Transcript Highlights:

• Do you want me to talk about the plan? >> You wanted to talk about the plan a little bit?
• </c> um and co-chair an AI planning group. um and co-chair an AI planning group.
• I mean, what's the plan? The plan is all the things I just said.
• We don't plan ahead.
• And what's the long-term plan? >> I don't know what the long-term plan is.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:31:35.279><c> if</c> both bodies about what's your plan if both bodies about what's your plan
• And this is our plan. it. And this is our plan. &gt;&gt; Senator<00:31:40.640><c> Hley.
• </c><01:43:03.520><c> for</c> projects further out in our plans for projects further out in our plans
• </c><01:45:59.119><c> and</c> director of capital planning and director of capital planning and archaeology
• </c> utilize planned and unfinished utilize planned and unfinished collection<01:48:44.800><c> space<

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's also widely known that where there is a cardiac emergency response plan or emergency action plan
• Not once. response plan bill last year, which does response plan bill last year, which does require<00
• </c> to the cardiac emergency response plan. to the cardiac emergency response plan.
• The gap training that there is a plan.
• Uh, Surya has had me out to... those wordings but that is the plan those wordings but that is the plan

Committee: Senate Education Policy

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 1088 aligns the three planning tools and makes important modernization updates.
• And my biggest concern has to do with big costs that you need to plan for.
• And my biggest concern has to do with big costs that you need to plan for.
• So we're asking for better planning in that sense.
• North Fork Kings GSA has developed a groundwater sustainability plan for 2028.

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee heard several bills focused on health care planning, mental health, housing, homeowners associations, groundwater enforcement, pet-friendly rental disclosures, and post-disaster property protections. SB 1088 would modernize POLST and DNR forms by renaming POLST to “portable orders for life-sustaining treatment,” allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants to sign, clarifying that the forms are voluntary, recognizing out-of-state forms, and permitting electronic signatures. It drew support from the Coalition for Compassionate Care and related groups and no opposition was presented. SB 1242 would allow family members who originally petitioned in CARE Court to continue participating for care coordination and information-sharing, subject to judicial discretion; supporters said it would improve treatment coordination, while Disability Rights California opposed it as coercive and a threat to confidentiality. The committee voted 7-0 to pass SB 1242, and it was placed on call. The committee also considered SB 1007, which would require more HOA transparency, including clearer budget comparisons and disclosure of evidence for violations, and would lower the threshold for regular assessment increases without a homeowner vote. Supporters argued it would curb steep fee hikes and improve accountability, while HOA industry groups warned it could undermine funding for insurance, maintenance, and other operating costs. Members raised concerns about the cap on assessments, but the bill advanced on a 6-1 vote and was placed on call. SB 1364, as amended, would bar custody or visitation rights for a person who impregnated a survivor through sexual assault, using a clear-and-convincing evidence standard rather than requiring a criminal conviction; supporters said it protects survivors and may increase federal funding, while opponents argued it could deny children a relationship with a parent. The bill passed 8-0 and was placed on call. Additional measures included SB 997, which would give the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency lien authority to enforce fees and sustainability rules; it had support from local water, farm, and county representatives and passed 9-0. SB 1296 would require landlords to disclose pet policies up front in applications, ads, and websites and allow application-fee refunds if disclosure was not made before payment; supporters said it would reduce wasted fees and pet relinquishment, while rental housing groups raised concerns about signage, ADA language, and vaccination disclosures. The bill passed 8-0 and was placed on call. Finally, SB 1090 would prohibit large property owners from making unsolicited purchase offers for five years in wildfire disaster areas, aiming to curb post-disaster speculation; supporters described aggressive investor pressure after the Eaton and Palisades fires, while real estate and title groups raised implementation and enforcement concerns. The committee was still discussing the bill when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those herd plans are going to go for four more years.
• And the department saw with clear heads to develop a response plan.
• But, um, put that plan together to keep it as contained as possible.
• So going back to the Arkansas plan, No, I got it. Thank you.
• And they mentioned the fact that the plan was already in place, Mr.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The committee continued discussing recommendations for chronic wasting disease (CWD) surveillance and response in Louisiana’s wild and captive deer herds. Members and staff reviewed current surveillance results, noting that LDWF had met goals in 32 of 64 parishes and that voluntary hunter-harvest sampling was falling short in other areas. Several ideas were raised to improve sample collection without making it broadly mandatory, including incentives for hunters, taxidermists, and possibly processors; use of DMAP properties and mobile sampling units; and targeted sampling of older bucks and other higher-risk animals. Members also discussed whether to use parish-level or other geographic control areas, and whether to mirror aspects of Arkansas’s approach, including testing to reduce or remove restrictions when prevalence remains low. The committee also heard from LDWF and LDAF about captive herd surveillance and reporting. LDAF described its licensed deer facilities, a 2024 positive in Jeff Davis Parish that led to depopulation and quarantines, and follow-up testing that has remained negative at quarantined farms. Witnesses said the agencies currently share information informally and through USDA/NVSL channels, but there is no specific law or regulation requiring 24-hour notification between agencies. The Wildlife Federation and several members recommended mandatory enrollment in the USDA herd certification program, mandatory reporting of positives, and clearer coordination between LDWF and LDAF. Members also discussed the cost of testing, with LDWF saying USDA grants covered diagnostic testing for the last two deer seasons, while department self-generated funds covered earlier costs. A major portion of the meeting focused on how to respond when a positive wild deer is found. Some members favored immediate restrictions, while others argued for keeping existing season rules in place through the season and using the positive as a trigger for intensified sampling, with the goal of avoiding unnecessary penalties and encouraging hunters to submit samples. There was also discussion of whether baiting should be prohibited, allowed during hunting season, or phased based on testing results, with Arkansas’s statewide baiting allowance and county-based disease management zones used as a comparison. The chair emphasized that no final recommendation would be adopted at this meeting; instead, staff was directed to compile the discussion and written recommendations for consideration at the April meeting, when the committee expects to vote and the commission may need to act quickly through its notice-of-intent or emergency rule process before the next hunting season.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not need more safety plans— We do not need more safety plans or additional training.
• We have seen innumerable children die with safety plans in place, even safety plans requiring a friend
• Safety plans are designed to immediately address the safety of a child, while service plans address the
• Children do not need the courts to order more in-home safety plans.
• Over and over again, we have read about the death of children who had safety plans.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2511, which would define “imminent physical harm” in the child welfare context as a substantial risk of serious harm arising from home conditions, caregiver conduct, neglect, substance abuse, unsafe environments, or other circumstances likely to cause significant injury. Representative Tom Dent, the sponsor, said the bill was intended to give caseworkers clearer tools to protect children while still recognizing the importance of keeping families together. Supporters, including some foster parents, kinship caregivers, advocates, and individuals with lived experience, argued that the current standard is too vague and has contributed to child fatalities and near-fatalities, especially in cases involving fentanyl exposure, chronic neglect, and abuse. They said clearer language would help courts and caseworkers intervene earlier and more consistently. Opponents, including legal aid, public defense, and child welfare policy groups, argued the bill is legally problematic, could conflict with existing statutes and ICWA-informed language, and would not address root causes such as service gaps, training, and inconsistent implementation. DCYF testified “other,” saying the bill could add clarity but that the language needed refinement; the sponsor said he was open to working on changes. No vote was taken on the bill during the hearing. The committee then heard House Bill 2660, which would allow courts at shelter care hearings to order parents of children under age five to comply with safety-related conditions, evaluations, or services when the child is returned home, with referrals required within seven days and participation not treated as an admission of abuse or neglect. The sponsor, Representative Ortiz-Self, said the bill is aimed at critical incidents and would give caseworkers and courts more ability to require safeguards for very young children when families are not voluntarily engaging in services. DCYF and the Office of the Family and Children’s Ombuds supported the bill, saying it could help prevent tragedies by allowing earlier court-ordered services and safety conditions. Some advocates and parents also supported it, describing cases where removal or court intervention helped protect children. Opponents, including public defense and some family-support organizations, raised constitutional and due process concerns, argued that services are not the same as immediate safety, and warned the bill could shift problems without fixing underlying service shortages. The sponsor and DCYF discussed the need for follow-up on language and implementation, but no committee action or vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• There, we also have plans to do some rural pilot projects in terms of water.
• One of the things, and you may have it, I don't have to go into any detail, but a plan to grow people
• Do we have a plan to help them make that transition into the community and out of the center?
• Areas that we have planned for this year.
• Let's make planned use decisions one way or another based on that data.

Committee: House Economic & Rural Development & Policy Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• The district improvement plan or a board improvement plan are both developed within the bill.
• They would be empowered to either approve or deny with reasons a plan, a detailed plan that the superintendent
• We should have passed the plan.
• We should have passed the plan.
• We should have passed the plan.

Committee: Assembly Education

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And as I said, each state developed their own plan for how they would address these rules.
• Staff proposal, we're planning to have that ready.
• It's a solid plan, but it begs an important question.
• That fiber plan is already pre-established.
• It's not without a thorough airtight plan that no one will be left out.

Committee: House Communications and Conveyance

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:11.640><c> as</c> wise to include it for future plans as wise to include it for future plans
• </c><00:07:34.120><c> that</c> be um being that are being planned that be um being that are being planned
• </c><00:07:48.599><c> but</c> seem like there's any current plans but seem like there's any current plans
• In talking about this long-range transmission planning and that, you know, this planning for Tranche
• and that you know transmission planning and that you know this<00:59:38.960><c> planning</c><00:59:39.280

Bills: HF75

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Keywords: HF75, earned incentive release credit, earned incentive credits, revocation, revocable credits, corrections, Minnesota Department of Corrections, prison discipline, incarcerated persons, inmate misconduct, facility rules, sentence reduction, supervised release, Minnesota Rehabilitation and Reinvestment Act, public safety, rehabilitation, prison credits, executed sentence, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't know that we affirmatively or definitively are planning that.
• or with the local government entity's comprehensive plan.
• or with the local government entity's comprehensive plan.
• what fiscal year, no matter if it takes six, seven fiscal years, whatever it is, if we could get a plan
• We will follow up with a more detailed plan of action.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The Louisiana Transportation Authority met on March 26 with a quorum present and approved the September 10, 2025 minutes. The main item was the Cameron Ferry privatization proposal from Labmar Ferry Services. Staff explained the ferry’s current operational problems, including reliability issues with the aging Cameron No. 2 vessel, limited backup capacity, and staffing challenges. They also reviewed the competitive solicitation process that followed Labmar’s unsolicited proposal, noting that Labmar was the only proposer and that local entities, including the Cameron Parish Police Jury and Cameron Port Harbor and Terminal District, had no objection to the concept. Staff and counsel outlined the statutory public-purpose factors the board had to consider and described the scope of a potential agreement, which would cover vessel operations, maintenance, facilities, communications, dry docking, and emergency response. Board members praised DOTD staff and the Cameron ferry workers for their long service and emphasized the need for more reliable service and better contingency planning. Senator Abraham asked procedural questions about the unsolicited proposal and the solicitation process. The board first voted that the privatization proposal would serve a public purpose, then voted to approve the proposal contingent on execution of a comprehensive agreement; both motions passed without objection. The meeting also covered next steps. DOTD said negotiations would continue through spring and early summer, with a possible transition to Labmar in late summer 2026 if an agreement and funding are secured. Staff reported that two new hybrid ferries, the Holly Beach and the Cameron, are expected in May and August 2026, and that temporary docking and site improvements are underway. A feasibility study for terminal expansion estimated costs between $30 million and $50 million, with permitting and design likely taking at least a year and a half to two years. Members discussed the need for a multi-year funding plan, and the meeting ended with a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• And how do you plan... Acres, while the South Point Google Data Center is 780 acres.
• And how do you plan on getting that much land? Are you going to get it by eminent domain?
• We actually have a plan for this, and it's called the Powering Missouri Growth Plan.
• What are the plans here? Thank you.
• As of right now, there are no plans to continue to test on a regular basis.

Committee: House Agriculture, Food Production and Outdoor Resources

Summary: The Agriculture Committee met with 11 members present and heard no bills for public hearing or executive action. Instead, the committee received a presentation from the Montgomery County R-2 FFA ag issues team on proposed data centers in their county, framed as a mock town hall discussion. The students and panel discussed the project’s scale, including roughly 1,760 acres across two sites, and debated concerns about eminent domain, noise, light pollution, water use, electricity demand, soil and wildlife impacts, recycling of equipment, and tax abatements versus projected school district revenue. The presentation featured sharply divided viewpoints: a county/economic development perspective emphasizing jobs, utility planning, and major tax revenue for schools; a community and environmental perspective raising concerns about farmland loss, groundwater and well impacts, property values, and long-term ecological effects; and a farmer’s perspective opposing the project to protect agricultural land and rural life. The panel cited figures such as about 50 million gallons of water annually, potential school district revenue of about $11 million in the first year of the initial phase and roughly $43 million annually when fully built out, and discussed PILOT payments and the Powering Missouri Growth Plan as ways to offset costs. Committee members then praised the students’ preparation and public speaking, and several offered policy and practical suggestions, including considering local construction labor, emergency service capacity, backup generator noise, and clearer context for water-usage numbers. One member asked what legislation could help, and the students suggested setting environmental-use limits such as water or light-pollution restrictions. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after the presentation and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• that can be made for self-funded plans that this is preempted by ERISA.
• So with, there's essentially two buckets of insurance plans here.
• There's fully insured and there's self-funded plans.
• For fully insured plans, can the state ask for this type of data?
• For plans that are typically covered under ERISA? Okay. It is definitely a complicated issue.

Committee: All ARKANSAS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (ALC)

Summary: The committee met and opened with a prayer, then approved the prior meeting minutes and received the monthly revenue report from the Bureau of Legislative Research. The report showed gross general revenue collections up year to date and net general revenue above forecast, with the staff noting changes driven by casino gaming transfers, income tax growth, and a lottery-related collection. No action was required on the revenue report. Several subcommittee reports were then presented and adopted, including the executive committee, administrative rules, game and fish/state police, hospital/Medicaid/developmental disability, occupational licensing, PEER, revenue, state insurance programs, and personnel. Topics included a Jackson County School District cooperative purchasing waiver, rulemaking updates from several agencies, federal immigration and wildlife issues, SNAP and Medicaid waiver reimbursement rates, occupational authorization reviews, temporary appropriations and transfer requests, a tire removal contract held for later review, EBD pharmacy and medical drug recommendations, and personnel items. The PEER report also included questions to the State Broadband Director about a provider with delinquent property taxes; he said the provider would not be brought forward until the issue is resolved and that broadband grant payments are tied to performance milestones. The most extended discussion came during review of a State Insurance Department report on pharmacy benefit manager oversight. Commissioners and members questioned Navitus Health Solutions’ refusal to provide certain claims data for self-funded plans in an affiliate pricing examination. The department said the matter is being briefed and set for an administrative hearing, likely in April, and that the dispute centers on ERISA preemption and state authority to request the data. Members also asked about the status of the other PBMs under review and whether they had raised similar objections. After all reports were adopted or filed as reviewed, the meeting adjourned with no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's about data from self-funded plans that we're looking at in this affiliate pricing examination.
• that can be made for self-funded plans that this is preempted by ERISA.
• So with, there's essentially two buckets of insurance plans here.
• There's fully insured and there's self-funded plans.
• So for fully insured plans, can the state ask for this type of data, for plans that are typically covered

Committee: All ARKANSAS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL (ALC)

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Idaho code, what if they haven't adopted a plan?
• Counties have been overlooked when it comes to land management planning for years and years.
• Okay, committee, the last bill that we plan to hear today.
• The last bill that we plan to hear today.
• Our plans are to meet on Wednesday, and we'll send that out as quickly as we can.

Committee: House Local Government

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So JFAC, through intent language, required a plan to be submitted and approved by them for us to handle
• But the idea, or the plan, that was accepted by the legislative auditors and by JFAC was to increase
• I think this is a good plan and makes a lot of sense on how you can get those that need to get up and
• We explain this plan to them.
• Many insurance plans cover acupuncture and ...and with hospice.

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to deal with our freezes, but not having water, water is very important for the growers and just planning
• For the 3rd year in a row, I'm only planning half of my farm because of very limited irrigation water
• Uh, in the state, you have a lot of, uh, projects that are being planned and, and considered, uh, some
• Many of these are planned for deployment in Texas.
• You have plans in the Permian Basin that could be hundreds or thousands of, of reactors. Wonderful.

Committee: House S/C on State-Federal Relations

Transcript Highlights:

• Office of Planning and Thank you.
• </c> of Planning, Sustainable Development. of Planning, Sustainable Development.
• ><c> Permitting</c><01:32:00.080><c> in</c> Department of Planning and Permitting in Department of Planning
• </c> developers don't have a long-term plan developers don't have a long-term plan to<01:46:26.320><c
• This creates inform the final plan.

Bills: HB2611 , HB2102 , HB1710 , HB1868 , HB1920 , HB1812 , HB1733 , HB1715 , HB1723 , HB1724 , HB1727 , HB1711

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: HB2611, Hawaii antitrust, rental housing, rent price-fixing, algorithmic pricing, algorithmic rent-setting, property management software, pricing algorithms, rent coordination, price-fixing, collusion, cartel, multifamily housing, landlord software, occupancy levels, lease terms, Attorney General, public education program, consumer protection, housing affordability

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that’s the plan.
• So that’s the plan.
• The plan is, I just want to remind everybody how difficult this is, and that all of our hearts are in
• The proposed language gives us a plan, but not a process.
• </c> fle flexibility offers valuable planning fle flexibility offers valuable planning Time<01:38:41.040

Committee: Senate Education Policy

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But there is no monthly revenue plan stipulated by the legislature; it's an annual plan, and we just
• </c> we'll be preparing the uh annual plan we'll be preparing the uh annual plan for<00:12:17.680><c>
• The federal government has to look at our plan.
• That is a younger plan, and we recently switched partners.
• And then there'll be a corrective action plan.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting featured presentations from the Department of Administrative Services and the Treasury Department on state revenue reporting and unclaimed property. State Comptroller Dana Call explained DAS’s role in compiling statewide revenue reports, including the annual revenue plan set through the budget process and the monthly revenue focus reports that track cash receipts. She noted that unrestricted general fund revenue is about $2 billion annually, while miscellaneous other revenue is a much smaller and less predictable category, averaging roughly $30 million to $32 million a year. She also described two more material internal revenue lines: statewide indirect cost recoveries and post-retirement benefit recoveries, which are billed to agencies and often tied to federal reimbursement rules. Members asked about the interest line in the revenue charts and about how the figures were presented, and Call clarified that the totals were in millions and that the interest item would be explained by the Treasurer. She also explained that the indirect cost and post-retirement recoveries are internal cost allocations that flow back into the unrestricted revenue pool and are reflected in agency budgets as interagency costs. Treasurer Monica Meissner then outlined Treasury Department functions, including bank deposits, statewide disbursements, banking relationships, investments, debt management, compliance, the FONA College Savings Program, the ABLE Plan, scholarship programs, and the abandoned property program. In discussing unclaimed property, she said holders report property after a five-year dormancy period, the state uses automated systems and outreach to locate owners, and claim activity has increased. In fiscal year 2024, the state returned about $12.2 million to citizens through roughly 12,000 claims; over the last 10 years, about $72.6 million has been returned. She also said the state escheated $19.9 million to the general fund and $1.8 million to counties last year, and explained that securities-related proceeds are harder to estimate because they depend on market conditions. No votes or formal actions were taken.