Transcript Highlights:

• And so they kind of determine what need of services the child needs.
• How is the $640,000 determined? Is that legislatively set, or?
• So I think that will also determine the other softwares because there's not more.
• Sentencing is a judicial function. And so it's not my opinion.
• To determine where that person is placed. Maybe that's the issue.

Summary: The committee opened with a moment of silence honoring a deceased member, then approved the April minutes. The first major presentation was from Chelsea Florey of Child and Family Services on the Diversion Task Force and related grant programs created with one-time funding from HB 1012. She reported that five of six proposals were funded, with youth diversion services operating in Bismarck, Fargo, Grand Forks, Minot, and a Red River Children’s Advocacy Center program focused on problematic sexualized behavior. Members discussed barriers such as staffing shortages, voluntary family engagement, service fatigue, and the need for better coordination, broader outreach, and possible changes to diversion eligibility rules so low-level cases can remain in diversion longer. Several legislators pressed for more practical system changes and clearer service navigation, while Florey said the task force is trying to build a service array or hub and is leaning on the Children’s Cabinet for broader recommendations. The committee then heard from North Dakota Lottery Director Thomas Lawler, who gave an operational overview and biennium report. He described the lottery’s history, games, retailer commissions, Pick and Click subscriptions, Players Club membership, and revenue distribution. For the 2023-25 biennium, about $67 million in tickets were purchased, with roughly $16.2 million transferred overall, including money for the general fund, drug task force grants, and compulsive gambling prevention and treatment. Members asked about the compulsive gambling allocation and whether the amount is set by statute. A lengthy presentation followed from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation on criminal justice data connectivity and reentry. Adam Anderson explained that North Dakota’s jail, court, HHS, and correctional systems use multiple separate databases that do not communicate in real time, requiring manual cross-checks and staff communication. He said the department is exploring a centralized hub or other integration approach, but noted challenges with identifiers, vendor contracts, confidentiality, and cost. Robin Schmolenberger then updated the committee on a Medicaid data-sharing project with HHS, saying monthly application assistance is now occurring in correctional facilities and that automated bi-directional data exchange is expected in late 2026 to help suspend and reactivate Medicaid coverage and identify former foster care youth. Members also discussed parole, probation, transitional housing, and the need for better real-time notifications and clearer data definitions. The committee also received an update from county representatives on the 24/7 sobriety program, including a recent attorney general opinion that if a court waives 24/7 fees, sheriffs may use the cheaper twice-daily breath test or urine testing instead of SCRAM bracelets or drug patches. Finally, Bruce Johnson of the Racing Commission presented on an audit report, acknowledging serious findings involving overspending from the promotion fund, grant documentation failures, a breeders fund eligibility reversal, and repeated procurement violations. He said the commission has already changed its procedures by tracking fund limits monthly, requiring grant applications and itemized reports, enforcing breeders fund rules as written, and routing purchases through procurement with written contracts. The committee asked follow-up questions throughout but took no formal votes on these presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• , how is a municipality to make that determination if they don't do site plan review?
• , how is a municipality to make that determination if they don't do site plan review?
• the high judicial standard, the strict scrutiny standard, and that's the strictest standard judicial
• legislative body so they can determine legislative body so they can determine basically<01:21:31.840
• And I would standard, judicial standard.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There is, if there's an emergency situation or provider determines in their very best professional judgment
• <00:02:16.800> in situation or provider determines in situation or provider determines in
• 00:19:42.000> the<00:19:42.159> committee<00:19:42.480> of<00:19:42.960> judicial
• be referred to the committee of judicial be referred to the committee of judicial um<00:19:44.240
• over<00:20:00.440> to I mean and and be headed over to I mean and and be headed over to judicial

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It is not even a prohibition on someone who has a judicial warrant making a civil arrest.
• 00:09:27.279> who<00:09:27.519> has<00:09:27.680> assigned<00:09:28.160> judicial
• on someone who has assigned judicial on someone who has assigned judicial warrant<00:09:29.040><
• 15:12.639> care<00:15:13.120> facilities<00:15:13.600> as<00:15:13.920> determined
• healthc care facilities as determined healthc care facilities as determined deter<00:15:15.360><

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair Alvarez: Let's start with 429, Determining Criminal Gang Membership by Representative Baker.
• When you look at social media determining whether or not people aren't getting us.
• Gottlieb: ...have spoken with General Maney about this in our Judicial Appropriations Committee, but
• It's encapsulated, it's judiciously reviewed over and over again.
• They are triggered only by judicial findings.

Transcript Highlights:

• It would also change the law in the middle of an ongoing judicial process.
• The middle of an ongoing judicial process. We have a lawsuit in place.
• We should allow the judicial process to play out.
• This is not a judicial process, so there is no evidentiary standard.
• There is no independent judicial finding before the designation takes effect.

Summary: The House opened with prayer, a moment of silence for former member Chester Clem, the Pledge of Allegiance, and quorum confirmation. Members then adopted the special order report for the day and approved a Rules and Ethics Committee report amending House Rule 15.3 to allow fundraising under certain circumstances during extended or special sessions. The chamber then took up several bills. HB 1405 on a statewide project for missing persons with special needs passed unanimously. CS/CS/CS/SB 290, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services bill, passed 94-10 after debate focused on conservation land surplus procedures and agricultural use of state lands. CS/CS/CS/HB 905, the “Fire Act” on foreign influence, foreign gifts, critical infrastructure, sister city agreements, and related restrictions, passed 80-20 after the House adopted an amendment adding a prohibition on certain surrogacy contracts involving citizens or residents of foreign countries of concern. CS/CS/HB 1197, dealing with information technology procurement and contracting, passed 109-0. HB 1103 on local administration of vessel restrictions passed unanimously. The House also debated CS/CS/CS/HB 399 on land use and development regulations. Supporters said it would limit development fees, standardize compatibility rules, allow manufactured homes in RV parks, and lower voting thresholds for comprehensive plan changes to address housing affordability; opponents argued it would preempt local control, weaken voter-approved urban boundary protections, and risk conservation lands. An amendment to preserve Orange County’s boundary rules failed, while a technical amendment on manufactured homes passed. The bill then passed 71-38. The House also passed several local bills, including measures for the Pace Fire Rescue District, Avalon Beach/Mulat Fire Protection District, East Point Water and Sewer District, Fellsmere Water Control District, and Headwaters Water Control District, with votes ranging from 83-27 to unanimous approval. The transcript also included farewell remarks from Representative Angie Nixon before the House returned to remaining business.

Bills: SB143, SB144, SB145, SB152, SB153, SB154, SB162, SB226, SB146, SB143, SB144, SB145, SB152, SB153, SB154, SB162, SB226, SB146

Keywords: SB143, solid waste, garbage collection, trash fees, refuse collection, municipal fees, county fees, fee exemption, veterans benefits, veteran household, disabled veteran, VA benefits, Social Security exemption, low-income households, poverty level, county commission, municipal governing body, Alabama solid waste law, certificate of exception, public health

Bills: HB44, HB400, HB444, HB487, SB249, SB252, SB58, HB44, HB400, HB444, HB487, SB249, SB252, SB58

Keywords: teachers retirement, credit purchase, St. Clair County, DAY Program, pension reform, dental insurance, benefit rollover, healthcare, insurance policy, annual maximum, HB444, vaccines, vaccine exemption, religious exemption, religious liberty, private school, church school, faith-based school, parochial school, school immunization

Transcript Highlights:

• this committee the full committee we're going to do those now and then Later in the day, to be determined
• It has become apparent to our physicians that there is the potential for adverse determinations.
• Is that just doing a blood and urine to determine elevated labs?
• How long we can watch her then is determined by other things that may start. happen.
• Texas has the ability to determine policy for our own citizens.

Bills: HB44, HB2200, HB1612, HB2747, HB2038, HB3717, HB1431, HB3800, HB3801, HB3560, HB3246, HB44

Keywords: HB 44, Life of the Mother Act, abortion exceptions, medical emergency, reasonable medical judgment, pregnancy complications, maternal health, life-threatening condition, ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, spontaneous abortion, fetal survival, Texas abortion law, abortion ban, physician liability, health care provider, disciplinary action, aiding and abetting, emergency abortion, obstetric care

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, this is dealing with the judicial compensation. Thank you, Mr. President.
• Members, this is dealing with the Judicial Compensation Fund.
• Some of this dealt with per diem and reimbursement in the judicial system, much like we've done in the
• relative to the cost of court to provide for the transfer of certain surplus monies in the 22nd Judicial
• relative to the cost of court to provide for the transfer of certain surplus monies in the 22nd Judicial

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Brad Burgett, the Seventh Judicial District Court district attorney, in support.
• And Andy Shevey with the 16th Judicial District Court; he's an assistant district attorney.
• Andy Shealy, the ADA from the 16th Judicial District District Attorney.
• Andy Shealy, ADA with the 16th Judicial District Court, will provide information if requested.
• Andy Shealy, ADA with the 16th Judicial District Court, will provide information if requested.

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Although they are nominees, they are still bound by the code of judicial conduct, and depending on the
• However, the same concept applies here. judicial conduct, judicial conduct, similar<00:17:09.679>
• Um, as a member of the judicial Um, as a member of the judicial retention<00:22:55.679> committee<
• <00:26:00.240> When<00:26:00.480> she our judicial system right now.
• When she our judicial system right now.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:46:12.720> operations about 95% of the judicial operations about 95% of the judicial operations
• judicial operating fund. judicial operating fund.
• <00:52:53.680> operations increase so that the judicial operations increase so that the judicial
• <00:53:26.880> if Have y'all been able to determine if Have y'all been able to determine if
• <00:57:37.599> fund, double our judicial operations fund, double our judicial operations fund

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 15 January, 2026; 2:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The meeting began with a budget presentation from the Office of Capital Post Conviction. Director Chrissy Noble described the office’s work representing death-row clients in state postconviction, federal habeas, clemency, and related matters, and said the Legislature has historically funded the office with enough flexibility to handle unpredictable cases. She highlighted four pending actual-innocence cases, including matters involving false forensics and a shaken-baby syndrome challenge, and noted that such cases often require multiple experts. She also cited a recent example where the office was appointed to a case shortly before an execution date was set, and said flexible spending authority allowed the office to secure experts and file on time. The office asked to retain any remaining special-fund cash balance into FY26 and said it had not requested additional salary funding for FY26 because the increase was already handled through flexibility; members praised the office’s work and no vote was taken. The committee then heard from the Ethics Commission. Staff explained requests for salary realignment, additional funding for a part-time hearing officer who handles public records and open meetings cases, and a small amount for fuel/food that was described as a system-related placeholder. The commission said it had a backlog because complaints have become more numerous and complex, and that more funding would allow the hearing officer to process more cases. Members also discussed a prior $10,000 system request that had lapsed and was later found to have been underestimated; the commission said the earlier figure came from an initial quote and the later $25,000 estimate reflected the actual cost. The chairman and members commended the commission’s work, and no formal action was taken. Finally, the Administrative Office of Courts presented its budget requests. The office outlined a deficit appropriation request tied to county-funded court reporter increases, funding for two newly appointed judges, special-judge appointment costs, and death benefits for a court administrator in Warren County. The discussion then focused on judicial salaries, with the office noting Mississippi ranks near the bottom nationally in trial and Supreme Court judge pay, though a cost-of-living adjustment would place the state around 27th. The office said its request follows State Personnel Board recommendations and that it is also seeking a possible increase in filing fees to support the Judicial Operations Fund, which helps cover salary costs not paid from general funds. Members discussed redistricting, special appointments, and the possibility of using fee revenue rather than general funds to support future increases; no vote was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• This date is determined by when the adoptive parent's occupation was officially added to the list of
• I think the bill calls for a pilot program in two judicial circuits with high need.
• And what specific training would those individuals get, who's going to determine the curriculum, and
• I think the bill calls for a pilot program in two judicial circuits with high need.
• You're taking us through a study of your member coalitions to determine if they have any?

Summary: The Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs met with a quorum and first took up SB 398, which would create a statewide public health awareness campaign through the Department of Elder Affairs on Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias. Senator Burgess said the campaign would focus on early detection, brain health, risk reduction, clinical trial access, and community resources. The committee heard supportive testimony from a caregiver, AARP, the Alzheimer’s Association, and others, with members discussing the need for culturally responsive outreach and continued funding. SB 398 was reported favorably by roll call vote. The committee then heard SB 106, which would strengthen Florida’s exploitation injunction law for vulnerable adults by allowing service of an unascertainable exploiter through the same communication method used to contact the victim, such as text, Facebook Messenger, or WhatsApp. Senator Martin explained the bill as a way to close a loophole that lets scammers evade traditional service, and witnesses from the Florida Bankers Association and the Florida Bar’s Elder Law Section supported it, describing how the bill could stop ongoing thefts more quickly while preserving due process. Members asked about gift card scams, clerk workload, and the definition of an unascertainable respondent. SB 106 was reported favorably. The Department of Children and Families then presented an update on the Adoption Benefits for Qualifying Adoptive Employees Program, describing its expansion over time and the current one-time lump-sum benefit structure for eligible adoptive parents. The presentation covered eligibility rules, open enrollment, funding history, and the program’s impact on adoption placements, with members asking why tax collectors were included but other constitutional offices were not, and whether foster relatives could qualify. Finally, the committee considered SPB 7012, a committee bill addressing child welfare workforce shortages, treatment foster care for high-acuity children, and improved data collection on commercially sexually exploited children. The bill would direct DCF to recruit former public safety workers for CPI and case manager roles, create a treatment foster care pilot in two judicial circuits, and require more detailed, analyzable data and capacity studies. The bill drew support from child welfare advocates, with some members urging DCF to return with a more developed framework; it was adopted as a committee bill and reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• the position, based on the application he sent in, that under federal law he has the authority to determine
• final and not subject to judicial final and not subject to judicial review.<00:22:30.559> Any
• That decision also is not subject to judicial review.
• That decision also is not subject to judicial review.
• This would not be an judicial review.

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 3 February, 2026; 3:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first took up several bills described as vehicles to keep options open for pending rural health issues, especially the rural health transformation fund and the Greenwood Hospital situation. The chair explained that Greenwood Hospital is struggling financially and operationally, including a Medicaid overpayment dispute in which Medicaid planned to recoup $2 million from a December payment, threatening payroll and continued operation. The committee discussed a proposed committee substitute that would delay recoupment until May 1 and preserve legislative flexibility to help Greenwood if a workable plan emerges. The committee adopted motions for title sufficiency and due pass on the block of bills, including the committee substitute and reverse repealer provisions. The committee then turned to two certificate-of-need bills. One bill, 2474, was presented as a rural hospitals measure that would let certain rural hospitals obtain certificates of need for services such as outpatient dialysis units, ambulatory surgical facilities, and geriatric psychiatric units, with definitions aimed largely at Delta and other rural counties. The chair also included a provision making the state health officer’s licensing decision final and not subject to judicial review, with only a short reconsideration process available. Senator Hill objected, arguing the bill concentrated too much power in the health department, eliminated meaningful court review, and unfairly picked winners and losers instead of letting the market work. The chair responded that the goal was to reduce costly, repetitive litigation and preserve access to care in areas where hospitals struggle financially. The committee then considered Senator Blackwell’s broader CO bill, which would address appeals and litigation more generally by shifting costs to the losing party in CO disputes. A reverse repealer was adopted first, and the chair explained that the bill was intended to reduce endless and expensive appeals while still allowing a limited opportunity for reconsideration. Senators Hill and others raised concerns about limiting judicial review and expanding health department power, while the chair said many states have no judicial review in this area and that the committee was exploring the issue further. The chair said he had asked several members to study the matter and contact the National Council of State Legislatures. The committee ultimately adopted the motions on the bills and amendments by voice vote, with the ayes prevailing each time.

Transcript Highlights:

• , judicial compensation, and related retirement benefits, as well as the reporting of certain judicial
• Do they lose the ability to have a judge make a determination on bail because...
• It's going to go to the voters for determination. That's right.
• Their ability to determine whether or not it's appropriate is that... Not right?
• Not all insurance companies use credit scores to help determine the rate.

Bills: SB15, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SB6, SB2878, SB13, SB30, SJR87, SB7, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB57, SB512, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB1346, SB2753, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB552, SB646, SJR1, SB15, 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, SB2501, SB66, SB268, SB331, SB618, SB414, SB1394, SB2425, SB898, SB993, SB442, SB735, SB784, SB2538, SB1919, SB1013, SB2215, SB2322, SB626, SB570, SB747, SB2183, SB673, SB1015, SB1447, SB1370, SB1784, SB1897, SB2873, SB2891, SB2933, SB2540, SB2681, SB2695, SB1965, SB2203, SB872, SB875, SB1030, SB1277, SB1730, SB1681, SB1152, SB2969, SB2747, SB2705, SB2541, SB1708, SB2080, SB2721, SB1986, SB2392, SB2539, SB2857, SB2799, SB2785, SB2782, SB1531, SB1927, SB1263, SB1098, SB35, SB290, SB1365, SB2568, SB18, SB427, SB1860, SB1864, SB2675, SB596, SB2858, SB3058, SB816, SB1163, SB1484, SB1898, SB1777, SB1802, SB2692, SB315, SB1585, SB1626, SB2058, SB2050, SB2105, SB2245, SB2764, SB2611, SB2497, SB2452, SB2243, SB1705, SB1244, SB1361, SB438, SB578, SB584, SB2690, SB2521, SB2487, SB2342, SB2063, SB125, SB2041, SB1962, SB1413, SCR9, SB21, SB1198, SB1405, SB2601, SB2778, HB5560, HB762, HB1584, HB 107, HB 114, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323, HB4341, HB6, HB171, HB143, HB449, HB3486, HB4263, HB5246, HB2, HB2011, SB17

Keywords: SB 15, Texas Local Government Code, zoning preemption, housing affordability, small lots, lot size, lot density, single-family zoning, residential subdivision, municipal land use, local control, state preemption, parking requirements, setbacks, infill development, missing middle housing, lot width, lot depth, homebuilders, housing supply

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the things about a judicial...
• So we're trying to give some deference to the determination.
• The GSAs are not making a sustainable yield determination.
• So it's not an independent due process-provided determination.
• They did not make a determination.

Summary: The committee heard several water, wildlife, conservation, and local government bills. AB 362, by Assembly Member Ramos, would add tribal water uses as a statewide beneficial use and strengthen tribal consultation in water planning; tribal representatives and conservation groups supported it as a long-overdue correction, while water agencies, business groups, and agricultural interests raised concerns about CEQA, regulatory uncertainty, and impacts on existing water planning. The bill was moved on a due pass motion to Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials, with some members noting ongoing stakeholder discussions and one abstention. AB 1089, by Assembly Member Carrillo, would expand local permitting authority under the Western Joshua Tree Conservation Act to include commercial and industrial projects. The author and the City of Adelanto argued it would speed housing and economic development in the high desert while preserving the overall conservation framework, but environmental groups opposed it as premature and potentially weakening protections for Joshua trees. The committee approved the bill on a due pass motion to Appropriations. AB 1024, by Assembly Member Harabedian, would require a regional black bear mitigation plan for the San Gabriel Valley and related areas; Sierra Madre officials described rising bear intrusions and the need for state help, and the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 846, by Assembly Member Connolly, would streamline permitting for local wildfire preparedness and vegetation management projects in local responsibility areas by creating a faster review process at Fish and Wildlife and improving mapping coordination with Cal Fire. Local government, fire service, and agricultural witnesses supported the bill as a common-sense wildfire prevention measure, and it passed to Natural Resources with no opposition. AB 263, by Assembly Member Rogers, would extend emergency minimum-flow regulations for the Scott and Shasta Rivers for five years or until permanent rules are adopted; supporters said it protects salmon recovery, tribal subsistence, and the fishing economy during a transition period, while opponents argued it bypasses normal regulatory process and harms farmers. The committee approved it on a due pass as amended motion to Appropriations, with one abstention and two no votes. AB 1044, by Assembly Member Bains, would create a new Tulare County groundwater sustainability agency for undistricted lands after other local agencies split off; the bill passed to Local Government. AB 1426, by Assembly Member Arambula, began testimony on creating a Diablo Range Conservation Program to fund habitat protection and restoration across the range.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um service that determines the rates.
• determining how that will be reviewed. determining how that will be reviewed.
• <01:19:38.400> exactly uh left to the PUC to determine exactly uh left to the PUC to determine
• performance-based model for determining performance-based model for determining utility<01:28:52.400
• as part of your quasi judicial as part of your quasi judicial establishment<02:56:08.640> of<

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational briefing on the Public Utilities Commission’s performance-based regulation (PBR) framework and the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs’ whistleblower complaint process. Chair Jared Kohole opened the meeting, noted it was informational only with no public testimony, and explained that members would hear presentations and then have an opportunity for questions. The committee heard first from Ulupono Initiative, which provided background on why utilities are regulated, how Hawaii’s cost-of-service model and rate cases work, and why PBR was adopted to shift utility incentives away from a capital-investment bias and toward performance, efficiency, cost control, and policy goals such as renewable energy and reliability. Ulupono described Hawaii’s PBR structure as a five-year multi-year rate plan with annual revenue adjustments, a customer dividend, a Z factor for extraordinary exogenous events, and an exceptional project recovery mechanism for large projects. It also outlined performance incentive mechanisms tied to renewable portfolio standard progress, interconnection speed, reliability, and shared savings. The presentation said the current docket is evaluating a possible hybrid approach that would combine forward-looking forecasting with historical results, and Ulupono advocated for stronger incentives, arguing the current rewards are too small relative to utility revenues and should be more meaningful to better align utility behavior with legislative intent. The PUC then presented its own overview, emphasizing that the PBR docket is open and active and that the briefing was limited to the record to avoid ex parte concerns. The commission described the development of PBR in Hawaii through multiple phases beginning in 2018: an initial collaborative phase to set goals, a formal contested-case phase that produced the initial framework, later phases adding scorecards, reported metrics, and additional performance incentive mechanisms, and subsequent refinements including sunset of some mechanisms and adjustments after the August 2023 Maui wildfires. The PUC said the framework is intended to be customer-centric, administratively efficient, and protective of utility financial integrity, and that current work includes evaluating how to balance forward-looking and historical test-year approaches within the rebasing process. No votes or formal actions were taken at the briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• review process to go back and judicial review process to go back and take<01:29:53.480> a<01:
• legislative intent for future judicial legislative intent for future judicial review<01:30:16.760
• <01:34:57.080> whether going to make my zba determine whether going to make my zba determine
• <01:41:11.159> whether And force the ZBA to determine whether or not that was a legitimate
• appropriate and our determination appropriate and our determination consistent<03:19:07.399>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Supreme Court and the judicial branch may have a problem with that.
• government whether it's the judicial government whether it's the judicial branch<00:21:26.320>
• The supreme court uh<00:22:50.159> and<00:22:50.320> the<00:22:50.480> judicial<
• My memory is that there is a Supreme Court rule about the process for determining how IOLTA funds are
• And come and just make a determination from there. Right.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee began by explaining that the meeting was a work session and that votes would only be taken where there was clear consensus. CACR 6, the proposed constitutional amendment on a “right to compute,” was discussed first but not acted on because the prime sponsor was absent. Members raised concerns about whether the issue belonged in the constitution and what the amendment would mean in practice, and the chair recessed the matter for a future meeting. HB 74, concerning the definition of “citizen” for the right-to-know law and disclosure of preliminary drafts circulated to a quorum or majority of a public body, drew little support. Members noted the Senate’s prior rejection of a related bill and agreed the proposal was unlikely to advance. A motion to ITL the bill passed unanimously by roll call, 15-0, and the bill was placed on the consent calendar. HB 232, dealing with rights of conscience for medical professionals, was also recessed. Members said they had not yet seen the amendment, which was described as narrowing the bill to abortion-related issues and limiting penalties. Several members said they could not judge the bill without the amendment and expected disagreement, so the chair recessed it. HB 253, on interest-bearing pooled trust accounts maintained by lawyers, was discussed at length; the chair said the bill did not address the underlying IOLTA issue and would likely create conflict with the bar and judiciary. Members cited existing Supreme Court procedures and suggested the bill was unnecessary. A straw vote showed support for interim study and ITL, and the committee ultimately voted 15-0 to place HB 253 on consent. HB 293, aimed at preventing minors from accessing obscene material on internet-connected devices, prompted substantial debate. Members generally supported the goal but objected to the bill’s private right of action, its focus on manufacturers rather than content providers or internet platforms, uncertainty about the filtering technology required, and concerns about defining obscenity on a national rather than community basis. The committee discussed forming a subcommittee to work on the bill further, and members volunteered to serve, indicating the issue would be revisited rather than voted on immediately.