Transcript Highlights:

• It could be environmental rules that keep...
• So it could be rule, environmental rules, right? I don't know what the answer is.

Transcript Highlights:

• thing is, I'll say, and I can't speak for the DOC, but in sheriffs and our collective bargaining agreements
• part of the fund, but we have one that maybe Joe might have and Pat has, but they're all different agreements
• only thing is I'll say and I can't speak for the DOC but in sheriffs in our collective bargaining agreements
• part of the fund, but we have one that maybe Joe might have and Pat has, but they're all different agreements
• going to spend three years negotiating renegotiating negotiating 19 million collective bargaining agreements

Summary: The commission opened an informal discussion focused on developing recommendations for its September report on correctional consolidation and cooperation. Chairs Dan Hunt and Senator Brownsberger emphasized that the group is still in an information-gathering phase, but should begin putting ideas on the table, including possible written recommendations, further hearings, and additional facility tours. Members discussed whether the commission should seek more input from frontline stakeholders such as sheriffs, probation, parole, reentry centers, unions, and the judiciary, and whether recommendations should be organized around specific issue areas like medical costs, programming, reentry, and facility operations. A major theme was the need for a more integrated and consistent correctional system. Participants raised concerns about fragmentation across DOC, county sheriffs, probation, and parole, and suggested exploring step-down pathways, minimum security, pre-release, day reporting, and regional reentry hubs to improve outcomes and reduce recidivism. Several speakers stressed the importance of uniform standards, evidence-based programming, better data on outcomes and spending, and clearer alignment between custody conditions and rehabilitation goals. There was also discussion of looking to other states and international models, as well as revisiting older reports and plans, including the 2009 commission report and the 2010 corrections master plan. Facility-specific issues were also raised, including the need to examine women’s facilities such as Framingham, Bridgewater, and restrictive housing practices in light of suicide concerns and mental health needs. Members discussed the relationship between correctional custody and behavioral health, the role of the judiciary in sentencing and reentry planning, and whether judges should be better informed about available programming and step-down options. There was broad agreement that collaboration, transparency, and accountability should be strengthened, with some members urging that recommendations be based on firsthand facts and data rather than opinion alone. The meeting also included presentation of a written set of eight high-level recommendations compiled by advocacy and legal organizations, which focused on clearer and more consistent programming, equitable application of rules, and reducing punitive conditions that function like solitary confinement. The chairs said the document would be shared with members and posted online. No formal votes were taken during the discussion, and the meeting ended with plans to continue the conversation at a future session, including possible follow-up on reentry centers, restrictive housing, and other systemwide reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• eligibility under this section without the individual’s primary care physician or nurse practitioner’s agreement
• section without the individual’s primary care physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner’s agreement
• have been that the payments hospitals have been making<01:32:30.719><c> these</c><01:32:30.880><c> agreements
• </c><01:32:31.360><c> but</c><01:32:31.600><c> that</c><01:32:31.719><c> is</c> making these agreements
• but that is making these agreements but that is going<01:32:32.040><c> to</c><01:32:32.320><c> expire

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• Absolutely, it's a great question, and it's something that the master agreement in place actually encourages
• The process would be that that's picked up along the roadside by a contractor that's on master agreement
• </c><00:37:35.839><c> with</c><00:37:35.960><c> the</c> that's on Master agreement with the that's on
• Master agreement with the transportation<00:37:36.760><c> cabinet</c><00:37:37.720><c> uh</c><00:37:
• So we're expect to see those cubic yards really start to expand, and there is the master agreement has

Summary: The concurrent House-Senate meeting opened with a roll call and then received a briefing from Kentucky Emergency Management and the Transportation Cabinet on the February storms and flooding. Officials described the event as ongoing and statewide in scope, beginning in western counties and then heavily affecting Eastern Kentucky, including major impacts in Perry, Letcher, Clay, Bell, Martin, Pike, and other counties. They reported widespread power and water outages, nearly 600 people initially sheltered, more than 1,500 water rescues, over 250 National Guard members activated, and substantial mutual aid from other states and FEMA. They also said 73 counties had declared emergencies, 23 fatalities had been confirmed at that point, and individual assistance had already distributed $5.5 million to residents after the federal declaration was signed. The administration emphasized that recovery needs were still being assessed but were already significant. Kentucky Emergency Management said public assistance estimates were about $58 million and rising, with about 2,005 homes and 272 businesses inspected so far. Debris removal was identified as a major issue, and officials said they had requested Category A federal assistance for debris in four counties while continuing to seek more as assessments continued. They also noted that disaster recovery centers were opening and that teams were going door to door in affected areas. On transportation, KYTC reported 39 counties affected, a peak of 355 road closures reduced to 49, 18 damaged bridges, 94 bridges with debris on them, and 579 roadway damages, while continuing to clear roads and move supplies such as water, food, blankets, and heaters. Secretary Hicks then asked lawmakers to consider additional funding mechanisms. He said the current $50 million emergency cap in the budget was likely to be exhausted, with $21.5 million already allocated, and proposed either lifting the cap or creating a new “safe fund” for this disaster, similar to prior funds used after the western Kentucky tornadoes and the 2022 eastern Kentucky floods. He said the state could redirect about $25 million from an unused western Kentucky economic development allocation and about $20 million from an eastern Kentucky transportation allocation, for a total of $45 million, to help with this response. Members and officials also discussed debris disposal, with the Pike County landfill expansion identified as a possible site to receive some of the debris and reduce costs. Representative Fugate thanked the agencies for their response and described severe local impacts, including water outages, road slides, damaged water treatment plants, and heavy debris in homes and driveways.

Transcript Highlights:

• :15.280><c> you're</c><00:36:15.400><c> not</c><00:36:15.520><c> on</c><00:36:15.640><c> the</c> agreement
• that you're not on the agreement that you're not on the committee<00:36:16.400><c> because</c><00:36
• <00:36:42.599><c> an</c> really to to force them to reach an really to to force them to reach an agreement
• 44.720><c> that</c><00:36:45.160><c> makes</c><00:36:45.599><c> sense</c><00:36:46.599><c> I</c> agreement
• uh in a way that makes sense I agreement uh in a way that makes sense I am<00:36:46.920><c> not</c><

Transcript Highlights:

• look like because the privacy agreements look like because the the<01:53:18.480><c> actual</c><01:53
• </c> districts then uh come to an agreement districts then uh come to an agreement through<02:55:53.359
• :55:55.680><c> uh</c> through a tuition agreement amongst uh through a tuition agreement amongst uh those
• on a per ADM that uh tuition agreement on a per ADM basis<02:56:04.319><c> for</c><02:56:04.560><c>
• , it used to be we called it our agreement and had a whole list of things, and they signed off.

Committee: Joint Education

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><02:35:29.200><c> or</c> that collective bargaining agreements or that collective bargaining agreements
• What about those collective bargaining agreements?
• What about those collective bargaining agreements?
• What about those collective bargaining agreements?
• What about those collective bargaining agreements?

Summary: The House Education Policy and Administration Committee met to hear a non-germane amendment to House Bill 131, which concerns bullying and cyberbullying prevention. Representative Glenn Cordelli, the prime sponsor, said the amendment was intended to revise and improve language from last year’s SB 210 and to incorporate measures from a cyberbullying bill previously passed by the House. He described changes to school communication requirements, mandatory reporting of bullying and retaliation, stronger investigation and collaboration requirements for cross-district cases, added safety and remediation language, a required conference with the alleged perpetrator and parents if available, updated reporting deadlines, and disciplinary consequences for harassment, intimidation, retaliation, and false reports. He also noted a later amendment would be needed to insert the words “the perpetrator” in one section, and he explained that some changes were meant to align with prior legislation and legislative drafting suggestions. Committee members raised several concerns. Representative Murray questioned the treatment of private and parochial schools, the change from gross negligence to negligence, and the removal of a definition of bullying based on imbalance of power and perceived characteristics. Representative Damon also objected to deleting that definition, arguing it would narrow the scope of bullying too much. Representative Han spoke in opposition, saying the amendment was too broad, unnecessary in parts, and not ready for final action; he criticized the removal of the imbalance-of-power language, the conference requirement when parents may not participate, and the reporting obligations for bus drivers and others. Cordelli responded that some issues were already addressed in prior law or SB 210 and that private schools have their own policies. Michelle Wongran of New Hampshire Legal Assistance testified in opposition, saying the bill was being heard without enough notice and that it does far more than the committee analysis suggests. She said the amendment adds undefined retaliation language, imposes reporting duties on school vendors and contractors, may conflict with FERPA and other federal privacy rules, and includes provisions that could have serious implications for schools and students. She said she supports parental involvement and some conference provisions in concept, but urged the committee to reject the amendment or at least send it through the normal legislative process for fuller review. No vote was taken during the hearing portion described in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• very discreet number of bills today that we're going to go through, and hopefully we'll have some agreement

Committee: Senate Energy And Telecommunications

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Energy and Telecommunications met with Senator Kevin Parker presiding and several colleagues present. The committee considered four bills: S.1551, which would prohibit the release of consumption data; S.2258, which would require emergency notices to customers in certain languages; S.2416, which would release victims of domestic violence from certain contracts; and S.9835, which would require gas and electric corporations to give 30 days’ notice before service rate or charge increases. The sponsor and committee briefly introduced each measure, and no substantive debate or testimony was recorded in the transcript. Each bill was moved and seconded. S.1551 and S.2258 each had one recorded no vote, but both still had enough support to advance. S.2416 and S.9835 were also approved without recorded opposition. All four bills were reported to third reading, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, we've been living with the current agreement in place, and I think our departments like it
• related to remote work and it agreement related to remote work and it went<00:28:33.520><c> into</c>
• Right now we've been living with the<00:28:53.760><c> current</c><00:28:54.000><c> agreement</c><00:28
• in place and um the current agreement in place and um and<00:28:56.240><c> I</c><00:28:56.399><c> think
• Um, again, we're not asking agreements.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:58:16.960><c> on</c><01:58:17.119><c> that</c> officials to come to agreement on that officials
• to come to agreement on that representative<01:58:18.320><c> level.
• </c> exactly what to expect in the agreement exactly what to expect in the agreement and<02:15:35.440
• We're in agreement<02:19:26.880><c> based</c><02:19:27.120><c> on</c><02:19:27.280><c> what</c><02:19
• :27.519><c> we've</c><02:19:27.760><c> already</c> agreement based on what we've already agreement based

Summary: The subcommittee continued work on Senate Bill 297 and a new amendment dealing with pooled risk management programs and whether they should be regulated under the insurance department. Lisa Duket, executive director of SchoolCare, testified at length that the draft language could allow co-mingling of public entity risk funds, could trigger producer-licensing requirements for staff who are not actually brokers, and may not fit public entity risk pools because they are not insurance companies. She also raised concerns about the March 1 reporting deadline, the proposed uniform accounting language, aggregate excess insurance, examination costs being charged to the program, and confidentiality provisions that she argued may conflict with right-to-know principles for public entities. She urged the committee to slow down and consider a study committee or more time for review, saying the regulated entities were not adequately involved in drafting the proposal. Chairman Hunt and the department responded that the bill is intended to create a licensure-based regulatory model, similar to other licensed industries, and that the pooled risk management program would be exempt from producer licensing while anyone else selling or negotiating such coverage would need a producer license. The department said failure to comply would be handled through an administrative licensing process, with denial or nonrenewal of a license and appeal through the department process. On the reporting deadline, the department said March 1 is a standard filing date used for financial analysis and that the filing can be the most recent annual report, regardless of fiscal year end. They also explained that the confidentiality language was taken from existing RSA 5B, that aggregate excess insurance was included as a solvency measure, and that the draft was intended to preserve familiar language while adapting it for pooled risk programs. The discussion did not include a final vote or formal action on the bill in the portion provided. The committee appeared to be compiling follow-up questions for the insurance department and considering whether additional revisions or a slower process would be needed before moving the bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's my understanding that if an agreement is entered into with tribes, it would exempt some of their
• It's my understanding that if an agreement is entered into with tribes, it would exempt some of their
• It's my understanding that if an agreement is entered into with tribes, it would exempt some of their
• um so those negotiations and agreements um so I<01:38:38.960><c> I</c><01:38:39.040><c> appreciate</
• </c> fact that dealer franchise agreements fact that dealer franchise agreements with<02:10:31.920><c

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• On Committee of Conference on SB 108, we have folders if you like them, but I think we're all in agreement

Summary: The committee of conference on SB 108 reported that the House and Senate had reached full agreement on the bill. Members noted they were “very flexible,” thanked each other for working together, and formally closed the hearing with unanimous concurrence. The meeting then moved to the Energy Committee of Conference on SB 232. The Senate stated it would agree with the House version of the bill, with no opposition voiced. The exchange was brief and cordial, with members thanking one another and indicating the matter was settled. No substantive policy debate or testimony was presented in either segment, and no recorded votes were taken beyond the stated concurrence and agreement on both bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• And they were in agreement.

Summary: The committee reconvened with a quorum and Representative Freilich reported back on concerns previously raised about recording devices. He explained that after reviewing the issue with Jonathan Alm and legislative council, they concluded the existing bill language and other provisions of the Century Code already addressed the concerns, and that adding more language could risk interfering with First Amendment rights. Members noted that most of the House changes were technical or grammatical, with one substantive change related to setting a deadline for repayment of overpayments. Senator Hogan moved to accept the House amendments, Representative Ruby seconded, and there was brief discussion indicating the proposal was straightforward. The clerk called the roll, and the motion to accept the House amendments passed unanimously, with all members voting aye. After the vote, the group confirmed the carrier for the measure, with Representative Freilich agreeing to remain the carrier. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• BUT I DID NOTICE WE HAVE ALREADY REACHED AGREEMENT ON SOME THINGS THAT ARE CLOSE ON OTHERS AND I THINK

Transcript Highlights:

• I sue you under this statute, and at some point we reach an agreement.
• But any agreement that we make that waives the damage aspect would be void?
• You can't enter an agreement and waive your fundamental civil rights. Thank you. You're welcome.
• Chairman. statute and at some point we reach an statute and at some point we reach an agreement<04:30
• that we make that but any agreement that we make that waves<04:31:08.560><c> the</c><04:31:08.800><c

Summary: The House Judiciary Committee opened a hearing on House Bill 148, which Rep. Jim Kofalt said is the same language as last year’s HB 396, vetoed by the governor. He described the bill as allowing, but not requiring, separation by biological sex in three areas: bathrooms and locker rooms, houses of correction, and certain athletic competitions. Kofalt argued the bill would give local school boards and other policymakers discretion to set practical rules, citing concerns about safety, privacy, and a Milford incident involving a biological male in girls’ locker rooms. Committee members pressed him on the lack of a definition of “biological sex,” and he said he did not think one was necessary because males and females are commonly understood. He also said the bill was meant to address situations where outside groups threaten lawsuits and leave local boards with no latitude. Testimony then split sharply. Supporters, including Executive Counselor Karen Hill and several others, said HB 148 would roll back anti-discrimination protections, contradict New Hampshire’s “Live Free or Die” values, and harm transgender and non-binary people. Opponents described the bill as discriminatory and unnecessary, arguing that existing bathroom and sports policies already work and that the bill would invite harassment, invasive enforcement, and legal conflict. Several speakers, including trans residents and parents of trans children, said they had used public restrooms without incident and warned that enforcement would be impractical or abusive. One supporter argued the bill was needed to protect girls’ privacy and safety and cited school sports disputes and a concern about a sex offender at a game as examples of why sex-segregated rules should be restored. Committee members asked questions about how biological sex would be defined, whether the bill was responding to real incidents in New Hampshire, and how any restrictions would be enforced. Kofalt said he was aware of issues in several school districts and at the State House, but did not have detailed documentation for every case. No vote or final action was taken in the portion of the hearing provided; the chair instead moved through public testimony under a strict two-minute limit and noted that follow-up questions would be limited so the committee could hear multiple bills that day.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is a one-year extension of the Colonial Life agreement.
• This is the one-year extension of the United Healthcare agreement.

Committee: All ALC-STATE INSURANCE PROGRAMS OVERSIGHT SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The committee reviewed several State Board of Finance actions related to employee and retiree health benefits, insurance contracts, and reserve funding. Members first considered a rule implementing Act 956 of 2025 requiring vendors working with the Employee Benefits Division to have their data validated by a third-party actuary; it was reviewed without objection. The committee then approved multiple pharmacy and medical formulary recommendations for June, July, and August, including shifting to lower-cost generics, excluding new-to-market drugs pending more evidence or better pricing, re-tiering specialty and limited-distribution drugs, and adjusting prior authorization, step therapy, and age restrictions. Members asked about how Navitus and EBRX develop recommendations, how rebates and coupons are tracked, and whether rebate incentives could influence coverage decisions. The committee also reviewed and approved a one-year Colonial Life accidental death and disability contract extension with level rates for 2026-2027, a one-year UnitedHealthcare Medicare Advantage extension that decouples medical and pharmacy benefits and raises premiums for state and public school retirees, and a new three-year financial auditing contract with Crow Chesnik after an RFQ produced only one response. The UnitedHealthcare renewal was described as the full extent of the increase for the year, with officials saying future increases are likely but should become more predictable. The committee then heard a presentation from Segal Group on public school plan funding and reserve adequacy, which projected that if funding stayed flat the reserve would be drawn down over time and could be exhausted by 2029. Segal presented scenarios showing that maintaining the target reserve would require substantial increases in the minimum district contribution alone, or more moderate increases if costs were spread across district, employee, and Department of Education funding. Members questioned the assumptions behind the projections, including why prescription drug claims were projected to grow 45 percent from an earlier forecast, why actual expenses had come in 17 percent above prior projections, and how federal changes, rising drug costs, and GLP-1 utilization might affect future costs. Several members raised concerns about the loss of wellness visit incentives, the need to control duplicate or inappropriate prescribing, and whether the target reserve level should be revisited. EBD said it is working on cost containment, wellness program redesign, and additional analysis, and indicated it expects to bring a funding and policy recommendation to the committee in September or October. The meeting ended with no further business and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• What they mean is that, in the absence of the seller and the bank having a separate agreement...
• In the absence of the seller and the bank having a separate agreement, that it's a rate that everybody

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the future of credit card payments and their impacts on small businesses held what was described as its last public hearing. Chair Paul Feeney opened by noting the commission’s mandate under Chapter 238 of the Acts of 2024 and explained that members would continue working on a final report after the hearing. The meeting featured testimony from banks, payment industry groups, restaurant advocates, convenience store representatives, and others, with repeated discussion of interchange fees, surcharging, fraud, and federal preemption issues. Banking and card-industry witnesses, including the Massachusetts Bankers Association, the Card Coalition, and the Electronic Payments Coalition, argued that state-level interchange restrictions would disrupt a global payment system, create compliance problems, and likely apply only to a small share of transactions because of federal preemption. They emphasized consumer and merchant benefits of cards, the role of banks in absorbing fraud losses, and recent federal and state developments, including Illinois litigation, OCC and NCUA actions, and a settlement that they said would give merchants more flexibility. Several witnesses also suggested alternatives such as vendor compensation for tax collection and modernizing Massachusetts’ surcharge ban. Restaurant and convenience-store advocates took the opposite view, saying swipe fees are a major burden on thin-margin businesses and that merchants should not pay interchange on sales tax or gratuities that are not their revenue. Mass Restaurants United and individual restaurant owners described severe financial strain, rising costs, and the need for transparency and relief. NACS supported swipe fee reform and argued that current fees are excessive and inflationary. A few members questioned witnesses about whether industry should share more of the burden and about the feasibility of changing the current system. No votes or formal policy actions were taken. The chair said the commission would meet again to discuss a draft framework and final report, and members of the public were invited to submit additional written testimony before the commission concludes its work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those in agreement, please stand. Sufficient number have arisen; a yeas and nays will be called.
• Those in agreement please stand. Sufficient number have arisen, a yeas and ayes will be called.

Summary: The Senate resumed debate on Senate No. 2696, An Act Regarding Free Expression, a bill addressing challenges to books and other library materials in school and public libraries. Senators supporting the bill argued it protects free expression and gives students, parents, guardians, and others a court path to challenge removals, while opponents raised concerns about parental rights, school control, and the scope and timing of the review process. Several speakers also emphasized the broader context of book bans and the impact on authors, librarians, and students. A number of amendments were considered. Amendment 4, offered by Senator Creem, was adopted and extended standing to authors and creators to challenge removals of their works, including in municipal libraries. Amendment 5, by Senator DiDomenico, was adopted and limited who may initiate challenges to those connected to the school community. Amendment 6, by Senator Comerford, was adopted to require that challenged materials be considered in their entirety. Amendment 8, by Senator Tarr, proposing parental notification of challenges, was rejected after a roll call. Subsequent Tarr amendments on parental opt-out, reporting, public process, and written policy were also rejected, while Amendment 19, requiring written reasons when librarians remove outdated or successor materials, was rejected as well. Amendment 7, a Ways and Means amendment, was adopted. The Senate then ordered the bill to a third reading and passed it to be engrossed by a roll call vote of 35 in favor and 3 against. The chamber also adopted an order to meet again the following Monday at 11:00 a.m., and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• within CTE pathways and connected to registered apprenticeship opportunities through formal linkage agreements
• within CTE pathways and connected to registered apprenticeship opportunities through formal linkage agreements

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard several Senate bills focused on student health, access, equity, and career preparation. SB 608 by Sen. Menjivar would expand access to condoms and related sexual health resources for students in grades 7–12 and direct the Department of Education to align with the California Healthy Youth Act. Supporters argued the bill would help address high STI rates among youth and remove barriers to access, while opponents raised concerns about parental authority, local control, and encouraging early sexual activity. The bill was approved on a 6-1 vote and sent to the Health Committee. SB 965 by Sen. Blakespear would prohibit libraries from requiring a parent to be physically present for a 16- or 17-year-old to obtain a library card, while still allowing libraries to require parental consent or signature. Supporters said the current rule creates unnecessary barriers for teens and school research projects, and the California Library Association said it was now neutral after amendments. The committee passed the bill 6-0 to Appropriations. SB 998 by Sen. Gonzalez would define and expand the duties of discrimination prevention coordinators in the state’s Office of Civil Rights, including adding a disability coordinator and deputy coordinators focused on anti-Black, anti-Asian, anti-Latino, and anti-Native American discrimination. Testimony emphasized the need to address rising hate incidents and discrimination in schools, especially for Black, LGBTQ+, AAPI, and other marginalized students. The bill was approved and sent to Judiciary with amendments to be processed there. SB 845 by Sen. Perez, which expands work-based learning and youth apprenticeship opportunities, also received broad support from education, workforce, and industry groups and passed unanimously to Labor and Employment. The committee also approved a consent calendar of additional bills and adjourned after all items were acted on.

Transcript Highlights:

• Finally, the bill contains provisions relating to the One Arizona opioid settlement agreement and continues
• Finally, the bill contains provisions relating to the One Arizona opioid settlement agreement and continues