Transcript Highlights:

• It's only after the second time that we've now had to take two bites of the same apple and the employer
• The first is, you know, Apple, you suck. I turn on do not disturb. You still let calls through.

Bills: SB1216, SB1391, SB1493, SB1520

Keywords: trauma, public safety, counseling, mental health, employee benefits, law enforcement, stress management, suicide prevention, workforce readiness, disciplinary action, appeals, termination, superior court, investigative process, reinstatement, immigration, data sharing, federal government, undocumented immigrants, visa overstays

Summary: The Committee on Public Safety and Law Enforcement heard several bills related to public safety personnel. SB 1520, which would have required state agencies to share certain immigration-related data with the federal government and sunset in 2029, was set aside after a proposed strike-everything amendment was defeated. The committee then voted 7-5 to give the underlying bill a do pass recommendation. SB 1216, which removes the sunset from traumatic event counseling programs for peace officers, firefighters, and 911 dispatchers and expands eligibility to crime scene and digital forensics technicians, drew support from police and fire representatives and passed 12-1 with a do pass recommendation. SB 1391 would create an AZ POST-administered law enforcement stress management pilot program, funded with a $950,000 general fund appropriation and operated through one Arizona nonprofit. The sponsor described it as a preventive, peer-support-focused program, but several members objected that the bill was overly prescriptive and looked like a vendor-specific measure. The committee voted 5-7 against giving SB 1391 a do pass recommendation. SB 1493, as amended, would require employers to pay taxable costs, attorney fees, and expert fees when a law enforcement officer who was terminated without just cause prevails through the administrative appeal process and then in Superior Court after the employer refuses reinstatement. Supporters argued it was a fairness and due process measure for rare cases where officers must litigate twice to be reinstated. After adopting a chairman’s amendment, the committee approved SB 1493 as amended with a due pass recommendation by an 8-3 vote, with one member changing from yes to no before the final tally.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a similarity to where we can actually have an apples-to-apples comparison throughout all the

Summary: The Joint Higher Education Committee met for a work session on higher education accounting practices and financial transparency. OFM Deputy Director Sarah Rupp explained how state accounting rules and higher education reporting differ, including what data is captured in AFRS today and what will move into Workday, with universities generally reporting summary-level fund data, mandatory codes, and most balance sheet and income statement activity, but not transaction-level detail or vendor payment information. Representatives from the University of Washington and Washington State University described the complexity of their own accounting systems, the many entities and business lines they must track for audits and compliance, and the need to reconcile university-level accrual accounting with state reporting requirements. The committee also heard from the Education Research and Data Center on the public four-year finance dashboard created under Senate Bill 5512; ERDC said the dashboard is based on publicly available data, is best used to examine institutions individually rather than compare them directly, and will be updated with additional metrics in 2025 and 2026. The committee then received a presentation from the Washington Student Achievement Council on the Workforce Education Investment Account (WIA). Joel Anderson reviewed WIA’s creation under House Bill 2158, its revenue sources, and its intended uses for higher education, financial aid, and workforce development. He said recent legislation significantly increased WIA revenues and that, in the 2025–27 budget, the account is being used in new ways, including to replace general fund support for University of Washington operations and to fund a larger share of the Washington College Grant and some faculty compensation costs. Anderson said roughly 98% of current WIA appropriations go to higher education, but the share used to supplant other higher education funding has grown, and he estimated about 60% to 70% of current spending still aligns with the account’s original intent. He also described a new effort to track WIA appropriations across biennia in more detail and noted the WIA Oversight Board’s role in recommending uses of the account and monitoring outcomes. No votes were taken; the committee ended by moving into executive session for staffing issues and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would love to see us from the insurance companies because they can to apples to apples, progressive

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not actually apples to apples there, right?

Bills: HF2430, HF2433

Keywords: education finance, teacher training, Read Act, state aid, school funding, education funding, children with disabilities, transition aid, special education, school district consolidation

Transcript Highlights:

• It's kind of an apples-to-apples comparison, I think, I would say.

Bills: HB809, HB 1193, HB1916, HB2558, HB1973, HB2350, HB2399, HB2340, HB 116, HB330, HB2496, HB116

Keywords: digitized signature, waiver of citation, marriage dissolution, electronic notarization, family law, HB 1193, informal marriage, common-law marriage, declaration of informal marriage, confidentiality, privacy, county clerk, vital statistics unit, Family Code, Health and Safety Code, marriage records, public records, personally identifying information, PII, legal representative

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm concerned that you are mixing apples and oranges when you take TDT into place.
• those concerns, and they were reflected here today, that the TDT, as we talked, you know, is it the apples

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met on March 20, 2025, and first approved HB 4025, creating the Duke Farm Stewardship District in Lee County, on a 17-0 vote. The committee then advanced HJR 1215, which proposes a constitutional amendment to exempt agricultural tangible personal property from property tax, after extended debate about the fiscal impact on counties, especially rural and fiscally constrained ones; it passed 16-1. HB 411 also passed unanimously after an amendment, extending affordable housing tax exemption treatment to certain nonprofit projects on leased land, including Habitat for Humanity projects. The committee likewise approved CS/HB 669, allowing local governments to purchase certain unrated bonds, and CS/HB 4017, codifying the Vermont Drainage District charter in Charlotte County, both without opposition. The committee also approved HJR 1039, which would let the Legislature prevent assessed-value increases for homestead properties that are improved to mitigate flood damage, and the related implementing bill HB 1041; both passed 17-0. Public testimony on these items included some opposition to the flood-related amendment, but no floor debate changed the outcome. The final major item was CS/HB 1221 by Rep. Miller, which would require local option taxes to be renewed by voter referendum every eight years, with longer terms allowed for bonded projects. That bill drew the most extensive testimony and debate, with counties, tourism groups, and local officials warning about impacts on tourism funding, infrastructure, schools, and public safety, while supporters argued for taxpayer accountability and periodic review. After debate, the committee reported the bill favorably on a 13-4 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• My name is Sophia Templos, and I am a senior at the School of Environmental Studies in Apple Valley.
• I also work part-time as a nursing assistant with Ecumen in Apple Valley as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• That term is so confusing because you think it's a map. That's an acronym.
• I think Miss Anderson and I are talking apples and oranges.
• Okay, we'll put that on the map.
• Okay, we'll put that on the<02:54:36.399> map.
• Oh, I you know what I'm saying the map.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint House and Senate tourism briefing focused on the Hawaii Tourism Authority’s interim action plans, current projects, contract oversight, destination management action plans (DMAPs), and the impact of recent legislation and audit findings. Interim CEO Caroline Anderson said she accepted the temporary role to help address agency challenges, emphasized rebuilding trust, and said HTA is reviewing the state auditor’s concerns and posting its response publicly. She also described HTA’s mission and organizational structure under SB 1571, including reporting lines to the governor, the director, and the board, and outlined staff additions in finance, brand marketing, destination stewardship, and planning. A major topic was the permanent CEO search. HTA board chair Tata Po said the goal is to select a CEO within about four months, with the search firm still engaged, the position description being revised to reflect the new law and compensation changes, and approvals still needed before the job can be reposted. Members expressed frustration that the recruitment had been paused and questioned whether HTA has sufficient qualified leadership and staff during the interim period. Board leadership said the current staff is limited by vacancies but that they have confidence in the team and will add resources if needed. Members also pressed HTA on the role of the destination stewardship team and the CNHA/Kilohana contract, asking how staff oversight works and whether staff members were effectively wearing multiple hats. HTA explained that the stewardship team provides direction to contractors and that the work is divided among specialists overseeing projects such as tour guide certification, technical assistance, community tourism collaboratives, and a destination app. The committee also discussed whether the board can still vote on budgets under the new structure; the Attorney General’s office was cited as confirming that the board may advise, but the department director retains budget authority. HTA said it is working with CNHA and HVCB on contract and budget timing, with a goal of shifting to a calendar-year process so recipients know funding earlier.

Transcript Highlights:

• Don’t mess the apple cart. Just leave it alone.”
• provide money for math core, about a million over base in the biennium with Representative Rarrower map
• provide money for math core, about a million over base in the biennium with Representative Rarrower map
• <02:33:01.680> stars with representative rarrower map stars with representative rarrower map
• , the uh youth council, the uh the maps, the uh youth council, the math<02:38:02.160> corps,<02

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The map that I received is the same map that you received.
• map.
• compared to the map that is the underlying and existing map that we have now, and a map that does not
• And that's what is proposed in these maps, this map.
• And that's what is proposed in these maps, this map.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of the map drawer.
• I think this map before us is just as compact as the current map.
• Bill 1D map.
• Bill 1D map.
• map.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• map.
• compared to the map that is the underlying and existing map that we have now, and a map that does not
• And that's what is proposed in these maps, this map.
• And that's what is proposed in these maps, this map.
• Vote on a map to decide within 24 hours. Don't support this map. No regard. Don't support this map.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session with an opening prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved to the special order calendar to consider congressional redistricting legislation, beginning with Senate Bill 8D and then substituting the identical House Bill 1D. The bill would establish Florida’s congressional districts. Senator Gaetz, presenting the measure, said the Governor had proposed the map to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts, and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible and has occurred before in Florida and other states. He repeatedly said the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal, but that the Governor had the prerogative to propose it. The floor debate focused heavily on the legality and timing of the map, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Louisiana redistricting decision was announced during the session. Several senators, including Rouson, Sharief, Smith, Polsky, Arrington, Bracy Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and Berman, questioned whether the map complied with the Florida Constitution’s Fair Districts Amendment, the Voting Rights Act, and equal protection principles. They raised concerns about the short notice, lack of statewide public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony from the Governor’s representatives, the claimed severability of the Fair Districts Amendment, and the impact on minority communities and communities of interest. Gaetz generally declined to offer legal opinions, saying those issues would ultimately be for the courts, but he relayed the Governor’s position that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional and that the proposed map is race-neutral and compact. Members also debated whether the map’s population data and compactness scores justified the district lines, with critics arguing that the plan cracked and split communities in places such as Central Florida, Tampa Bay, and South Florida. Gaetz said the Governor’s office relied on 2020 census data plus updated population estimates from the Office of Economic and Demographic Research and the American Community Survey, and that the mapmaker said he drew the map himself without outside consultants. After questions concluded, the Senate adopted a motion to substitute HB 1D for SB 8D, read the bill a third time, and proceeded to debate the House bill. The transcript ends during debate, with no final vote on passage shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• map.
• And that's what is proposed in these maps, this map.
• This map is illegal. This map is expected to increase one party’s This map is illegal.
• Vote on a map to decide within 24 hours. Don't support this map. No regard. Don't support this map.
• map.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The map that I received is the same map that you received.
• map.
• compared to the map that is the underlying and existing map that we have now, and a map that does not
• This map is illegal. This map is expected to increase one party's This map is illegal.
• Vote on a map to decide within 24 hours. Don't support this map. No regard. Don't support this map.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.

Transcript Highlights:

• of the map drawer.
• We are the ones considering the map. We are the ones voting on the map.
• I think this map before us is just as compact as the current map.
• 1D map.
• 1D map.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for former member Mark Weissman and local officials Donna Lou Fiala and Eric C. Brecknitz, and the Pledge of Allegiance. Members approved the journal and adopted the Rules and Ethics Committee’s special order report setting the calendar and debate times for the day. The chamber then took up House Bill 1D, establishing Florida’s congressional districts, as the main item on the special order calendar. During questioning and debate on HB 1D, sponsors and opponents focused heavily on the map’s process and legality. Supporters argued the plan was based on a viable legal theory, used the 2020 census data as required, and was within the Legislature’s discretion to consider mid-cycle redistricting. Opponents repeatedly argued the map was drawn by the governor’s office using partisan data, without meaningful legislative or public input, and that it violated the Fair Districts Amendment by favoring a party, splitting more counties and municipalities, and reducing compactness. Several members also raised concerns about taxpayer costs, the absence of a new census or court order, and the Legislature’s role versus the governor’s office. After structured debate, the House voted on final passage of HB 1D and passed it 83-28. A motion to recess for two hours to consider a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision failed. Following passage of the redistricting bill, the House adopted a motion to adjourn sine die, ending the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• map.
• And that's what is proposed in these maps, this map.
• And that's what is proposed in these maps, this map.
• This map is illegal. This map is expected to increase one party's This map is illegal.
• map.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituted with House Bill 1D, both establishing Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Senator Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a proposed redistricting plan on short notice and argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional. He repeatedly said the Legislature was not being asked to prove the Governor’s legal theory, only to consider the proposal, and noted that no amendments were offered. A lengthy question-and-answer period followed, with senators raising concerns about the rushed process, lack of statewide public hearings, and the map’s effects on minority communities, compactness, communities of interest, and partisan fairness. Senators questioned whether the map cracked Latino and Black communities, whether partisan data was used, whether the Governor’s office had outside consultants, and whether the plan complied with the Florida Constitution, the Fair Districts Amendment, and the Voting Rights Act. Gates generally deferred on legal conclusions, said the Governor’s representatives had testified the map was race-neutral and used political data only as one factor, and emphasized that any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. After a motion to temporarily postpone failed by a recorded vote of 12 yeas to 23 nays, the Senate continued debate. Senators Rouson, Bernard, and others spoke in opposition, arguing the proposal was rushed, partisan, and harmful to communities of interest and minority voting power. Gates maintained that the Governor had a constitutional prerogative to propose the map and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The House companion bill was then substituted for the Senate bill, read a third time, and the chamber moved into final debate on the congressional redistricting plan.

Transcript Highlights:

• The map that I received is the same map that you received.
• map.
• compared to the map that is the underlying and existing map that we have now, and a map that does not
• This map is illegal. This map is expected to increase one party's This map is illegal.
• Vote on a map to decide within 24 hours. Don't support this map. No regard. Don't support this map.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D / House Bill 1D, which would establish Florida’s congressional districts. The sponsor, Sen. Gates, explained that the Governor had transmitted a redistricting plan two days earlier and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible, citing population growth and the Governor’s view that race-based districting is unconstitutional. Much of the floor time was spent in extended questioning about the process, the lack of public hearings compared with prior redistricting cycles, the use of population estimates from the Census/EDR/ACS, compactness scores, and whether the Governor’s office used partisan data or outside consultants. Gates repeatedly said he was relaying the Governor’s proposal and legal theory rather than offering his own legal opinion, and he said any constitutional challenge would be for the courts. A major portion of the debate focused on the U.S. Supreme Court’s newly issued Calais decision and its implications for the Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators questioned whether the decision struck down Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, whether it affected Florida’s constitutional ban on partisan gerrymandering, and whether the Legislature should postpone action to review the ruling. A motion to temporarily postpone the bill failed by voice vote and then by recorded vote, 12 yeas to 23 nays. Senators also raised concerns that the proposed map cracked minority communities, including Latino and Black populations in Central Florida and Tampa Bay, and that it would produce a heavily Republican-leaning map despite the state’s voter registration mix. After debate on the Senate bill, the chamber substituted the identical House companion bill, read it a third time, and proceeded to final debate. Opponents argued the map was an illegal partisan gerrymander, was based on assumptions rather than verified data, and would likely lead to litigation. Supporters maintained that the Governor had authority to propose a congressional map, that the plan was race-neutral, and that the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend it. The transcript ends during continued debate on House Bill 1D, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• it's our state legislative maps or our congressional maps or our judicial maps.
• versus any other maps that was presented, which map would you say has the public...” “...other maps
• that is more compact, a map that is more contiguous, a map that passes the eyeball test, a map that
• This map doesn't do that. This map... ...of no party. This map doesn't do that.
• Members, I come to you, and as a lot of my colleagues said, this map is a very fair map, a map that would

Bills: SR122, SR123, SR124, SCR12, HB940, HB221, HCR109, HCR58, HB27, HB143, HB205, HB259, HB267, HB288, HB308, HB403, HB405, HB414, HB417, HB478, HB546, HB548, HB555, HB557, HB609, HB670, HB672, HB740, HB779, HB786, HB796, HB812, HB848, HB909, HB915, HB917, HB921, HB930, HB933, HB938, HB971, HB1095, HB1096, HB1103, HB1129, HB1154, HB1166, HB1187, HB1195, HB1230, SB121, SCR22, SCR24, SB29, SB30, SB32, SB41, SB42, SB43, SB47, SB84, SB93, SB113, SB192, SB199, SB219, SB220, SB221, SB222, SB241, SB253, SB255, SB289, SB292, SB306, SB314, SB351, SB399, SB404, SB14, SB102, SB133, SB151, SB165, SB169, SB170, SB200, SB217, SB280, SB291, SB300, SB303, SB330, SB449, SB489, SB521, SB45, SB156, SB181, SB203, SB274, SB304, SB379, SB396, SB410, SB425, SB427, SB436, SB424, SCR61, SCR9, SB35, SB65, SB215, SB246, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, HCR31, HB296, HB299, HB322, HB364, HB519, HB535, HB538, HB568, HB571, HB622, HB635, HB676, HB772, HB784, HB1006, HB1018, HB1043, HB1070, HB1134, HB1239, HB62, HB193, HB203, HB210, HB220, HB228, HB246, HB420, HB475, HB486, HB574, HB584, HB750, HB813, HB815, HB826, HB870, HB949, HB953, HB1045, HB1092, HB1151, HB1162, HB1176, HB1177, HB1196, HB1214, HB1241, HB22, HB28, HB33, HB41, HB47, HB87, HB115, HB162, HB195, HB214, HB217, HB233, HB283, HB290, HB319, HB324, HB345, HB362, HB363, HB368, HB377, HB380, HB382, HB386, HB392, HB406, HB431, HB441, HB466, HB503, HB533, HB559, HB575, HB590, HB593, HB618, HB636, HB655, HB664, HB685, HB692, HB707, HB715, HB732, HB738, HB741, HB748, HB776, HB807, HB822, HB856, HB860, HB868, HB887, HB888, HB905, HB908, HB961, HB980, HB990, HB992, HB999, HB1000, HB1010, HB1146, HB1157, HB1233, HB1236, HB1243, HB17, HB36, HB73, HB119, HB126, HB129, HB133, HB140, HB159, HB166, HB211, HB226, HB245, HB271, HB280, HB337, HB351, HB354, HB399, HB677, HB712, HB723, HB726, HB728, HB759, HB789, HB844, HB850, HB966, HB1036, SB149, SB382, SB441, HB134, HB258, HB359, HB782

Keywords: SR122, Senate Resolution 122, Metairie Park Country Day School, Country Day Cajuns, Cajuns basketball, LHSAA, Louisiana High School Athletic Association, Division III Select, boys basketball, state championship, high school sports, athletic commendation, sports resolution, Lake Charles, Marsh Madness, Mike McGuire, Brennan White, Kellen Brewer, Calvary Baptist Academy, school recognition

Transcript Highlights:

• it's our state legislative maps or our congressional maps or our judicial maps.
• Senator Price's map only splits seven parishes. Your map, your current map, splits 15 parishes.
• that is more compact, a map that is more contiguous, a map that passes the eyeball test, a map that
• This map doesn't do that. This map... ...of no party. This map doesn't do that.
• This map...

Bills: SR122, SR123, SR124, SCR12, HB940, HB221, HCR109, HCR58, HB27, HB143, HB205, HB259, HB267, HB288, HB308, HB403, HB405, HB414, HB417, HB478, HB546, HB548, HB555, HB557, HB609, HB670, HB672, HB740, HB779, HB786, HB796, HB812, HB848, HB909, HB915, HB917, HB921, HB930, HB933, HB938, HB971, HB1095, HB1096, HB1103, HB1129, HB1154, HB1166, HB1187, HB1195, HB1230, SB121, SCR22, SCR24, SB29, SB30, SB32, SB41, SB42, SB43, SB47, SB84, SB93, SB113, SB192, SB199, SB219, SB220, SB221, SB222, SB241, SB253, SB255, SB289, SB292, SB306, SB314, SB351, SB399, SB404, SB14, SB102, SB133, SB151, SB165, SB169, SB170, SB200, SB217, SB280, SB291, SB300, SB303, SB330, SB449, SB489, SB521, SB45, SB156, SB181, SB203, SB274, SB304, SB379, SB396, SB410, SB425, SB427, SB436, SB424, SCR61, SCR9, SB35, SB65, SB215, SB246, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, HCR31, HB296, HB299, HB322, HB364, HB519, HB535, HB538, HB568, HB571, HB622, HB635, HB676, HB772, HB784, HB1006, HB1018, HB1043, HB1070, HB1134, HB1239, HB62, HB193, HB203, HB210, HB220, HB228, HB246, HB420, HB475, HB486, HB574, HB584, HB750, HB813, HB815, HB826, HB870, HB949, HB953, HB1045, HB1092, HB1151, HB1162, HB1176, HB1177, HB1196, HB1214, HB1241, HB22, HB28, HB33, HB41, HB47, HB87, HB115, HB162, HB195, HB214, HB217, HB233, HB283, HB290, HB319, HB324, HB345, HB362, HB363, HB368, HB377, HB380, HB382, HB386, HB392, HB406, HB431, HB441, HB466, HB503, HB533, HB559, HB575, HB590, HB593, HB618, HB636, HB655, HB664, HB685, HB692, HB707, HB715, HB732, HB738, HB741, HB748, HB776, HB807, HB822, HB856, HB860, HB868, HB887, HB888, HB905, HB908, HB961, HB980, HB990, HB992, HB999, HB1000, HB1010, HB1146, HB1157, HB1233, HB1236, HB1243, HB17, HB36, HB73, HB119, HB126, HB129, HB133, HB140, HB159, HB166, HB211, HB226, HB245, HB271, HB280, HB337, HB351, HB354, HB399, HB677, HB712, HB723, HB726, HB728, HB759, HB789, HB844, HB850, HB966, HB1036, SB149, SB382, SB441, HB134, HB258, HB359, HB782

Keywords: SR122, Senate Resolution 122, Metairie Park Country Day School, Country Day Cajuns, Cajuns basketball, LHSAA, Louisiana High School Athletic Association, Division III Select, boys basketball, state championship, high school sports, athletic commendation, sports resolution, Lake Charles, Marsh Madness, Mike McGuire, Brennan White, Kellen Brewer, Calvary Baptist Academy, school recognition

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, heard a guest minister’s prayer and the pledge, and dispensed with reading the journal. The chamber then received Legislative Bureau reports on numerous House bills, many of which were reported favorably or without amendments and ordered to third reading or to the Legislative Bureau. The Senate also adopted a House concurrent resolution commending Special Olympics Louisiana by a 35-0 vote, and it took up several Senate resolutions, including one urging the Navy to use a transparent and competitive acquisition strategy to protect jobs at Conrad Shipyard, one commending Metairie Park Country Day School, one designating Early Ed Day, and one offering condolences for Carolyn Ann Cherry Moore. The main floor debate centered on Senate Bill 121, the congressional redistricting bill. Senator Morris presented the bill as a response to the federal court’s Calais decision, arguing the current map was unconstitutional and that the new plan should avoid race as the predominant factor while using partisan advantage, incumbency protection, compactness, contiguity, and communities of interest. Senators questioned whether the proposal effectively created a 5-1 Republican map, whether it diluted Black and Democratic voting strength, and whether it split too many parishes. Morris said the map was drawn from the 2022 plan, tweaked in committee and again on the floor, and that litigation was likely regardless of the final version. Two competing amendments drew extended debate. Senator Morris’s amendment, which further refined his map, was adopted 26-10. Senator Price then offered an alternative map based on an amicus brief and algorithmic criteria, arguing it would create two opportunity districts, split fewer parishes, avoid using race, and better reflect the state’s partisan balance; supporters said it was fairer and more compact, but it failed 10-27. After the amendments, the Senate returned to SB 121 for further questions, with members continuing to debate whether the bill’s 5-1 structure was a lawful partisan gerrymander or an impermissible racial dilution of voting strength.

Transcript Highlights:

• the last map that you're drawing until you draw a new map or a new proposed map that you see here today
• The map is one of the most compact districts that was in that map carried over to this map.
• I guess my question was, you know, based on the current map in existence to this map, is this map an
• Entire map.
• We're not numbers on a map. We're not lines on a map.

Summary: The Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting met to consider HB 1D, which would establish Florida’s congressional districts using the governor’s proposed map, EOG PCRP 26. Representative Persons-Mulicka briefly introduced the bill, and Jason Jazeel and Jason Pareda of the governor’s office presented the legal rationale and map details. Jazeel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is not prohibited, that the governor’s position is to draw districts without considering race, and that federal equal-protection principles should control over state race-based redistricting provisions. Pareda said he drew the map alone using 2020 census data and census blocks, while also considering population growth estimates, traditional redistricting criteria, and county/city boundaries where feasible. Pareda described the map as race-neutral and said it keeps 48 counties whole, 382 cities whole, and has a boundary-analysis score of about 85.7%. He walked through regional changes, including major revisions in South Florida, adjustments in Central Florida, and changes in the Tampa Bay area, explaining that population shifts and the need for exact congressional population equality drove many of the district configurations. Members questioned the timing of the special session, the use of 2020 census data versus newer population estimates, the role of the legislature versus the governor, the legal basis for mid-decade redistricting, and whether the map complies with the Voting Rights Act and Fair Districts amendments. Motions to place witnesses under oath and to extend the committee meeting by 30 minutes both failed. During public testimony, every speaker who was heard opposed the map. Commenters argued that the proposal was a partisan power grab, would reduce Democratic and minority representation, and violated the Florida Constitution and voting rights protections. Several speakers criticized the short notice and lack of public input, while others said the map would confuse voters or split communities. The chair repeatedly reminded attendees to maintain decorum and limited each speaker to about one minute.