Transcript Highlights:

• has been working in my legislative office all session.
• I move to excuse those members on this legislative day who were excused on the previous legislative day
• Bernal has done with this legislation.
• Morgan Hamer is in support of this legislation.
• We need to pass this legislation.

Bills: SB31, SB33, SB20, SB217, SB264, SB269, SB650, SB681, SB528, SB502, SB740, SB916, SB995, SB10, SB2581, SB2570, SB3031, SB24, SB379, SB1171, SB1121, SB1120, SB1061, SB1036, SB1019, SB890, SB11, SB868, SB1188, SB1254, SB2778, SB2543, SB2443, SB1333, SB1259, SB1401, SB1404, SB2139, SB2165, SB2237, SB2268, SB1202, SB1198, SB1212, SB1451, SB1470, SB1498, SB965, SB1547, SB1667, SB1818, SB1902, SB2129, SB2078, SB2069, SB1737, SB1589, SB1318, SB387, SB1150, SB1574, SB2127, SB3034, SB860, SB1278, SCR5, SCR32, SB4, SB23, SB1762, SB34, SB60, SB706, SB1814, SB1220, SB523, SB565, SB1253, SB840, SB764, SB2383, SB2155, SB1535, SB1423, SB1566, SB1804, SB1728, SB1816, SB1952, SB75, SB2068, SB1455, SB213, SB627, SB2037, SB670, SB896, SB917, SB1184, SB971, SB1255, SB1261, SB1283, SB991, SB1733, SB21, SB231, SB739, SB1252, SB1371, SB646, SB3, SCR27, SB552, SB1405, SB1948, SB243, SJR1, SB31, SB33, SB20, SB217, SB264, SB269, SB650, SB681, SB528, SB502, SB740, SB916, SB995, SB10, SB2581, SB2570, SB3031, SB24, SB379, SB1171, SB1121, SB1120, SB1061, SB1036, SB1019, SB890, SB11, SB868, SB1188, SB1254, SB2778, SB2543, SB2443, SB1333, SB1259, SB1401, SB1404, SB2139, SB2165, SB2237, SB2268, SB1202, SB1198, SB1212, SB1451, SB1470, SB1498, SB965, SB1547, SB1667, SB1818, SB1902, SB2129, SB2078, SB2069, SB1737, SB1589, SB1318, SB387, SB1150, SB1574, SB2127, SB3034, SB860, SB1278, SCR5, SCR32, SB546, SB647, SB648, SB1493, SB1709, SB2001, HB5669, HB3115, HB5655, HB5675, HB5689, HB5690, HB5653, HB3228, HB2802, HB45, HB1318, HB5560, HB2894, HB4344, HB2775, HB33, HB 12, HB148

Keywords: SB 31, Life of the Mother Act, Texas abortion law, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment, pregnancy complications, maternal health, life-threatening condition, ectopic pregnancy, spontaneous abortion, miscarriage, unborn child, abortion exception, abortion ban, physician liability, health care liability claim, aiding and abetting, Texas Medical Board, State Bar of Texas, continuing medical education

Transcript Highlights:

• members, require legislative sessions to be held on an annual basis, and unduly impair the legislative
• track the impacts of legislation.
• track the impacts of legislation.
• So Nevada actually passed legislation in 2011 requiring all new legislators to attend the Legislative
• legislators.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee met with a quorum, approved the previous meeting minutes, and heard an update from Garty Consulting on the interim study of legislative term limits. The consultants outlined their research plan and preliminary themes, including loss of institutional knowledge, shifts in power toward executive agencies and lobbyists, reduced long-term policy capacity, faster leadership turnover, and recruitment/support challenges. They also described possible recommendation categories ranging from constitutional and statutory changes to procedural and cultural adjustments. Committee members asked about how other states repealed term limits, how the public survey would address perceptions of term limits, and how stakeholder focus groups would be selected. The committee also heard a presentation from NCSL on term limits in other states, including examples from Nevada, Montana, and Colorado, with discussion of training programs, staffing changes, annual-session debates, bill limits, and impacts on decorum and leadership continuity. Several members requested follow-up data on part-time versus full-time legislatures, taxpayer costs, and nonpartisan staff devoted to oversight. The committee then considered revisions to the legislature’s workplace harassment policy and related forms. Legislative Council explained changes that clarified the definition of harassment, added captions for readability, extended several deadlines, allowed informal resolution before a review panel is appointed, clarified the role of Legislative Council in intake and documentation, and updated confidentiality/open-records language. Members, especially Senator Hogan, said the revisions better formalize the role of counsel and provide a less intimidating path for resolving complaints. The committee adopted the revised policy and forms by roll call vote. Finally, the committee approved a motion to enter executive session at 1:00 p.m. to review the results of a capital threat assessment and discuss legislator security, citing the applicable open-meetings exemptions. Members were instructed to limit discussion to the stated purpose and not take final action until returning to open session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, the issues before this Legislative Ethics Board, Now, the issues before this Legislative Ethics
• , Would hope that everything that all legislators do always in their legislative positions is for the
• Representative Simmons, like all legislators, is expected to use her legislative position to benefit
• I mean, you can have a bright-line that prohibits legislators from taking any legislative action that
• That's what legislators do. Legislators do as a matter of course.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings held oral argument before the Legislative Ethics Board in the matter of Tara Simmons, docket 401-645, on a respondent-filed motion for summary judgment. Judge T.J. Martin identified the issues as whether Simmons violated the Ethics Act by using her legislative position for the benefit of others and by holding outside employment that conflicted with her official duties, under RCW 42.52.070 and RCW 42.52.020, and, if violations were found, what penalties or sanctions would be appropriate. The judge clarified that board staff had not filed its own summary judgment motion, only a response to Simmons’ motion. Attorney Doug McKinney argued that the complaint and board staff’s allegations were legally insufficient because they did not allege a personal benefit to Simmons, only benefits to her employer, EEC, or to others. He contended that the Ethics Act has historically required a benefit to the legislator herself, that employees do not automatically have a disqualifying interest in their employers, and that the board’s position would create a new bright-line rule and unfairly change the law as applied to Simmons. He also addressed allegations involving a contract provision, a campaign surplus donation to AEG, a subcontract dispute involving AEG and EEC, and text messages with Anthony Powers, arguing none showed a special privilege or conflict of interest for Simmons. Assistant Attorney General Julia Eisenhower, for board staff, argued the motion should be denied because the record sufficiently alleged violations of both statutes. She said Simmons’ involvement in securing funding for EEC, her employment duties involving stakeholder and legislator connections, her donation of campaign surplus funds to AEG to help secure a job for someone she knew, her role in the AEG-EEC subcontract dispute, and her text messages referencing her official capacity all supported the allegations. A board member asked whether the allegations were sufficient to show a special benefit, and Eisenhower responded that the facts were enough at the summary judgment stage. After rebuttal by McKinney, the ALJ closed the hearing and the board went into deliberations; no ruling was announced during the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• , legislator capacity, one in their admissible. acts, one in legislators, legislator capacity, one in
• I mean, it was the legislative process, so I didn't really—I mean, the legislative process is the legislative
• the legislator to push or advance the employer's legislative agenda or to oppose legislation disfavored
• legislative assistant and put on my legislative calendar.
• role as a legislator.

Summary: The hearing resumed in the Legislative Ethics Board matter involving Tara Simmons after the board confirmed no ex parte communications had occurred overnight. Respondent’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she violated ethics rules by combining legislative support for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and personal dealings were intertwined. After a recess for deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss, and the hearing moved into the defense case. The first defense witness was Sharon Navas, executive director of the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC). Navas testified that she met Simmons in 2018, later hired her, and took steps to separate Simmons’s legislative duties from her work for EEC. She said Simmons was never paid for lobbying or legislative acts, that her compensation came from unrestricted funds, and that the organization used written ethics-compliance language and a formal scope of work. Navas also described the proviso-funded dashboard project involving Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley, testifying that Simmons was not involved in the project’s day-to-day work, did not attend the meetings about the dispute, and was not part of the alleged contract disagreement. On cross-examination, staff focused on the contract documents, the dashboard work, and whether the scope of work matched the parties’ understanding. Tara Simmons then testified in her own defense. She described her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics guidance from House counsel and board-related materials before taking outside employment or supporting provisos. She said she relied on prior ethics advice when separating her legislative role from outside work and when seeking provisos for AEJG and EEC. Simmons also addressed her relationship with Anthony Powers, describing it as a friendship rooted in criminal justice reform work and prior collaboration. The hearing was still in the middle of Simmons’s direct testimony when the transcript excerpt ended, with no final ruling on the merits or disposition of the allegations.

Transcript Highlights:

• , legislator capacity, one in their admissible. acts, one in legislators, legislator capacity, one in
• And Legislator A sought funding for this hospital in their legislative capacity.
• I mean, it was the legislative process, so I didn't really—I mean, the legislative process is the legislative
• the legislator to push or advance the employer's legislative agenda or to oppose legislation disfavored
• legislative assistant and put on my legislative calendar.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The hearing resumed on day two of the Legislative Ethics Board fact-finding matter involving Representative Tara Simmons. After opening remarks and confirmation that board members had not engaged in outside research or ex parte communications, Simmons’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she improperly combined a legislative proviso for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and private conduct were intertwined and that the board had enough evidence to require a defense. After deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss and proceeded to hear defense testimony. The first defense witness, Sharon Navas, testified that she met Simmons through advocacy work, later hired her at the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), and maintained written employment policies intended to separate Simmons’s legislative role from her work for EEC. Navas said Simmons was never compensated for lobbying or legislative acts, that EEC paid her from unrestricted funds, and that Simmons did not work on the AEJG dashboard project or participate in the contract dispute with Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley. Navas described the proviso request and later contract issues as separate from Simmons’s legislative duties, and said she continued to pay invoices while the project was being completed. Simmons then testified about her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics advice before taking outside employment or pursuing provisos. She said she repeatedly consulted House ethics counsel and reviewed prior board decisions to ensure her outside work and legislative actions were separated. Simmons described her relationship with Anthony Powers, the dashboard project, the proviso process, and her understanding that the work was distinct from her legislative role. The hearing paused for lunch after part of Simmons’s direct examination, with testimony set to continue after the break.

Transcript Highlights:

• District legislative aides to come and go to the legislative session for 30 or 60 days.
• district legislative aid position.
• legislative aides.
• by the legislators?
• Legislators, all right.

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislation moves to pass the House.
• The legislation originally passed the House.
• The legislation originally passed the House.
• The legislation originally passed the House.
• The legislation originally passed the House.

Keywords: March 11, 2026 - Regular Session, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I appreciate all of the Legislative Ethics Legislative Ethics Board.
• Now, the issues before this Legislative Ethics Board, Now, the issues before this Legislative Ethics
• , ...would hope that everything that all legislators do always in their legislative positions is for
• Representative Simmons, like all legislators, is expected to use her legislative position to benefit
• I mean, you can have a bright-line that prohibits legislators from taking any legislative action that

Summary: The Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings held oral argument before the Legislative Ethics Board in the matter of Representative Tara Simmons, docketed as Legislative Ethics Board case 2025-5. The hearing concerned Simmons’ motion for summary judgment in an ethics complaint alleging violations of RCW 42.52.020 (conflicts of interest) and RCW 42.52.070 (special privileges), based on her work involving an EEC proviso, her employment relationship with EEC, a campaign surplus donation connected to AEJG and Jerry Stone, her involvement in an AEJG-EEC subcontract dispute, and related text messages with Anthony Powers. No evidence was taken; the session focused on legal argument over whether the alleged facts, if accepted as true, were sufficient to establish violations as a matter of law. Simmons’ counsel argued the complaint was legally insufficient because the alleged actions benefited her employer or others, not Simmons herself, and that existing board opinions allow legislators to support employers absent a direct personal benefit. He also argued the board was effectively trying to adopt a new bright-line rule prohibiting legislators from funding employers, which he said would be an improper retroactive change. Board staff, through Assistant Attorney General Julia Eisentrout, opposed summary judgment and argued the facts were enough to show Simmons had an indirect financial or other interest in EEC’s funding, that her job duties and legislative actions created conflicts, and that her actions around the donation, subcontract dispute, and text messages could be viewed as using her position to secure special privileges. A board member asked whether the allegations themselves were sufficient and whether the standard required assuming the facts as alleged; staff responded that the motion failed because the record contained sufficient facts to proceed, and that any factual disputes should be resolved at hearing. After rebuttal, the ALJ closed the oral argument and turned the matter over to the Legislative Ethics Board for deliberation. No ruling was issued during the hearing, and the board was to decide whether to grant the summary judgment motion or set the case for an evidentiary hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• A separate legislative side where we can send messages to legislators separate from the entire population
• and outcomes, turnover in legislative leadership, and the recruitment and support for future legislators
• We did interviews with legislative leaders and members, surveys of legislators in the public, focus groups
• We had 86 legislators, current legislators, January.
• We had 86 legislators, current legislators participate in it for a 61% rate.

Summary: The Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior minutes, and then took up a draft bill to make legislators’ and candidates’ residential addresses confidential in public records. Legislative Council and the Secretary of State explained the proposal was prompted by security concerns and would protect residential addresses while still allowing election officials to verify residency and keep candidate names and offices public. Members raised concerns about unintended consequences, transparency, and how the change would affect rural districts and residency enforcement. The Secretary of State suggested an amendment to end the confidentiality when a candidate’s term ends, and the committee agreed to hold the bill over for further discussion at the next meeting. The committee also reviewed follow-up materials on legislator security and best practices, including advice on situational awareness, internet hygiene, varying routines, and reporting threats, along with NCSL materials comparing capitol security practices in other states. Members discussed a recent security incident and the need to keep alert contact information current, and staff said they would continue working with the Highway Patrol on legislative-specific notifications. The bulk of the meeting was devoted to Garrity Consulting’s final report on mitigating the effects of legislative term limits. The consultants summarized survey, focus group, and stakeholder input showing concerns about loss of institutional knowledge, leadership turnover, onboarding demands, and workload pressures, while also noting public support for term limits and annual sessions. Recommendations included considering annual sessions or shifting biennial sessions to even-numbered years, restructuring organizational session and interim committee work, creating office hours and more structured orientation and mentorship, expanding ongoing training and staff support, improving public communication and virtual testimony rules, and addressing barriers to service such as employer support and travel costs. Members discussed the tension between making the legislature more effective and preserving a citizen-legislature model, and the report was received as a roadmap for future implementation rather than immediate action.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first is a legislative employee should be required to resign from legislative employment to campaign
• So, it applies to DLAs leadership staff, legislative council service staff, legislative Finance committee
• to their legislative employment.
• of all district legislative aides and most other legislative employees, but that legislator, in consultation
• The DLA is hired by that legislator and serves at the pleasure of that legislator.

Transcript Highlights:

• folks... ...us rural legislators or small-town legislators or small-town, small-country folks, if you
• As it relates to new legislators.
• for new legislators.
• So we have a discussion of legislative council services to legislators.
• or new legislators.

Summary: The committee met to organize upcoming legislative session arrangements and staffing, and to review several rule and security-related items. It first approved a Joint Rule 211 change, recommended by the Employee Benefits Committee, that clarifies the deadline and statutory references for introducing health insurance mandate bills so required cost-benefit materials can be completed in time. Members noted the change would streamline the process, though it would not solve all timing and mandate-determination issues. The committee then discussed a draft bill on confidentiality protections for certain public officials and candidates, but members raised concerns about the statute’s complexity, the practical difficulty of administering it, and whether it would meaningfully improve safety; no action was taken and the topic was set aside for further discussion. The committee received an update on the new NCSL Legislator Security Fund. Staff explained that North Dakota is in process to apply for grant funding that could reimburse up to about $200 per legislator for personal security-related expenses such as home cameras, locks, lighting, or monitoring services, with reimbursement handled through Legislative Council and subject to Emergency Commission approval. Members asked about eligible expenses, timing, and whether new legislators would be included, and staff said the program would likely cover current legislators only for this round. The committee also approved the 2027 joint session schedule for the State of the State, tribal-state message, and State of the Judiciary on January 5, with the tribal and judiciary addresses in the morning and the governor’s address later in the day. The committee next approved the statutory reporting schedule for the Commerce Commissioner and agricultural commodity groups, setting the Commerce report for January 13, 2027, and the agriculture reports and pesticide container disposal update for January 14, 2027. Members questioned the usefulness of some of these recurring reports, but agreed to follow the existing statutory requirements. The largest discussion centered on Legislative Council staffing for the 2027 session: the committee approved reducing session staff to 36 Senate and 41 House employees, eliminating procedural clerk positions in standing committees in favor of permanent policy analysts, while retaining quality assurance clerks and adding a House parking lot attendant. It also approved a 3% salary increase for those staff positions, matching the increase given to state employees. Finally, the committee reviewed a revised organizational session and new legislator training agenda. Staff proposed moving some orientation content into a separate pre-session training day for new legislators on November 30, including laptop setup, mock committee and floor sessions, parliamentary procedure, and HR/benefits training, while adding more security and budgeting instruction. Members strongly supported earlier and more practical training, including follow-up reinforcement during the first week of session, and suggested using experienced or term-limited former legislators as mentors. Staff also described efforts to expand training materials into podcasts, flowcharts, and other formats, and Legislative Council leadership outlined the office’s remaining vacancies and a proposed expansion of policy analysts, program evaluators, legal staff, and training support to better serve the legislature and improve oversight of state programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• She's a legislative fellow.
• a damn fine legislator.
• My legislative aide, Masochi.
• Legislative Session.
• 89th Legislative Session.

Summary: The House met on sine die and began with prayer, pledges, quorum verification, and a series of announcements and recognitions. The chamber received Senate messages reporting adoption of conference committee reports on SB 268 and SB 2972, and Senate concurrence in House amendments to SB 1637. Members also referred several resolutions and announced the signing of numerous House and Senate measures by the presence of the House. Technical correction resolutions were adopted: HCR 171, authorizing corrections to HB 46, passed 138-0, and SCR 55, making a wording correction in SB 1964, passed 126-12. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to memorials and recognitions. The House honored Pastor Dave Welch, with several members offering condolences and reflections on his work organizing pastors and engaging in civic life, followed by a moment of silence. Members also recognized the Ganado High School Maidens for winning the 2025 UIL 2A Division I softball state championship, Waco police K-9 Andor after being shot in the line of duty, Region 7 DPS for Capitol Complex security, and various restaurants, staff members, interns, caucus staff, and caucus freshmen of the year across Republican, Democratic, Black, Progressive, LGBTQ, IT, Energy and Climate, and Mexican American Legislative Caucuses. The chamber also heard a retirement-style address from Rep. Tony Tinderholt, who reflected on his six sessions in the House, his military service, and his decision to step aside to focus on family, while colleagues from both parties praised his service, discipline, and willingness to work across differences. The House then continued with additional staff and caucus recognitions, including committee staff, district office staff, and interns, with members repeatedly thanking their teams for their work during the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and legislative commissions, councils, committees, and other legislative entities.
• That's companion legislation to Senate Bill 190.
• That's companion legislation to Senate Bill 190.
• Companion legislation is House Bill 7.
• That's companion legislation, Senate Bill 122.

Keywords: March 12, 2026 - Regular Session Part 2, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of legislative privilege.
• The Supreme Court also extended those protections to legislative staff, committees, and legislative agencies
• applies to all legislative acts, so any kind of act that a legislator conducts in lawmaking... ...so
• Broad argument or a more specific argument that legislative privilege itself offers protections for legislative
• This is a legislative body.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with committee chairs explaining the Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions’ role under Article 48 and outlining the process for initiative petition 25-14, H5-004, an act to improve access to public records. The first panel consisted of subject-matter experts. William Clark of the National Conference of State Legislatures gave an overview of public records laws across states, noting that all states have some form of open-records law but that exemptions for legislatures vary widely. He discussed common legislative exemptions, legislative privilege, and court cases showing that outcomes often turn on specific constitutional and statutory language. Rebecca Murray, General Counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth, described Massachusetts public records trends, saying state agency requests and appeals have risen sharply since the 2017 law update, with 2025 setting a record for appeals. She said the initiative would extend the public records law to the General Court and the Governor’s Office and add exemptions specific to those offices, while also noting resource concerns from the growing volume of requests and appeals.

Transcript Highlights:

• day to the 27th legislative day.
• So it would move it up to the 27th legislative day, making it seven legislative days sooner.
• day to the 34th legislative day.
• Chairman Hogan, members of Legislative Management, for the record, Liz Fordall, Legislative Council.
• a legislative code of ethics.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: Legislative Management met with a quorum, approved the July 11, 2025 minutes, and then considered recommendations from the Legislative Procedures and Arrangements Committee. Beth Dittes explained proposed special session rule changes, which largely mirror prior special session rules and are intended to speed floor action. The changes would allow faster second readings and transmission between chambers, replace regular standing committees with two joint committees for the special session—Joint Appropriations and Joint Policy—and limit bill introduction methods. The package also included delayed-effective-date changes for the next regular session, such as moving the agency and Supreme Court prefile deadline earlier and advancing several resolution deadlines. Liz Fordall then reviewed revisions to the legislative workplace harassment policy, including clarified definitions, longer intake and review deadlines, an option for informal resolution before a review panel, and clearer disclosure rules. The committee adopted the report and forwarded the rules and policy changes. The committee also approved tentative first-day special session agendas for both chambers, with a Speaker-requested revision to allow time to swear in new House members. Megan Gordon outlined the schedule: early Rules Committee meetings, morning floor sessions, a joint session for the governor’s State of the State, then meetings of the joint appropriations and policy committees, with optional later floor and committee time. Members discussed how the joint committees would handle bills and confirmed the process would mirror the prior special session. The agendas were adopted. Chairman Bekkedahl then reported for the Rural Health Transformation Committee, which had completed its work and recommended five bill drafts for the special session: a Presidential Physical Fitness Test requirement for schools, a nutrition component for physician continuing education, joining a physician assistant licensure compact, expanding pharmacist scope for lab testing and prescribing, and a two-year appropriations bill to cover the program through the next regular session. He explained the federal rural health transformation grant, the state’s application, funding restrictions, and the need to keep the bills aligned with CMS requirements to avoid funding reductions or clawbacks. DHS officials said the department would measure outcomes through required metrics, use templates for awards, and set up an Office of Health Transformation to track long-term impacts. The committee adopted the rural health report and forwarded the bills. Finally, members discussed special-session logistics. Legislative staff said employment committees would approve a limited number of staff, Legislative Management would serve as the delayed-bills committee, and a letter would be sent to legislators explaining the process and a suggested Friday noon drafting deadline for bills to be considered at the January 20 meeting. The committee also discussed how many bills might be introduced and how to assign the rural health bills to the House or Senate for origin. No formal vote was taken on those logistics, and the meeting adjourned with plans to reconvene on January 20.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if legislators made their expenditures, submitted receipts to Legislative Council, that would give
• Legislative Council's proposal for what may be needed for the 2027 legislative assembly staff for the
• for new legislators.
• So we have a discussion of legislative council services to legislators.
• or new legislators.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We started in 1993 as a group of legislators coordinating, and it evolved into an invaluable legislative
• She's a legislative fellow from the great Texas Legislative Internship Program, which was founded in
• If you will pattern your legislative career after Ms. T, you're going to be a damn fine legislator.
• legislative session.
• the 89th legislative session.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It'll be sitting in a pot and as legislators apply... ...It'll be sitting in a pot and as legislators
• So if legislators made their expenditures, submitted receipts to Legislative Council, that would give
• new legislator training agenda.
• So we have a discussion of legislative council services to legislators.
• or new legislators.

Summary: The Legislative Procedures and Arrangements Committee met with a quorum and approved the minutes from the previous meeting. The committee first considered and adopted a Joint Rule 211 change clarifying the deadline and statutory references for bill drafts involving health insurance mandates, after discussion that the process is still somewhat cumbersome but improved by the clarification. The committee then reviewed a revised draft addressing confidentiality protections for certain legislators and candidates, but members expressed concerns about the breadth, enforceability, and transparency implications of the proposal, and the committee chose not to advance it at this time. The committee received an informational update on the new NCSL Legislator Security Fund. Staff explained that North Dakota is applying for the grant, which could provide about $200 per legislator for home security or related safety expenses, subject to Emergency Commission approval and reimbursement procedures. Members asked about eligible expenses, administrative burden, and whether new legislators would be covered; staff said guidance would be provided if funding is approved. The committee also approved the 2027 timing for the State of the Judiciary, tribal-state relationship message, and State of the State address on January 5, and set the Commerce Department and agricultural commodity reports for January 13 and 14, respectively, as required by statute. A major portion of the meeting focused on legislative staffing and organizational planning. The committee approved a recommendation for 36 Senate staff positions and 41 House staff positions, along with a 3% compensation increase for session staff. Discussion centered on replacing some procedural clerk duties with permanent policy analyst staff, retaining quality assurance roles for now, and adding or repurposing positions in IT, program evaluation, legal, and administration. Members also discussed expanding program evaluation capacity and the need for clearer oversight of new programs, with staff noting upcoming training and model-sharing with other states. Finally, the committee reviewed a proposed new legislator orientation day on November 30 and broader organizational session training changes, including mock committee and floor sessions, security training, and more robust budget/appropriations instruction, but took no final action on the agenda items and adjourned after completing the budget-related recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• This legislation does one thing. It provides legislative staff with the ability to form a union.
• This legislation does one thing. It provides legislative staff with the ability to form a union.
• This legislation will address that. If passed, the legislation would do three things.
• This legislation will address that. If passed, the legislation would do three things.
• To be clear, this legislation does not undermine the unique nature of legislative work.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on several labor-related bills, especially proposals to give legislative employees the right to organize and collectively bargain, close a prevailing wage loophole for off-site prefabrication work, and strengthen enforcement against wage theft. Committee chairs opened the hearing by explaining the hybrid format and asking witnesses to keep testimony brief. Multiple legislators testified in support of the legislative staff union bill, saying staff deserve the same bargaining rights as other public employees and that unionization would improve pay, benefits, retention, and workplace dignity. Witnesses also discussed how the bill would likely be structured, with separate House and Senate bargaining arrangements or locals, and emphasized that it would only create the option to unionize, not require it. A second major topic was the prevailing wage bill addressing off-site fabrication and prefabrication in construction. Union leaders, contractors, and workers described how more work is being shifted from job sites into shops, especially in sheet metal, HVAC, electrical, and pipefitting work, and argued that the law should treat that work the same as on-site construction when it is part of a public project. They said the current loophole lets some contractors underbid by paying lower wages off-site, while responsible contractors already pay prevailing wages in their shops. Supporters argued the bill would protect workers, preserve apprenticeship and training standards, improve safety and quality, and make enforcement easier through certified payroll and clearer definitions. The committee also heard testimony on wage theft legislation. Representative Dan Donahue, the Attorney General’s Fair Labor Division, AFL-CIO representatives, and carpenters’ union witnesses described wage theft, misclassification, labor brokers, and tax fraud as widespread problems that hurt workers, honest contractors, and public revenues. They supported giving the Attorney General stronger enforcement tools, adding contractor accountability up the subcontracting chain, and protecting workers from retaliation and from delays that can cause claims to expire. A separate witness supported a bill to extend the statute of limitations for Wage Act cases while AG investigations are pending, and another supported changes to help hospital workers enforce timely payment rights. No votes were taken during the hearing; witnesses repeatedly asked for favorable reports on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's the Office of the Legislative Auditor, that you heard from last week; the Legislative Budget
• jurisdiction. comprised of legislative leadership it comprised of legislative leadership it is<00:01
• minority the chair of the legislative minority the chair of the legislative coordin<00:02:29.879
• heard from last week the legislative you heard from last week the legislative budget<00:03:14.560>
• budget office the legislative reference budget office the legislative reference library<00:03:17.159

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met briefly to approve the January 16 minutes, then heard a series of informational presentations from legislative joint offices and commissions that fall under its jurisdiction. Michelle Urick of the Legislative Coordinating Commission explained the LCC’s governance structure, including its leadership-based membership and role overseeing joint offices such as the Legislative Auditor, Legislative Budget Office, Legislative Reference Library, Revisor of Statutes, and the LCC staff office itself. Christian Larson of the Legislative Budget Office described the office’s nonpartisan fiscal note work, local impact notes, and support for the Tax Expenditure Review Commission, noting the volume of requests it handles and that the office currently has 18 budgeted FTE. He also explained the LBO Oversight Commission’s role in setting standards and appointing the director. Elizabeth Lincoln of the Legislative Reference Library outlined the library’s services, including answering thousands of reference questions, maintaining state policy and legislative collections, archiving state documents, supporting the legislative website and search tools, and preserving House and Senate audio, video, and committee minutes. She also noted the library’s staffing levels and its move to the Capitol. In response to a question, she said copies of the book Minnesota Standoff were in constant circulation, that the title is out of print, and that the library had digitized it for use by legislators and staff. Ryan Inman, the Revisor of Statutes, described the office’s drafting, legal review, publication, IT, and other services. He said every bill introduced is reviewed by a Revisor attorney, the office publishes Laws of Minnesota, Minnesota Statutes, and Minnesota Rules, and it maintains the legislative drafting system now being replaced. He also discussed rule drafting for agencies, legal counsel, the claims subcommittee, court opinions reports, and the annual technical Revisor bill. Members asked about bill volume, amendment drafting, and the history of administrative rules review; Inman said the office is handling over 2,500 active bill requests and that a prior commission on administrative rules existed in the past. No votes were taken beyond approving the minutes.