Transcript Highlights:

• There is a process of arbitration when it comes to jurisdictional or scope-of-work disputes, um, and
• That's the process, and those are final and binding.
• when it comes to arbitration when it comes to jurisdictional<00:07:09.360> or<00:07:09.479>
• now if we're looking final and binding now if we're looking for<00:07:44.800> an<00:07:45.000
• I think that is in the arbitration process, and that is where it needs to happen. Thank you.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the no fault mandatory binding the no fault mandatory binding arbitration<00:38:05.760> limit
• The language about binding arbitration remains.
• The binding arbitration remains. We're just taking out the change language. >> Thanks. >> Mr.
• The language about binding arbitration remains.
• The language about binding arbitration remains.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In achieving this, this definition of who negotiates on behalf of the state has since led to true binding
• Agreements that are binding because they are signed by those authorized to sign agreements between a
• In addition, efforts to use the arbitration provisions in the 1997 compacts to address the 16% revenue
• Mescalero's response to the lawsuit was to ask the court to... ...force the arbitration provision, but
• the court has yet to respond, and the arbitration provisions of the 1997 compacts remain untested as

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill also repeals a cap on arbitrator compensation rates and court-ordered non-binding arbitration

Summary: The Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice met with a quorum present and first received an implementation update on CS for SB 606, the Boating Safety Act of 2022, from FWC Lieutenant Colonel Robert Roe. He described the livery permit system, safety and insurance requirements, required pre-rental and pre-ride instruction, recordkeeping, overdue-vessel reporting, accident reporting, and penalties for violations. He also reported enforcement results since the permit requirement took effect in January 2023, including 1,428 permits issued, 1,093 liveries operating, three 90-day suspensions, one revocation, and two pending revocations. Members asked whether liveries may require boating safety education even for people exempt under current law; Roe said they may do so as a business decision, but current law does not require it unless the statute is changed. A member noted concern that many accidents involve boaters in the older exempt age group and said the issue may be revisited this session. The committee then considered SB 878 by Senator Martin, which extends probation for misdemeanor offenders who were using controlled substances when they committed the offense, allowing supervision for up to one year and aligning those cases more closely with existing alcohol-related misdemeanor probation rules. With no appearance forms or debate, the bill was voted favorably. Next, the committee took up CS for SB 538 by Senator Bradley, the state court system package. The bill updates statutes to reflect current court operations, including duty judge procedures, removal of a location limit for duty hearings, repeal of a cap on arbitrator compensation in court-ordered non-binding arbitration, and an alternative method for judicial authentication when a court seal is unavailable. An amendment shifting certain clerk reimbursement requests through the Justice Administrative Commission was adopted, and the bill was then reported favorably with support waivers from several court-related entities. Finally, the committee heard SB 472 by Senator Truenow, which provides that inmates who complete classes meeting required curriculum standards may receive credit toward licensure requirements for those classes. Several organizations waived in support, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Under current law, Texas utilizes a binding arbitration process to settle such disputes, with the cost
• arbitration?
• As well, but if the average arbitration fee is $200, the average arbitration fee is $1,200.
• The point was to get rid of the cost... of arbitration, lower the cost of arbitration.
• arbitration.

Bills: HB136, HB451, SB425, SB466, SB905, SB1986, SB2311, SB2450, SB2805, SB2826, SB2919, SB3001, HB136

Keywords: Medicaid, lactation, healthcare, consultation, reimbursement, maternal health, infant care, commercial sexual exploitation, child sex trafficking, human trafficking, child welfare, foster care, DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, juvenile probation, risk assessment, needs assessment, trauma screening, child abuse prevention, exploitation screening

Transcript Highlights:

• transparency of information on the Internet, and provides that taxpayers leasing property can use binding
• Arbitration limits the court's ability to require discovery.
• They may request binding arbitration. Yes, sir. Good thing. Okay.
• Under this bill, that approval is binding, and yet the public will still look to us, the city, for accountability

Bills: SB2784, HB23, HB247, HB1533, HB2011, HB2013, HB2273, HB2421, HB2464, HB3120, HB3424, HB3575, HB3788, HB4370, HB4809, HB5057, HB5084, HB5534, HB5668, HJR34, HB23, HB247, HJR34

Keywords: Somervell County, hospital district, board of directors, elections, local governance, staggered terms, third-party review, property development, local government, permits, construction inspection, regulatory authority, land development, liability, occupancy certificate, border security, tax exemption, ad valorem, real property, infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:

• Claimant alleged that it has an outstanding arbitral award of over 5.6 million pounds against Blue Oak
• The end result of that was an arbitration award where some money was awarded from Blue Oak to Tetronix
• But there were certainly this claim and this arbitration award that had occurred before that liquidation
• discretion only if the claim arises from the failure of the respondent to carry out and enforce a binding
• A refusal to implement a binding remand constitutes administrative noncompliance with a superior court

Summary: The committee first reviewed several wage-claim and labor-related litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing. Members questioned the department’s authority and jurisdiction, whether it was acting like a court, and why it sought attorney’s fees and costs. Department staff explained that the claims arose under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act and related labor statutes, that the department investigates small wage claims and can file suit when informal resolution fails, and that filing fees are waived by statute though service costs may be incurred. The committee reviewed individual cases, including one where the employer had not proven cash payments, another that had already been paid and dismissed, and a third where service could not yet be completed. The committee then voted to review or batch-file the labor items. The University of Arkansas System then reported on three pending lawsuits under the litigation-notification statute. One case involving a tenured professor alleging age and race discrimination had already been resolved and dismissed after the university re-engaged in discussions about a position. A second case involving a former employee alleging ADA and FMLA retaliation was moving forward after partial dismissal and an answer denying liability. A third case involved a former vendor employee alleging retaliation tied to a parking ticket; members asked about individual-capacity exposure for a university police sergeant, and counsel explained that punitive damages could potentially create personal exposure. The committee reviewed each report. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000, with interest and penalties waived, and the committee approved it. The Claims Commission then presented several claims and settlements, including an unpaid salary differential for the Department of Health, reissued warrants, unpaid bills for DHS, and multiple negotiated settlements involving UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT; these were generally approved or batched for approval. The most extensive discussion involved a settlement between the Teacher Retirement System and Tetronics International Limited in liquidation, arising from losses tied to the failed Blue Oak project; members questioned the company’s liquidation status, the prior investment loss, and why the matter was settling for $65,000, and the committee ultimately affirmed the settlement. The committee also heard a disputed tax-sale claim involving the Commissioner of State Lands, where a claimant argued that excess proceeds from a 2009 tax sale should have gone to her family rather than escheating to the county. After testimony from the claimant and counsel, members debated sovereign immunity, heirship, and whether the committee could or should award the $4,200 overage. The motion was amended and then replaced with a motion to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session, which passed. Finally, the committee considered an appeal by Andrew Simpson challenging dismissal of his claim against the Arkansas Court of Appeals; after Simpson and court staff explained the underlying dispute, the committee reviewed the dismissal and the matter was held over for further consideration.

Bills: HF3479, HF4205, HF3782, HF4081, HF4138

Keywords: foreclosure, mortgage, redemption period, homestead, Minnesota Statutes, automated license plate reader, ALPR, license plate recognition, vehicle surveillance, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, BCA, data privacy, government data practices, law enforcement data, surveillance technology, location data, vehicle tracking, warrant requirement, probable cause, exigent circumstances

Transcript Highlights:

• adjustments we made even and House Bill 3, which I loved and I voted for, are putting the them in a bind
• Figure out what the fix would be so that the school districts aren't put in a bind over something that's
• Court, they can file limited binding arbitration. They can file binding arbitration.
• final property owners can challenge the appraised values through the ARB process, various forms of arbitration

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:08:12.400> and on board with going to arbitration and on board with going to arbitration
• Is it currently legal for them to seek arbitration on their own without having it in law?
• is non-binding and it also<01:10:48.640> is<01:10:48.800> inadmissible.
• It's supposed to be some sort of arbitration system, yada yada. It's not.
• supposed to be some sort of arbitration supposed to be some sort of arbitration system,<01:27:39.760

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee began with procedural announcements about report turnaround, amendment submission methods during split operations, a possible January 29 session, the governor’s State of the State on February 5, parking, cafeteria opening, and the plan to finish work by February 10. It then moved into executive session on HB 1123, which would require certain companies to post salary ranges on public job listings. Representative Granger moved ITL, arguing the bill would interfere with negotiations, especially for higher-level jobs, and raise compelled-speech concerns. Supporters, including Representatives Schultz, Sullivan, Cahill, Staub, and others, said salary ranges help applicants avoid wasted time and travel, improve transparency, and are already a common workplace disclosure. The committee voted 10-9 to ITL HB 1123. The committee next took up HB 177, concerning a definition of remote work in labor law. Representative Murphy moved ITL, saying the bill could burden employers, create vague obligations, duplicate existing protections, and potentially require intrusive compliance measures. Representative Sullivan described a proposed amendment that would narrow the bill to a definition of remote work and remove broader requirements, but the committee ultimately voted 11-9 to ITL HB 177. Members also noted that the amendment had not been fully circulated in time and that the issue might merit further review. Finally, the committee opened HB 1352, a workers’ compensation bill focused on repricing and payment practices. The sponsor withdrew an initial ITL motion and moved OTP after amendment review. Members discussed concerns raised at the hearing about delayed payments, third-party administrators, and the need for better accountability. Representative McKenzie’s amendment would define good faith, create a voluntary three-year dispute-resolution pilot, restore fines to prior levels, and add reporting/accountability requirements for carriers that miss the 30-day payment deadline. Several members supported the amendment as a way to help small businesses and providers, while others said repricing needed broader study through the workers’ compensation advisory council. The Department of Labor explained that the amendment would require carriers and related payers to report missed determinations to the department and would increase oversight of payment timeliness.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have businesses that put arbitration clauses, not I've not ever seen that on the personal lines
• And I don't think that putting an arbitration clause in the UK policy would meet the UK standards so
• And I do understand that I I'm a big fan of arbitration.
• I've even heard some cases all the way to New York to do an arbitration.
• And so therefore, they want to have the rent to arbitration in New York, for example.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think the only thing that is not in there is authorizing parenting time expeditors to issue binding
• The only differences This is... parenting time expeditors to issue binding decisions.
• binding part of it.
• And then they'll basically arbitrate it and say, okay, well, this is what I'm going to do.
• What a parenting time expediter does is there a mediation-arbitration wing of things.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and reviewed a memorandum compiling member suggestions for possible legislation. The memo grouped ideas into topics including creation of a family court, expanded education for parents, attorneys, and judges, expedited hearings for parenting-time violations, limiting law enforcement involvement in custody disputes, creating parenting time expediters, and adopting more uniform court procedures. Members also discussed whether to form subcommittees, but the task force decided to continue working as a full committee rather than create subcommittees at this time. The committee then heard testimony from Dr. John Perez, a mental health professional, who described his personal custody experience and his professional work with families he believes have been affected by parental alienation. He argued for stronger education, faster court response times, and better tools to address intentional interference with parenting time. Members questioned him about his case history, the concept of parental alienation, and whether specialized family courts or judges with family-law training could help. Dr. Perez said a dedicated family court and faster hearings would likely have helped his situation. The task force spent substantial time discussing the possible creation of a family court. Judge Hovey supported the idea of a specialized family court or at least a study of one, saying family cases are distinct from ordinary adversarial litigation and that judges with family-law experience could better handle them. Several members agreed that a family court could improve consistency, expertise, and speed, but others cautioned that the task force’s current directive is focused on enforcement of existing orders rather than broader custody policy, and noted that voters had previously rejected equal shared parenting proposals. The group also discussed expedited procedures for parenting-time disputes, with Judge Hovey suggesting a 30-day hearing timeline may be workable. On education, members generally supported requiring parents to complete a parenting education course and adding educational materials explaining court process, child support, and what judges can and cannot do. Mr. McLean suggested a short instructional video for litigants and more family-law education for judges and attorneys, while Ms. Moldenhauer said education could be incorporated into scheduling orders or mediation orders. Members also discussed the Parents Forever course, including whether it should be mandatory in all counties and whether cost is a barrier; no vote was taken on any of these proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Private health plans require binding arbitration to resolve malpractice claims.
• Despite the clear misdiagnosis, we were forced into private binding arbitration at great cost.
• We also learned that if an arbitrator rules against an HMO, the HMO simply declines that arbitrator in
• We also learned that if an arbitrator rules against an HMO, the HMO simply declines that arbitrator in
• When a dispute goes to arbitration, the arbitrator often depends on repeat business from the very health

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When disputes arise, they take longer to resolve and often require unnecessary litigation and arbitration
• Teaching positions are also not subject to a binding decision by the ALJ.
• It is a non-binding decision. So there again, we do not see how this bill creates parity.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Claimant alleged that it has an outstanding arbitral award of over 5.6 million pounds against Blue Oak
• The end result of that was an arbitration award where some money was awarded from Blue Oak to Tetronix
• But there were certainly this claim and this arbitration award that had occurred before that liquidation
• Rather, the claim arises from the failure of the respondent to carry out and enforce a binding remand
• A refusal to implement a binding remand does not involve adjudication, fact-finding, or legal interpretation

Summary: The committee first reviewed litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing involving wage claims brought under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. Members questioned the department’s authority, jurisdiction, use of attorney fees and costs, and whether defendants had to be licensed. The department explained it has long enforced wage and overtime laws, that the claims were small-dollar cases handled by investigators and counsel, and that one case had been paid and dismissed while others were unresolved or had service issues. The committee voted to review or batch-file the labor cases after discussion. The University of Arkansas System then reported three pending lawsuits: an age- and race-discrimination claim by a tenured professor that was resolved early; an ADA/FMLA retaliation claim by a former employee that survived in part on a motion to dismiss and was moving into discovery; and a Section 1983 claim against a UAMS sergeant arising from a parking-ticket dispute, with the university explaining that only punitive damages could create personal exposure for the officer. The committee reviewed each report and voted to accept them. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000 and waiving interest and penalties, which the committee approved for review. The Claims Commission then presented several claims: an unpaid salary differential for a Department of Health employee, reissued warrants, unpaid DHS bills, and multiple negotiated settlements involving ATRS, UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT. Members approved or affirmed most of these items, including a $65,000 settlement in the Tetronics/ATRS matter, a $150,000 medical-negligence settlement, and several vehicle-accident settlements. The most extended debate involved a tax-delinquent property sale claim by Sharon Greer and relatives. The claimant argued they were not properly notified and sought the $4,200 excess from the 2009 sale. Land Commissioner counsel explained the excess had escheated to the county after the statutory claim period expired, while members debated sovereign immunity, standing, heirs, and whether the committee could or should award money anyway. The committee ultimately chose to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session rather than decide it immediately. The committee also heard appeals from dismissed claims, including a UAMS medical-negligence claim, a land-sale notice claim, a pothole claim against ARDOT, and a judicial-immunity claim against the Court of Appeals; most dismissals were affirmed, and the Simpson matter was held over for additional review after the claimant testified.

Transcript Highlights:

• either o dolly or the arbitr either o dolly or the arbitr right<00:19:00.400> okay<00:19:
• the peace officer grievance arbitration the peace officer grievance arbitration roster<00:32:21.440
• The BMS has a main roster of arbitrators with a minimum of 25 and a maximum of 60 arbitrators, and we're
• c><00:37:59.200> we're Max maximum of 60 arbitrators and we're Max maximum of 60 arbitrators and
• While arbitrators on the list are not Bureau employees, their decisions are binding on both parties.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Labor Committee received an overview from Chief Judge Patricia Millan of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals (WCCA). She explained the court’s history, created in 1981, its role as the appellate body for workers’ compensation disputes after Department of Labor and Industry and Office of Administrative Hearings proceedings, and its original jurisdiction over petitions to vacate settlement agreements. She also noted the court is composed of five judges, is funded entirely by the workers’ compensation fund, and operates with five staff attorneys and two full-time employees. The committee then heard introductory remarks from the judges present for confirmation: Deb Sunquist, Katherine Carlson, Shan Quinn, and Thomas Christensen, with a procedural note that Quinn’s reappointment had not yet been formally referred to the committee, so his motion would be held until paperwork arrived. The judges emphasized their collaborative, panel-based work, their experience representing both injured workers and employers, and their commitment to the workers’ compensation system. Quinn also described efforts to teach workers’ compensation at the University of Minnesota and encourage younger lawyers to enter the field. Members asked about the court’s caseload and about delays in workers’ compensation claims. In response, the judges said the WCCA’s caseload has generally declined and fluctuates, and they offered to provide case-count data. In a more detailed exchange, a senator described a family member’s long-delayed claim; judges explained that repetitive-trauma or “Gillette” injuries often require substantial medical proof and can be difficult for insurers to accept, but that the system is intended to be no-fault and typically takes about a year to a year and a half from filing to resolution. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected here.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so while I think that we should have a discussion about arbitration, um I would certainly am open
• to u to help resolve sector arbitration to u to help resolve private<00:55:43.839> sector<00:
• He questioned how private arbitrators can be trusted to do anything even remotely similar to fairness
• He asked whether it is currently legal for them to seek arbitration on their own without having it in
• supposed to be some sort of arbitration supposed to be some sort of arbitration system,<01:27:39.760

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Rhonda: Madam Chair, members, House Bill 2371, arbitration divorce proceedings, artificial intelligence
• Excuse me, this bill allows parties to divorce proceedings to use artificial intelligence-assisted arbitration
• It attempts to bind future legislatures and so it presents an entrenchment issue.
• Fish thank you uh leader yeah um also unconstitutional it attempts to bind future legislatures and so

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus reviewed a long calendar of House bills across education, health, water, land, housing, labor, public safety, and taxation. Several measures dealt with artificial intelligence, including bills on AI disclosures for minors, AI-assisted divorce arbitration, an Arizona AI education program, AI privilege protections, and a required AI course in schools. Other topics included ESA administration funding, a prohibition on public money for certain foreign-controlled genetic sequencing devices, towing regulations, DUI and ignition interlock changes, health facility and nursing facility complaint timelines, internationally trained physicians, nurse anesthetist reimbursement, pharmacy penalties, childhood cancer research, cybersecurity encryption, school mental health instruction repeal, superintendent performance pay, adoption disclosures in student health settings, anti-Semitism in schools, and a range of water, land, and housing bills. Members frequently raised concerns about local control, unfunded mandates, constitutional issues, and the scope of state intervention. Several bills drew criticism for affecting school curriculum, public education, reproductive rights, protest activity, or tribal communities. Others were supported as technical fixes, consumer protections, or funding measures. The caucus also discussed a series of bills related to the Mexican gray wolf, state land management, solar and wind siting, groundwater transport, and rural development, with some members objecting that the proposals would undermine federal protections or tribal interests. A number of bills were pulled from consent for further discussion, including HB 2020, HB 2957, HCR 2044, HB 2352, HB 2667, HB 2906, HB 2093, HB 2386, HB 2481, HB 2830, HB 2076, HB 2411, HB 2136, HB 2665, and HB 2904. The meeting ended with an announcement of the Latino Caucus guest presentation and an emotional tribute to Reverend Jesse Jackson, followed by presentation of an Affordability Award to Representatives Lorena Austin and Stephanie Simacek for work on economic justice and working families. The caucus then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• If it's not done in time, binding arbitration, 30-day limit on the binding arbitration.
• If it's not done in time, binding arbitration, 30-day limit on the binding arbitration.
• If it's not done in time, binding If it's not done in time, binding arbitration, arbitration, arbitration
• <01:45:44.000> arbitration.
• And if arbitration fails, then it goes to the courts, but it's binding arbitration. >> The chair recognizes

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• arbitration.
• To ensure that arbitrators remain qualified and well-informed, they are required to complete continuing
• education in arbitration and property tax.
• The committee's substitute to House Bill 3307 allows arbitrators to complete approved continuing legal
• a person to renew the person's agreement with the controller of public accounts to serve as an arbitrator

Bills: HJR1, HB9, HB21, HB26, HB30, HB37, HB116, HB630, HB879, HB913, HB1151, HB1318, HB1593, HB1899, HB2703, HB2809, HB2890, HB2970, HB3307, HB3526, HB5092, SB128, SB203, SB317, SB393, SB397, SB644, SB731, SB801, SB913, SB1071, SB1073, SB1086, SB1087, SB1232, SB1250, SB1262, SB1285, SB1310, SB1359, SB1444, SB1483, SB1705, SB1782, SB1861, SB1897, SB1944, SB2023, SB2043, SB2082, SB2133, SB2215, SB2297, SB2298, SB2309, SB2532, SB2549, SB2566, SB2617, SB2619, SB2639, SB2688, SB2696, SB2717, SB2790, SB2841, SB2847, SB2850, SB2857, SB2891, SB2919, SB2928, SB2972, SB3052, SB3053, SB1, SB260, SB1506, SB1637, HB37, HB109, HB334, HB1130, HB1238, HB1327, HB1610, HB1615, HB1620, HB1689, HB2081, HB2809, HB2884, HB2890, HB4215, HB5092, HCR7, HCR75, HCR86, HCR92, HCR93, HCR126, SB644, SB1086, SB1230, SB1310, SB1361, SB1553, SB1778, SB1790, SB2344, SB2460, SB2515, SB2600, SB2747, SB2751, SB2785, SB2790, SB3047, SB3048, SB3050, SB3051, SB3052, SB3053, SB3056, SB3058, SB3061, HJR1, HB1130, HB1689, HB2884, HB1393, HB2559, HB26, HB3012, HB1327, HB109, HB1238, HB2890, HB9, HB4215, HB2970, HB37, HB1899, HB1593, HB2607, HB3526, HB3810, HB5092, HB388, HB2809, HB1151, HB913, HB3307, HB879, HB116, HB12, HB2703, HB1610, HB1615, HB1620, HB30, HB21, HB2712, HB2692, HB1633, HB1318, HB685, HB630, HB4753, HB2742, HB303, HB198, HB1535, HB762, HB148, HB1520, HB5061, HB2286, HB1606, HB1041, HB132, HB11, HCR7, HCR75, HCR86, HCR92, HCR93, HCR126, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB1310, SB2972, SB1073, SB2847, SB2532, SB2619, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB511, SB2309, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1359, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB2891, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1285, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB2460, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB2994, SB2747, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1861, SB2043, SB1367, SB2857, SB128, SB3058, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3048, SB3052, SB3053, SB3036, SB3057, SB3056, SB3043, SB3050, SB3063, SB3035, SB1790, SB1778, SB203, SB3061, SB2799, SB2790, SB2688, SB2515, SB1230, SB2522, SB2639, SB2459, SB3051, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2617, SB2751, SB2928, SB2566, SB1897, SB1749, SB1361, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1782, SB1705, SB2696, SB1944, SB2215, SB644, SB1232, SB2850, HB45, HB48, HB1261, HB1465, HB1778, HB2596, HB5238, HB33, HB1188, HB210, HB1022, HB1458, HB5560, HB1240, HB1950, HB2027, HB2768, HB2788, HB2791, HB3146, HB3698, HB3699, HB1893, HB3700, HB4850, HB4187, HB1397, HB4885, HB4804, HB3751, HB3611, HB2775, HB2061, HB2003, HB1729, HB1242, HB791, HB2029, HB647, HB2522, HB4738, HB3033, HB3594, HB3474, HB2563, HB2802, HCR90, SJR87, SB2969, SB3073, SB2497, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB781

Keywords: constitutional amendment, property tax, ad valorem tax, tax exemption, tangible personal property, income-producing property, business personal property, equipment exemption, machinery, local government finance, school district revenue, county taxes, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, tax relief, commercial property, appraisal district, chief appraiser, rendition statement, property tax relief