussion?
• Members, we do have to get to the floor, so we have plenty of time to continue the discussion.

Bills: HB229 , HB3990 , HB5082 , HB5510 , HB229

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: biological sex, government information, definitions, sex-based distinctions, public health, flags, display, state law, municipalities, government buildings, drug enforcement, local control, home rule, municipal charter, county policy, ordinance preemption, state preemption, attorney general enforcement, civil penalties, mandamus

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a discussion.
• The discussion then turned to whether the work had to be physically in North Dakota.
• But if you chop both, then you run into the issue that you're discussing earlier.
• Senator Powers, further discussion? Everybody's clear as mud, I can tell.
• Any further discussion? If not, this conference committee is adjourned. Sounds good.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The conference committee discussed a child care tax credit bill and focused mainly on narrowing the eligibility language. Members agreed to remove a proposed 10-mile limitation tied to the state line at first, then revisited the issue after concerns from the Tax Department and Legislative Council about remote workers, border communities, and out-of-state daycare use. Testimony from the Greater North Dakota Chamber supported the credit as a more flexible version of a prior grant program, while committee members debated whether the credit should apply only to North Dakota residents, employees working in North Dakota, or child care providers located in North Dakota or border cities. After extended discussion, the committee settled on keeping the 10-mile language and striking the resident requirement from the definition of “qualified employee,” with the intent of better capturing border-area workers while avoiding broader unintended coverage. Members noted the bill is aimed at workforce and child care access, especially in Fargo, Grand Forks, and other border areas, and acknowledged that the language may still need adjustment in the future. The Tax Department and Legislative Council indicated the revised language would be workable. Representative Foss moved the final amendment to the conference committee report, Senator Powers seconded, and the motion passed on a roll call vote with all members voting yes: Chairman Rummel, Senator Marseille, Senator Powers, Representative Doctor, Representative Foss, and Representative Anderson. The committee then adjourned, with House and Senate members designated to carry the report forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's what we wanted in the discussion. But those discussions didn't further.
• That's what we wanted in the discussion. But those discussions didn't further.
• Any further discussion? In closing. No seeing no further comments, any further discussion?
• Any further discussion?
• Any further discussion?

Summary: The House convened, approved the journal, and spent much of the opening portion recognizing guests and interns from both parties, along with former lawmakers and a newly seated member, Representative Sylvia Allen. The chamber then took up House Concurrent Resolution 2065 honoring the late Alfredo Gutierrez. Members from both parties gave extended remarks about his life as a civil rights advocate, student activist, legislator, and mentor, and the resolution was unanimously adopted and transmitted to the Senate. Family members of Gutierrez were recognized in the gallery during the memorial tribute. The House then moved into Committee of the Whole on the first budget-related measures. On House Bill 4138, the “feed bill”/budget operations measure, Democrats argued the budget favored corporations and data centers over seniors, health care, housing, universities, and vulnerable families, while Republicans defended it as a continuation of prior policy and said it preserved tax conformity and modest agency cuts. After debate and questions, the committee recommended the bill do pass and the House adopted that report, sending HB 4138 to engrossing. The chamber next considered House Bill 4139, the amusement/gaming-related budget bill. Members debated whether it was essentially unchanged from last year’s budget language, with Republicans saying it was a continuation bill and that gaming-related provisions would support rural economies and tourism, while Democrats questioned the broader budget context and its effects on working families. The committee recommended HB 4139 do pass, and the House adopted that recommendation. The House then began debate on House Bill 4140, the state budget implementation bill, focusing on the budget stabilization fund and a proposed government efficiency initiative; discussion was still underway at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,</c> &gt;&gt; Well, that of course can be discussed, &gt;&gt; Well, that of course can be discussed,
• The third item on the agenda is a discussion on the voting systems.
• The third item on the agenda is a discussion on the voting systems.
• I think as we discussed at the barcodes.
• Uh we do election roundt discussions.

Keywords: Discussion of BR 25 (2026 RS) 04:15 Presentation on voting systems by ES&S 48:14 Presentation on voting systems by Hart InterCivic and Harp Enterprises 01:13:07, 958, all

Summary: The committee met, approved the October 21 minutes, and then took up BR 25 for the 2026 regular session, a proposal to prohibit the use of tax dollars and public resources to advocate for or against ballot questions, including constitutional amendments. Senator Rawlings and the other presenters argued the current law already bars such advocacy but lacks meaningful enforcement, citing the 2024 school choice amendment campaign and other examples where public officials and school systems allegedly used taxpayer-funded resources to influence voters. They said the bill would add civil and criminal penalties, while preserving First Amendment rights for public employees acting in their personal capacities. Much of the discussion focused on whether the bill should be limited to school districts or broadened to cover other public entities, and on how to define terms such as “advocating in impartial terms.” Members raised concerns about possible effects on county and city lobbying through groups like KLC and KCO, on legitimate factual explanations by public officials, and on whether the bill could unintentionally restrict needed representation for local governments. The sponsors said the measure was intended to be narrow, would be vetted further, and would not bar individuals from speaking on their own behalf. Several members suggested revisions. Representative Lockett asked that schools and school employees be specifically named, and suggested separating the lobbying restrictions from the ballot-measure provisions into different bills. Representative Layman questioned the meaning of the bill’s language and whether it would cover factual testimony by officials. Representative Heen asked about a Jefferson County example involving legal fees used to challenge petition signatures; counsel said that situation would likely be allowable under the bill as drafted, though some members thought it should be covered. No final vote was taken on BR 25 during this discussion.