Transcript Highlights:

• Now, as a veterinarian, I can tell you, I have taken out a lot of interesting things out of the stomach
• of that.
• In the interest of time, we're going to only focus on two. First, advancing this bill is premature.
• Because I'm very interested in your finishing of the statement there of what you were talking about.
• Unlike some of the others you've heard from today, we do not represent corporate interests.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several waste and recycling bills. House Bill 2212 would require microfiber filters on commercial and industrial washing machines, with Ecology authorized to consider residential machine rules later if cost thresholds are met. Supporters, including the sponsor, students, environmental advocates, and scientists, said washing machines are a major source of microplastics and that filtration is a practical way to reduce pollution before it reaches waterways and human bodies. Opponents, including appliance manufacturers, laundromat operators, business groups, and Ecology staff, raised concerns about technical feasibility, worker safety, cost, and the lack of third-party certification for commercial systems. Ecology said the science is emerging and the proposal would create new agency work and costs. No vote was taken. House Bill 2233 would tighten the state’s carry-out bag laws by banning reusable film plastic bags, raising the paper bag pass-through charge to 20 cents, and extending certain requirements to manufacturers, distributors, and third-party sales platforms, while preserving protections for food assistance cardholders. Supporters argued the current thicker-bag approach has not reduced plastic waste, that plastic bags contribute to litter and microplastics, and that a stronger ban would better protect waterways and wildlife. Opponents from grocery, retail, hospitality, paper, and business groups argued the bill would raise consumer costs, create checkout and food-safety problems, and add operational complexity; some also said the state should wait to see the effects of the recent fee increase. Several local government and environmental witnesses supported the bill. No final action was taken. House Bill 1420 would establish an extended producer responsibility program for textiles and apparel, requiring producers to form a producer responsibility organization to manage collection, reuse, repair, recycling, and related infrastructure. The sponsor described the bill as a response to textile waste, overconsumption, and landfill impacts, and said the proposal had been refined through extensive stakeholder work. Supporters from environmental groups, local governments, Ecology, counties, Goodwill, and circular-economy organizations said textiles are a growing waste stream and that producer responsibility could improve collection, reduce dumping, and support repair and reuse. Opponents from business, retail, hospitality, apparel, and medical-device groups raised concerns about complexity, consumer and compliance costs, governance, supply-chain reporting, and possible unintended coverage of uniforms or medical products. The hearing also included a State Board of Health health impact review noting likely increased awareness and collection but limited evidence on large-scale reuse and recycling outcomes. No vote was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• The administrative side of managing the popularity of this plate has been kind of taxing on the DSO.
• The second element of our mission statement is what makes the National Guard truly unique, in that the
• For those of you that have not been here before, you will find this interesting: we are allocated 12,000
• to its force structure for those of you that have not been here before you will find this interesting
• of ratio of guardsmen to population out of 54 National Guard units this allocation of 12,000 guardsmen

Committee: Senate Military and Veterans Affairs, Space, and Domestic Security

Summary: The committee took up SB 116 by Senator Burgess, a veterans bill aimed at several FDVA-related changes. The bill would reduce annual nominations to the Florida Veterans Hall of Fame from 20 to 5, expand FDVA’s survey work to assess veterans’ awareness of available programs and their health literacy, add mental health training to the veterans suicide prevention pilot, strengthen coordination and reporting between Veterans Florida and FDVA, direct FDVA to develop a plan for adult day health care facilities statewide, and allow the Florida Veterans Foundation to use a portion of Gadsden flag plate proceeds for administrative costs. Senator Burgess said the measure builds on prior “Forward March” efforts and helps close service gaps for aging veterans and others who may not know about available benefits. Testimony on SB 116 was uniformly supportive. FDVA leadership said adult day health care could be added at existing facilities such as Port St. Lucie and Lake City, and that the state would need authority and funding to move forward. A veterans legal collaborative, AARP Florida, and Endeavors all voiced support, with speakers emphasizing the importance of better outreach, mental health awareness, and care options that allow veterans to remain at home. The committee then voted favorably on SB 116. The remainder of the meeting was devoted to agency and stakeholder presentations. Florida National Guard officials described a high operational tempo, deployments at home and abroad, hurricane response efforts, and the need to grow the force and infrastructure. FDVA’s adjutant general reported Florida now has the nation’s second-largest veteran population, rising in-migration of younger veterans, a large and aging Vietnam-era population, strong claims and outreach activity, declining veteran homelessness, and improved suicide prevention outcomes. The Florida Veterans Foundation outlined its emergency relief, dental, transportation, and license-plate-funded programs, while Veterans Florida and CareerSource Florida detailed workforce, apprenticeship, SkillBridge, entrepreneurship, and job-fair programs for veterans and spouses, along with efforts to expand recurring funding and better protect customer information.

Transcript Highlights:

• Much of this work has been possible because of SB 515 by the Senator.
• the ages of 2 and 10.
• Alejandro Solis on behalf of Los Amigos of the Community and the Cooperative Campesina of California,
• Alejandro Solis on behalf of Los Amigos of the Community and the Cooperative Campesina of California,
• on behalf of the California Association of Joint Powers Authorities.

Committee: House Education

Transcript Highlights:

• So, I'm interested in this bill primarily because it does allow for the use of remote meetings, which
• 67% of the voting interest, some higher than that.
• and and by a minimum of 67% of the<00:51:45.200><c> voting</c><00:51:45.520><c> interest,</c><00:51:
• the financial and time burden<01:05:56.400><c> on</c><01:05:56.640><c> some</c><01:05:56.799><c> of<
• </c><05:09:41.040><c> parties,</c><05:09:42.240><c> uh</c> of time with some interested parties, uh of

Committee: House Housing

Transcript Highlights:

• Nearly two years of doctor's visits, of testing, of fear, two years of out-of-pocket medical expenses
• of syndromes.
• data of people.
• And so I appreciate members of this body that have a healthy distrust of government in a lot of ways,
• And we found it's a very true statement that he's making that the first responders of what It's a very

Summary: The House first established a quorum after introductions of the Freedom of the Road Riders and Warsaw High School students. Members then took up House Bill 1855, a reporting bill on alpha-gal syndrome. The sponsor described the bill as a public health surveillance measure to add alpha-gal to Missouri’s reportable conditions, require lab reporting to the Department of Health and Senior Services, and send aggregated data to the CDC. Supporters said the bill would help identify hotspots, guide education and funding, and address a serious tick-borne condition affecting rural and urban Missourians alike. Opponents raised concerns about cost, false positives/negatives, and privacy, but the sponsor and others said the system would be HIPAA-compliant and de-identified at the federal level. Two amendments to HB 1855 were debated. An amendment changing the department’s follow-up authority from “may” to “shall” was adopted, with supporters arguing that if the legislature funds follow-up, the department should be required to do it. A second amendment creating an opt-in/opt-out consent process for reporting was rejected 41-10 after extensive debate over privacy, data collection, and whether consent would undermine disease surveillance. The House then adopted the House committee substitute for HB 1855 as amended and ordered it perfected and printed. The chamber next considered House Bills 2230 and 2978, a revised education measure aimed at reducing screen time in K-5 classrooms and encouraging handwriting and cursive instruction. The sponsor said the bill was based on research linking heavy screen use to poorer educational and behavioral outcomes, and supporters emphasized local control, parent access to screen-time policies, and the need to bring experts together through a state-level focus group. An amendment to exclude virtual school programs was adopted. The House then adopted the committee substitute for HB 2230 and 2978 as amended and ordered it perfected and printed. Finally, the House began debate on House Bill 2355, the Food Is Medicine Initiative. The sponsor said the bill would let Missouri use federal funds through 1115 waivers to pilot medically tailored meals, produce prescriptions, nutrition counseling, and related interventions to improve health and lower Medicaid costs. Members generally supported the concept, citing food deserts and the benefits of better nutrition, but an amendment adding vitamin therapies and cleanup language prompted concern from one member about supplement quality and regulation; the transcript ends during that amendment discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• one of the guys that did it. >> Senator, I appreciate your statements, and I'm allowing a little more
• one of the guys that did it. >> Senator, I appreciate your statements, and I'm allowing a little more
• of being a part of the NCAA, getting part of those monies.
• I believe there is an interest in, or a discussion of, an amendment on their AWC position.
• Chairman, we do have a handful of small agencies if you're interested.

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• The purpose of the bill is to ensure courts may consider reliable out-of-court statements in cases involving
• findings before any out-of-court statement may be admitted.
• </c> of limitations. of limitations.
• </c> state of being. state of being.
• ><c> the</c> the issue part of the issue, one of the the issue part of the issue, one of the main<00:

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:52:57.840><c> as</c><01:52:58.080><c> they</c> interest of the Shosonyi tribe as they interest
• I think in some situations the state has an interest in terms of tax revenues and other things.
• So his interest in that waned, and the conversation kind of got stuck at that legal challenge of how
• endowments and scholarships and other financial aid options, and if that is the desire of the group
• </c> information of financial aid op options. information of financial aid op options.

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Tribal Relations

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> so your statement about at the time of so your statement about at the time of hire<01:41:49.679>
• c> that</c><01:46:13.280><c> we</c> a kind of an interesting way that we a kind of an interesting way
• When it comes to public employers, we have kind of an interesting patchwork of authority over them, but
• Um, so this is just another example, I think, of an out-of-state special interest group coming into New
• Um, so this is just another example, I think, of an out-of-state special interest group coming into New

Committee: House Labor, Industrial and Rehabilitative Services

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm very interested in what kind of systemic solutions we can do.
• So I'm very interested in what kind of systemic solutions we can do.
• So I'm very interested in what kind of systemic solutions we can do.
• So I'm very interested in what kind of systemic solutions we can do.
• So I'm very interested in what kind<00:21:34.799><c> of</c><00:21:34.880><c> systemic</c><00:21:35.360

Bills: HF3902 , HF3895

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Amendment number three introduces a comprehensive conflict-of-interest, excuse me, provision prohibiting
• Jordan's line of questioning, and part of my concern is the risk of preemption.
• Of that 23%, most of it would be in the form of co-pays, a little over... ...would be in the form of
• And so for that, I think it is kind of a false statement from one of the most profitable industries in
• And so for that statement, I think it is kind of a false statement from one of the most profitable industries

Committee: House Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• And they are now more interested in the work of the commission, simply put, as referred to in the resolution
• The first sentence of the resolve statement does, in fact, say that this joint commission will be established
• I will read kind of through most of it.
• Any person eligible may file a petition for assistance of counsel and statement of indigency.
• This does kind of relate back to Chair Aird's statement earlier that this kind of was a stop and go,

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think some of them are going to have to be resurrected so that we can be reminded of some of them
• And there was a lot of hours and a lot of work and a lot of debate, healthy debate, that took place and
• And we want this to be a collaboration of all of us.
• of children today are not the same as the interests of children yesterday.
• After hearing and in writing that it is in the interest of justice to do so.

Summary: The Juvenile Justice Policy and Oversight Committee (JJPOC) met for administrative updates, approved the April meeting minutes, and discussed a proposed shift from monthly full committee meetings to a quarterly schedule beginning later this year. Members generally supported the change, saying it would reduce strain on agency and committee resources and allow more time for work groups to complete implementation tasks. Several members also asked for more flexible agendas and a clearer way to add issues between meetings, with staff suggesting a standardized form for submitting topics in advance. Work group updates covered cross-agency data sharing, diversion, education, incarceration, and community expertise. The data-sharing group reported continued work on the Equity Dashboard 2.0, a statewide expulsions analysis, municipal-level data collaboration with UConn’s IMRP, and a cross-system analysis of crossover youth. The diversion group described work on POST curriculum revisions for juvenile law, a youth-focused law enforcement interaction training, a community-police relationship toolkit, expansion of youth diversion teams, and pre-arrest diversion policy. The education group is reviewing implementation of the law creating educational oversight in juvenile facilities, along with a free public transportation pilot for high school students and truancy cleanup legislation. The incarceration group is tracking conditions of confinement, DOC restraint and chemical agent reports, the DOJ settlement monitoring process, the reentry success plan, and gender-responsive programming. The community expertise group emphasized elevating lived experience, youth voice, prevention, and conditions of confinement, with members urging the committee to focus on stability, infrastructure, and meaningful use of lived-experience perspectives. A major presentation from OPM outlined Connecticut’s effort to re-enter the federal Title II juvenile justice formula grant program. OPM explained the program’s core compliance requirements, including deinstitutionalization of status offenders, adult jail and lockup removal, sight-and-sound separation, and addressing racial and ethnic disparities. Staff said Connecticut is currently not fully compliant because of issues including youth being held in adult facilities and the state’s six-hour detention rule, and that Title II funding is on hold while OPM works toward compliance. OPM is developing a monitoring manual, identifying facilities to be monitored, and forming a state advisory group (SAG) to support the application and compliance process. Members questioned why a separate SAG is needed, whether JJPOC or the community expertise group could serve that role, and how lived-experience members would be selected; OPM said federal rules require the SAG to include youth or parents with lived experience and that the group cannot be composed of state or government employees in the key leadership roles. The committee agreed to circulate the federal parameters and ask members to suggest candidates for the SAG and to help move compliance work forward over the summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• Briefly, just a couple of those things: one of them was the age.
• So they kind of hit us on both sides and said we couldn't do that, which we thought was an interesting
• way of Kind of hit us on both sides and said we couldn't do that, which we thought was an interesting
• way of interpreting it.
• denturistry to the board of dentistry.

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• Amendment number three introduces a comprehensive conflict-of-interest, excuse me, provision prohibiting
• Jordan's line of questioning, and part of my concern is the risk of preemption.
• Jordan's line of questioning, and part of my concern is the risk of preemption.
• Of that 23%, most of it would be in the form of co-pays.
• And so for that statement, I think it is kind of a false statement from one of the most profitable industries

Committee: House Insurance

Summary: The House Insurance Committee met on April 1 with a quorum present and first took up House Bill 938 by Rep. Turner, which would overhaul pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) regulation by setting a flat administration fee, requiring dispensing fees and NADAC-based reimbursement, mandating rebate pass-through, giving the Department of Insurance access to PBM data, and creating a reverse-auction process for PBM procurement. Turner said the bill is intended to level the playing field for independent pharmacies, improve transparency, and reduce hidden PBM practices. The committee adopted amendment set 1444 without objection, and Turner said additional conceptual amendments were still being worked on. Supporters included independent pharmacies and the PBM Accountability Project; opponents included union plan representatives, benefits consultants, and PBM/insurance industry witnesses who warned of higher costs, ERISA preemption problems, and likely litigation. After extended questioning on cost, preemption, and vertical integration, the committee reported HB 938 with amendments. The committee then considered House Bill 870, also by Rep. Turner, dealing with formulary placement and cost-sharing for generic drugs and biosimilars and limiting certain utilization management practices. Amendment set 1540 was adopted, revising and tightening technical definitions. Turner and a representative of the Association for Accessible Medicines argued the bill would help lower-cost generics and biosimilars gain market share and reduce patient costs, citing examples such as insulin and Humira biosimilars. Opponents from Louisiana Blue said the bill would force coverage based on wholesale acquisition cost rather than net cost, would raise premiums for fully insured members, and would mandate coverage of drugs that are not always the lowest net-cost option. Rep. Jordan again raised ERISA and preemption concerns, and committee members discussed whether the bill would interfere with tiering and plan design. After closing comments and a motion by Rep. Glorioso, HB 870 was reported with amendments, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> districts, that it be communities of districts, that it be communities of interest,<02:01:46.639
• for public comment and discussion and considers communities of interest.
• communities of interest and that shall not include political parties or political candidates.
• It taking into consideration, but it also needs to take into consideration communities of interest.
• </c> consideration communities of interest. consideration communities of interest.

Committee: House Election Law

Transcript Highlights:

• low cost financial assistance to water systems to finance and repair and replacement of drinking water
• Tens of billions of IRBs have been issued on behalf of companies.
• So it is in their best interest if they want to continue is to adhere to all of the state and federal
• It's an authority, uh, it has a board, um, uh, uh, board of directors of, of the different, um, of the
• Um Of that actual body of of this process.

Transcript Highlights:

• of our 2025 session.
• of of the regulations reference points of of the regulations with<00:08:26.159><c> the</c><00:08:26.319
• Short of...
• Short of...
• Short of...

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Economic Development and Workforce Investment met for its first 2025 session meeting, took roll, and established a quorum. The committee adopted a committee substitute for House Bill 398, an act relating to occupational safety and health, before hearing testimony. Sponsor Representative Walker Thomas said the bill is intended to align Kentucky’s occupational safety and health rules more closely with federal standards, provide clearer reference points for employers, and improve consistency and compliance while maintaining worker safety. He also explained that the substitute added and clarified a de minimis citation provision and defined “qualified representative,” and he noted a typo in the substitute would be corrected on the floor. Members asked whether the bill would change Kentucky’s OSHA structure or affect state offices, and Thomas said Kentucky remains a state-plan state with its own offices and enforcement staff, and that the bill would not eliminate those offices. He said the measure is meant to streamline rules and clarify that certain notices would carry no penalty when there is no substantial impact on safety or health. He also said employers must be given an opportunity to be present for inspections, typically with 45 minutes to an hour to arrange representation. Opposition testimony came from Dustin Ryan Stadler of the Kentucky State AFL-CIO and Gerald Atkins of Working Strategies 2 on behalf of the Kentucky State Building and Construction Trades Council. They argued the bill weakens worker protections, reduces accountability, limits who may request inspections, and could prevent family members from seeking inspections after a fatal workplace incident. Stadler described a fatal construction accident he witnessed in 2006 and said OSHA protections exist for a reason. Atkins cited workplace deaths and injuries, said the bill would go beyond prior 2021 changes, and warned that allowing Franklin Circuit Court to award uncapped costs and attorney fees against OSHA could chill enforcement. Several members then questioned whether federal standards are sufficient, with supporters saying the bill simply aligns Kentucky with federal rules and opponents arguing Kentucky should retain the ability to keep stronger protections for certain industries. No final vote on House Bill 398 was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• education that are of common interest to the department and to the education preparation programs across
• </c><00:34:51.040><c> interest</c> definitely generated a lot of interest definitely generated a lot
• </c><01:05:15.839><c> off</c><01:05:16.000><c> of</c> &gt;&gt; so you guys are making interest off of
• So the first two years of operation, we met all of the financial objectives.
• </c> of the financial objectives. of the financial objectives.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, basically, if a contract is approved, if there's a perceived conflict of interest between parties
• So, basically, if a contract is approved, if there's a perceived conflict of interest between parties
• Just noting my agreement with some of your statements, such as your comment about the lack of a cap,
• 01:21:51.679><c> your</c><01:21:51.920><c> statements</c> agreement with some of your statements agreement
• with some of your statements such<01:21:52.400><c> as</c><01:21:52.639><c> the</c><01:21:52.880><c>

Committee: House Housing

Summary: The subcommittee first took up House Bill 1598 and an amendment, 2026-0463H. Elliott Barry and Nick Norman testified that the amendment reflected a hard-fought compromise balancing concerns from all sides, and they urged no further changes. With no questions from members, the subcommittee voted unanimously to recommend the bill with the amendment to the full committee, 3-0, and closed the subcommittee. The housing committee then moved through several executive session bills. HB 1010 was amended with 2026-0274H, described as clarifying and implementing prior housing law (HB 631) governing residential units above office and retail space; the amendment was adopted unanimously and the bill was reported ought to pass as amended on a 17-0 vote and placed on consent. HB 65 was then voted ought to pass and also placed on consent, with members saying it was duplicative of the compromise reached on HB 1010. HB 1349 was reconsidered for a clarifying vote and again received unanimous support for its prior disposition, 17-0, and was placed on consent. The committee next took up HB 1523, which concerned homeowners associations. An amendment, 2026-0380H, removed Section 5’s Attorney General enforcement mechanism, added HOA conflict-of-interest approval language, and delayed the effective date to give stakeholders more time; it was adopted unanimously. The bill then passed 18-0 as amended and was put on consent. The committee also voted ITL on CACR 16, a constitutional amendment related to sleeping or homelessness issues, after debate over unintended consequences and whether it protected a basic right; the vote was 10-8, with a majority report assigned and a minority report to be written. Later, HB 108, dealing with inclusionary zoning, was voted ITL 10-8 after members argued the bill imposed unrealistic burdens and could halt development; a minority report was noted with amendment 0149H. HB 7, concerning ADUs and restrictive covenants, was also voted ITL 10-8 after discussion of unintended consequences and a proposed amendment to encourage second ADUs; it was sent to the regular calendar with a minority report and amendment 0289H. HB 1120, on water-related subdivision requirements, was ITL’d 17-1 and placed on consent, with one member noting a study amendment had been offered. HB 1143, addressing housing-provider obligations and municipal enforcement powers, was ITL’d 17-1 and placed on consent. Finally, HB 1145, a fee/tax proposal tied to housing development, was ITL’d 11-7; members debated whether it would discourage development, and a minority report was assigned.