Transcript Highlights:

• How does your data set and analysis account for that? Senator Latz, thank you, Mr. Chair, and Mr.
• How does your data set and analysis account for that? Senator, you are correct.
• Chair, Senator, thank you for that question, and I'm not prepared to provide any data to that specifically
• Chair, Senator, thank you for that question, and I'm not prepared to provide any data to that specifically
• We'll move on to Senate File 7. Senate File 7. Senator Latz, Mr.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• In Senate File 730, the court stated that the legislature intended to classify all the data listed in
• It did not classify data on corporations or non-individual entities. >> Senator Westin. >> Thank you,
• And Senator Over Burbaten, we went to the Supreme Court because of our interpretation of the data practices
• of Taxes yesterday and went to General Orders, and I spoke with Senator Latz about it and the data practices
• </c> with Senator Latz about it and the data with Senator Latz about it and the data p<02:54:09.439><

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• These data centers, as the senator from Washington said, have a ton of money.
• These data centers, as the senator from Washington said, have a ton of money.
• These data centers, as the senator from Washington said, have a ton of money.
• These data centers, as the senator from Washington said, have a ton of money.
• These data centers, as the senator from Washington said, have a ton of money.

Transcript Highlights:

• the sale of location data, and Senate 29, an act to establish the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act.
• the sale of location data, and Senate 29, an act to establish the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act.
• Senate Bill 197 would ban the sale of location data in Massachusetts.
• the sale of location data, and Senate 29, an act to establish the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act.
• Senate Bill 197 would ban the sale of location data in Massachusetts.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity

Summary: The committee hearing focused on a package of Massachusetts privacy and technology bills, especially measures to ban the sale of location data, establish a comprehensive consumer data privacy law, and regulate biometric recognition and surveillance pricing. Chairs and sponsors argued that self-regulation has failed, that data brokers and large tech companies routinely collect and monetize sensitive information, and that state action is needed because federal protections are weak or absent. Several speakers tied the bills to reproductive health, gender-affirming care, domestic violence, children’s data, and other sensitive uses of location and biometric information. Supporters included legislators and advocates who backed H. 86/S. 197 (Location Shield), H. 78/S. 45/H. 104/S. 29 (comprehensive privacy bills), H. 99/S. 47 (surveillance pricing in grocery stores), and H. 36/S. 36 (biometric recognition accountability). They emphasized data minimization, bans on selling sensitive data, consumer rights to access, delete, and opt out, and in some cases a private right of action. Several witnesses said Massachusetts should lead or align with other states, while others argued that stronger protections are needed because data can be weaponized by stalkers, anti-abortion actors, abusive partners, insurers, or law enforcement. Industry and coalition witnesses urged the committee to favor a more standardized, interoperable framework modeled on laws already adopted in other states, warning that novel definitions, data-minimization rules, and private rights of action could create compliance burdens, confusion, and costs for businesses, including small businesses. They argued that entity-level exemptions for sectors already covered by federal laws like HIPAA or GLBA promote consistency, and that Attorney General enforcement is preferable to private lawsuits. Committee members questioned witnesses on patchwork concerns, the scope of exemptions, and whether the proposed bills would harm or help consumers and small businesses. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; written testimony was noted as due later, and the committee continued taking testimony from multiple panels and virtual witnesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• Will the Senate please come to order. Senator from Chittenden. Thank you, Mr. President.
• President, the data that I was given was incorrect. Thank you. That's why we corrected it, Senator.
• H. 211, an act relating to data brokers and personal information. Senator from Chittenden. Uh, Mr.
• </c> Data<00:40:13.280><c> breaches?</c> Data breaches? Data breaches?
• </c> senator from Essex. senator from Essex.

Transcript Highlights:

• , de-identified data, and derived data.
• Sensitive data is a subset of personal data that includes data revealing...
• , genetic or biometric data, and personal data collected from an... ...personal data collected from an
• Senator.
• Senator from Rutland has moved that the Senate...

Transcript Highlights:

• Member from Poultney, on our notice calendar today is Senate Bill 71, an act relating to consumer data
• Senate Bill 71 is an act relating to consumer data privacy and online surveillance.
• > is</c><00:10:20.520><c> data</c><00:10:20.800><c> generated</c> Biometric data is used is data generated
• </c><00:15:08.280><c> for</c> any data, sorry, process that data for any data, sorry, process that data
• </c> their personal data rights. their personal data rights.

Transcript Highlights:

• I impose a call of the Senate. The Senate is now under call. Senator Murphy. Mr.
• Senator<00:50:32.680><c> Bar.</c> Senator Bar. Senator Bar.
• center coming to their neutral on a data center coming to their community.<00:59:14.600><c> Senator<
• President, Senator May Quade, is when I'm looking at the definition on 1.15, it says a data center means
• to thank my Senate co-authors, Senator Lang, Senator Rarick, Senator McEwen, and Senator Matthews, and

Transcript Highlights:

• Members present: Senator Russ Huxball, Senator Elizabeth Lachman, Senator Spiros Mantzavinos, Senator
• Trey Pardee, Senator Ray Siegfried, Senator Eric Buckson, Senator Brian Pettyjohn, and myself, Senator
• Senator Lachman is joining us virtually. Senator Mantzavinos is absent. Senator Pardee is absent.
• Senator Siegfried is present. Senator Buckson is present. Senator Pettyjohn is absent.
• Senator Lachman? Senator Lachman is joining us virtually. Senator Lachman.

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Transportation

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on energy, public safety, and environmental cleanup. House Bill 455 would create a historic preservation license plate to raise funds and awareness for Delaware preservation efforts, and House Bill 471 would tighten rules and penalties for off-highway vehicles on shared private roads, with golf carts excluded. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 439, the Truth in E-Bike Marketing Act, would require clearer disclosures when selling electric mopeds and electric motorcycles so consumers understand classification, power, and licensing/insurance requirements. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 407, related to the Hazardous Substance Cleanup Act and brownfields, would shift funding for brownfield cleanup from the original realty transfer tax approach to a dedicated share of the hazardous substance cleanup fund and raise civil penalties for fraudulent acts. The committee also approved the June 18, 2026 minutes once quorum was reached. Most of the meeting centered on House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 233, as amended, a large-load/data center bill intended to protect ratepayers from costs tied to massive new electricity users. The sponsor and Public Advocate said PJM’s warnings about a coming reliability backstop auction made it urgent to establish a Delaware framework now, requiring large energy users to sign utility agreements, cover their share of transmission, distribution, and capacity costs, and comply with curtailment and other protections. Supporters from environmental groups and some labor and business voices said the bill was needed to prevent cost shifts to households and small businesses, while opponents argued it was being rushed, could deter investment, and might unintentionally affect other industries; several asked for more time and clearer definitions. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee also took up House Bill 470, which would authorize Delmarva Power, with PSC approval, to build and operate utility-owned battery storage and spread costs across the customer base. The sponsor and Delmarva said the bill would improve reliability quickly and help avoid outages, while the chair expressed concern that the state had not yet fully studied whether utility-owned or competitively procured storage is the best model, noting a recent SEU storage study and broader policy questions. Supporters said utility storage could be deployed faster and help with peak shaving, while others urged a competitive process; the transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 470.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you, Senator Hoffman. Welcome back, Senator Klein, if you don't mind.
• Senator mchan where much thanks Senator Senator mchan where are<00:24:14.159><c> you</c><00:24:14.279
• Senator Matthews, okay, members, last chance at questions on data center—Senator Lucero and then Senator
• Senator Lucero. Senator Gruenhagen? Oh, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
• Senator Lucero. Senator Gruenhagen? Oh, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• While we had a little discussion here, Senator 1393, very important legislation regarding data centers
• </c> Senator McEwen: The community than we use as a data center, um, before 2030.
• Senator McEwen: I note that the state has never issued a CN exemption to a data center, and I am very
• Senator McEwen: What does that mean to Minnesotans who might be living around those data centers in terms
• Senator McEwen: What does that mean to Minnesotans who might be living around those data centers in terms

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• We have Senate Bill 5941 before us. There's an amendment. We have Senate Bill 5941 before us.
• Senator Short. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• Senator Short. Thank you, Madam Chair.
• SB 6171 also requires data centers to report new data to Ecology.
• I'm testifying in support of Senate Bill 6171. I'm testifying in support of Senate Bill 6171.

Bills: SB6171 , SB5965 , SB5982 , SB6004 , SB6010 , SB5941 , SB6050

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Technology

Keywords: energy facilities, large energy consumers, regulation, environment, sustainability, retail bags, pollution, customer impact, consumer-owned utilities, clean energy, port districts, market customers, energy transformation, renewable energy, public entities, electric generation, contracting, SB 6010, Washington energy siting, EFSEC

Transcript Highlights:

• We have Senate Bill 5941 before us. There's an amendment. We have Senate Bill 5941 before us.
• Senator Short, thank you, Madam Chair.
• Senator Leah.
• SB 6171 also requires data centers to report new data to Ecology.
• I'm testifying in support of Senate Bill 6171. I'm testifying in support of Senate Bill 6171.

Summary: The committee first met in executive session on Senate Bill 5941, which would exempt certain school districts from a Washington State Energy Code requirement for onsite renewable energy systems on large new commercial buildings or additions. The committee adopted Senator Short’s amendment narrowing the eligible school district definition from 1,000 or fewer students to 500 or fewer students, then approved the bill as amended and sent it to the Rules Committee with a do pass recommendation. The committee then held a public hearing on Senate Bill 6171, a proposed substitute addressing emerging large energy use facilities, primarily data centers. Staff explained that the bill would require utilities serving such facilities to adopt tariffs or policies to protect other ratepayers, require long-term contracts and full cost recovery, allow curtailment during emergencies, add reporting and sustainability requirements, create a fee to fund energy assistance, weatherization, and higher education programs, and impose new clean energy and labor-related requirements. The prime sponsor said the bill is intended to protect affordability, reliability, transparency, and the public interest as data center demand grows. Testimony was mixed. Supporters, including community action groups, environmental organizations, some utilities, Ecology, and student representatives, argued the bill would prevent cost shifting, improve transparency, support low-income energy assistance, and help manage grid and climate impacts. Opponents, including data center representatives, public utility district and business groups, and some local government and port officials, said the bill was too prescriptive, could raise costs, threaten competitiveness, duplicate existing utility practices, and interfere with existing CCA/CETA provisions and local flexibility. No vote was taken on SB 6171 during the hearing, and the meeting adjourned after public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Patten.
• And data and the availability of data vary by states.
• than your traditional finance data center or health care data center.
• Senator Bekkedahl, Senator Rummel, thank you for bringing that up.
• Senator Patten? Aye. Senator Powers. Aye. Senator Rummel? Yes. Senator Weber. Yes.

Committee: Joint Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee

Summary: The Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee met with a quorum and approved the prior minutes. Staff reviewed the interim work schedule, noting that most assigned studies were complete and that the final meeting would be September 29, with remaining work focused on economic development tax incentives, the stripper well exemption, and property tax reform items such as the primary residence credit. The committee then took up a referral on political subdivision compliance with state law, especially reserve limits and levy calculations. State Auditor Josh Gallion explained the audit standards used for local governments, the state auditor’s limited authority to force compliance, and the practical challenges created by a shortage of auditors. He used Stark County and Mountrail County examples to show how reserve balances affect levy calculations, including Stark County’s 2023 general fund levy issue and Mountrail County’s zero-levy approach. Stark County Commission Chair Neil Messer defended his county’s decision to keep reserves for major projects and volatility in oil-related revenues, while acknowledging the county remained out of compliance with the 75% reserve rule. Committee members and staff discussed possible enforcement mechanisms, the role of county auditors, and whether the law should be changed to better fit current fiscal conditions. Linda from the Association of Counties and Matt Gardner from the League of Cities said both organizations have been heavily training local officials on the new tax cap and reserve rules. Linda said counties and cities are using standardized worksheets for the 3% cap and levy limitations, and suggested that an affidavit certifying compliance could be attached to levy submissions. She also clarified that the primary residence credit does not reduce mill levies; it only reduces the taxpayer’s bill. Gardner said city auditors receive required finance training and that his organization was unaware of current city reserve noncompliance. The committee did not take action on the issue and planned to revisit it at the September 29 meeting. The final portion of the meeting moved into a subcommittee report on the property tax statement, where Representative Headland introduced a bill draft to remove the legislative property tax relief line from the statement for further committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Sidiya-Lopez and Senator Worth. We have time.
• justice data.
• Everyone wants to share data. Everyone wants everyone else's data.
• be able to pull that data off the data exchange.
• So we do regular data downloads on them. We do get certain data.

Bills: SB100 , SB100

Committees: Senate Senate Judiciary , Senate House Judiciary

Keywords: burglary, aggravated burglary, dwelling, criminal law, property rights

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to see what the data is. >> Senator Bell, I guess two things.
• data, mortality data.
• >> Yes, sir. >> So, Senator, so what do you want to do with the data? Department of Public Health.
• Uh, so I honestly don't see how you can be opposed to collecting the data. >> Senator Roberts, I've been
• </c> >> Senator Williams. >> Senator Williams. >> Senator Studts. >> Senator Studts. >> Senator Studts

Bills: HB128 , SB297 , HB128 , SB297

Committee: Senate Healthcare

Keywords: HB128, Alabama Board of Nursing, Sunset Law, sunset review, nursing board, nurse licensure, registered nurse, RN, licensed practical nurse, LPN, advanced practice nursing, certified registered nurse anesthetist, CRNA, consumer member, board appointments, congressional districts, geographic representation, nursing regulation, nursing education programs, licensure compact

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Bernard. Senator Boyd. Senator Bracey Davis. Senator Brodeur. Senator Burgess.
• Senator Bernard. Senator Boyd. Senator Bracey Davis. Senator Brodeur. Yes. Senator Burgess.
• Senator Bernard, Senator Boyd, Senator Bracey Davis, Senator Brodeur, Senator Burgess, Senator Calatayud
• Members, we will take up tab 6, SB 484 on data centers by Senator Avila.
• If you will stay with us, we will take up tab 7, SB 1118 on public records data centers by Senator Avela

Bills: S0408 , S0986 , S0678 , S0800 , S1050 , S0484 , S1118

Committee: Senate Regulated Industries

Transcript Highlights:

• And welcome, Senator Patton.
• And data and the availability of data vary by states.
• Data center.
• Senator Beckett-All, Senator Romo, thank you for bringing that up.
• Senator Patton? Aye. Senator Powers. Aye. Senator Rummel? Yes. Senator Weber. Yes.

Summary: The committee met to review its interim schedule and then focused on a referral regarding political subdivision compliance with state law, especially levy limitations and reserve levels. State Auditor Josh Gallion explained the audit process, the Yellow Book standards, and key statutes governing political subdivisions, including the 75% cash reserve cap and mill levy limits. He said the auditor’s office has limited authority to force compliance, has only stepped in a couple of times to resume audits for fiscal irregularities, and is constrained by staffing shortages and a backlog of local government audits. Gallion used Stark County and Mountrail County as examples to show how reserve calculations affect levy decisions. He said Stark County’s 2023 general fund levy calculation should have been zero under the statute, but the county still levied mills, while Mountrail County had recently reduced or eliminated some county levies after building large reserves. Stark County Commission Chair Neil Messer responded that the county chose not to move excess funds into a capital projects fund because it wanted flexibility for future projects and emergencies, and said the county has since reduced its levy and committed reserves to major projects such as road work, a regional airport, and public safety facilities. Committee members questioned whether penalties should apply to auditors or elected officials and whether the statutes should be updated to reflect current revenue conditions. Association of Counties director Linda Svihovec and League of Cities director Matt Gardner both said they have been heavily training local officials on the new 3% property tax cap and reserve rules. Svihovec said the association has held dozens of training sessions and that the standard worksheets used statewide are designed to help counties comply; she suggested that a possible enforcement tool could be requiring an affidavit from taxing districts certifying compliance with the cap. Gardner said city auditors receive required training through the League of Cities and that he was unaware of any cities currently out of compliance. The committee took no formal action and indicated it would continue the discussion at its September 29 meeting, with members asked to review the legislative council memo on possible enforcement mechanisms and statutory changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Bernard. Senator Boyd. Senator Bracey Davis. Senator Brodeur. Yes. Senator Burgess.
• Senator Bernard. Senator Boyd. Senator Bracey Davis. Senator Broder. Yes. Senator Burgess.
• Recognize, members, we will take up Tab 6, SB 484 on data centers by Senator Avila.
• Senator Pizzo: Are you familiar with any data center and how many people it employs anywhere in Florida
• If you will stay with us, we will take up tab 7, SB 1118 on public records data centers by Senator Avela

Bills: S0408 , S0986 , S0678 , S0800 , S1050 , S0484 , S1118

Committee: Senate Regulated Industries

Summary: The Committee on Regulated Industries considered several bills and took final action on each. SB 986, by Senator Gruters and presented by Senator Rodriguez, would prohibit smoking or vaping marijuana in public places and in certain indoor spaces; restaurant and lodging representatives supported adding marijuana and vaping to clean indoor air rules but asked to preserve designated smoking areas on private property, while cannabis advocates warned the bill was overly broad and could affect patients and property rights. The committee voted the bill favorably. SB 678, by Senator Mayfield, would restore statutory authority for DBPR to continue allowing alcohol distributors to deduct unsellable alcohol from monthly excise tax calculations; the committee adopted a strike-all amendment and reported the committee substitute favorably. SB 800, also by Senator Mayfield, increases penalties for repeated unlicensed engineering practice and creates an engineering student loan assistance program for engineers working for state agencies and water management districts; after adopting an amendment clarifying eligibility, the committee reported the bill favorably. The committee then heard SB 408, by Senator Grall, which would create a Florida cause of action against vaccine manufacturers that advertise in the state, allowing injured individuals to sue in Florida courts. Supporters argued the bill would rebuild public trust and hold manufacturers accountable, while opponents from the Florida Justice Reform Institute, American Tort Reform Association, BIO, the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, and several medical and business groups argued the field is largely preempted by federal law, that existing federal compensation programs already address vaccine injuries, and that the bill raises First Amendment and policy concerns. After debate focused on vaccine injury data, compensation rates, and liability, the committee voted SB 408 favorably. The committee also considered SB 484 and SB 1118, both by Senator Avila, dealing with data centers. SB 484 would preserve local planning authority, bar nondisclosure agreements that prevent disclosure of potential data center development, require the PSC to set large-load tariff requirements so data centers pay their own costs, and limit consumptive use permits for large-scale data centers absent no harm to water resources and compliance with local zoning; supporters emphasized ratepayer protection and economic development, while some witnesses urged flexibility for behind-the-meter projects and confidentiality in negotiations. The bill was reported favorably. SB 1118 would create a time-limited public records exemption for county or municipal information about data center siting and protect proprietary business information; Senator Pizzo raised concerns about how the exemption would affect disclosure of competing projects and local officials’ ability to speak, but the sponsor said he would work on clarifying the language. The committee also passed SB 1050, by Senator Calatayud, which requires veterinarians to provide pet owners with written prescriptions and information about pharmacy choice while preserving veterinary judgment and emergency dispensing authority. The meeting concluded after all bills were reported favorably and members recorded additional votes on prior items.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Bernard. Yeah. Senator Boyd. Senator Bracy Davis. Senator Brodeur. Here. Senator Burgess.
• Senator Bernard. Senator Boyd. Senator Bracey Davis. Senator Broder. Yes. Senator Burgess.
• Senator Bernard. Senator Boyd. Senator Bracy Davis. Yes. Senator Brodeur. Senator Burgess.
• Recognize, members, we will take up Tab 6, SB 484 on data centers by Senator Abla.
• Senator Pizzle's earlier comments or questions regarding the scale and scope of what data centers are

Summary: The Committee on Regulated Industries heard and voted on several bills. SB 986 would prohibit smoking or vaping marijuana in public places and also restrict smoking in rooms and bars; the sponsor said it is intended to protect public health and outdoor spaces, while the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association supported the goal but raised concerns about impacts on designated smoking areas, and cannabis advocates warned about unintended effects on patients and property rights. The committee reported SB 986 favorably. The committee also passed SB 678, which restores statutory authority for DBPR’s long-standing rule allowing alcohol distributors to deduct unsellable alcohol from monthly excise taxes; a strike-all amendment was adopted, including retroactive application to January 1, 2025, and the bill was reported favorably. SB 800, which increases penalties for repeat unlicensed engineering practice and creates an engineering student loan assistance program for engineers working for state agencies and water management districts, was amended and reported favorably as well. Members then considered SB 408 on vaccine advertising and liability. The sponsor argued the bill would address declining public trust in vaccines by allowing claims against manufacturers that advertise in Florida, while opponents said the measure is preempted by federal law, raises First Amendment concerns, and would create unnecessary litigation. After extensive testimony and debate, the committee reported SB 408 favorably. The committee also heard SB 484 on data centers, which would set PSC tariff requirements so large load customers pay their own costs, preserve local planning authority, and limit water permits for large data centers; testimony was mixed, with supporters emphasizing ratepayer protections and economic benefits and critics warning about overregulation and confidentiality limits. The bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee approved SB 1118, which creates a time-limited public records exemption for certain data center development information held by local governments, after the sponsor said it was meant to prevent extended NDAs while still allowing local notice and input. SB 1050, requiring veterinarians to provide written prescriptions so pet owners can choose their pharmacy, was also reported favorably. The meeting ended after several members recorded votes on bills they had missed.