Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Bill 598 will ensure we can quickly and responsibly bring better housing for these kids and
• Subsection 3 of the bill created a carve-out for that.
• Subsection 3 of the bill created a carve out for that.
• So we respectfully request that Section 3 be amended out of the bill.
• As you can see, it's Reprint 3, so you know there's no... ...with the stakeholders and the bill sponsor

Committee: Senate Commerce and Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• as amended by the House; House Bill 124; House Bill 158, as amended by the House; House Appropriations
• as amended by the House; House Bill 124; House Bill 158, as amended by the House; House Appropriations
• House Bill 112.
• President, and items 9 through 12 of House amendments to Senate Bill 3 as amended.
• The Senate has not concurred with House amendments number 8 and 13 to Senate Bill 3.

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving to page R4, House section 3. This is a House-only section.
• Moving to page R4, House section 3. This is a House-only section.
• </c> Senator Wickland's bill, article 9, section 3.
• c><01:19:47.840><c> impact</c><01:19:48.320><c> on</c> House bill would have no impact on House bill
• So, uh, I can say that I introduced a bill in the House and we did have a hearing in the House.

Transcript Highlights:

• How did we come to 3%?
• You're probably talking 2/3 or 3% or below. Multiple restaurants that I have are 3.5 to 3.8%.
• If you just anybody refresh my memory, did we not see a similar bill like this come out of the House,
• You are welcome to explain House Bill. You're welcome to explain House Bill 1623. Thank you, Mr.
• This bill actually has the same language we passed in House Bill 3020, which was an OBA request bill

Bills: SB1623 , SB2067 , SB2132

Committee: House Banking, Financial Services and Pensions

Keywords: credit union, Oklahoma State Credit Union Board, membership, loans, investments, board compensation, financial regulations, financial exploitation, protected adults, financial institution, notification, temporary hold, credit card, surcharge, discounts, consumer protection, payment methods

Transcript Highlights:

• The House will please be in order.
• Wildlife and fisheries will meet at 3:00 in room 114. Transportation will meet at 3:00 in 204.
• 00</c> Wildlife and fisheries will meet at 3:00 Wildlife and fisheries will meet at 3:00 in<00:13:55.680
• Ports and harbors will meet 3:00 in 204.
• For tomorrow, at 3:30 in room 103.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I see we have Senator Rodriguez asked so we will go to tab 3, which is Senate Bill 656, on health
• I'm gonna comment on this bill because I have been working carefully with my House counterpart and this
• is a quite a change from the bill that he presented in the House.
• The bill provides that the president of the Senate and speaker of the House each have 3 appointments
• I move pursuant to rule 3 point will 2.3, 5 to reconsider the vote on the Senate bill 16?

Transcript Highlights:

• Items A through D will be discussed in detail in section 3, beginning on page 3.
• Turning the page to page 3, Item one discusses the Texas Energy Fund.
• for House Bill 2555, and Rider Seven contingency for 2627, as both of those bills have been enacted
• The agency Jeb Bell: has 3 exceptional items totaling 1.7 million.
• On page 3, section 3 provides two fiscal and policy issues.

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met to review Article 8, regulatory agencies, and began Article 9, general provisions, before recessing for floor action. The committee first heard budget presentations from the Public Utility Commission (PUC) and the Office of Public Utility Counsel (OPUC). The PUC budget recommendation was about $5.07 billion in all funds, including an additional $5 billion for the Texas Energy Fund, plus funding for staffing and technology needs tied to contested cases, infrastructure resiliency, and outage mapping. PUC witnesses emphasized the agency’s growing workload, the need for more staff and modern systems, and oversight of the Texas Energy Fund. OPUC’s recommendation was about $6.9 million, with a reduction in authorized FTEs to better match actual staffing; the agency requested additional funding for salaries, expert witnesses, and budget flexibility, and members highlighted OPUC’s role representing residential and small commercial consumers in utility proceedings. The committee then heard from the Behavioral Health Executive Council (BHEC), whose recommendation was just over $11.2 million. BHEC’s main requests included funding to fill vacant positions, money for continuous National Practitioner Data Bank queries, and a proposed Texas-owned psychology licensing exam in response to concerns about changes to the national exam. Agency leaders also discussed a rider request that would shift responsibility for certain judgments or settlements to the comptroller. Members asked about prior complaint backlogs, and BHEC said those backlogs had been cleared. The Board of Chiropractic Examiners followed, with a recommendation of just under $2.4 million; the board sought support for staffing, training, broadband, and salary retention, and described its work regulating chiropractors and workers’ compensation-related doctors. The Board of Dental Examiners was the last agency heard before the committee recessed. Its recommendation was just under $10 million, and it requested a 10% salary increase for eligible staff, three additional licensing staff, one staff member to handle required background checks, an additional attorney, and an executive director salary adjustment. Dental board witnesses said licensure growth, increased complaints, and low salaries were straining licensing and enforcement operations, even though the agency reported strong performance and high case completion rates. The chair ended the hearing early because the Senate had to return to the floor, and the committee remained in recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:38:39.240><c> have</c> text in house bill one that will have text in house bill one that will
• Bill 1 and House Bill 2.
• House Bill 2 does that House Bill 1 can't do. added $10,000 to the Senate uh and they added $10,000
• do that House Bill 1 can't do.
• They pass it, and then they table it, and then they modify House Bill 2 because it's a House bill to

Summary: The Finance Committee met for an organizational opening session in which the chair, Ken Weyler, called the committee to order and members introduced themselves. The introductions established the committee’s leadership and membership, including Vice Chair Dan McGuire, ranking member Mary Jane Wallner, deputy ranking member Karen Eil, clerk Jerry Griffin, and other members from both parties. Many members briefly described prior legislative service and professional backgrounds, with several noting prior experience on Finance or related budget committees. Chair Weyler then outlined committee procedures and expectations. He emphasized that Finance handles spending bills and fiscal notes, that bills will generally be heard by the full committee and then referred to the appropriate division, and that executive sessions may be used to save time when positions are clear. He reviewed rules on attendance, dress, phones, paperwork handling, committee replacements, conflict of interest and recusal, and the process for testimony, including that members should listen without debating witnesses and that sponsors of bills must recuse themselves from questioning witnesses on their own bills. He also described the committee’s structure and workload, noting three divisions and the role of legislative budget staff. Weyler said the committee would likely see bills from many policy committees that have fiscal impacts, and he encouraged policy committees to find offsets within their own areas rather than assume new spending will be added. No bills were heard and no votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, the bill increases from 3 to 6, the number of programs for which each career center and
• Madam chair, that is the bill. Sorry. >> I get. Are there questions on the bill?
• Any debate on the bill.
• That is the bill. >> Thank you for that explanation. Are there questions on the bill?
• My husband and I have 3, 2, 3, teen boys and I am an attorney by trade.

Transcript Highlights:

• , House Bill 1095 as amended, House Bill 1089, House Bill 1277, House Bill 1198 as amended, passed on
• House Bill 1257 as amended, House Bill 1095 as amended, House Bill 1089, House Bill 1277, and House Bill
• Bill</c> amended, House Bill 1089, House Bill amended, House Bill 1089, House Bill 1277,<00:55:04.800
• House Bill 1134, House Bill 1259 as amended, House Bill 1050 as amended, House Bill 1127 as amended,
• House Bill 1134, House Bill 1259 as amended, House Bill 1050 as amended, and House Bill 1127 as amended

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's the bill.
• house, I should be allowed to fix how to break in my house.
• this bill does that.
• The bill is 7-0 and remains on call. The bill is 7-0 and remains on call.
• Senators Aidegine, aye; Seyarto, no. 9 to 3. Bills out.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Transportation heard testimony on a large agenda of transportation-related bills, with several measures discussed before a quorum was established. AB 1588 focused on sideshows and street takeovers, with the author, San Francisco Police Department, and Streets Are for Everyone arguing the bill would modernize enforcement, add motorbikes and dirt bikes to the sideshow framework, and improve public safety; there was no opposition testimony. AB 2015 would require Caltrans to study the effects of third-party navigation apps on congestion, local streets, infrastructure, and emergency response, and was supported by Streets for All, AAA, and local agencies, with no opposition. AB 2717 would extend a sunset for off-site advertising displays at large sports venues; the Dodgers supported it, the San Jose Sharks and others noted amendments, and no opposition was heard. AB 1608 would strengthen the independence and transparency of the High-Speed Rail Office of Inspector General by requiring public reports, adding confidentiality protections for sensitive security information, and granting staffing and purchasing authority; the First Amendment Coalition supported the amended bill, while the Vice Chair raised concerns about transparency and limiting confidential notices to committee chairs. The committee also heard AB 2346 on e-bike safety, which would require speedometers on Class 2 e-bikes, lights, a statewide sidewalk speed limit, local authority over bike-path speeds, and point-of-sale disclosures. Support came from medical, law enforcement, local government, and safety groups citing rising injuries and confusion over e-bike rules; PeopleForBikes remained opposed unless amended, mainly over lighting and disclosure requirements, though Streets for All withdrew its opposition after amendments. Members broadly supported the bill and discussed helmet use, youth safety, and the distinction between e-bikes and higher-powered e-motos. AB 1919 would let Santa Cruz Metro place a citizens’ initiative on the ballot to secure transit funding and protect service and jobs; the sponsor, bus operators, and labor supported it, with no opposition testimony. AB 2012 would streamline permits for moving manufactured homes under an annual permit, and AB 2024 would clarify Outdoor Advertising Act permitting and relocation procedures; both drew support from industry and housing groups and no opposition. After quorum was established, the committee adopted the consent calendar, which included items 13, 6, 8, 11, 14, 15, and 21, by roll call vote. The committee then heard AB 2484, which would allow San Diego voters to authorize a local transit tax initiative for MTS; the author and MTS argued it would preserve service and allow voters to decide future funding, and the bill advanced on a 5-2 roll call with the roll left open for absent members. The committee also heard AB 2560, which would codify the state transportation climate principles known as CAPTI; supporters said it would lock in goals for transit, rail, active transportation, equity, and greenhouse gas reduction, while Orange County Transportation Authority opposed. The author closed by asking for aye votes, and the committee proceeded toward roll-call action on the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• by virtue of authority vested in us by Article 3, Section 3(c), Florida Constitution, and Section 11.01
• Section 3(c).
• The vast majority of the legislation will be familiar to you from the bill of this House.
• The vast majority of the legislation will be familiar to you from the bill of this House passed two weeks
• The House is adjourned.

Summary: The House convened in special session, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and the clerk announced a quorum of 108 members present. The proclamation calling the Legislature into special session for February 11-14, 2025, was read into the record, and the journal was approved. No introductions, communications, Senate messages, committee reports, reconsiderations, third-reading bills, special-order items, or resolutions were on the desk. The Speaker then outlined the purpose of the special session: to address illegal immigration through two bills and a memorial, described as largely familiar from prior House legislation with some additions and modifications. He said the House would not repeat the earlier select committee process, instead referring the bill to the Budget Committee, which was noticed to meet Wednesday morning, with floor action planned for Thursday at noon. He also thanked the Senate, the Governor, and House members for their work during the process. Representative Garrison moved that the House adjourn after receiving reports to allow committee and subcommittee meetings and other House business, with reconvening set for Thursday, February 13, at 12 p.m. or on call of the chair. The motion passed, and the House adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• That was due to legislative changes as a part of House Bill 1158, which I believe everyone in the room
• That was due to legislative changes as a part of House Bill 1158, which I believe everyone in the room
• Bill 1176.
• Bill 1176.
• House Bill 1176 established a gap funding program because as that 3% cap was implemented, it drove down

Summary: The Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee met with a quorum, approved the March 17, 2026 minutes, and heard a lengthy update from Tax Commissioner Brian Croshys on property tax relief programs. He reviewed the Homestead Property Tax Credit, Disabled Veteran Credit, and Primary Residence Credit, noting increased relief after House Bill 1158 and House Bill 1176, but also discussing how some households “income adjust out” of eligibility over time. Members asked about indexing income thresholds, expanding eligibility by age alone, simplifying administration, county-level notices, and whether the county and state systems could be streamlined. Croshys said the programs are heavily used, largely administered at the county level, and that the department is still refining compliance and reporting; he also said there were no material findings or overarching concerns in the latest review. The committee agreed more detailed PRC information would likely come back in a September meeting, and the chair announced an afternoon recess for lunch before later reconvening. Shelly Myers then presented the statewide property tax increase report, the zero-growth report, and a statistical report on property values and tax levies by class. She explained how county auditors report levy and valuation data, how increases and decreases are counted, and identified counties and cities with the largest percentage changes in growth or decline. She also summarized recent trends: agricultural values remain relatively flat, while residential, commercial, and centrally assessed values have risen over the last five years; in 2025, residential property accounted for the largest share of statewide property tax levies, followed by commercial, agriculture, and centrally assessed property. Committee members asked about unusual zero-growth figures, the effect of annexation and land-use changes, and whether the 3% levy cap was forcing political subdivisions to use reserves or defer spending. Myers said many counties complied by using reserves, delaying capital projects, or limiting increases, and that some counties had not used their full cap. The committee then moved to the stripper oil extraction tax exemption. Commissioner Croshys reviewed the state’s oil tax structure and estimated the revenue impact of keeping stripper wells exempt from extraction tax while still paying production tax. He said the exemption saves operators hundreds of millions of dollars over a biennium, while the state still collects production tax on those wells. He also discussed projected impacts if the exemption were changed for future wells and noted that future outcomes depend on oil prices, production declines, and technology such as CO2 enhanced oil recovery. Nathan Anderson of the Department of Mineral Resources briefly explained the historical difference between the 35-barrel and 30-barrel thresholds for certain wells, citing differences in completion costs and lateral lengths. The committee then heard from EERC CEO Charles Gorecki, who presented an analysis of oil well life cycles and said most oil is produced before wells reach stripper status, but that refracturing or other reinvestment can significantly extend production and keep wells above the threshold for years.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2367 does three main things.
• Welcome to House Finance. Let's hear about your bill.
• Under substitute House Bill 1974, a public housing authority, Under substitute House Bill 1974, a public
• Welcome to House Finance. Let's hear about your bill.
• I'm here to respectfully oppose House Bill 2626.

Summary: House Finance heard several bills and took no recorded votes. HB 2367 would end special tax and emissions exemptions for the Centralia coal plant by limiting its Climate Commitment Act exemption to pre-2026 emissions, removing limits on additional greenhouse gas requirements, and repealing coal sales and use tax exemptions. The sponsor, Rep. Fitzgibbon, said the bill would help keep the plant’s transition to cleaner natural gas generation on track; Climate Solutions supported it, while business and clean-energy groups raised concerns about allowance-market impacts and asked for amendments to adjust the cap-and-invest allowance budget. HB 1974 would authorize public housing authorities, public corporations, and nonprofits to operate as land banks for affordable housing, give them priority for tax-foreclosed properties, and provide property tax, leasehold excise tax, and REET exemptions for land bank transactions. Rep. Hill said the bill was narrowed to reduce fiscal impact and support existing land banking work in Spokane; supporters said it would lower land costs and speed affordable housing development, while questions focused on how public land would be used and whether affordability should be permanent rather than limited to 30 years. HB 2650, a Department of Revenue request, would standardize notice and effective dates for local REET and lodging tax changes and clarify documentation for an affordable housing sales tax deferral. DOR supported the bill as an administrative efficiency measure, and there was no opposition testimony. HB 2626 would raise the premium tax on health maintenance organizations, health care service contractors, and self-funded multiple employer welfare arrangements from 2% to 3%, remove a dentistry-related exemption, and add a new 1% tax on certain disability and group stop-loss insurers. The sponsor said the bill is intended to help fund Apple Health and subsidies amid federal funding concerns; insurers and business groups opposed it as a cost increase likely to be passed on to consumers and employers, while patient and advocacy groups supported the revenue idea but urged that funds be dedicated to subsidies or other health care supports and that pass-through to consumers be prevented.

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair lays out Senate Bill 3 and recognizes the Chair. I happen to explain the bill.
• Specific to Senate Bill 3, it includes $200 million to cover the...
• Texas 2036 here today in support of Senate Bill 3.
• What is in House Bill 2 that you support that is not in Senate Bill 3? What is it?
• Senate Bill 3 is reported to the Senate with a favorable recommendation.

Bills: SB3 , SB 3

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Page two, these are the House Bill laws funded.
• One, District 2 has allocated and spent 90% of all the funding that we received through the House Bill
• Of where we've utilized the laws of House Bill 2.
• Some of these are funded through state, whether the House Bill and, of course, our match portion through
• However, we've sketched out where most of those House Bill projects have gone, and where they are, have

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 3256. Yeah, Mike, I still have concerns about the criminal provisions in that bill.
• House Bill 3256. Yeah, Mike, I still have concerns about the criminal provisions in that bill.
• I now move that the House Committee substitute for House Bill 3256 be voted do pass.
• With your vote of five yes and one no, you have voted House Committee substitute for House Bill 3256
• And we go back to House Bill 2923, sponsored by Rep. Caton.

Committee: House Special Committee on Tax Reform

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2923, which would give homeowners a temporary property tax exemption of up to four years on qualifying home improvements between $7,500 and $75,000, so long as the property is the owner’s homestead and the required intent and completion forms are filed. The sponsor said the bill is meant to encourage reinvestment in homes, including after catastrophic events, and said the fiscal note showed no impact. Members asked about the bill’s effect on assessors, taxing districts, school districts, the definition of homestead, and whether the state would reimburse lost revenue. Testimony in support argued the bill would reduce ambiguity in new-construction assessments, encourage repairs and improvements, and help homeowners avoid being penalized for fixing damaged homes. Concerns were raised about routine maintenance, the four-dwelling language, possible burdens on assessors, and whether the bill could affect senior tax freezes. The hearing on HB 2923 ended without a vote. The committee then went into executive session on House Bill 3256, adopted a committee substitute, and voted the substitute do pass by a roll call of five yes and one no. Discussion focused on criminal penalties in the bill, with the ranking member objecting to those provisions and noting that other states do not include them. The sponsor explained changes in the substitute, including broader retail-establishment language, explicit coverage of sports venues and concert halls, and removal of banks and credit unions from the bill. Members suggested further floor amendments and additional review of other states’ statutes. Finally, the committee heard Senate Joint Resolution 95, which would create the Show Me Prosperity Fund as a constitutional endowment intended to eventually replace all state-imposed taxes with investment earnings. The senator said the fund would be seeded by a one-time appropriation, managed by the treasurer, audited by the auditor, and protected from borrowing or diversion, with distributions capped at 3 percent. Supporters said the proposal would use compound growth to create long-term tax relief and eventually make Missouri the first state to eliminate state taxes; one witness called it straightforward and honest. Members questioned the size of the needed appropriation, how the fund would work if state income tax changes separately, whether state law allows the needed investments, and how the fund would avoid becoming unstable if distributions begin before it is large enough. No opposition testimony was offered, and the hearing concluded without action on SJR 95.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 5000, an act to allow single-family homes on small lots in areas with adequate infrastructure
• But it couldn't be a multifamily; it would have to be house, house, house, house, right?
• Bill 5000.
• Federal housing legislation that could make history for housing production.
• This bill brings together an otherwise gridlocked Congress around the shared goal of expanding housing

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-03, House Bill 5000, which would allow single-family homes on small lots in areas with adequate infrastructure. Committee chairs outlined the Article 48 process and the hearing format, then heard first from two subject-matter experts. Under Secretary Chris Clutchman of Housing and Livable Communities explained that the proposal would amend Chapter 40A’s Section 3 (the Dover Amendment) to require most municipalities, except Boston, to allow single-family homes on residentially zoned lots of at least 5,000 square feet with 50 feet of frontage and access to public water and sewer, while still allowing reasonable local regulations on setbacks, height, bulk, and short-term rentals. He distinguished the proposal from Chapter 40Y starter-home zoning, said implementation would likely require regulations to address issues such as wetlands, infrastructure capacity, and nonconforming lots, and answered committee questions about lot subdivision, MBTA Communities, and the relationship to existing zoning tools. Attorney Susan Murphy testified that the petition would significantly override local zoning and could create conflicts with existing statutes, including Chapter 40A Section 6 protections for certain nonconforming lots, subdivision control law, and other residential zoning districts. She raised concerns about how “access” to water and sewer would be defined, whether the measure could apply in business or industrial districts where residential uses are allowed, and whether the proposal could allow large homes on small lots without any affordability limits. She also warned that the measure could have significant infrastructure impacts and argued that the Legislature should consider broader, more comprehensive housing legislation rather than expanding exceptions to the zoning framework. Committee members asked both experts about frontage, lot size, infrastructure capacity, and how the proposal would interact with 40Y and MBTA Communities. The proponents, led by Andrew McCulla of the Legalized Starter Homes Coalition, argued that Massachusetts faces a severe housing shortage and affordability crisis, citing high home prices, high rents, declining listings, and outmigration of younger residents. They said the measure would legalize modest single-family homes on smaller lots, increase housing supply, and help first-time buyers and downsizing seniors, while leaving most other local rules in place. Other proponents, including representatives from Abundant Housing Massachusetts, the Charles River Regional Chamber, and individual residents, emphasized workforce retention, the need for more starter homes, and the view that large minimum lot sizes are a major barrier to production. Committee members pressed the panel on the lack of any home-size or affordability requirement, possible effects on 40B compliance, the number of new lots and homes that might result, and the fact that the ballot initiative would not be amendable by the Legislature. The hearing then turned to opponents from the Massachusetts Municipal Association, who urged the committee to take no action. MMA leaders said zoning should remain a local decision made by residents and elected local officials, and argued that the proposal would preempt local control with a one-size-fits-all mandate. They also said the measure is impractical because many communities with water and sewer are already at or near capacity, so infrastructure availability does not necessarily mean development capacity. The hearing ended during the MMA’s testimony, with no vote or final committee action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill also modifies the definition of normal retirement for Tier 3 members to allow the option for
• And especially considering we see bills in the House, as I saw coming up, that there's going to be a
• And especially considering we see bills in the House, as I saw coming up, that there's going to be a
• There was, I believe, if I'm not mistaken, a bill to change their Tier 3, and um...
• If I'm not mistaken, that there was a bill to change their Tier 3.

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 1630, which would direct AHCCCS to seek federal approval for a home- and community-based services program for adults determined to be seriously mentally ill, with quarterly implementation updates, a stakeholder work group, and a cap on enrollment. The sponsor and advocates from Arizona Mad Moms argued the bill would create a Medicaid-funded long-term care option for the most disabled SMI patients, reduce costly hospital and state-only care, and improve continuity of care. A committee amendment narrowed eligibility to individuals needing a long-term SMI level of care, changed reporting to semiannual, reduced the initial cap to 250 members with possible growth tied to savings, and required AHCCCS to keep pursuing approval if CMS denies it. The amendment was adopted, and SB 1630 as amended passed 10-0. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1131, which originally required every school district and charter school to adopt a cardiac emergency response plan and appropriated $1 million for implementation. A Warner amendment replaced the mandate with a reporting requirement on AED counts, CPR/AED-trained staff, and whether a plan exists, while shifting the appropriation toward AED grants and limiting school spending to purchasing and maintaining AEDs. The American Heart Association supported the amendment as a way to gather baseline data and target resources, while some members questioned the funding split and the rural-school priority. The amendment was adopted, and SB 1131 as amended passed 9-1. Next, the committee took up Senate Bill 1582, dealing with the school safety interoperability fund. The amendment changed the appropriation from ADE to ADOA and allocated funds to specific county sheriff’s offices to continue existing interoperable communication systems linking schools and first responders; supporters said the systems had been used in drills and some real incidents, and were important for school safety. One member raised concerns about the auditor general’s report and whether the program should continue, but sheriffs and school officials described it as a useful communication tool. The amendment was adopted, and SB 1582 as amended passed 6-4. Finally, the committee began hearing Senate Bill 1504, which would change retirement rules for Tier 2 and Tier 3 public safety personnel and reduce the waiting period for cost-of-living adjustments. The sponsor, police and fire representatives, and pension consultants argued the bill would improve recruitment and retention and align benefits more closely with what employees were promised, while cities, counties, and taxpayer groups warned it would add substantial unfunded liabilities and undermine the 2016 pension reforms. The committee spent extensive time on actuarial costs, funding status, and the effect of the amendment exempting the bill from statutory pre-funding requirements; the transcript ends during that discussion before a final vote on SB 1504 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• President, I transmit herewith House Bill 559, which has passed the House.
• House Bill 559 will be referred to the 11th order of business for introduction.
• President, I transmit here with House Bill 559, which is passed the House for Acting Chief Clerk.
• House Bill 559 will be referred to the 11th order of business for introduction.
• In the House of Representatives, House Bill 559 by the Revenue and Taxation Committee: an act relating