Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, we place limits on when we can raise funds; we place limits on...
• You're okay with the idea of placing limits at times.
• Yeah, there are no current limits.
• I'm sitting under this bill, what are the limits?
• Does it put any limits on the executive?

Bills: HB18

Keywords: HB 18, Texas Legislature, quorum break, quorum-busting, legislative walkout, absent legislators, political contributions, campaign finance, political expenditures, legislative caucus, specific-purpose committee, Texas Ethics Commission, civil penalty, show cause order, district court, Fifteenth Court of Appeals, session fundraising, travel lodging food expenses, legislative session, compelled attendance

Summary: The meeting of the committee focused on the discussions surrounding HB18, which aims to prevent legislators from financially benefiting when they break quorum. Chairman Shaheen emphasized that this bill addresses the integrity of the Texas legislature and responds to constituent concerns about lawmakers being absent and raising funds simultaneously. Throughout the meeting, members discussed the implications of enforcing penalties for breaking quorum and the balance between legislative strategy and financial transparency. Various representatives expressed their views, with some supporting the bill for enhancing accountability, while others argued that it imposes unfair restrictions on a constitutional tactic historically used by minority factions.

Transcript Highlights:

• If your oral testimony is different from your written testimony, the time limit for each testifier will
• <00:00:43.080> limit<00:00:43.320> for written testimony, the time limit for written
• testimony, the time limit for each<00:00:43.600> testifier<00:00:44.040> will<00:00:44.160
• The time limit for each testifier will be 1 minute.
• The time limit your written testimony.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2455, HD2, relating to employment practices. Testimony was limited, with support from the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women and UPW; the committee noted nine support, zero opposition, and zero comments. No vote was taken on this bill during the portion provided. The committee then took up House Bill 2165, HD2, relating to the Hawaii Employment Security Law. DLIR supported the measure but requested an amendment moving language in Section 2 from subsection A to subsection C to preserve the legal structure. Members questioned DLIR about a January 8 U.S. Department of Labor letter and whether the bill would keep Hawaii in conformity with federal unemployment insurance requirements. DLIR said the federal guidance requires the state to remove the carve-out for labor-dispute claimants, though unions with hiring halls and members in good standing could still be exempt from work-search requirements under an authorized list. UNITE HERE Local 5 opposed the bill and said the current law already gives the department discretion to exempt striking workers. The committee recessed the bill before any final action was taken in the portion shown. In the joint hearing with Commerce and Consumer Protection, the committees heard House Bill 1509, HD2, relating to workers’ compensation. DLIR supported the bill, DHER offered comments and requested an amendment, UPW supported it, and one Zoom testifier described personal experience with delayed care and urged faster decisions. After testimony, the committees voted to pass the bill with amendments. The adopted amendments restored the 7-day treatment-plan deadline from 10 days, changed the effective date to January 1, 2077, and struck the proposed $500 fine for employers who fail to respond within 10 days. Back in the Labor and Technology agenda, the committee heard House Bill 1515, HD2, also relating to workers’ compensation, with testimony noting seven in support, one in opposition, and one comment, but no action was taken in the excerpt. The committee also heard House Bill 1514, HD2, relating to workers’ compensation vocational rehabilitation plans. A Zoom testifier opposed the bill, arguing the 120-day timeline was unrealistic for complex cases. DLIR said the bill would give the director discretion to extend the vocational rehabilitation plan timeline beyond 120 days with no cap on extensions, and the committee noted five support, four opposition, and zero comments. Finally, the committee began House Bill 2458, HD3, relating to surveillance pricing. OCP said it stood on written testimony, while supporters argued the bill would prevent corporations from using personal data to set prices, especially for groceries. Retail and grocery interests opposed the measure, saying it was too broad and could restrict loyalty programs, promotions, and discounts; one witness asked that a loyalty-program exemption be restored.

Transcript Highlights:

• Florida's current home equity interest limit is 730,000.
• What this does here is that limits the secretary's ability to and kind of limits the amount that can
• If it's a it's those either the step down limit.
• This at the time of the bill analysis.
• Also a limited number of paid claims there.

Transcript Highlights:

• to time put their own ideas on the ballot.
• The bill explicitly contains no character or line limit to this addition at this time.
• These limits are arbitrary. And so I'm clearly in support of a more reasonable 1,500 limit.
• And just to be clear, this is limiting.
• serving at the same time.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . limitations. limitations.
• And we the second time around we...
• <00:21:05.840> making So, they'd have had a hard time making So, they'd have had a hard time
• You will see me from time to time volunteering here at the Capitol. I enjoy being a docent.
• time, Senator B?

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• limit that you had referenced. limit that you had referenced.
• ft canopy limit or not even a limit ft canopy limit or not even a limit canopy<01:20:20.000>
• at that time. at that time.
• from time to time, because that amount is so high.
• /c> statistics in real time uh from time to statistics in real time uh from time to time<03:40:30.880

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the upper payment limit is considered the Medicare limit for each state.
• That is such a timely question.
• That is such a timely question.
• Appreciate the time.
• So I think it’s perfect timing.

Summary: The subcommittee met to review Department of Human Services hospital payments in Arkansas Medicaid, with DHS Secretary Janet Mann and Deputy Secretary Misty Eubanks presenting first, followed by Arkansas Hospital Association Executive Vice President Jody Ann Tritt and a brief comment from Arkansas Children’s. DHS outlined the main hospital payment streams: fee-for-service per diem payments, upper payment limit (UPL) supplemental payments, cost settlements, and smaller payments such as graduate medical education and disproportionate share hospital funds. Members asked for plain-language explanations of cost settlements, why per diem rates vary by hospital type, and why UPL applies to private hospitals. DHS said cost settlements and UPL are mechanisms to help offset Medicaid underpayment, with SFY 2025 hospital payments totaling hundreds of millions of dollars and no general revenue used for supplemental payments beyond the state share funded through hospital assessments and related financing structures. Committee members focused heavily on whether Arkansas hospitals are adequately reimbursed and why rural hospitals struggle. Tritt explained that critical access hospitals, rural emergency hospitals, PPS hospitals, and specialty hospitals operate under different federal and state rules, and said lower per diem rates for some facilities help with cash flow and later cost settlement adjustments. She said Arkansas hospitals are under financial strain, citing a negative patient services margin statewide and noting that Medicaid, Medicare, and commercial payers all contribute to the problem. She also said the association had just authorized a statewide survey of hospital finances and costs, which she expected would take about a year to complete. A major theme was commercial insurance reimbursement. Tritt argued Arkansas hospitals are paid far less than hospitals in neighboring states even though premiums are similar, and said administrative burdens, prior authorizations, and denials add to the problem. She said hospitals receive about 52 to 53 cents on the dollar for Medicaid costs without UPL and about 78 cents with UPL, still below cost. Members also discussed Medicare wage index issues, Medicare Advantage, and whether hospitals could use technology or alternative arrangements to improve finances. No votes were taken on the hospital presentation. At the end of the meeting, DHS provided a brief update on Living Choices and assisted living reimbursement. Officials said one assisted living facility, Pillars of the Community in Crossett, had announced closure, with nine waiver clients being transitioned to other settings. DHS said the current cost reporting period was underway and that a new rate study could be ready for review before the end of the fiscal year if reports were submitted on time. Members also asked about the broader waiver plan, and DHS said the next waiver iteration would likely be brought back to the committee in the summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 20 requires digital platforms to either establish safeguards to limit the amount of time minors
• of the time of day.
• And if they are already operating in a way that is protecting youth, by limiting time, for example, by
• Many platforms already offer robust tools that allow parents to set time limits, filter content, and
• Thank you for the time. Thank you for the time.

Bills: AB52, AB76, AB163, AB388, AB483

Keywords: health insurance, claims process, insurance regulation, admin penalties, healthcare access, cannabis, cannabis establishment, medical cannabis, adult-use cannabis, advertising regulations, packaging requirements, unlicensed cannabis activities, state prosecution, confidentiality, Cannabis Compliance Board, disciplinary proceedings, mental health, counseling, interstate practice, telehealth

Transcript Highlights:

• It's the right time and the right thing to do.
• Despite the 20-year statute of limitations beginning in statute, the clock is reset any time the FTB
• board members meeting on limited schedules.
• The bill would allow large counties, through a limited pilot program, to use a single-member, full-time
• We'll double-check on that, and if that is a part-time journalist for qualifying part-time hours, okay

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Had plenty of time. Thank snowed in. Had plenty of time.
• Limited to three minutes. explain. Limited to three minutes.
• They're not limited to once a month. They're not limited to once a month.
• No limits at all.
• Limited to three minutes.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate convened with an invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, roll call, and a quorum established. The journal was approved, absent senators were excused, and new bills and resolutions were introduced, including measures on housing districts, calorie information, alcohol beverage control, county clerk filings, vital records, and a resolution honoring Dr. Samantha Shaver. The chamber also received notice that the House had passed House Bills 384, 144, and 290 and requested concurrence. The Senate then recessed briefly for party caucuses before reconvening. The main floor action centered on Senate Bill 3, relating to school district finances. The bill, as amended by Senate Committee Amendment 1 and Senate Floor Amendment 2, was described as strengthening financial transparency for school districts by requiring public access to budgeting information, monthly credit card statements, superintendent contracts and compensation, audits, and final working budgets. Supporters argued it would improve fiscal responsibility and accountability in response to concerns about spending practices in large districts. The Senate adopted both amendments and passed SB 3 by a vote of 35-1, with one senator explaining a no vote while acknowledging the need for transparency. The Senate then took up Senate Bill 1, relating to education and the governance structure of a large school district. Supporters said the bill responds to a recent court ruling by adding detailed findings to justify treating the district differently and by clarifying that the superintendent handles day-to-day operations while the board focuses on strategic planning, budget approval, audits, and hiring or firing the superintendent. Proponents cited the district’s size, share of state education funding, number of students, and concentration of low-performing schools as reasons for the change. Opponents argued the bill would reduce elected board accountability, questioned whether the structure would improve outcomes, and emphasized broader funding and achievement challenges. After extended debate, the Senate proceeded to a vote on SB 1; the transcript shows a brief proponent statement and a lengthy opposing explanation, but the final vote result is not included in the provided text.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that's pretty much it, and thank you for your time. Thank you.
• selling limit, or what is the equivalent of 3.25 liters. ...to a selling limit, the existing selling
• limit, or what is the equivalent of three bottles per person.
• Todd, perfect timing. Your turn to present. Actually, Mr. Taw.
• In closing, there was a time when gift shops in hospitals sold tobacco.

Summary: The Governmental Organization Committee heard a series of bills focused largely on alcohol licensing, nonprofit funding, tribal grants, public transparency, and tobacco policy. AB 342 (Haney) would allow local governments to create hospitality zones with extended last-call hours on certain days; supporters argued it would boost tourism, nightlife, and major-event readiness, while opponents warned of alcohol-related harms and public safety risks. AB 684 (Patel) would subject the UC Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools to open-meeting requirements, with supporters saying admissions-related changes should be more transparent and allow schools time to adjust. AB 1008 (Addis) would authorize up to 10 new on-sale general licenses in San Luis Obispo County to meet tourism demand, and AB 1039 (Hart) would require state agencies to offer advance payments on new nonprofit grants and contracts, which supporters said would help cash-strapped nonprofits deliver services. AB 221 (Ramos) would revise the Tribal Nation Grant Fund to provide more predictable annual distributions to eligible non-gaming and limited-gaming tribes, and it drew broad support from tribal representatives and others. AB 795 (Jeff Gonzalez) would create a California commission for the nation’s 250th anniversary celebration, with supporters describing it as a privately funded, nonpartisan planning body. AB 828/AB 28 (Mark Gonzalez, as referenced in the transcript) would expand neighborhood-restricted liquor licenses in Los Angeles County to reduce costs and support restaurant recovery, and AB 1246 (Hoover) would increase craft distillers’ direct sales limits and address barrel-storage rules; both were supported as small-business measures. AB 1428 (Ta) would require reporting of all surplus and underutilized state land, and AB 957 (Ortega) would prohibit tobacco sales in pharmacies, with strong public health support. Several bills were voted out on motions to Appropriations, some with amendments, while others were held or left on call until quorum was established; the committee also adopted a consent calendar and left rolls open for absent members on multiple measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, that continuance would only be limited one time per case on the human trafficking case, and
• it would only be... ...limited one time per case on the human trafficking case, and it would only be
• limited to no more than 10 days.
• We have seen time and time again throughout the justice system that when additional discretionary barriers
• Deferred entry of judgment is available only to a limited group of young people, those facing a first-time

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard AB 647, a cleanup bill to AB 630 that would clarify that local agencies in Los Angeles and Alameda counties can use a pilot program to remove and dismantle certain abandoned, inoperable RVs valued at $4,000 or less. Supporters, including the author and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass’s representative, said the measure would help address public health and safety hazards tied to dilapidated RVs and homelessness. Opponents argued existing abandoned-vehicle laws already provide tools, and warned the bill could be used to remove vehicles occupied by unhoused residents without offering services. AB 647 was later approved on a due pass to Appropriations vote. The committee then considered AB 1656, which would give courts discretion to consider a prosecutor’s scheduling conflict when deciding whether to continue a human trafficking case, with amendments making the continuance discretionary and limited. Supporters said the bill would help preserve vertical prosecution and continuity for traumatized survivors; opponents raised speedy-trial and due process concerns. After discussion about balancing victim support and constitutional rights, the committee voted AB 1656 out on a due pass as amended to the floor. Members also heard AB 917, which would require prosecutors to file a motion to reinstate charges dismissed at a preliminary hearing rather than simply adding them back, with amendments clarifying procedures and violent felony refiling. Supporters said it would protect due process and respect judicial decisions; district attorneys opposed the bill as procedurally unnecessary and burdensome. The committee approved AB 917 on a due pass as amended to Appropriations. AB 2636, which would require courts to consider loaded-firearm possession when deciding whether a juvenile is eligible for deferred entry of judgment, also passed on a due pass to the floor after supporters emphasized public safety and opponents argued it would reduce rehabilitative opportunities for youth. Finally, the committee heard AB 1632, which would replace the notarization requirement for 602 trespass authorization letters with a statement under penalty of perjury. Supporters said the change would reduce administrative burden and help property owners and police address trespassing more efficiently; opponents warned it could weaken safeguards and be misused against tenants or unhoused people. The bill passed on a due pass as amended to the floor. The hearing also began consideration of AB 1974, a voluntary firearm safe-storage bill inspired by Pierce’s Pledge, with the author and a survivor advocate presenting the measure, but the transcript cuts off before the committee completed action on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Testimony is limited to three minutes per person.
• and to implement signage speed limits.
• and to implement signage speed limits.
• It's just a lot of time, you know.
• Thank you for your time. Thank you. Sierra Harkin?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a hybrid hearing on the governor’s Ride Safe Act, S. 3077, and related micromobility bills. Chairs and administration officials described the bill as a statewide, speed-based framework for e-bikes, scooters, mopeds, and similar devices, intended to replace outdated device categories with clearer rules for age limits, helmets, equipment, operating locations, registration, insurance for higher-speed devices, and restrictions on tampering. They also emphasized improved crash-data collection, a working group for future updates, and battery safety standards such as UL certification to reduce fire risk. Committee members asked about enforcement, shared-use paths, commuter rail accommodations, battery storage, and how the bill would apply to other vehicles like quads; the administration said some issues would need further study or follow-up. Testimony from advocates, municipal officials, and commission members was mixed but generally supportive of clearer statewide rules. Transportation and safety advocates backed the speed-based tier system but urged additional measures, including a default speed limit on shared-use paths, automated enforcement, and more funding for Complete Streets and Shared Streets programs. Bike shop and police representatives said current laws are confusing for riders and law enforcement and that better definitions and data reporting are needed. Several speakers stressed that enforcement and education will be critical, and that local patchwork rules are difficult to apply consistently. Medical testimony strongly supported tighter protections for young riders. Pediatric emergency and trauma doctors described a sharp rise in serious injuries and deaths involving e-bikes and scooters, including severe pediatric cases, and urged amendments adding a minimum age for faster devices and a universal helmet requirement. They argued that the force and weight of these devices make crashes more dangerous than conventional bicycles and pointed to past Massachusetts safety laws as evidence that age and equipment restrictions can reduce injuries. Some public testimony opposed the bill as written, especially from moped commuters who argued that gas-powered mopeds are being treated differently from comparable electric devices and should be included in the framework. They called for clearer rules on bike-lane access, insurance, parking, and statewide standards for mopeds as vulnerable road users. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony and questions only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Time is money.
• This bill shines a light on ...repeatedly time and time again.
• Nobody is ever limited by one moment in time.
• Senator Pizzo: This moves the statute of limitations from what amount of time to what amount of time?
• Does this one-year statute of limitations on inmate lawsuits, does the suit toll the period of time in

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several recognitions, including remarks from Senator Berman outlining Democratic priorities such as education, health care, environmental protection, and opposition to rollbacks on child labor, book access, and gun safety. The chamber also recognized military guests and an intern before moving to the special order calendar. Several bills were temporarily postponed, including measures on human trafficking, waste management, Bright Futures, Medicaid oversight at one point in the flow, and mammogram coverage, though the Medicaid oversight bill was later taken up and passed. The Senate passed a series of bills, often after substituting House companions and adopting technical amendments. Among the major measures approved were the dangerous dogs bill (the Pam Rock Act), which tightened penalties and procedures after fatal attacks; a local government land regulation bill that streamlined comp plan review and defined impact-fee circumstances, though members raised concerns about quasi-judicial hearing limits and local costs; a vessel-related bill combining boating safety and voter-freedom provisions; a blood clot screening and treatment bill creating the Emily Adkins Family Protection Act; fleeing and eluding penalties; concealed carry and firearm possession rules for certain officers and service members; timeshare management reforms; and public education on background screening requirements. The chamber also approved bills on disability history and awareness instruction, manufacturing and a related fee bill, utility service restrictions, educational opportunities for military children, health facilities authorities, and veteran and spouse nursing home beds. The disability instruction bill drew extended debate about the use of the term “disability,” inclusion, and whether the measure was consistent with broader DEI debates; it passed unanimously after emotional testimony from the sponsor and families. The manufacturing and utility bills focused on statewide economic policy and preemption of local restrictions, while the military children bill was presented as a student-driven proposal. Most measures passed with strong bipartisan support, with recorded votes ranging from unanimous to 33-3 on the firearm bill and 26-8 on the land regulation bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• This limit would also undermine accountability.
• This limit would also undermine accountability.
• This limit would also undermine accountability.
• Thank you very much for your time.
• <00:30:02.080> including them kind of in real time including them kind of in real time including

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 4, as amended, was heard in committee. The bill proposes a constitutional amendment to create a Minnesota tax relief account that would capture projected general fund revenues exceeding 105% of projected expenditures and return those funds to taxpayers, primarily through property tax relief or income tax relief. The committee adopted an amendment to put the bill in the author’s preferred shape, and later adopted a technical amendment from Representative Smith to insert the word “projected” before “expenditures” on line 2.2. Representative Johnson presented the bill as an affordability measure meant to return surplus money to the people rather than create new spending, arguing it would help homeowners and taxpayers if a surplus occurs. Ranna Lee of Americans for Prosperity supported the concept of returning surplus funds to taxpayers but also urged broader tax and budget reforms, including triggers for rate reductions and changes to budgeting practices. Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project and Eric Bernstein of We Make Minnesota opposed the proposal, warning that embedding budget and tax rules in the Constitution would reduce legislative flexibility, weaken public investment, shift costs to local governments, and make it harder to respond to recessions or emergencies. Members raised questions about how the formula would work, who would qualify for refunds, whether corporations with property tax liability could benefit, and how the proposal would handle forecast-based calculations and unexpected events such as pandemics or federal policy changes. House research and committee staff clarified that the bill would need to go to Ways and Means and then Rules to satisfy House requirements for constitutional amendments, and that a fiscal note had been requested and was in process. The committee did not take final action on the bill in the portion of the transcript provided, but the motion before it was to recommend passage and send House File 4 to Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:10:46.560> we $425 per square foot so by the time we $425 per square foot so by the time
• Armory building commission the time Armory building commission the time flexibility<00:13:12.720
• <00:15:48.519> serving this I've spent a lot of time serving this I've spent a lot of time
• which was a limiting which was a limiting factor<00:20:08.400> with<00:20:08.600> this
• This is our time for discussion and questions.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The options are limited out there.
• now is our average policy limit.
• We, again, have limited staff.
• During that same time period, our average policy limit has gone from $684,000 up to just over a million
• We advanced 50% of the personal property limits, or the full personal property limits if they were...

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Fair Plan, focused on the plan’s rapid growth, its financial stability after the January Southern California wildfires, and its role as the insurer of last resort. Fair Plan officials explained that the plan was created in 1968, is a not-for-profit involuntary association of licensed property insurers, and is intended to be a temporary safety net until policyholders can return to the admitted market. They emphasized that the plan is not a state agency or taxpayer-funded, but is regulated by the Department of Insurance and supported by member-company assessments if claims exceed available funds. Victoria Roach and Armand Feliciano said the Fair Plan has grown sharply since 2018 and especially after market pullbacks by major insurers, reaching about 575,000 policies and roughly $600 billion in exposure by spring 2025. They noted that growth is increasingly occurring in lower wildfire-risk areas, where the plan can sometimes be cheaper than the voluntary market, and said this undermines depopulation back into the private market. They also discussed recent policy expansions, including coverage for farms, higher residential and commercial limits, and pending or proposed changes such as AB 290, SB 525, and AB 226, which would add tools like a line of credit and bond access. A major portion of the hearing addressed the January wildfire losses and the plan’s financial response. Fair Plan officials said they assessed member insurers for $1 billion after determining claims and cash flow would exceed available resources, and that the process was approved quickly and paid smoothly, with more than 80% of the assessment collected within 10 days. They also described the reinsurance tower, the plan’s limited surplus, and the need for actuarially sound rates to reduce future reliance on assessments. On claims handling, they said the plan has received over 5,500 claims from the fires, has paid more than $2.9 billion so far, expects total payments near $4 billion, and has focused on advancing payments quickly for total losses and other urgent needs. Members questioned the plan’s solvency, the growth in non-wildfire areas, claim denials, smoke-loss coverage, and how depopulation works. Roach said most closed claims without payment were duplicates rather than denials, and that smoke claims require direct physical loss under the policy, with coverage determined case by case. Public commenters from the California Building Industry Association and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California said the Fair Plan’s growth reflects a weak voluntary market, inadequate rates, and insurer fear of future assessments, and urged support for rate increases and AB 226. The hearing concluded with no vote, but with a commitment from Fair Plan officials to follow up on unanswered questions and continue providing more transparency through public data and website disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thanks for taking the time.
• A lot, several times.
• But again, it’s not the time for panic; it’s the time for thought. So, to you, Mr.
• Just remember, we’re on limited time, but you guys are— Yep. You guys get where you need.
• We’re on limited time, but you guys would— Yep. You guys get what you need, right?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Atlantic sea scallop fishery, with particular attention to Massachusetts ports, federal scallop management, the proposed reopening of the Northern Edge on Georges Bank, and permit stacking/consolidation. The chair opened by noting the hearing would take written and oral testimony, that time was limited, and that the discussion was intended to inform legislative engagement with federal regulators rather than decide the issue directly. Dan McCarron of the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries and Dr. Kate O’Keefe of the New England Fishery Management Council outlined the federal management structure under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the role of annual catch limits and rotational closures, and the economic importance of scallops to New Bedford, Gloucester, and other Massachusetts ports. O’Keefe said the council’s current scallop framework is based on annual management, research surveys, and public input, and that recent environmental changes and uncertainty are affecting catch advice and biomass. Dr. O’Keefe and later Dr. Kevin Stokesbury of UMass Dartmouth described the fishery’s recent condition: abundance has increased in some areas, but biomass has fallen because many scallops are still too small to harvest, and changing ocean conditions and natural mortality are affecting the stock. They said the Northern Edge action was considered as a joint scallop/habitat framework but was discontinued in 2024 because the council could not reconcile competing objectives involving scallop yield, habitat protection, and impacts on other species such as cod, lobster, and herring. Stokesbury emphasized the long-running collaborative survey work with industry, said the fishery remains highly productive, and argued that the science supports careful rotational management and that the Northern Edge could be highly productive for scallops, though he acknowledged habitat tradeoffs. Committee members pressed both witnesses on why the issue had remained unresolved for so long and whether the council could revisit it through a future framework. Representatives of the Sustainable Scalloping Fund, including attorney Drew Kavage, John Lees, Sam Blasley, and Tony Alvernes, urged support for reopening the Northern Edge and for permit stacking, which would allow more than one scallop permit on a vessel while keeping ownership caps in place. They argued the fishery is a major economic driver, that industry-funded research has supported sustainable management, and that stacking would help family-owned operators reduce costs, improve safety, and avoid financial distress. They also stressed the need to protect working waterfront infrastructure in New Bedford and other ports. The chair said he was not opposed to stacking in principle but wanted to avoid a slippery slope toward excessive consolidation or private equity control; he noted that any stacking change would require an amendment to the fishery management plan or federal action. No votes were taken, and the hearing concluded with an invitation for continued engagement and future updates on the council process.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will have a two-minute limit.
• All right, your time will wait now. It starts...
• I mean, you're limiting it to 5.
• You're limiting it to 5... ...you're limiting it to 5 when 3 is the level of marijuana, correct?
• I think it's time that we do... In the past, I think it's time that we do this.

Bills: HB441, HB445, HB477, HB441, HB445

Keywords: speech-language pathology, licensure, clinical supervision, educational qualifications, healthcare assistant, hemp-derived cannabinoids, CBD, THC, delta-8, delta-9, delta-10, consumable hemp products, psychoactive cannabinoids, cannabinoid regulation, hemp licensing, ABC Board, Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, retail hemp sales, wholesale hemp distribution, hemp tax

Transcript Highlights:

• So on your topic, just utilize your time wisely and in the committee's time wisely.
• So any single serving should be multiplied times 30 for the container limits.
• So any single serving should be multiplied times 30 for the container limits.
• Thank you for your time.
• Thank you for your time. Thank you for being here. Thank you for your time.

Summary: The Committee on Agriculture heard a presentation from Florida FFA state officers Gabby Howell and Macy Jordan, who described FFA and agricultural education as a three-part model of classroom instruction, supervised agricultural experience, and leadership development. They highlighted FFA membership growth, Florida’s more than 60,000 members, industry certifications, and state funding that allows all agriculture education students to participate at no cost. Members praised the students and the organization’s role in developing future agricultural leaders. The committee then took up SB 438, which would regulate hemp and hemp extract products, including THC-infused beverages, by adding testing, labeling, retail location, age, and event restrictions, along with penalties and $2 million for testing equipment. Senator Burton said the bill is intended to address public safety, prevent products with illegal THC levels from reaching consumers, and respond to the governor’s prior veto concerns, especially store location and regulation. An amendment clarifying final batch testing was adopted without objection. Testimony was mixed. Supporters, including beverage distributors, law enforcement, and some hemp beverage businesses, backed regulation and said the bill would improve safety and clarity, though some asked for changes to avoid treating specialty beverage retailers like liquor stores. Opponents and some hemp industry representatives argued the bill was too restrictive, would hurt small businesses, and could push products into the black market; they also objected to THC limits, event restrictions, and the proposed regulatory structure. After debate, the committee voted 6-0 to report CS for SB 438 favorably.