Transcript Highlights:

• this bill, so I urge your support.
• President, I would rise in support. Senator Harris. Mr.
• I rise in support of the motion also. This is a new bill.
• and we appreciate their support.
• Terry Kirkham has demonstrated that balance.

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the journal, received committee reports, and moved through messages from the House and first- and second-reading business before taking up a long series of third-reading bills. Early action included referral of Senate Bill 1449 on elections petitions and signature gatherers, and passage of several measures on cooperative purchasing, industrial hemp, community infrastructure districts, parental school choice tax credit clarifications, open meetings recording rights, an advisory question on an official state gun, water skiing rules, and data center water use. The chamber also returned House Bill 888 to committee after concerns were raised about procurement transparency and possible conflict with another procurement bill passed the prior day. Several bills drew extended debate. Senate Bill 1424, which would have expanded dealer protections against direct manufacturer vehicle sales and grandfathered existing operations, failed on a 11-24 vote after opponents called it protectionist and argued it would limit consumer choice. Senate Bill 1436, clarifying cooperative and group discount purchasing for state procurement, passed after supporters said it would allow agencies to use competitive bids more effectively and avoid litigation. House Bill 772 and House Bill 879, both relating to industrial hemp, passed with supporters stressing they were clarifications for grain/fiber hemp and consumable hemp products, while opponents worried about THC and regulatory scope. House Bill 926, allowing counties to form community infrastructure districts in unincorporated areas, passed despite objections that it would accelerate development and increase property tax burdens. House Bill 934, making technical changes to the parental school choice tax credit, passed after a lengthy debate over whether students using the credit should still participate in public school extracurriculars; supporters said the bill clarified original intent, while opponents called it a double dip. House Bill 894, protecting the public’s right to record open meetings, passed overwhelmingly. House Bill 932, placing an advisory question on the ballot for an official state gun, also passed after a spirited historical discussion of firearms. House Bill 887, creating a limited exception for early-morning water skiing outside designated courses, passed by unanimous-consent roll call. The final bill discussed in the excerpt, House Bill 895 on data center cooling and water use, was introduced with a warning that consumptive water use by large data centers could strain Idaho’s aquifer and should be limited to closed-loop systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• to support trying to do more work in that area.
• Sometimes the committee will take a vote to support something or not support that.
• Everyone was in support of.
• I have those two individuals in support.
• urges your support.

Bills: SB100

Committee: Senate Senate Judiciary

Keywords: burglary, aggravated burglary, dwelling, criminal law, property rights, 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I supported it then, the concept, and I would support it today.
• So I I would not support it. citizens. So I I would not support it.
• I just couldn't support it. My district wouldn't support it.
• I just couldn't support it. My with it. I just couldn't support it.
• I support that concept. I support that concept.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you have any support from the community in helping get those incentives?
• But yes, we have community support. Thank you so much. I buy things like that myself.
• So you also mentioned the maybe areas of support, like academic support in a school or a school district
• At least having about 120 literacy coaches statewide to support our D and F schools.
• So would you support more funding from the Educational Adequacy Fund to be able to support some of that

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He said that if the League does not support the bill, it should bring forward legislation it does support
• If the league doesn't support this bill, the league needs to bring forward legislation that they do support
• This concept has broad public support.
• We are support.
• We are support. So I I don't know.

Committee: House House Ways & Means Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2290, which would clarify transaction privilege tax sourcing rules for tangible personal property by specifying that servers are not used to determine where an order is received and by defining business location. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill simply codifies existing origin-based treatment for Arizona businesses and provides certainty, while the League of Arizona Cities and Towns and ATRA warned it would shift revenue, create compliance problems, and potentially subject businesses to multiple tax rates depending on distribution or pickup locations. The Department of Revenue said it was neutral, noted a 2023 draft ruling had reflected a legal analysis of the issue but was never finalized, and said the bill would address a real need for clarity. After extensive debate over examples involving feed stores, Target, pizza delivery, and online orders, the committee voted 5-3 with one absent to return HB 2290 with a do pass recommendation. The committee then heard House Bill 2373, which would add a space on the individual income tax return for taxpayers to voluntarily contribute part of a refund to the Veterans Donations Fund or Veterans Service Organization Fund. The sponsor and a veterans policy advocate said the measure would give taxpayers a simple way to support veterans organizations, with examples from Colorado and local veterans projects. The bill passed unanimously, 8-0 with one absent, and was returned with a do pass recommendation. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 2143, a technical PSPRS measure that would limit the 5% ownership cap to publicly traded corporations. PSPRS representatives said the change would align the statute with its intended purpose, reduce unnecessary workarounds and legal costs, and preserve broader investment flexibility while maintaining other risk controls. Members discussed how the cap compares with ASRS and other retirement systems, and the bill was still under discussion at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• support.
• It passed with overwhelming support the last two years.
• I ask somebody to support. Thank you. Further discussion.
• It's an excellent bill, has a lot of bipartisan support.
• And of course I'm going to support this.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The House first established a quorum, then took up several bills for perfection and printing. House Bill 2297, a fence-law bill, was presented as a way to let livestock owners enter up to 10 feet onto neighboring property to repair fences, remove trees and debris on the fence line, and avoid trespass liability while repairing damage caused by livestock escaping. Supporters said the measure addresses a real rural problem and protects farmers who are already responsible for keeping animals contained; the bill was adopted and perfected and printed after debate over property rights and access concerns. The chamber then considered House Bills 2142 and 2058, a film and television tax incentive measure. Supporters said Missouri’s film credit program has produced strong economic returns, created jobs, and attracted productions, and they argued for combining separate film and TV funding buckets while removing a proposed sunset extension. An amendment to keep the sunset at 2029 was adopted, and the bill was then adopted, perfected, and printed. The House also took up House Bill 3004, a hardwood labeling bill requiring products sold in Missouri to be labeled accurately as wood or non-wood materials; supporters framed it as truth-in-advertising and protection for the state’s timber industry, while one member questioned how the law would apply to online and out-of-state sellers. The bill was adopted and perfected and printed. Next, the House considered House Bills 3283 and 3306, which set a timeline and process for public-sector collective bargaining disputes, including negotiation, mediation, and arbitration, and defined “good faith” in bargaining. An amendment narrowed the bill so it would not apply to teachers, police, or other excluded public employees under existing law. Supporters said the bill would prevent years-long contract disputes and save taxpayer money, especially for firefighters and other first responders; the substitute was adopted and perfected and printed. Finally, House Bill 2536, a bill on sex-designated restrooms and other private spaces in government-controlled settings, drew extensive debate. The sponsor said it was intended to protect privacy and safety in restrooms, changing rooms, sleeping quarters, schools, airports, correctional facilities, and similar spaces, and an amendment clarified exceptions for corrections officers and other public safety duties. Opponents argued the bill would target transgender people, create enforcement problems, and rely on signage rather than preventing crime; supporters said it was needed to protect women and girls. The amendment was adopted, and debate continued on the bill as amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Here in California, we have taken action to support meeting federal requirements, but we also must act
• We're also pursuing incentives to address affordability of vehicles and infrastructure to support the
• Again, I support our clean air goals.”
• And so, yes, part of that is about displaced worker support.
• You've all seen them here in support of renewable energy policies in California.

Summary: The Senate Environmental Quality Committee held an informational hearing on the environmental impacts and policy considerations surrounding refinery closures. Chair Blakespear framed the hearing as part of California’s broader transition away from fossil fuels, emphasizing the need for proactive planning so communities, workers, and local governments are not caught off guard. Vice Chair Gunda argued that the state has long signaled a future away from oil, while also warning that closures can create supply instability, higher prices, and infrastructure stress if not managed carefully. Senators also raised concerns about consumer costs, supply reliability, the role of imports, and whether California’s climate policies are contributing to refinery disinvestment. The first panel included the California Energy Commission, CARB, and the State Water Resources Control Board. Gunda described California as being in a “mid-transition,” with gasoline demand gradually declining, zero-emission vehicle adoption rising, and refinery capacity shrinking through both conversions to renewable fuels and outright closures. He said the state needs a coordinated strategy that balances near-term supply stability with long-term decarbonization, and noted that refinery closures can shift liabilities onto pipelines, terminals, and potentially the state. CARB’s Matthew Boutill said the agency’s focus is reducing air pollution and greenhouse gases, and that state policies are already driving billions in annual investment in alternative fuels, EV infrastructure, and refinery conversions. Water Board representative Annalisa Kihara explained the cleanup authorities used at refinery sites, including investigation, remediation, and enforcement tools, and said decommissioning often reveals previously inaccessible contamination and may require new monitoring wells and additional site assessment. Committee members pressed the panel on whether the state has enough information to plan for land reuse and cleanup costs, whether current tools are adequate, and whether more legislative direction is needed. Gunda said there are still gaps in information and transparency, especially around liability and long-term community planning. Kihara said the Water Boards can require more data, cleanup, and timelines, but that refinery remediation is highly site-specific and can take tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. Senators Menjivar, Stern, and Hurtado questioned demand trends, the pace of refinery closures versus demand decline, the role of imports and the Jones Act, and whether California should consider options such as state ownership or broader ecosystem planning. The panel generally agreed that closures are likely to continue and that the state should plan proactively rather than reactively. A second panel presented recent research on refinery closures. Emily Grubert said closure costs and remediation obligations are often underestimated and that California should better define end-of-life obligations and financial assurance requirements. Tham Herschbach outlined five drivers of refinery closures: declining California crude production, falling in-state gasoline demand, the shift toward renewable diesel and other alternative fuels, global refinery consolidation, and the growing availability of imported gasoline. Anne Alexander focused on community impacts, using the Phillips 66 Los Angeles refinery closure as a case study, and said refinery sites are often heavily contaminated, cleanup can take a decade or more, and communities are often left without clear information because refineries have little end-of-life planning or financial assurance requirements. No votes or formal actions were taken at the informational hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Here in California, we have taken action to support meeting federal requirements, but we also must act
• We're also pursuing incentives to address affordability of vehicles and infrastructure to support the
• So I’m very supportive on that. And, in air quality.
• And so, yes, part of that is about displaced worker support.
• You've all seen them here in support of renewable energy policies in California.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:08:21.520><c> ourselves</c> airports to be able to support ourselves airports to be able to support
• We think uh that the FA has supported.
• to support our air service development efforts.
• </c><00:31:31.919><c> advanced</c> infrastructure um to support advanced infrastructure um to support
• </c> dedicated funding to support our air dedicated funding to support our air service<00:32:16.480><

Keywords: The live stream for this meeting was prematurely interrupted. The full version will be uploaded in the next few days., 958, all

Summary: The committee heard an update from Kentucky’s three major commercial airports: Lexington Blue Grass Airport, Louisville Regional Airport Authority (SDF and Bowman Field), and CVG. Lexington’s Eric Franco described post-COVID growth that has already exceeded pre-pandemic activity, along with a master plan focused on the whole airport, expanded surface parking, relocation of the air traffic control tower, and a major terminal project estimated at $500 million to $700 million. He emphasized the airport’s role in serving both passenger and corporate aviation across central Kentucky and thanked the legislature for prior funding, including $5 million for parking. Louisville’s Dan Mann reported record passenger growth, expanded nonstop service, and especially strong cargo activity driven by UPS, noting SDF is now among the busiest cargo airports in North America and Bowman Field remains the state’s busiest general aviation airport. He highlighted major infrastructure needs, including airfield and terminal work, parking expansion, and a planned federal inspection service facility to support international flights around events like the Kentucky Derby.

Transcript Highlights:

• or other support.
• to support...
• More funding from the Educational Adequacy Fund to be able to support some of that?
• I think our ABC program does have that data to support it.
• PD is instead provided to ensure that personnel is equipped to support all students.

Summary: The committee first approved the March 9 and 10 minutes, then heard a presentation from the Arkansas Excellence in Teaching Fellowship Program featuring three third-grade teachers from Poyen, Drew Central, and Cabot, along with Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva. The teachers described the fellowship as a year-long collaboration among 23 merit-pay recipients from across the state, focused on sharing classroom strategies, data use, and professional support. Members asked about teacher experience, how the fellowship information is shared locally, the role of merit pay, and how teachers are addressing third-grade reading and retention concerns under the ATLAS assessment system. The teachers emphasized early intervention, relationships with students, small-group instruction, progress monitoring, and communication with families; they also described community supports such as churches, food backpacks, and local donations. Several members raised broader questions about poverty, trauma, social services, DHS involvement, and whether similar professional learning should be expanded to more teachers. Secretary Oliva said the fellowship is a small subset of a larger merit-pay program, that participation was voluntary, and that the state is working to improve literacy supports, clarity, and alignment across grades. He also said ATLAS results are now available to schools and families much faster than in the past, often within 24 to 72 hours, and that the state is using the data to identify at-risk students earlier and support intervention before retention decisions are made. The committee then moved to the adequacy/resource allocation presentation from the Bureau of Legislative Research. Staff explained that the report is part of the statutory adequacy review and focuses on state funding sources beyond foundation aid, including categorical and supplemental funds. They noted that districts and charters spent more than $7 billion in the 2025 school year, with roughly 49% from foundation funding and 51% from other sources over the last three years. The presentation outlined the four categorical funds—Alternative Learning Environment, English Learners, Enhanced Student Achievement, and Professional Development—describing their restricted uses, student-based funding formulas, and the ability of districts to transfer some money among categoricals while keeping it within allowable purposes. Staff said categorical funds account for about 4% of total spending, or less than $300 million, and reviewed superintendent feedback on whether those funds met district needs, with responses varying by category and district.

Transcript Highlights:

• support systems, and continues investing in entrepreneurs across the state.
• operational grants to support their initiatives.
• Do we provide any support?
• Can be used to support what kind of housing? Typically rental properties.
• be, that tax credit can be used to support what kind of housing?

Summary: The House Budget Committee heard the Department of Economic Development’s fiscal year 2027 budget presentation, beginning with Director Michelle Hadaway and division leaders. The department emphasized that most of its budget is federally funded and walked through requests for regional engagement, international trade and investment offices, business recruitment and marketing, Delta Regional Authority dues, business and community solutions, tax increment financing, MODESA, DRPP, CDBG, disaster recovery, Missouri Main Street, AmeriCorps, Missouri One Start, the Missouri Technology Corporation, semiconductor and API reshoring efforts, SSBCI, and other economic development items. Members repeatedly asked about lapses, one-time appropriations, whether general revenue could be reduced or replaced with other funds, and how the department prioritizes federal and other non-GR sources. Several members also praised regional engagement, Missouri Partnership, and rural economic development efforts. A major portion of the discussion focused on specific one-time or performance-based projects. Members questioned the large GR transfer for TIFs and MODESA, the use of funds for the Urban League plaza renovation, the Northeast Missouri housing fund, the Highway MM corridor, and the Missouri Technology Corporation. Department witnesses explained that many of these amounts are based on projected performance or are tied to multi-year obligations, and that some unspent balances reflect project timing, federal reimbursement timing, or delayed construction. The committee also discussed the Missouri Main Street program, with staff explaining it supports both new and existing Main Street communities and can be adapted for county-wide models. The committee spent significant time on workforce and innovation programs. Missouri One Start described its customized training and upskilling programs, including a statutory fund switch to align with existing law, while members asked for more data on participation and impact. Missouri Technology Corporation explained that reduced funding last year limited some entrepreneur-support programs, and that its venture fund has leveraged state dollars into private capital and jobs. Members also discussed the API reshoring item and semiconductor funding, asking what the money would do, what companies would benefit, and how much federal leverage the state could expect. Witnesses said the API request supports a nonprofit center working with existing Missouri companies to reshore pharmaceutical production, while the semiconductor item is tied to federal matching opportunities that have moved slowly. The committee did not take final action on the budget during the portion of the hearing provided. The chair recessed the committee to go to session, stating that the hearing would resume afterward and that public testimony on House Bill 2007 would follow completion of the department presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you so much for all the support you've shown us.
• The program has been supported for about 31 years through federal funding.
• We are fortunate in an extension to be able to support the program in October.
• Thank you to those of you that were supportive and sponsored to carry that bill.
• Is it going to get supported and signed?

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They need to feel supported and self-actualized.
• That our practitioners have ways of being supportive, with support for both second-victim phenomena and
• Forty-eight of these are supported by legislative funding. Thank you very much for your support.
• These ECHOs focus on diabetes self-management education and support.
• Project ECHO has also been supporting behavioral health reform.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• He was always a supporter of mine.
• She particularly supported.
• Thank you so much for your love and support.
• She's been supportive of me.
• support.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here today in support of AB 1026.
• So we're happy to have support today.
• We are a supporter of a larger market footprint.
• We are a supporter of a larger market footprint.
• We generally support the concepts behind that.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1026 by Assembly Member Wilson, which would require investor-owned utilities to provide clearer front-end information and follow more consistent timelines for post-entitlement energization applications tied to housing projects. The author and supporters from the Housing Action Coalition and Mission Housing said utility delays can hold up approved housing, add costs, and create uncertainty, and they argued the bill would align utility processes with recent state efforts to streamline local permitting. PG&E and Southern California Edison opposed the bill, saying existing CPUC timelines and the ongoing energization rulemaking already address the issue, that the bill could be duplicative or premature, and that some proposed timelines were too short. The committee discussed the bill’s relationship to the CPUC’s September 2024 decision, and AB 1026 was ultimately approved on a 15-0 vote, with the consent calendar also passing. The second half of the hearing was the committee’s annual oversight hearing on electric reliability. Representatives from the CPUC, CEC, CAISO, and DWR reviewed lessons from the 2020 and 2022 heat emergencies, emphasizing that California has since added significant resources, improved planning, and created backstop programs such as the strategic reliability reserve. They said the summer 2025 outlook is cautiously optimistic, with no expected shortfalls under traditional planning conditions and a projected surplus, though wildfire and extreme heat remain risks. The agencies also described major changes in planning and operations, including more battery storage, updated resource adequacy rules, expanded transmission planning, and reforms to the interconnection queue. Members asked about data center load, Diablo Canyon’s future, the strategic reliability reserve, demand response, wildfire mitigation costs, affordability, and regional market expansion. Witnesses said data center demand is a major variable but can be managed through better forecasting, flexible service arrangements, and siting in areas with existing capacity; they also said firm clean resources remain valuable while planning continues around Diablo Canyon’s scheduled retirement. On affordability, they said the agencies try to balance reliability with least-cost procurement, and that new resources can lower market prices even as they require upfront investment. CAISO also highlighted the value of the Western Energy Imbalance Market and the planned day-ahead market, saying regional coordination improves both reliability and cost savings.

Transcript Highlights:

• Here in California, we have taken action to support meeting federal requirements, but we also must act
• We're also pursuing incentives to address affordability of vehicles and infrastructure to support the
• So I'm very supportive of that. And, in terms of air quality, I'm very supportive on that end.
• Again, I support our clean air goals.
• You've all seen them here in support of renewable energy policies in California.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Summary: The Senate Environmental Quality Committee held an informational hearing on the environmental impacts and planning considerations associated with refinery closures. In opening remarks, the chair framed refinery shutdowns as a complex part of California’s decarbonization transition and said the committee would focus on environmental and land-use issues, while Vice Chair Gunda argued closures reflect years of policy-driven disinvestment and warned that supply disruptions and higher prices could harm working families. State agency witnesses from the Energy Commission, CARB, and the Water Boards described the state as being in a “mid-transition,” with declining gasoline demand, growing zero-emission vehicle adoption, and increasing conversion of some refinery assets to renewable fuels, but also with abrupt capacity losses that can force greater reliance on imports and storage. They emphasized the need for proactive planning, transparency, and coordination across agencies, and noted that refinery closures can stress pipelines, terminals, and other linked infrastructure, with potential liabilities falling to the state if those assets are not financially supported. The Water Boards explained their cleanup authorities and tools for refinery decommissioning, including investigation, monitoring, remediation, and enforcement under the Water Code, and said site-specific cleanup plans depend on contamination, groundwater conditions, and future land use. They noted that decommissioning can reveal previously inaccessible areas and require additional sampling or wells, and that cleanup costs can range from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. Committee members pressed the witnesses on whether the state has enough information to plan for land transitions, whether current tools are adequate, and whether more standardized procedures or financial assurances are needed. The witnesses generally said existing tools are useful but that more transparency and better data sharing would help communities and policymakers understand liabilities and long-term redevelopment opportunities. Members also questioned the relationship between California policy, refinery closures, imports, and global emissions. CARB said its programs apply to transportation fuel suppliers whether fuel is refined in-state or imported, and that its climate and air-quality rules are designed to reduce emissions and avoid leakage. Some senators argued that California’s policies have accelerated closures and that demand has not fallen fast enough to offset lost refining capacity, while agency witnesses responded that closures are also driven by global market forces, aging infrastructure, crude quality, and changing fuel demand. The committee then heard from outside experts, including a Notre Dame professor who said closure costs are often underestimated and that stronger financial assurance requirements can shift company behavior, a Stanford/SLAC researcher who outlined five drivers of refinery closures, and an environmental attorney who discussed community impacts and lessons from the Phillips 66 Los Angeles refinery closure. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational and focused on testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's why I'll be supporting this bill today. Additional debate.
• I don't remember any statewide elected official who supported us.
• Supported us, the greatest majority for any constitutional amendment.
• I will support this today. I will support this in this state today. But I'm simply saying.
• For your favorable support. Thank you.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of member introductions recognizing interns, pages, volunteers, and the retirement of Pastor Gary Austin from the sergeant’s office. Leadership also announced that budget talks with the House were continuing and that senators would not need to plan on being in next week, suggesting progress toward a budget framework. After routine floor business, the chamber took up a major third-reading measure on citizen initiatives and several education bills, followed later by returning messages from the House on health and school-safety measures. The most extensive debate centered on the citizen initiative bill, which sponsors said was intended to protect the constitutional amendment process from fraud and abuse based on election-crime investigations and a large state report on petition fraud. Supporters argued the bill would add reasonable guardrails, prevent misuse of public funds, and preserve integrity while still allowing grassroots participation. Opponents from both parties argued it would make citizen-led amendments much harder by adding costs, deadlines, criminal penalties, and administrative burdens that would chill participation and favor wealthy or corporate interests. After lengthy debate, the Senate voted 28-10 to pass the bill. The chamber then passed several education measures with little or no opposition, including bills tied to Bright Futures, dual enrollment, Florida ABLE, teacher preparation, and other education policy updates, all by 38-0. Later, the Senate concurred in House amendments on a stem cell therapy bill, an EKG requirement for student athletes, and a cardiac emergency bill, each passing 37-0. The House also sent back a school safety bill with amendments affecting child care facility partnerships with law enforcement, temporary door locks during active assailant incidents, supervision windows, and funding for panic alarm systems; the transcript ends as that bill is being explained.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would have asked the nominee whether she supported that policy.
• Her letter clearly says that she supports the investigation.
• And I came in here in support today because...
• We are here in support of Director Johnston's nomination.
• “I’m here on behalf of myself today in support of Chuck Bassett.

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met with four members present and approved the prior minutes without objection. Chair Jay Kaufman outlined the committee’s role in reviewing executive nominations and explained the hearing process for three nominees: Mary Foote for the Office of Economic Opportunity, Debbie Johnston for the Department of Health Services, and Chuck Bassett. Foote did not appear for her hearing, and members discussed her absence and alleged omissions in her disclosure materials, including prior service with Planned Parenthood-related organizations. The committee then moved to reject her nomination, and the motion passed 3-2, recommending that the full Senate reject Mary Foote. Debbie Johnston, nominee to lead the Department of Health Services, appeared and gave an opening statement describing her Arizona background, prior Senate staff work, and more than 20 years with the Arizona Hospital and Health Care Association. She said her priorities at ADHS include rebuilding trust in public health licensing, improving stakeholder engagement, standardizing rulemaking communication, addressing alleged religious discrimination and retaliation concerns in licensing, and using technology and AI to improve efficiency. In questioning, senators pressed her on her management style, conflict-of-interest safeguards given her prior industry role, enforcement priorities, budget pressures, behavioral health and assisted living oversight, and the department’s response to COVID-19. Johnston said she would follow statutes, recuse herself from enforcement matters involving former contacts, and resign if directed to carry out an unlawful policy. She also said the department does not regulate therapy itself, only facilities, and that it would rely on legal counsel regarding the governor’s conversion-therapy executive order and related federal civil-rights allegations. Several senators focused on public health trust and the department’s pandemic response, with Johnston acknowledging concerns about closures, data collection, and communication during COVID-19 while saying she would review past after-action materials and be better prepared in the future. Public testimony from stakeholders in aging services and health care strongly supported her confirmation, praising her accessibility, responsiveness, and collaborative approach. After testimony, the vice chair moved to recommend Johnston’s confirmation to the full Senate. The roll call was underway when the transcript ended, with several members voting aye and one member expressing reservations about her not reviewing the pandemic after-action report before another crisis occurs.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to support the gentleman's motion.
• Speaker, with all my heart, I support this bill, I support this effort, and the numbers work correctly
• Please support it. Missourians, please listen. Please support it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
• I support what our governor is wanting us to do.
• So I would just like to say, I support this. I support what we're doing.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to support the gentleman's motion.
• Speaker, with all my heart, I support this bill, I support this effort, and the numbers work correctly
• Please support it. Missourians, please listen. Please support it. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
• So I would just like to say, I support this.
• I support what— So I would just like to say, I support this. I support what we're doing.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, approval of the House Journal by roll call vote (117-5), and a long series of special guest introductions, including YouthBuild students, school groups, family members, former legislators, and a Delta Sigma Theta Sorority Day recognition. The chamber then moved to third-reading business and reconsideration motions on House Committee Substitute for House Bills 3283 and 3306. Members explained the bills needed to be sent back to Legislative Review to address possible conflicts with current case law and to tighten the language, especially around arbitration and municipal/court jurisdiction issues. The reconsideration motions and the motion to commit the bills to Legislative Review all passed by roll call votes in the 98-43 range. The House then took up House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 982, which would revise Missouri’s sex offender registry system. The sponsor said the bill responds to concerns from an advocacy group and registry administrators, converting Missouri from a hybrid offense-based system to a true tier-based system aligned with federal SORNA standards, clarifying who must register, reducing litigation exposure, and adding related language on civil commitment housing, name changes, and carnival employees. Members asked about whether offenders could eventually petition off the registry; the sponsor said the bill would streamline removal where allowed under the tier system. House Amendment 1, correcting a typo, was adopted, the committee substitute was adopted, and the bill was third read and passed 141-4. The House also debated House Joint Resolutions 173 and 174, a proposal to amend the constitution to phase out the state income tax and shift more of the tax burden toward sales and use taxes over time. Supporters argued the current income tax hurts the middle class, discourages growth, and places Missouri at a disadvantage compared with no-income-tax states like Tennessee; they said the measure would let voters decide and could improve economic development, population growth, and fairness by making taxes more visible and consumption-based. Opponents argued the plan would raise taxes on most Missourians, especially low- and middle-income families, seniors on fixed incomes, and people who spend more of their income on necessities, and that it would shift costs onto consumers while weakening funding for schools, health care, and other services. The debate was extensive and included questions about constitutional tax limits, revenue neutrality, and comparisons to Tennessee and Washington, but no final vote on the resolutions was shown in the transcript.