Transcript Highlights:

• These terminations include a grant totaling over $8 million to the National Policing Institute, which
• It was $811 million in grants that were terminated.
• million in grants that were terminated. million in grants that were terminated.
• And then we can follow that up with what I think would be a significant symbolic statement, as Ms.
• entire agencies created by terminate entire agencies created by Congress.<06:46:34.878> This<

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, May 15, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And one area we cannot Get into, but it's more of a clarification, especially on the statement.
• And one area we cannot get into, but it's more of a clarification, especially on the statement.
• But we do also have refined fuels terminals in Fargo and Grand Forks.
• North Dakota law typically includes a termination of wind easements after five years.
• A termination of wind easements after five years, they go away if they're not acted upon.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Energy Development and Transmission Committee met in interim session and approved the November 6 minutes. Chair Novak outlined the committee’s study agenda, including large energy users such as data centers, geothermal, landowner relations, wind and solar, and other energy topics across the state. The meeting was framed as informational only, with no bills or formal legislative action taken beyond the minutes approval. Testimony focused first on landowner relations. Oliver County Commissioner Dave Berger described the county’s energy history and local support for coal and related development. North Dakota Farmers Union President Matt Perdue emphasized proactive, face-to-face communication with landowners, respect for property rights, and the need for developers to be transparent about tradeoffs; he also discussed insurance and liability concerns tied to easements. Committee members asked about eminent domain, local versus state authority, and how communities can better understand the revenue and infrastructure implications of energy development. Department of Agriculture Deputy Commissioner Tom Bodine then described the department’s ombudsman programs for pipeline restoration and reclamation, wind restoration, and royalty oversight. He said the programs provide confidential, third-party assistance on reclamation and royalty disputes, but do not provide legal advice. Senators raised concerns about post-production deductions in royalty leases and whether the ombudsman can explain them; Bodine said the program can clarify statements and deductions but cannot resolve legal disputes. He also said the department has not received requests related to fiber lines. Representatives from Grid United and One Oak described their project development and landowner engagement practices. Grid United’s Brent Johnson discussed the North Plains Connector transmission project, its route selection process, voluntary acquisition approach, and efforts to avoid eminent domain by working closely with regulators, counties, townships, and landowners. One Oak’s Danette Welsh and Tom Giltner described the company’s midstream operations, extensive North Dakota footprint, and emphasis on direct landowner communication, consistent local regulation, careful construction practices, and post-construction reclamation. Members asked about setbacks, zoning consistency, invasive species prevention, outside advocacy groups, and eminent domain use; One Oak said it has not used eminent domain on its North Dakota projects, largely because most gathering lines are negotiated easements.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:58:28.799> grant requiring MDE to terminate grant requiring MDE to terminate grant agreements
• /c><00:58:40.559> failure<00:58:41.040> to<00:58:41.200> meet or financial statements
• , failure to meet or financial statements, failure to meet applicable<00:58:42.160> state<00:58
• And so I'm really excited that in Article 4 and the Read Act, we now have a policy statement at the very
• I am pleased that the bill will crack down and terminate payments to nonprofits that put some of the

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Paraquat is utilized by farmers as a pre-plant burn-down tool to terminate existing vegetation prior
• Paraquat is utilized by farmers as a pre-plant burn-down tool to terminate existing vegetation prior
• Paraquat is utilized by farmers as a pre-plant burn-down tool to terminate existing vegetation prior
• Paraquat is utilized by farmers as a pre-plant burn-down tool to terminate existing vegetation prior
• <00:37:57.320> was<00:37:57.480> a I'll say that my second statement was a I'll say

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the photos on these cards, they will also then be federally required to add, adding the following statement
• It's when, um, criminals, uh, actually attach a Device to this card, the, um, payment terminal where

Bills: SB 596, SB 961, SB 1398, SB 1183, SB 1952

Keywords: DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child protective services, foster care, child welfare, Family Code, conservatorship, managing conservator, parental child safety placement, authorization agreement, temporary authorization order, child abuse, child neglect, placement reporting, court-ordered removal, investigation, family preservation, transparency, public reporting, data reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, with those statements, are we ready to vote, chairs? Yes. Okay. So, for me, I vote aye.
• date of birth, and specifies how certain covered offenses are to be tiered for purposes of seeking termination
• to be tiered for purposes<03:02:07.439> of<03:02:07.600> seeking<03:02:08.000> termination
• <03:02:08.640> of purposes of seeking termination of purposes of seeking termination of registration

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• criminalize decisions to terminate criminalize decisions to terminate pregnancies<01:52:27.840><
• But we know this is going nowhere because I'll go back to the first statement I made.
• <02:22:36.800> I I'll go back to the first statement I I'll go back to the first statement
• wouldn't stop terminating a pregnancy. wouldn't stop terminating a pregnancy.
• protections in place to terminate protections in place to terminate parental<02:43:11.920> rights

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House adopted the conference committee report on House File 1141, the housing bill, and repassed the bill as amended by conference. Representative Howard said the compromise bill would help build thousands of homes, keep Minnesotans housed, and improve transparency and collaboration with the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, while remaining budget-neutral by using MHFA interest earnings and fund transfers. He highlighted investments in housing infrastructure bonds, greater Minnesota workforce housing, manufactured housing, FHPAP, supportive housing, and added transparency for MHFA board meetings, while noting that some Senate provisions such as a manufactured housing bill of rights and a ban on private equity home purchases were not included. Several members spoke in support, emphasizing housing as a basic need and linking the bill to homelessness, workforce shortages, and health outcomes. Supporters praised the bill’s funding for supportive housing, first-generation homebuyer assistance, tenant hotline services, and manufactured housing, and said the bipartisan conference process improved the measure. Representative Kosowski and others argued the bill would help people stay housed, reduce pressure on schools, hospitals, and emergency rooms, and support communities across all 87 counties and tribal nations. Republican members raised concerns about spending and government growth, arguing the state should prioritize taxpayer relief, school safety, fraud prevention, and asset preservation instead of housing investments. Representative McDonald questioned the growth in MHFA staffing over the past decade, and Representative Howard responded that the agency had taken on many new responsibilities since the state’s larger housing investments and needed staff to administer programs effectively. After the motion to adopt the conference report prevailed, the bill moved to third reading, where further discussion continued in a generally supportive but divided debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• WE HAVE NORMAL EMPLOYEE ACCESS NOT TERMINATED TIMELY, FOR EXAMPLE ONE EXAMPLE 15 EMPLOYEES CONTINUED
• WE PERFORM RECONCILIATION BETWEEN THE STATEMENTS AND THIS PROVIDES ASSURANCE THAT FLORIDA AMOUNTS IN
• WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS, WE PRIMARILY TO LET YOU KNOW IN THE PRIOR YEAR WE HAD THREE FINANCIAL STATEMENT

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's part of the reason that they used to terminate his scholarship when we really know it was
• And that's part of the reason that they used to terminate his scholarship when we really know it was
• That's the one thing I kind of want to say is, you know, sometimes we make these statements like it's
• That's the one thing I kind of want to say is, you know, sometimes we make these, you know, statements
• and open up the public microphone as well, too, for any members of the public that wish to make a statement

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on name, image, and likeness (NIL) and financial literacy for student athletes, with members framing California as a national leader on NIL but emphasizing the need for stronger protections and more consistent education. The chair and witnesses discussed how NIL opportunities now include both third-party endorsement deals and school revenue-sharing arrangements, and how the current landscape varies widely by institution, leaving athletes with a patchwork of rules and support. Several witnesses argued that student athletes, especially younger ones and those from low-income or first-generation backgrounds, are vulnerable to predatory contracts, tax problems, and pressure from family, agents, or lenders. The first panel featured Tyree Dillingham and Brandon Copeland, who called for standardized financial literacy, better guardrails against predatory NIL advances, and a player-led association or similar collective voice for athletes. They described examples of athletes not understanding paychecks, taxes, or contract terms, and warned that some schools and collectives blur the line between education and marketing. Copeland also argued that college athletics now functions like a professional business and that athletes need representation and a standard contract structure to protect them. The second panel focused on lived experience, including testimony from attorney Anthony Coronae and student athlete Mikey Williams. Coronae described reviewing a contract that he said functioned like a predatory loan disguised as marketing support, with the company taking exclusive rights to Williams’ NIL and requiring repayment far beyond the advance. Williams testified that he signed without a lawyer, later lost endorsements, scholarship, and housing stability, and only later learned the contract’s consequences. He said a required financial literacy course at Sacramento State helped him begin to understand budgeting, taxes, and contracts, and he urged the legislature to require legal review or stronger safeguards for athletes. The third panel, from San Diego State University, highlighted a more structured institutional model. Athletic director Brendan Hill described a mandatory four-year life-skills program that includes financial literacy, resume workshops, internships, and branding education, while student athlete Sloan Benchoff said the program helped her manage money and prepare for post-college life. Witnesses agreed that support is uneven across schools, that some agents and lenders are exploiting athletes, and that California should consider standardized financial education and agent regulation while also being careful not to create rules that unintentionally restrict athlete rights. No formal vote or bill action was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• I AM DISAPPOINTED IN THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED AND THE STATEMENT THAT NO ONE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A RECOVERY
• THIS MEAN THAT IN THE STATE PROGRAM WILL BE EQUALLY HAVE THEIR LICENSE REVOKED AND SUSPENDED OR TERMINATED
• YOUR COMMENTS AND YOUR STATEMENTS JUST THERE WAS GIVE US INCENTIVE.
• SENATOR HARRELL AND TALKED ABOUT THE SPECIFICS OF ITEMS THAT COULD BE INCENTIVES THAT I WAS MAKING A STATEMENT
• I'M CONCERNED THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ALONE HAS THE DISCRETION TO TERMINATE A LICENSE OR REVOKE A LICENSE

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I also uh did not hear him um statement.
• President, uh I'll just make<00:32:32.000> my<00:32:32.240> statement.
• I guess the uh the make my statement.
• <01:14:43.760> that I find Senator Lass's statement that I find Senator Lass's statement that
• <03:50:50.720> without<03:50:51.199> any would be terminated without any would be terminated

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That also, if they are terminated from a program, they have the right to appeal that termination or eviction
• Then there is a rulemaking section, including any process for reinstatement after termination.
• Then there is a rulemaking section, including any process for reinstatement after termination.
• . termination. termination.
• Uh, just want to make a statement first, and then I've got a question for the reporter.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh so environmental impact statements.
• <00:39:15.119> also environmental impact statement also environmental impact statement also
• Is that an accurate statement?
• Is that an accurate statement?
• Um, so... a termination. Oh, sorry. Uh, okay. a termination. Oh, sorry. Uh, okay.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint hearing covered three measures. SB 1602 would appropriate funds to DLNR for monitoring wells for the Koho aquifer system; DLNR and HHFDC supported it, and written testimony from several organizations and individuals was also in support. Members asked whether monitoring wells are a statewide function rather than a county function, and staff confirmed they are done statewide. The second bill was an administration measure clarifying that criminal water pollution enforcement remains with the Department of Health rather than DLNR. The Attorney General’s office said it was a cleanup clarification and that DOH has stronger enforcement powers and better testing capability; DOH and DLNR supported it, and there was no opposition noted. The final and most heavily debated measure was SB 1074 on environmental impact statements. The bill would let previously authorized or permitted commercial activities continue for up to one year while an agency determines whether environmental review applies after a challenge, and would allow permit renewals during that review. DLNR said it stood on written comments and suggested aligning the bill with similar House language. Supporters, including several ocean tourism and Maui business representatives, argued the bill would provide certainty and keep families and small operators working while environmental review is completed, especially in the wake of the Lahaina fires and ongoing business losses. Some supporters said the measure should be narrowed with a sunset or limited to recently renewed permits. Opponents, including the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, Earthjustice, the Sierra Club, and other environmental advocates, argued the bill was overly broad and could weaken HEPA/NEPA-style environmental review, especially for fisheries and other commercial activities. They said the bill could be used as a “Trojan horse” to avoid review and that DLNR could resolve the underlying disputes more quickly through settlement or existing exemption processes. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• you do wish to testify, though, you're going to need to fill out an electronic witness affirmation statement
• If they don't pay the money, do you terminate PTIs?
• His family was forced to move, and that's just not a true statement.
• Is that a fair statement? I think so. Okay, so we also have 9.31. We also have 9.32.
• That takes quite a while, or to work with their landlord to utilize lease termination statutes.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2777 by Representative Rose, which would bar the death penalty for defendants who can prove by clear and convincing evidence that they had schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and active psychotic symptoms at the time of the offense. Rose said the bill would still hold defendants accountable through life without parole, would save money by avoiding lengthy capital litigation, and would address cases where severe mental illness was not adequately considered. Supporters from NAMI Texas, the Catholic bishops, and a forensic psychologist said the bill is narrowly tailored, consistent with neuroscience and moral principles, and would prevent executions of people whose psychosis substantially impaired reality testing. Committee members questioned how the bill interacts with existing competency and insanity law, whether the diagnosis is sufficiently defined, and whether the statute requires active psychosis at the time of the offense. An opponent argued the death penalty should remain available for juries to decide in all cases. The bill was left pending. The committee then heard House Bill 1221 by Representative Lozano, which would raise the cap on pretrial intervention program fees from $500 to $1,200. Lozano and a district attorney witness said the increase is needed because program costs have risen and the fees help make diversion programs self-sustaining, allowing first-time or low-level offenders to complete rehabilitation and potentially obtain expunction. Opponents from the Texas Fair Defense Project argued the higher fee could make diversion unaffordable for indigent defendants and undermine an important alternative to incarceration, especially where related supervision and monitoring costs already add up. Members discussed whether the fee applies only to PTI participants, how payment plans and waivers work, and whether ability to pay should be addressed more explicitly. The bill was left pending. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1738 by Representative Jones, which would repeal Penal Code Section 21.06 and related Health and Safety Code references concerning homosexual conduct. Jones said the law is unconstitutional under Lawrence v. Texas, remains harmful on the books, and has led to confusion and unnecessary costs even though it is unenforceable. Supporters said the bill simply removes outdated language and protects civil liberties, while opponents from Texas Values argued the statute still serves as a statement that homosexual conduct is unacceptable and should remain as a warning, even if unenforceable. Members debated whether the law’s remaining language is merely symbolic or still harmful, and whether other criminal statutes already cover conduct such as prostitution, incest, and offenses involving minors. The bill was left pending after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• :05:43.440> a The current statute says a comprehensive university shall not offer certain terminal
• The current statute says a comprehensive university shall not offer certain terminal degrees, including
• The current statute says a comprehensive university shall not offer certain terminal degrees, including
• .<00:07:08.639> There's<00:07:08.880> some<00:07:09.039> additional statement.
• There's some additional statement.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 77, which would allow comprehensive universities to pursue doctoral programs under a new approval process and, in the original bill, would also change who may serve on the EPSB board for small colleges and universities. The sponsor and Council on Postsecondary Education representative explained that the committee substitute removed the current statutory prohibition on comprehensive universities offering certain doctoral degrees, but added eligibility guardrails: a 77% first-to-second-year retention rate, a 56% six-year graduation rate, and three months of unrestricted cash reserves. They said the thresholds were based on national data placing institutions in roughly the top quartile, and that CPE would still review proposals for mission fit, workforce need, fiscal impact, and, where applicable, programmatic accreditation and legislative appropriations. EKU President David McFaden supported creating a pathway for comprehensive universities, said Kentucky is unusual in having an explicit statutory prohibition, and urged the committee to keep the standards attainable and durable. The committee approved the bill and adopted a title amendment, with the motion passing unanimously. The committee then heard Senate Joint Resolution 55, which addresses antisemitism on postsecondary campuses. Senator Tichenor said the resolution responds to a rise in antisemitic incidents after October 7, 2023, and would require campuses to notify students each semester of Title VI rights, complaint procedures, existing harassment policies, and available Jewish student resources. It would also direct campuses to disband student organizations found to provide material support to known terrorist organizations, report such matters to law enforcement, and collect and report antisemitism data to CPE for posting on its website. A guest speaker from the Kentucky Jewish Council described a sharp increase in reported incidents, including harassment, threats, vandalism, and hostile campus activity, and argued that schools have often done too little to respond. He said the resolution was amended to protect free speech while ensuring Jewish students receive the same protections as other protected groups. The transcript ends while testimony on the resolution was still underway, before any committee vote on SJR 55.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, one of the statements that was made about the thick book of regulations was that it was developed
• So thank you. the ex one of the statements that was the ex one of the statements that was made<00:34:
• I think he was saying when the negotiated agreement terminates, then the next agreement can't be any
• Uh, I'm, it's a very broad statement.
• Department of Education to terminate Department of Education to terminate funding<01:51:18.159><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee’s higher education subcommittee met to discuss HB 443, HB 510, and related issues. The chair explained the subcommittee membership and noted that Representative Luno was absent and replaced by Representative Bricky, with other full committee members allowed to participate in discussion but not final votes. No votes were taken during this meeting, and the chair said final subcommittee recommendations would likely come in the first week of November. On HB 443, which concerns terms of appointment to the Higher Education Commission, the chair described the bill as intended to let the governor replace members who are not attending or no longer representing the appointing organization. He said the prior governor supported the idea, but the current governor’s office believes the bill is unnecessary because nonattendance or loss of representation would already amount to resignation or removal. Members raised questions about legal authority and whether the same principle should apply to other boards. The chair said he was leaning toward finding the bill not needed, but would continue discussion later. The committee then spent most of the meeting on HB 510, which would establish due process rights for students, student organizations, and faculty at public higher education institutions and address collective bargaining issues. Supporters, including Representatives Papovich and Brown, argued the bill would provide clear, minimum protections, especially because campus rules are lengthy and vary by institution; Brown also suggested adding an independent ombudsman or representation for students. Opponents, including Representatives Burton and Bricky, said existing campus regulations already provide due process and that the bill could interfere with campus governance and collective bargaining. The chair and others discussed whether the bill’s definitions should be aligned with existing law to avoid confusion, and several members suggested using existing statutory definitions or cross-references. The chair also said the bill would apply only when disciplinary action is involved, not as a general challenge to DEI policies, though members referenced recent national examples involving DEI-related disputes as context.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a terminal diagnosis. And even today, I'm fighting for his life.
• It's terminal diagnosis. And disease. It's terminal diagnosis.
• I think that is a positive statement.
• <00:43:31.839> Um that is a positive statement. Um that is a positive statement.
• <00:45:10.720> of I think that's a general statement of I think that's a general statement

Bills: SF0099, SF0116, SJ0006

Keywords: easement, electricity delivery, public utility, prescriptive easement, landowner rights, surface water, drainage utilities, municipality, elections, environmental management, shared parenting, family law, joint custody, child well-being, parental rights, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think there are three local governments that should terminate their contracts with ICE at the earliest
• I have prepared some statements. More than anything.
• Chair, Representative, yes, that would give us a cause to terminate the contract, which This would be
• The parties have already bargained for and agreed on contract termination provisions that require mere
• Would that be an accurate statement? Often, yes.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't know that that's an accurate statement.
• Unless otherwise provided by TDLR, no more than five terminals will be given to any retailer.
• TDLR is required to review... ...each existing contract to determine whether to renew, amend, or terminate
• When you hear the advertising statement, a dollar... A dream. What does that mean to you?
• Dutton's statement that all of a sudden, poor people don't matter. I've been on, I had been on...

Bills: SB835, SB3070, SB22, SJR59, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SB37, SB8, SB10, SB227, SB261, SB12, SB15, SJR27, SB552, SB835, SB3070, SB22, SJR59, SB25, SB57, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB512, SB241, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2035, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB310, SB1346, SB2753, SB2703, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SB926, SB1494, SB251, SB456, SB500, SB1307, SB2615, SB2995, SB2321, SB973, SB974, SB865, SB506, SB781, SB1522, SB1558, SB510, SB667, SB763, SB2073, SB1858, SB1660, SB505, SB2900, SB1433, SB1540, SB1964, SB1300, SB1644, SB2217, SB2373, SB2431, SB1758, SB2480, SB3039, SB3047, SB3073, SB2920, SB2781, SB826, SB766, SB2460, SB527, SB1946, SB2885, SB1243, SB2610, SB2595, SB857, SCR9, HB5560, HB762, HB 107, HB 114, HB300, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323

Keywords: sexual abuse, nondisclosure agreements, confidentiality agreements, public policy, victim rights, lottery, bingo, regulation, Texas Lottery Commission, Department of Licensing and Regulation, criminal offenses, state administration, audits, transfers, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation

Transcript Highlights:

• I disagree with that statement. Okay. Thank you very much. before you go Okay.
• :16:37.279> disagree<00:16:37.759> with<00:16:38.000> that<00:16:38.399> statement
• So, um, I disagree with that statement because I can give you a prime example as to one of the reasons
• four of those cases were there a geographical restriction granted, and one of those was already terminated
• <00:45:27.200> Our were was already terminated. Our were was already terminated.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on HB 126, which would change civil asset forfeiture law. The Attorney General’s Office, Honolulu Police Department, and county prosecutors opposed the bill’s proposed SD1, arguing that requiring a criminal conviction and changing how forfeiture proceeds are distributed would weaken or effectively end the tool, create fiscal and law enforcement problems, and make it harder to address organized crime or cases where an owner cannot be identified. The Public Defender’s Office, Community Alliance on Prisons, Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, and other supporters argued the measure would improve transparency and accountability, protect property rights, and reduce abuses that disproportionately affect low-income people. The chair questioned law enforcement about fairness, storage of seized property, and access to counsel, and the discussion focused heavily on whether forfeiture should depend on a conviction. No vote was taken. The committee then heard HB 280, which would make the Community Outreach Court permanent and appropriate funds for it as a division of the First Circuit district court. The Department of the Attorney General and Judiciary supported the concept and described the court’s success in helping people resolve cases, clear license stoppers, recall bench warrants, and access services, but suggested amendments to remove the Attorney General from the bill’s definition and funding mechanism. The Public Defender, Department of Human Services, mental health and substance use advocates, neighborhood and community groups, and others strongly supported the bill, emphasizing its benefits for people facing housing instability, behavioral health issues, and transportation barriers. No opposition was voiced, and no vote was taken. The committee also heard HB 370, which would increase partial public campaign financing for elective offices. The Campaign Spending Commission supported the original bill and asked the committee to restore the original percentage amounts, keep the proposed funding increases, and reinstate funding for two additional full-time staff positions. Supporters said the public financing system has not kept pace with inflation and needs modernization to be viable; a few testifiers opposed the measure. The committee reported 30 in support, two opposed, and one comment, and then moved on without a vote. Finally, HB 371 was heard, a campaign contribution bill that would bar state and county contractors, grantees, and certain related persons from contributing during the contract period. The Campaign Spending Commission said the bill is intended to address pay-to-play concerns and false-name contributions, while the State Procurement Office raised concerns about the burden of requiring agencies to provide contract information for all contracts regardless of dollar value. The testimony ended with the commission saying it was working with procurement and the Attorney General on implementation details; no vote was taken.