Transcript Highlights:

• It's a messy process, but there does seem to be processes in current statute to deal with all of the
• And it has been a messy process all the way from the beginning.
• It's a different process. It's just which process is more efficient is my concern. Yep, I get that.
• There's no online process, but I know we're working on that.
• It is a really important process.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee opened with roll call and a review of special-session procedure: bills would be heard in filing order, with related school-lunch bills grouped together, and any bill advancing would require a motion, second, and majority vote to be introduced. Members also discussed that the committee was functioning much like a delayed-bills committee, with final referral to either Appropriations or Policy depending on the bill’s fiscal impact. The first major proposal was Senator Schibley’s bill to create a narrow, statewide Bank of North Dakota bridge-loan program for struggling nonprofit medical facilities, prompted by Jacobson Memorial Hospital’s financial crisis. He argued the hospital and surrounding EMS services could close without short-term help, while committee members questioned the added language, the population cap, the $10 million fund with $5 million per applicant limit, and whether the program could open the door to future requests. Representative Headland then presented two cleanup bills from the prior property-tax session: one to fix notice and tax-certification issues for local taxing districts, and another to correct how the primary residence credit is applied so taxpayers receive the full benefit rather than counties retaining part of the reimbursement. Members asked about township hearing timing, the estimated $10–15 million annual impact, and whether the credit issue could be fixed retroactively; Headland said the bill was intended to correct the problem going forward. Three school-lunch bills drew extensive discussion. Representative Vetter proposed a small administrative appropriation to add an FTE to help eligible families enroll in the existing free/reduced lunch program, saying the goal was to ensure needy children are signed up and that the state should not subsidize meals for wealthy families. Representative Nathe offered a broader bill mirroring the pending initiated measure but placing the program in statute instead of the Constitution, moving implementation up a year, and funding it with a one-time $65 million from the strategic investment fund; he said this would preserve legislative flexibility and avoid constitutional entrenchment. Representative Dressler proposed raising the state-funded eligibility threshold from 225% to 300% of poverty, arguing it would expand access while still preserving federal reimbursements and encouraging better enrollment systems. Members debated costs, future budget pressure, whether the bills set a precedent for responding to ballot measures, and whether the program should include breakfast and other operational details. Other proposals included Senator Powers’ bill to create a hyperbaric oxygen board and support rural access to hyperbaric chambers for wounds, concussions, PTSD, and other conditions; Representative Tolman’s reporting-requirements bill to force new or expanded programs to justify purpose, alternatives, evaluation methods, and full implementation costs; Representative Frelich’s bill addressing the ongoing redistricting litigation and what happens if the Supreme Court or lower courts alter the current map; and a bill requested by the Public Service Commission and ITD for FERC litigation support and ADA website/document compliance. The committee also heard a rural-health eligibility bill from Representative Twait aimed at steering federal rural health dollars toward rural providers, with questions focused on whether the mileage limits would exclude some communities. One Holocaust education item was deferred until the sponsor could be located.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a region, we've done, or we're going through the process.
• It says state review process and regulations.
• And talking with them, they have their processes, their internal processes.
• So the legislature, in the process we end, and it is...
• Now let's talk about the state review processes.

Summary: The meeting began with introductions from members of the Joint Transportation Committee and a presentation from the Association of Washington Cities and the public works directors of Richland, Kennewick, Pasco, and West Richland. The cities described the Quad Cities region as one of the fastest-growing in the state and outlined shared transportation priorities that align with the committee’s focus on safety, multimodal access, climate resilience, and economic development. They emphasized Vision Zero efforts, complete streets, ADA accessibility, regional trail and bike/pedestrian planning, and coordinated long-range transportation and land-use planning to manage growth. The city officials also discussed major funding and delivery challenges, including rising construction costs, project phasing, pavement preservation, right-of-way acquisition, and delays caused by state and federal permitting and review processes. They highlighted regional cooperation through the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments, Good Roads, and local funding tools such as impact fees, transportation benefit districts, REET, tax increment financing, and state and federal grants. Specific projects discussed included Richland’s SR 240/Aaron Drive complete streets project and downtown connectivity work, Kennewick’s Columbia Center Boulevard improvements and rail study, Pasco’s Court/Road 68, Sylvester Street corridor, I-182 bridge/interchange work, and a new north-south bridge study, and West Richland’s SR 224 Red Mountain corridor project, which officials said was awarded under budget and is scheduled to begin construction. Committee members asked questions about sidewalk connections to schools, state-agency right-of-way timelines, apprenticeship utilization, contractor selection, and whether complete streets requirements add burdens to pavement preservation projects. The city officials said new development is generally meeting sidewalk standards, but older infill areas remain a gap; that state right-of-way transactions can take much longer than expected; that apprenticeship requirements are common but harder for smaller contractors and local labor markets; and that low-bid contracting leaves little room to screen for performance history. They also said complete streets requirements are usually manageable on major projects but can be difficult to absorb in smaller preservation work. The committee then shifted to a JTC-funded study on transit-oriented development, presented by Urban Institute researcher Yona Freemark. The study examined TOD conditions in 33 cities in Snohomish, King, Pierce, Clark, and Spokane counties near rail and bus rapid transit stations. Freemark said Washington’s housing affordability crisis is severe, especially near transit, and found that high-cost cities have seen more development near stations but also signs of gentrification and loss of affordable housing, while lower-cost cities have had less development and worsening affordability relative to income. He identified barriers including high debt costs, land costs, infrastructure costs, zoning and parking rules, and limited subsidies for affordable housing. He recommended more neighborhood infrastructure funding near stations, stronger affordable housing investment, and better use of public land, noting that HB 1491 and related legislation are already changing some local requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• process the meat into jerky.
• <02:37:02.680> that<02:37:02.920> is process needs to be a process that is process
• So there is a process.
• So there is a process.
• So there is a process.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first held a work session on HB 505, which would allow the sale of freeze-dried foods produced in homestead food operations. Members raised concerns about the bill’s broad language, especially the provision stating freeze-dried food would not be considered potentially hazardous. Several suggested narrowing the bill to specific products such as processed foods, berries, fruit, dairy products, ice cream, or vegetables, and requiring use of commercial freeze-drying equipment rather than dehydrators. There was also discussion of oxygen absorbers, moisture control, sanitation, and whether the issue should be handled in statute or rules. By the end of the discussion, members generally agreed the topic should be treated in a separate section of law rather than folded into the existing homestead food license, and the chair said the matter would be sent to the food safety subcommittee, with the possibility of a study committee if more time was needed. The committee then moved to HB 277, a technical correction to the animal cruelty statutes. Representative Bixby explained that current law refers to a “colt,” which applies only to male baby horses, leaving fillies unaddressed; the bill would replace “colt” with “foal” and make related wording changes so the restriction applies to any horse under 90 days old not being nursed by its dam. The New Hampshire Farm Bureau testified in support, saying the change was requested to clarify and modernize the statute and that the issue had been identified during work on related animal cruelty legislation. No votes were taken in the portion provided. The chair recessed the work session until 11:00 a.m. and announced that Representative Ktoa would take over the hearing on HB 277.

Transcript Highlights:

• process where we're going to talk. process where we're going to talk.
• <01:58:23.360> that process by establishing a process that process by establishing a process
• that is setting up the process. that is setting up the process.
• that process should be maintained. that process should be maintained.
• Our process right now is process.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The truth in taxation process requires.
• Several of the study processes overlap.
• What, if any, is your role in that process?
• So it's a nerve-wracking process for us.
• It has been two distinct separate processes, the appraisal process to determine the proper size of. of

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But I would contend that there still should be a process in place; there should be due process in our
• But I would contend that there still should be a process in place; there should be due process in our
• But I would contend that there still should be a process in place; there should be due process in our
• But I would contend that there still should be a process in place; there should be due process in our
• <01:29:21.320> and or maybe it just says due process and or maybe it just says due process

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, the process really does matter.
• It was very well done about procurement processes.
• That's dictating process.
• process that includes one public notice and the opportunity and a public participation process that
• environment would be helpful to that process.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So thank you for the process. I think it was needed a long time ago, and not just today.
• When funding sources require separate processes, When funding sources require separate processes with
• What if we saved a year on that process?
• And that is the closing process that people referred to over and over again.
• But, um, you know, I now know the processes. I go to these things and I also learn a process.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Governor’s 2025 reorganization plan to split the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into two new agencies: a Business and Consumer Services Agency and a California Housing and Homelessness Agency. Administration officials said the change would give each side more focused leadership, improve consumer protection and regulatory oversight, and better align housing and homelessness policy with the state’s broader housing goals. Leaders from the Department of Consumer Affairs, Cannabis Control, Alcoholic Beverage Control, and Financial Protection and Innovation all voiced support for the business-side reorganization, while housing officials emphasized that the new housing agency would help streamline funding, compliance, and coordination across programs. Members raised concerns about timing, budget impacts, office space, and whether the split would actually reduce bureaucracy. The administration said the plan would be included in the May Revision, was intended to be cost-neutral, and would not require fee increases for licensees or additional office space. On the housing side, officials said the new Housing Development and Finance Committee would work toward a single application and more coordinated award process for affordable housing funding, while preserving CalHFA’s statutory and financial independence. They also said the reorganization would improve compliance monitoring, data collection, and coordination with local governments, including Los Angeles homelessness programs. Public testimony was largely supportive. Industry groups representing beverage distributors, craft brewers, wine, mortgage lenders, and housing organizations backed the business-side split, and housing advocates such as Housing California, the California Housing Partnership, and the California Housing Consortium supported the housing agency concept and the proposed one-stop-shop approach. Several witnesses urged that tax credits, bonds, and other funding sources be better coordinated, and some said the plan should be paired with additional state investment and implementation resources. No formal vote was taken; the hearing was informational.

Transcript Highlights:

• It outlines the process, some of the procedures.
• So it's a really lopsided process.
• And the process is... But the process is... But the process is... It's three lines.
• Any time after this process, once that offer-counteroffer process starts, and if we end up in the condemnation
• It's not a rulemaking process.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 5695, which would create the Sayers Ranch Municipal Utility District in Bastrop County between Elgin and Bastrop. Representative Gurdis said Bastrop County commissioners unanimously supported the district. There was no public testimony, the bill was left pending, and later reported favorably to the full House on an 8-0 vote. The main debate centered on Senate Bill 291, which would require condemning entities to pay landowner attorney’s fees if they fail to provide 10 years of appraisal reports with an initial offer in an eminent domain case. Supporters, including Rita Beving and Charles Maley, argued the bill would add an enforcement mechanism and better protect landowners in a process they described as intimidating and lopsided. Opponents, including Tom Zabel and Lisa Kaufman, said current law already provides a remedy through abatement and attorney’s fees under Section 21.047 of the Property Code, and warned the bill could create inconsistency, delay public infrastructure projects, and increase costs. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard House Bill 5699, a simple MUD boundary change in Harris County Municipal Utility District No. 405 that would allow a tract to leave one district and join another. Representative Schofield said the landowner and district agreed to the change and to pay the tract’s share of debt. The committee substitute was adopted and the bill was reported favorably on an 8-0 vote. Later, the committee considered House Bill 5489, which would impose a four-year moratorium on impact fees. Representative Dyson framed it as an “active study” to test whether impact fees raise housing costs. College Station officials and other opponents argued impact fees help fund infrastructure for growth and that local governments should retain control; supporters said the fees are regressive and add to housing prices. The bill was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 292, which would update the Landowner Bill of Rights to add information on surveys, require separate offers for property not sought in condemnation, and require the rights document to be delivered with the initial offer. Supporters said it would improve transparency and fill gaps in the current document, while opponents said it was unnecessary because the law already exists and warned against revisiting a 2021 compromise. The transcript ends during that discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're still in the planning process and the permitting process.
• It's just our process is kind of out of order.
• I was not in junior high when this process started.
• So my concern is that we try to rush this through the budget process when we already have another process
• no public involvement or no public process.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:38.879> was improvements to our election process was improvements to our election process
• It provides that process.
• that process. It authorizes the board of that process.
• <00:04:57.360> as process for individuals identified as process for individuals identified
• We know that lawmaking is a process, and we respect that process and continue to be a partner in it.

Keywords: HB 534 (only one on the agenda) – 00:02:08, 958, all

Summary: The House Elections, Constitutional Amendments, and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee met to consider House Bill 534, sponsored by Rep. DJ Johnson, with a committee substitute. Johnson said the bill was the product of interim work with the Secretary of State’s office, the State Board of Elections, county clerks, KREF, and other stakeholders, and that the committee substitute folded in several election-administration changes. He highlighted provisions clarifying the timeline for felony voter-roll removals, allowing the Board of Elections to work with federal agencies to identify non-citizens on the voter rolls, creating a process for those individuals to prove citizenship and vote provisionally, and changing some KREF board appointments. He also described technical campaign-finance changes and said some provisions might still be adjusted through floor amendments. Members raised concerns about fiscal impact, timing, and voter privacy. Rep. Bivens questioned the cost and whether the bill could affect voter records; Johnson responded that the bill itself did not require new equipment or broad new spending, though a special election in a local government failure scenario could create costs. Rep. Hancock and Rep. Marzian argued the bill could create unnecessary burdens on county clerks and questioned whether there was a demonstrated problem to justify the changes. The county clerks’ association, through Rockcastle County Clerk Danetta Ford Allen, opposed the bill as introduced, warning that citizenship checks could wrongly remove eligible voters, that online ballot images or cast vote records could threaten voter privacy and facilitate vote buying, and that the emergency clause would force major changes too close to the May primary. Johnson defended the bill as a targeted response to a real local election failure and said the citizenship data sharing would be limited to name, date of birth, and Social Security number. He also explained that the ballot-image language was permissive and intended to let counties explore emerging technology, but he was open to removing that section or changing the effective date in a floor amendment. He further said he would consider preserving gubernatorial appointments to KREF with Senate oversight instead of shifting appointments to legislative leaders. After discussion, the committee voted 9-2 with one pass to report the bill out, with several members explaining yes votes as support for moving the bill forward while expecting further cleanup, and no votes citing cost, timing, and voter-access concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• WE ARE GENERALLY TRYING TO FIND A BETTER PROCESS.
• >> WE THINK THAT PROCESS SHOULD BE THROUGH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT. THE ACTUAL PROCESS ITSELF. >> Sen.
• SB 1080 STREAMS AND THE PROCESS ORDERS BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
• SHEET SAYING THIS DIFFICULTY ALREADY WITH THE FUNDING PROCESS.
• BUT WE DID WITH THE MATCHING PROCESS.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• appeal process. means of appealing any action as to them.
• We are working on processes for process improvements so we could potential for automation of some of
• He's using a chainsaw instead of a thoughtful process.
• We are in the process.
• A standard and a process for appeal.

Bills: SB124, SB201, SB275, SB410, SB478, SB607, SB610, SB611, SB654, SB702, SB787, SB831, SB892

Keywords: Department of Veterans Affairs, disciplinary procedures, accountability, personnel actions, whistleblower protection, cancer, military, aircrew, veterans, health study, toxins, morbidity, mortality, service members, mental health, community care, accessibility, treatment programs, substance abuse, appointments

Summary: During the meeting, various members engaged in extensive discussions surrounding 15 proposed bills related to veterans' affairs. Notably, concerns regarding recent VA workforce changes sparked debates, particularly about potential cuts and their implications for veterans' care and benefits. Chairman Moran emphasized the need for thoughtful reforms and coordination with stakeholders, urging responsible measures to prevent negatively impacting service delivery. The meeting highlighted a significant bipartisan effort to enhance veterans' access to essential health services, particularly in light of recent challenges faced by the VA workforce. Senator Blumenthal's assertions about the urgent plight of veterans due to cuts in personnel drew strong reactions, showcasing the deep concern among committee members regarding the current state of veteran services.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the vetting process to apply to get grants for a city?
• , milk process value-added milk processing facility incentive program, and this is similar to what we've
• , milk process value-added milk processing facility incentive program, and this is similar to what we've
• And along with dairy processing plants, they also had to have a milk processing plant.
• In the state of North Dakota, along with dairy processing plants, they also had to have a milk processing

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to work on three remaining policy bills. On HB 2225, members discussed an amendment reducing the Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund housing grant program from $50 million to $30 million, lowering the maximum grant amount, and clarifying that existing lots can qualify after a certificate of occupancy is issued so the program can help communities like Watford City and Williston use prepared lots. Members also discussed the matching requirements, tribal eligibility, and how Commerce would score applications to ensure the money lowers lot costs rather than being absorbed by political subdivisions. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Murphy was assigned to carry the bill. The committee then took up SB 2200, which funds the 988 crisis hotline. After discussion, members agreed to strip out the proposed phone-line charge approach and instead provide a $500,000 appropriation from the Community Health Care Trust Fund, consistent with the Senate version, to supplement existing funding for increased staffing and texting-related demand. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Nelson will carry the bill. Finally, the committee considered SB 2342, which creates a value-added milk processing facility incentive program. The amendment reduced the proposed line of credit from $10 million to $5 million, with the program intended to support dairy-related processing infrastructure such as utilities, roads, water, wastewater, and rail access. Members noted the program would be administered through the Agriculture Diversification and Development Committee, could potentially support one or multiple facilities, and sunsets June 30, 2027. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Brandenburg will carry the bill. The committee then adjourned, planning to reconvene the next morning to take up additional bills and budget adjustments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you lose water in that process?
• The permitting process will be much simpler.
• Um, but the process seems to be, uh, you're a little bit ahead of the process, and, and that's what worries
• Uh, like the process with RUS with all the co-ops, we're using the same process, uh, for this hydrogen
• So this was, this was a competitive process.

Transcript Highlights:

• was left over after the claims process was left over after the claims process was<00:15:14.720><
• $117,000 annually we're in the process $117,000 annually we're in the process right<00:18:54.080
• <00:30:58.840> to make that a standard ardized process to make that a standard ardized process
• through that but there there's a process through that but there there's a process to<00:41:32.119
• team has learned how to process team has learned how to process applications<01:31:42.880> quickly

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a working process.
• And that process, I believe, represented...
• Process.
• The exact same process is contemplated here.
• There's a long process before they get issued.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• procuring processes. procuring processes.
• requirements and processes. requirements and processes.
• management processes. management processes.
• the performance management process. the performance management process.
• processes related to surety bonds. processes related to surety bonds.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's an important process, if I remember correctly, that EPI process. Correct, correct.
• You have things in process.
• We do appreciate that review process.
• But we try to do the best we can through the waiver process and through the enforcement process, but
• But we try to do the best we can through the waiver process and through the enforcement process, but

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The committee began with Article I budget items for the Secretary of State. LBB staff outlined recommendations that would reduce the agency’s appropriation by about $40.3 million, including changes to HAVA funding, removal of one-time business system replacement money, and a rider directing the agency to use Fund 5095 first. Secretary Jane Nelson and staff then defended several exceptional items, especially additional staffing for elections and business filings, a new website, digitization of records, cybersecurity tools, and renovation of the James Earl Rudder Building. Members focused heavily on election administration, cross-checking voter rolls, Harris County complaints, call-center response times, and whether online voter registration should be expanded. No votes were taken; the discussion was informational and budget-focused. The committee then heard the Office of the Governor and trustee programs. LBB presented a recommended $2.4 million decrease for the governor’s office proper and a much larger decrease in trustee programs driven by one-time funding and unexpended balances, while still preserving major border security funding and victim assistance funding. Governor’s staff emphasized Texas’ economic growth, the importance of border security, and efforts to seek federal reimbursement for the roughly $11 billion Texas has spent on border operations. Members discussed whether shifting National Guard deployment to federal control could reduce state costs, and they also reviewed the music incubator program, the Governor’s University Research Initiative, and the semiconductor innovation consortium. Staff highlighted a $5 million late-added request for grants to protect nonprofits from violence and terrorism. Again, the exchange was largely explanatory, with no formal action. Finally, the committee took up the Texas Facilities Commission and lease payments for revenue bonds. LBB recommended major reductions overall, including removal of border wall construction funding and capital complex bond funding, but added money for higher utility costs, renovation of the Rudder Building, and additional facilities staff. George Purcell also noted stable maintenance-and-renewal funding and new riders related to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission building, tenant communications, and space utilization. For lease payments, LBB recommended a smaller appropriation tied to revenue-bond costs allocated across agencies. The discussion was informational, with members asking about the Rudder Building renovation, border wall progress, and capital complex construction timelines; no votes were recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• necessarily helpful. ...process of how to get to that point.
• Everyone fine with adding to include process.
• the family law courts, and process in the state of North Dakota.
• It's an expensive process. Actually, you've got to publish them.
• It's an expensive process. Actually, you've got to publish them.

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met to approve prior minutes and then worked through draft legislation related to a possible family court study committee. The group discussed the proposed 15-member committee’s makeup in detail, including whether to add parent representation, judges, family law section members, child support, clerks of court, domestic violence advocates, and other stakeholders. The task force ultimately agreed to keep the committee at 15 members, reduce the legislative membership from eight to six, add two judges from different districts, add two family law section members with rural and urban representation, include one parent subject to a custody order, and replace the mental health professional with a clerk of court representative appointed through the trial court administrator’s office. The draft was also revised to keep domestic violence advocacy representation and to clarify that the study could consider juvenile court issues as part of the family court umbrella. The committee voted to approve the revised draft and recommend it to Legislative Management, with one recorded “no” vote from Judge Hovey after the meeting resumed. The task force then turned to a second draft dealing with requiring participation in a family transition program, which was renamed in discussion to a parenting education course. Members debated whether the bill should simply refer to an existing program like Parents Forever or instead specify broader education about the court process, parental rights, co-parenting, and related issues. Some members supported the requirement as a way to reduce conflict and improve understanding of the system, while others raised concerns about vague language, cost to parents, lack of exemptions, and whether the bill was too open-ended or potentially duplicative of other legislation. The discussion became lengthy and unresolved, with the drafter noting that more specific direction would be needed to revise the bill. The transcript cuts off before a final vote or action on this second draft is shown.