Transcript Highlights:

• That's all existing statute.
• But the statute and, in Section 143, But the statute in Section 43-105 does include a definition of the
• That's clearly identified in statute.
• is not consistent with statute.
• If the department has read the statute one way historically, taxpayers have filed under that statute

Committee: House House Ways & Means Committee of Reference

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee considered several Senate bills dealing largely with cryptocurrency, county tax liens, and tax conformity. SB 1042 would allow state retirement systems to invest up to 10% in virtual currency holdings, and SB 1043 would let state agencies accept virtual currency payments through agreements with providers; both were described as permissive rather than mandatory and were returned with due pass recommendations on 5-3 votes. Members expressed caution about volatility and government involvement in digital assets, but supporters said the bills simply create options and could improve efficiency. The committee then took up SB 1067, which addresses county cleanup assessments for blighted properties in unincorporated areas. Chairman Olson offered an amendment removing the bill’s original mechanism for placing the assessment directly on the property tax bill, while preserving the lien so it survives a tax lien sale. County officials and the County Supervisors Association testified in support, saying counties currently absorb cleanup costs for hazardous properties and the amendment would help make counties whole without broadening property tax use. The amendment was adopted and the bill was returned with a due pass as amended recommendation on an 8-0 vote. SB 1180, on Department of Revenue tax conformity forms and instructions, prompted extended debate over whether DOR should presume conformity with federal tax changes and how to avoid an automatic tax increase without legislative action. Chairman Olson’s amendment would have DOR presume conformity only when federal changes reduce income or tax liability, while nonconformity would be presumed for increases; the sponsor said he wanted the bill to move but did not prefer the amendment. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 5-3, with members noting the issue needed further work and clearer statutory language. SB 1221, requiring DOR to notify legislative tax chairs before new interpretations that adversely affect taxpayers and to testify if asked, also passed 5-3 after adoption of an intent-clause amendment. SB 1292, clarifying PSPRS’s 5% voting-stock cap applies to publicly traded corporations, passed unanimously, and SCR 1033, a nonbinding resolution encouraging retirement systems to monitor digital asset ETFs and report back before the next session, passed 5-3. SB 1503 was held at the sponsor’s request, and the committee adjourned at the end of the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that defined somewhere in this statute or an existing statute? or an existing statute.
• Not in this statute, not in the other statutes where the schedules are.
• the reasonable construction of the statute.
• Madam Chair and Madam Witt, the statute you cite is actually the statute upon which Rule 74...
• The statute you cite is actually the statute upon which Rule 74 is based.

Bills: HB99 , HB38 , HB165 , HB127 , HB72 , HB151 , SB40 , SB104 , SB136 , SB164

Committee: House House Judiciary

Keywords: medical malpractice, malpractice reform, patient's compensation fund, PCF, health care liability, tort reform, damage caps, punitive damages, hospital liability, physician liability, nurse practitioner, certified nurse-midwife, outpatient facility, ambulatory surgical center, urgent care, free-standing emergency room, insurance surcharge, superintendent of insurance, New Mexico hospitals, medical review process

Transcript Highlights:

• There is no statute.
• statute of limitations.
• The statute of limitations had already expired.
• And eliminating the statute of limitations.
• So, the statute says that each induced abortion—and that's a defined term in the statute—and induced

Bills: SB41 , SB33 , SB32 , SB30

Committee: Senate Senate Health & Public Affairs

Keywords: sexual crimes, statute of limitations, criminal justice, victim rights, child abuse, individualized treatment, investigational treatment, health care, life-threatening illness, patient rights, physician recommendation, informed consent, human trafficking, sexual exploitation, child protection, prosecution, crime amendments, SB30, induced abortion, abortion reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• There's already a statute that addresses that.
• The perfect fix is no statute of limitations for victims of sexual abuse, but with no change in the statute
• The statute of limitations piece involving lowering the statute of limitations from five to three is
• And that they can also, in the old statute, or as it stands now, the statutes, they can almost only invest
• And that they can also, in the old statute, or as it stands now, the statutes, they can almost only invest

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, approval of the House Journal by a 121-0 vote, and a brief suspension of business for the Speaker to sign HB 2014. Members also observed a moment of silence for Butler County Fire Protection District Sergeant Commander Jatin Warren, who died in the line of duty, and the chamber introduced several guest groups, including Missouri Council on Aging representatives and county clerks. A resolution was also presented honoring former state representative K. H. Steinmetz for her 18 years of service in the Missouri House. The House then received committee reports recommending passage of HB 2934, HB 1800, and HB 1707. On third reading, HB 2974 passed 136-0 on telehealth and licensure reciprocity; HB 2934 passed 121-24 on consolidating St. Louis convention center governance; HB 2057 passed 137-10 on entertainment districts for Osage Beach and Chesterfield; the combined HB 1839/2921/3015 passed 120-19 on age verification for harmful online content; HB 1707 passed 149-0 to bar the Department of Revenue from taxing credit card processing fees; HB 2819 passed 145-0 to set rounding rules as the penny is phased out; and HB 2600 passed 148-0 to allow ambulance districts to combine resources for coverage. HB 1800, which reduces the inflationary growth factor for certain taxing districts from 5% to 3% and adjusts assessment ranges, drew the most extended debate over its effect on schools, fire districts, and taxpayers; it ultimately passed 82-61. Members also perfected HB 2774, which bars state and local governments from restricting equipment sales or use based on fuel source, and HB 2383, a utility infrastructure protection bill adding wired/copper infrastructure to existing critical infrastructure protections and setting penalties for theft or damage; HB 2383 was amended to align with the Senate version and then perfected. Finally, the House began debate on a combined bill package including HB 1664, 1610, 1645, and 2182, which would extend the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse civil claims while also shortening the general personal injury statute of limitations from five years to three; the child sexual abuse provisions drew broad support, while the tort-reform portion prompted sharp disagreement over access to justice versus business certainty.

Transcript Highlights:

• You've mentioned the statute of limitations, and I'm looking at the order.
• Then we have the situation with the statute.
• One is that the statute of limitations had run.
• The issue concerning the statute of limitations?
• Okay, anything further on the statute of limitations?

Committee: All JBC-CLAIMS REVIEW/LITIGATION REPORTS OVERSIGHT SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The Joint Budget Committee’s Claims Review and Litigation Reports Oversight Subcommittee met to consider two proposed Department of Corrections litigation settlements and one appealed claim from the Claims Commission. The first settlement, Caroline Arnett v. Larry Norris et al., involved allegations of long-term sexual abuse by a corrections employee. Committee members asked about PREA audits, facility practices, and whether the inmate had been placed at the proper facility. The department said audits and other safeguards were underway, and the committee approved the settlement. The second settlement, Latasha Ridgel v. Arkansas Department of Corrections, also involved sexual harassment/assault allegations. Members questioned the seven-year delay in the case and whether the issue was systemic; the department cited attorney turnover, COVID delays, and legislative changes making inmate exposure a felony. The committee approved that settlement as well. The committee then heard an appeal in Sharon Greer and Deanna Hayes v. Commissioner of State Lands, a denied and dismissed claim involving a tax-delinquent sale of family property in Crittenden County. Staff and the Commissioner of State Lands’ office said the property was certified in 2000, sold in 2009 after notice was sent, and that excess proceeds were available for a limited period before escheating to the county. The claimants argued they were not properly notified of the sale or the excess proceeds and only learned of the matter in 2025 after receiving the deed at a family funeral. Committee members discussed the notice process, statute of limitations, and the handling of excess proceeds, with several noting the issue may call for legislative review rather than relief in this case. After debate, the committee voted to affirm the Claims Commission’s dismissal of the Greer/Hayes claim. Members also discussed broader concerns about how excess proceeds from tax sales are handled and whether the current statutory process should be revisited in future legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• , statute, statute, um<00:24:35.720><c> I</c><00:24:35.800><c> don't</c><00:24:36.080><c> understand<
• The registration statute... I agree.
• </c> actual violations of new statutes? actual violations of new statutes?
• That must be a very old statute.
• Does it go back to the statute?

Summary: The meeting on SB 460 focused almost entirely on where the bill should be placed in statute and how it would be enforced. One side argued the proposal should be moved out of the loitering section and into the sex offender registration framework, saying loitering is already under constitutional challenge, is vague, and does not fit the conduct at issue. They said the bill is meant to create a clear, advance-notice restriction for registered sex offenders, especially around schools, day care facilities, and similar places, and that this would be easier for police to enforce. The opposing view was that the loitering placement is the better fit and that moving the bill would create broader drafting problems by opening the door to reorganizing many other sex-offender-related restrictions. There was also discussion of whether the bill’s references to schools should use the school-property statute, whether churches should be included, and whether the existing loitering statute’s alarm-based elements are too complicated and potentially unconstitutional. The committee also discussed a pending federal challenge to the loitering law, with one member saying there was no injunction yet but the case was being challenged. No agreement was reached. After a brief break and further debate, members concluded that the Senate and House positions remained unresolved, and the meeting ended without a compromise or vote on the substantive dispute.

Transcript Highlights:

• So look, this part is only about the statute. I mean, I think your complaint is with the statute.
• This is only about the statute.
• I mean, I think your complaint is with the statute, because the statute already said you can post information
• This is only about the statute.
• I mean, I think your complaint is with the statute, because the statute already said you can post information

Summary: The board opened its public meeting with a quorum, approved the prior minutes by motion and voice vote, and noted there were no employment disclosure forms. The main substantive item was an advisory opinion request from the chief clerk about whether legislators may include information about other governmental agencies or events in constituent newsletters, especially when the same material can be posted on official legislative websites or social media under a statutory safe harbor. Board members discussed the scope of the statute and whether the safe harbor for official websites and social media should be read to extend to printed newsletters. Some members argued the newsletter context is different because it is distributed directly to constituents and has limited space, while others said the same principle should apply and that the statute is not an exclusive list of permissible content. The discussion also touched on examples such as public health notices, bike safety events, and other government-published information, with concern expressed that a broader reading could allow too much unrelated content. No final advisory opinion was adopted during the meeting. Instead, the board directed staff to rewrite the draft opinion to reflect the discussion and bring it back later. The meeting then moved toward public testimony, but no testimony was taken before the public portion was adjourned and the board proceeded into executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• CCW permit process is run by DPS according to state statute, and state statute is pretty broad in giving
• Chairman, Representative Hernandez, the statute is statute, okay?
• Statute is fine.
• Chairman, Representative Hernandez, the statute is statute, okay, DPS can do their regulatory change
• Statute is fine.

Committee: House House Judiciary Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several Senate bills and one House bill. SB 1039 would allow attorneys prevailing in disciplinary matters to recover lost earnings and seek reputational harm damages from the State Bar; SB 1148 would require the Arizona Supreme Court to directly license attorneys rather than delegate that function; both received due pass recommendations. SB 1061, lowering the fentanyl enhanced-penalty threshold from 200 grams to 9 grams, also passed after opposition from the ACLU and defense counsel argued it would sweep in personal-use cases and increase incarceration, while supporters said it targets trafficking. SB 1068, which limits campus firearm restrictions for concealed-carry permit holders, passed over strong opposition from gun-safety advocates and university faculty, and SB 1069, removing suppressors from the definition of prohibited weapons, also passed despite concerns about public safety and prohibited possessors. The committee then approved SB 1099, which sets statutory elements for defamation claims based on whether the plaintiff is a private or public figure and whether the matter is of public or private concern. The ACLU opposed it, warning that codifying defamation law could chill speech and conflict with evolving First Amendment precedent; supporters said it largely codifies existing case law and adds an internet-related limitation period. SB 1271, barring municipalities from penalizing businesses for legitimate emergency calls unless there is a pattern of false or frivolous reports, passed unanimously after testimony that some cities were discouraging 911 calls for theft and other incidents. The committee also passed SB 1127, requiring mandatory reporters with direct knowledge of child abuse or neglect to report immediately and personally to DCS. Phoenix Children’s Hospital and DCS supported the bill but asked for clarification so medical emergencies would not be disrupted, and members discussed possible amendments. SB 1426, changing forcible detainer procedures by removing the written demand-to-vacate requirement and expediting claims, passed despite landlord-group concerns that it could affect holdover tenant cases. Finally, SB 1448, as amended, passed to expand aggravated assault protections to utility, telecommunications, video service, and related workers; supporters cited rising threats and assaults, while opponents argued existing assault laws already cover the conduct and the bill is overly broad.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that's an argument laid out in the Constitution and then in statutes.
• And then I would say in other court cases, if the statute is clear or the constitution is clear and statute
• So there is language in the statute...
• Right, so there is language in the statute that puts that as an exemption.
• Where in statute it says that.

Bills: H5004

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Keywords: public records, public records law, transparency, open government, government accountability, legislature, general court, governor's office, executive records, legislative records, constituent communications, policy drafts, deliberative process, freedom of information, FOIA, records access, Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 66, Chapter 4, veterans services records, initiative petition

Transcript Highlights:

• “And that’s by statute, too?”
• Those statutes had all expired.
• It was outside the statute of limitations.
• This is a violation of statute, U.S. Statute 60-C4. Which is what? I don't know that statute.
• This is a violation of statute, U.S. Statute 60-C4. Which is what? I don't know that statute.

Committee: All ALC-CLAIMS REVIEW/LITIGATION REPORTS OVERSIGHT

Transcript Highlights:

• First and foremost, PSPRS already has fiduciary statutes outlined in our statutes.
• First and foremost, PSPRS already has fiduciary statutes outlined in our statutes.
• The goal with the statute change is to define property combination and property split in statute.
• So that's why we want to provide clarity in statutes.
• This bill clarifies current use in statute.

Committee: Senate Senate Finance Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee approved the February 2, 2026 minutes and held Senate Bill 1090. It then took up SB 1503, which would require pension fiduciaries and proxy advisory firms to base voting and advice solely on economic interests, prohibit ESG or ideological considerations except in limited circumstances, and authorize attorney general enforcement. The sponsor said the bill was meant to protect investors and align with federal action; supporters argued proxy advisors lack transparency and can influence votes against shareholders’ financial interests. Arizona retirement system representatives said they were neutral but warned the bill would add major operational costs, create reporting burdens, increase litigation risk, and could narrow the market for proxy advisory services. The committee passed SB 1503 on a 4-3 vote. The committee then considered SB 1293, which would bar GPLET abatements from applying to school-district revenue during the eight-year abatement period. Supporters said the bill would protect school funding and reduce the state aid backfill tied to GPLET projects, while opponents from Phoenix, Mesa, and economic development groups said GPLET is a key redevelopment tool that helps finance downtown and blighted-area projects and that the bill would weaken future investment. The committee adopted the amendment and passed SB 1293 on a 4-3 vote. It also heard and passed SB 1414, which gives insurers 30 days to review and respond to third-party settlement demands; insurers supported the bill as a reasonable commercial timeframe, while trial lawyers opposed it as too slow and urged a 15-day standard, with members indicating they expected a possible friendly amendment. Next, the committee heard SB 1633, which would create an Arizona income tax subtraction for capital gains from the sale of a primary residence, after five years of occupancy. Opponents argued it would mainly benefit wealthy homeowners and could cost the state tens of millions annually, while the sponsor said it could help homeowners move without facing large tax bills and improve housing turnover. The committee passed the bill 4-2. It also adopted an amendment to SB 1429, which would have expanded Arizona Commerce Authority board ex officio membership, then held the bill for further consideration. Finally, the committee passed SB 1536, allowing temporary consolidation of street light improvement districts, and heard SB 1724, which clarifies when property splits or consolidations trigger limited property value recalculation, with county assessors supporting the measure as an anti-gaming reform.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so that's an argument laid out in the Constitution and then in statutes.
• In 2025, there were 604 such requests, ...by statute.
• the language of the statute, then courts will turn to policies.
• So there is language in the statute...
• Right, so there is language in the statute that puts that as an exemption.

Bills: H5004

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-14, H 5-004, “an act to improve access to public records.” Chairs Cindy Friedman and Alice Peisch outlined the Article 48 process and explained that the committee was hearing expert testimony, then proponents, then opponents, before any public testimony. The first expert, Will Clark of the National Conference of State Legislatures, gave a general overview of public records laws across the states, emphasizing that all states have some form of open-records law but that exemptions, timelines, fees, and coverage of legislatures vary widely. He discussed legislative exemptions, legislative privilege, and court cases showing that outcomes often turn on the exact language of state constitutions, statutes, and chamber rules. Rebecca Murray, General Counsel for the Secretary of the Commonwealth, testified about Massachusetts public records administration, saying requests and appeals have risen sharply since the 2017 law update, with state agency requests increasing from 22,572 in 2017 to 47,776 in 2025 and appeals reaching a record 4,051 cases in 2025. She said the initiative would extend the law to the General Court and the Governor’s office and add exemptions for those branches, while warning that the volume and complexity of requests could require more resources. The proponents, led by Jesse Littlewood of the Coalition for Healthy Democracy, Scotia Hila of Act on Mass, and Auditor Diana DiZoglio, argued that Massachusetts is an outlier for exempting the legislature and governor from public records law and that the proposal would create needed accountability without exposing personal constituent communications or internal deliberations. They said the measure would make records such as committee votes, final bill drafts, amendments, expenditures, attendance records, minutes, and public testimony available, while preserving exemptions for constituent services, draft legislation, internal staff communications, and policy development discussions. DiZoglio emphasized that the initiative is aimed at basic administrative and financial records, citing her own difficulty obtaining receipts, contracts, and procurement documents, and said the public should be able to see how taxpayer dollars are spent. Committee members questioned the witnesses extensively about the scope of exemptions, constituent privacy, legislative privilege, and whether the measure could reach communications with nonprofits or lobbying-type interactions; proponents responded that privacy and constituent-service exemptions were intended to remain in place, though some members pressed for clearer statutory language. The hearing also included a contentious exchange over whether the initiative could affect legislative communications and whether the Senate had already taken a position against the measure. Some members raised concerns about separation of powers, legislative privilege, and the possibility of exposing constituent communications or internal deliberations, while proponents argued that the initiative was narrowly tailored and that any legal disputes could be resolved in court. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing. The committee concluded the testimony portion after hearing from the proponents and their questions, with the matter left pending for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is no statute of limitations on murder of the body.
• So the statute is clear on this.
• Back in 2014, we extended the civil statute of limitations.
• We need to update the CSAM statute as well.
• It changed the statute of limitations.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on the Judiciary

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Judiciary held a lengthy hearing on a wide range of bills involving domestic violence, sexual assault, child sexual abuse, trafficking, victim compensation, and related criminal justice reforms. Testimony focused on measures to support survivors and close perceived legal gaps, including bills to protect domestic violence survivors in child welfare proceedings, expand victim compensation for homicide families and trafficking survivors, create a DNA exception to the rape statute of limitations, eliminate or extend statutes of limitations for child sexual abuse, and strengthen laws on upskirting, sexual abuse by adults in positions of authority, and sexual assault by rideshare drivers. Several speakers also addressed bills concerning vulnerable adults, harassment and custody-related abuse, and early evidence kits. Witnesses included legislators, prosecutors, advocates, and many survivors who described personal experiences with abuse and barriers to justice. Supporters argued that current laws often leave survivors without meaningful remedies, especially where consent, reporting requirements, evidentiary rules, or statutes of limitations prevent prosecution or compensation. Prosecutors and advocates said the bills would clarify vague statutes, increase penalties in some cases, and better reflect the realities of coercion, grooming, trafficking, and delayed reporting. Some testimony also urged amendments, including changes to victim compensation reporting rules and clarifications to avoid unintended conflicts with other wage-recovery laws. No committee votes or final actions were taken in the hearing itself. The chairs emphasized strict time limits, respectful conduct, and the submission of written testimony, and several witnesses were called out of order to accommodate the large number of speakers.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and these types of statutes are strictly construed.
• statute.
• It was up to 200% under one of the two statutes.
• The statute says 50%, I get 50%.
• There are actually grace periods built into the other statutes that this is not that statute that relate

Committee: House Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• The statute already exists that governs that board.
• We're following everything that's already in that statute.
• Let's make sure it's in statute.
• This is getting back to putting this in statute.
• That would actually go against our current statutes.

Committee: House Professional Registration and Licensing

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 3111, which concerns bail bonds oversight. Representative Phelps offered a committee substitute that moved bail bondsmen into the existing Board of Private Investigators, Private Fire Investigators, and Professional Surety Bail Bonds to avoid a fiscal note. An amendment was adopted to remove fee caps in the substitute, and the committee then adopted the revised substitute and voted it do pass 21-0. The committee then heard Senate Substitute No. 2 for Senate Bill 1233, the CPA licensure bill, along with related provisions for social work supervisors and speech pathologists. Senator Trent and supporters from the Missouri Society of CPAs, the speech-language association, the social work community, and the State Auditor’s Office said the bill would address CPA shortages by creating a new licensure path based more on experience, while preserving exam standards and adding reciprocity. No opposition was offered, and the hearing concluded without a vote. House Bill 2999 on optometry scope of practice drew extensive testimony and debate. The sponsor and ophthalmology witnesses described the bill as a negotiated compromise that would codify specific procedures optometrists may perform, while opponents from optometry argued it would freeze scope in statute, limit modernization, and require repeated legislative action as standards change. Witnesses disagreed sharply over whether the bill improved patient safety and access, whether the procedures were already within current practice, and whether surgical procedures such as lasers should be included. The bill was heard but no committee action was taken in the transcript. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2957 on respiratory therapist licensure. Representative Castile and respiratory care witnesses said the bill would phase out the CRT as the entry credential for new applicants in favor of the higher RRT standard, while grandfathering current CRTs and adding renewal audits to confirm active credentials. Supporters said the change reflects current training standards and would raise patient-care quality without reducing workforce numbers. No opposition testimony was presented, and the hearing adjourned without a vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is so enlightening, and I've worked on a lot of the education statutes and postsecondary statutes
• </c> there are several sections of statutes there are several sections of statutes that<00:18:13.600>
• uh just trying to clean up that statute uh just trying to clean up the<00:18:50.039><c> statutes</c>
• </c><00:19:06.640><c> are</c> those those sections of statutes are those those sections of statutes are
• </c><00:19:58.039><c> uh</c> prudent to remove that from statute uh prudent to remove that from statute

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 276, which would revise the membership of the performance-based funding work group for postsecondary education. Representative Tipton explained that the committee substitute changes the group so the CPE president chairs it as a nonvoting member, all nine university and KCTCS presidents serve as nonvoting advisory members, and the voting members are three House members, three Senate members, the state budget director, and one gubernatorial appointee. He said the goal was to reduce deadlock among institutions and allow legislators to deliberate before meetings. Some members raised concerns that the change shifts influence away from the universities and toward the legislature, but Tipton said he had not heard pushback from the presidents. The committee adopted the substitute and passed HB 276 with an expression of opinion that it should pass with the committee substitute attached; several members voted yes, while Representative Roarx voted no and Representative Stalker passed. The committee then considered House Bill 711, another bill sponsored by Representative Baker and presented by Representative Tipton. Tipton said the measure is a cleanup bill for postsecondary statutes, repealing outdated provisions for groups that have not met in years, including the Strategic Committee on Postsecondary Education, the STEM Initiative Task Force, and local P-16 councils, and removing obsolete language about one-time board appointments. It also strikes the statutory definition of remedial education because Kentucky public postsecondary institutions no longer offer remedial classes, instead using transitional courses with wraparound support that count for credit. A question was raised about whether Senate confirmation requirements for some appointees had been removed in the committee substitute, and Tipton confirmed they had. The committee then passed HB 711 with an expression of opinion that it should pass with the committee substitute attached. After the bills, the committee reviewed administrative regulations from the Council on Postsecondary Education. CPE Senior Vice President and General Counsel Travis Pahl explained that the regulations update the performance funding model for the Kentucky Community and Technical College System to reflect changes made by Senate Bill 191, including a Community Needs Index that reallocates part of an equity adjustment based on regional poverty, unemployment, and labor participation across the 16 colleges. Members were told the committee could ask questions, propose amendments, or find the regulations deficient, but no further action was taken. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• , definitions, definitions, Itself, and we apply the definition statutes, definition of agricultural
• It's another case of assessors being overzealous and overdetermining what statutes say.
• Chairman, Representative Cruz, the Arizona state statutes.
• If you introduce new statute now and the court rules differently... ...statute now and the court rules
• I think it's unlikely, but we have the ability to put that clarity into the statute.

Committee: House House Ways & Means Committee of Reference

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee heard several tax-related bills. House Bill 2261, sponsored by Representative Griffin, would rename and clarify the agricultural real property classification statute and codify the income-based valuation approach for agricultural lands, especially permanent crops such as orchards and vineyards. Griffin and farm/ranch supporters said the bill simply reflects recent court rulings and would avoid further litigation costs, while county assessors and the Arizona Association of Counties opposed it, urging the committee to wait for the pending Arizona Supreme Court case. After discussion about the tax court and appellate rulings, the committee voted 5-3 with one absent to return HB 2261 with a do pass recommendation. House Bill 2173, sponsored by Representative Livingston, would allow tax officers to accept and send certain notices electronically unless certified mail is required. County assessors supported the measure as a modernization that would reduce delays, postage, and paper use, and there was discussion about how to handle outdated email addresses. The committee voted 7-0 with one absent to return HB 2173 with a do pass recommendation. House Bill 2120 would add the Social Security Administration to the definition of competent medical authority for property tax disability determinations; it was described as reducing the need for duplicate documentation. The committee approved HB 2120 on a 6-1 vote with one present and one absent. House Bill 2786 would extend a tax deduction for bookstore textbook rentals to include textbooks required by state universities or community colleges, including digital rentals as clarified in testimony from the University of Arizona. Members said it would provide relief to students, and the committee returned the bill with a do pass recommendation on an 8-0 vote with one absent. House Bill 2792, a cleanup bill related to the 100% property tax exemption for veterans with service-connected disabilities, was supported by assessors as necessary to resolve conflicting language and implement the exemption correctly. The committee voted 8-0 with one absent to return HB 2792 with a do pass recommendation, and the meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• My life-threatening is in the current statute.
• It's in Texas revised civil statutes.
• Please remove the references to the 1925 statute.
• a there's a a severability statute that's specific to abortion statutes, also in the Code Construction
• We've got multiple severability statutes and...

Bills: HB44 , HB2200 , HB1612 , HB2747 , HB2038 , HB3717 , HB1431 , HB3800 , HB3801 , HB3560 , HB3246 , HB44

Committee: House Public Health

Keywords: HB 44, Life of the Mother Act, abortion exceptions, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment, pregnancy complications, maternal health, life-threatening condition, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, spontaneous abortion, fetal survival, Texas abortion law, abortion ban, physician liability, health care provider, disciplinary action, aiding and abetting, emergency abortion, obstetric care

Transcript Highlights:

• So, statute sets that 25,000 and below, statute sets Sets that 25,000 and below, statute sets that 25,000
• So, that's all set by statute.
• Those have stayed static within statute.
• Um, that would require a change in statute.
• Statute says you're supposed to." Statute says you're supposed to.

Committee: Joint Management Audit Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• From the constitutional sections, it would become enacted as statutes in the state of Oklahoma.
• But yes, the legislative body would have the ability to change statutes. Follow up.
• In statute, it can be changed by new statutes. Yes. Thank you.
• This simply asks the voters to move it from the constitution to the statute.
• It simply moves it from the constitution into statute. Follow up, Senator Bore. Thank you.

Bills: HB4440 , HJR1067 , HJR1087 , HJR1089

Committee: Senate Rules