Transcript Highlights:

• So, depending on what program it is, we base it on these income levels.
• So, depending on what program it is, we base it on these income levels.
• So it depends on the program, but specifically within preservation, that is focusing on the building
• So it depends on the program, but specifically within preservation, that is focusing on the building
• <00:38:07.720> on<00:38:07.880> the the um residents so it it depends on the the um

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Housing Finance and Policy Committee met for an informational session with no bills taken up and no votes or formal actions. Members and staff introduced themselves, and Chair Speno said the committee would focus on understanding housing policy and barriers to building more homes, noting Minnesota’s housing shortage and the need to support both single-family and multifamily construction. House Research analyst Mary Davis and House Fiscal analyst Katrina Heimark gave an overview of the committee’s jurisdiction and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency’s programs and funding streams. Davis outlined areas the committee may hear about, including real estate law, landlord-tenant law, manufactured home parks, housing cooperatives, zoning, property taxes, and MHFA programs. Heimark described MHFA’s five main budget areas—development and redevelopment, housing stability, homeownership assistance, preservation, and resident/organization support—and reviewed recent appropriations, emphasizing that much of the large 2024–25 funding was one-time money and that ongoing base funding is lower in 2026–27. Members asked several questions about how prior appropriations were spent, whether unused funds return to the general fund, and whether funds can be repurposed. Heimark said transferred funds generally are not returned to the general fund if unspent, but are expected to be used for the purposes outlined in the appropriation; she also said she had requested more detailed expenditure information from the agency and would follow up. Questions also focused on who benefits from programs such as rental housing rehabilitation and the affordable rental investment fund, with the testifiers explaining that most MHFA programs are targeted to low- and moderate-income households and that income eligibility varies by program. The committee also discussed the new metro-area sales tax revenue dedicated to housing, with members requesting more detail on reporting, oversight, and allowable uses.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's always the case, but I think it's especially the case when we have very little growth, when employers
• Um and then also case across the board.
• I will add them in case I get questions.
• , >> and I figure that might be the case, >> and I figure that might be the case, right
• It'll depend on your you know.

Bills: HF3004, HF3663

Keywords: workforce development, youth employment, internships, mentoring, job opportunities, digital platform, online portal, career pathways, youth workforce, employment and economic development, DEED, general fund appropriation, nonprofit grant, social media outreach, digital outreach, workforce opportunities, teen jobs, young adults, career exploration, Minnesota youth

Transcript Highlights:

• We were just talking on another bill where they kept making the case that the public was never showing
• We'd have to have it set up in case somebody from public is there.
• We'd have to have a two systems set up in case anybody from the public was present.
• sure that, you know, we, we, we operate at the utmost transparency for our constituents and in your case
• Uh, the cameras are, you know, depending on what quality you want to get, $50 to $1000 depending on the

Bills: HB 279, HB 310, HB 365, HB 391, HB 420, HB 422, HB 638

Keywords: HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit, production area authorization, production zone, Texas Water Code, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, contested case hearing, administrative hearing, groundwater restoration, groundwater baseline, water quality, mining permit, restoration values, natural resources, environmental regulation, in-situ uranium mining, permit amendment, public hearing

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll see if that happens, depending on other things to consider.
• So in this case, currently, it's $3.72. That $3.72 is determined by a formula by CMS.
• In other words, we've lost money since that time, so that is not the case.
• It depends. We have a mixture of models. Okay, it's a mixture of models.
• In my case, Corona is a Rural Health Clinic and.

Transcript Highlights:

• I cannot speak for someone else in the case.
• But this one can, again, I don't think that's the case.
• It just depends on what the facts are in that case. Senator Osgood. Thank you, Mr. President.
• It just depends on what the facts are in that case. Senator Osgood. Thank you, Mr. President.
• Instead, it is on a case-by-case basis, topic by topic.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, introductions, and a moment of silence honoring service members killed in the conflict in Iran, including Florida native Captain Cody Cork. The chamber then moved through a special order calendar, taking up several bills on education, public safety, insurance, health, and local government policy. Many measures were accompanied by sponsor explanations and supportive remarks from members, often emphasizing constituent impacts, public safety, and administrative efficiency. The first major bill, SB 1062 on speech and debate education, was expanded through a delete-all amendment and passed 37-0 after extensive floor debate praising debate programs as a civic and educational tool. SB 1072 created an anti-Semitism task force in the Attorney General’s Office; an amendment clarified that criticism of Israel is not prohibited, and the bill passed 37-0. SB 1230/HB 1019 addressed PFAS “forever chemicals,” especially in firefighting foam, with phase-outs, testing, enforcement, and exceptions for certain federal, military, and emergency uses; it also passed 37-0 and was dedicated in memory of former firefighter Joe Casello. SB 1706 expanded the My Safe Florida Condominium Pilot Program with tighter eligibility rules, and SB 186 required broader seizure-response training and seizure action plans in schools; both passed unanimously. The Senate also approved SB 598 updating funeral and cemetery regulation, SB 990 authorizing protected cell captive insurance companies, SB 554 modernizing nonprofit corporation law, SB 560 streamlining foster care medication and oversight procedures, SB 684 easing electronic signature requirements for total-loss vehicle and vessel titles, and SB 778 revising forensic client services for certain defendants with intellectual disabilities or autism. Several bills were temporarily postponed, including SB 432, SB 928, and SB 620. Most of these measures passed by votes of 36-0 or 37-0 after brief debate or no debate. The most contentious item was SB 1134 on official actions of local governments related to DEI. The sponsor argued the bill would stop taxpayer funding and promotion of discriminatory or indoctrinating DEI practices, citing examples from several counties and cities. Multiple amendments sought to narrow penalties, protect good-faith officials, and preserve local proclamations and observances, including LGBTQ Pride Month and other cultural events, but those amendments were rejected. Debate centered on vagueness, local discretion, and whether the bill would chill legitimate government activity. The transcript cuts off during questioning on the underlying bill, before final disposition is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Future next lieutenant governor also the room to be able to just accommodate, whether, you know, depending
• It depends on what grades are moving over there. So it might not be all the one-to-one thing.
• “I think that’s why in the governor’s balanced budgets, she did set aside that $70 million just in case
• That's completely dependent on what you all determine is the adequacy foundation funding amount.
• Yes, in this case the governor put $70 million set aside in case we need to, because the difficulty with

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• More measles cases in Massachusetts?
• More measles cases in Massachusetts?
• Two Massachusetts court cases and two Supreme Court cases have protected our religious rights.
• Two Massachusetts court cases and two Supreme Court cases have protected our religious rights.
• Laura Friedland Case. Laura Friedland Case. Hi there.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health held a hearing on several vaccination-related bills, including proposals to eliminate non-medical or religious exemptions for school immunizations (notably H. 2554 and S. 1557), a bill to require or improve reporting and administration of immunization data and exemptions (described as the Community Immunity Act, S. 1618), and H. 2431, which would prohibit COVID-19, mRNA, or gene-altering vaccine requirements. The committee also heard testimony on H. 2463, which would classify funeral directors as public health workers for vaccine-priority purposes during emergencies. The chair reviewed testimony rules and repeatedly asked speakers to keep comments orderly and brief so the committee could hear as many people as possible. No votes were taken during the hearing. Testimony on H. 2554 and S. 1557 was sharply divided. Pediatricians, infectious disease specialists, public health advocates, and groups such as the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Massachusetts Medical Society, March of Dimes, Massachusetts Families for Vaccines, and several parents supported eliminating religious exemptions, arguing that vaccination protects medically vulnerable children and adults, improves herd immunity, and helps prevent outbreaks of measles, pertussis, and other diseases. They cited local school data showing pockets of lower coverage and incomplete reporting, and several speakers referenced outbreaks in other states and the need for stronger, more consistent reporting and exemption management. Opponents argued the bills would infringe on religious freedom and parental rights, force families to choose between faith and education, and unfairly target a small number of families; some also said Massachusetts already has high vaccination rates and that the real issue is incomplete data or the gap population rather than religious exemptions. H. 2431 drew testimony from supporters who said COVID-era mandates caused job losses, privacy concerns, and harm, and that the bill would prevent future requirements for COVID, mRNA, or gene-altering vaccines in schools, workplaces, and public settings. Supporters described personal experiences with alleged vaccine injury or mandate-related hardship. H. 2463 was supported by the Massachusetts Funeral Directors Association, which argued funeral directors work in infection-facing settings and should be eligible for vaccine priority during public health emergencies. The hearing featured extensive public testimony but no committee action beyond hearing the bills and taking questions from members.

Transcript Highlights:

• case team to IRP.
• And it's about 30 staff approximately per rate case. So this would be for Edison’s rate case.
• So this would be for Edison’s rate case, PG&E’s rate case, San Diego Gas and Electric’s rate case, for
• , energy rate case, yes?
• the rate case.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Where is my computer case? Is this one? Brooke.
• cases get started with a summons.
• Senator, open cases as far as trafficker investigations?
• , a lawyer, is telling me that that's not the case.
• When he contacts the FBI, they decline to take the case because they won't take cases under a million

Bills: HB2028, HB2047, HB2136, HB2244, HB2364, HB2406, HB2415, HB2557, HB2573, HB2589, HB2720, HB2749, HB2825, HB2861, HB2862, HB2870, HB2970, HB4070, HB4117, HCR2004, HCR2051

Keywords: community restitution, homelessness, indigence, court assessments, monetary obligations, forcible entry, detainer, writ of restitution, criminal trespass, judgment enforcement, civil terrorism, disorderly conduct, vandalism, political activism, public order, subversion, government security, evictions, judgment satisfaction, tenant rights

Transcript Highlights:

• So it depends on the turtle. It depends on the landscape, how far they will travel.
• So it depends on the turtle.<00:40:44.960> It<00:40:45.119> depends<00:40:45.440> on
• 00:40:51.839> could basically depending upon this could basically depending upon this could affect
• <01:07:38.240> of either a breeding unit in the case of either a breeding unit in the case
• ,<01:37:49.440> but which works fine in most cases, but which works fine in most cases, but

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Are you aware of his case? You know, I may be. I've read a number of the cases.
• His case was later dismissed.
• So again, I don't know that case.
• And this is related to that case at all? I'm not familiar with that case.
• I'm familiar with Texas cases. Okay, which Texas case are you familiar with?

Bills: SJR39, SB22, SB30, SB33, SB34, SB37, SB75, SB209, SB310, SB505, SB552, SB618, SB626, SB636, SB732, SB747, SB762, SB769, SB819, SB825, SB870, SB926, SB964, SB1030, SB1080, SB1099, SB1124, SB1177, SB1208, SB1233, SB1314, SB1325, SB1333, SB1405, SB1455, SB1506, SB1524, SB1541, SB1577, SB1579, SB1596, SB1646, SB1667, SB1727, SB1750, SB1758, SB1760, SB1791, SB1804, SB1806, SB1869, SB1923, SB1927, SB1951, SB1960, SB1962, SB2023, SB2024, SB2056, SB2078, SB2122, SB2129, SB2180, SB2183, SB2185, SB2207, SB2252, SB2361, SB2365, SB2368, SB2405, SB2411, SB2420, SB2425, SB2569, SB2717, SJR36, SJR50, SJR39, SJR63, SJR68, SCR12, SCR39, SCR38, SCR37, SCR42, SCR29, SB762, SB1596, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB1505, SB583, SB957, SB1502, SB507, SB1026, SB1349, SB1433, SB1434, SB310, SB505, SB264, SB1364, SB1376, SB1585, SB1772, SB2016, SB1163, SB619, SB1122, SB1877, SB732, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1333, SB1436, SB964, SB287, SB2143, SB261, SB1247, SB1882, SB618, SB393, SB2243, SB2226, SB1919, SB1791, SB22, SB651, SB1080, SB826, SB1079, SB1243, SB1504, SB1851, SB1879, SB2237, SB1257, SB2034, SB1522, SB1151, SB596, SB1191, SB226, SB570, SB870, SB991, SB60, SB1401, SB1728, SB586, SB529, SB217, SB209, SB1923, SB1839, SB387, SB1874, SB1872, SB1873, SB1921, SB1883, SB1620, SB1838, SB2024, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB2166, SB510, SB33, SB2420, SB1860, SB1541, SB1314, SB1398, SB1869, SB1750, SB855, SB1233, SB2425, SB2037, SB1758, SB1759, SB2365, SB1924, SB1818, SB1405, SB1762, SB1968, SB1977, SB2077, SB2321, SB1662, SB1663, SB2124, SB2204, SB1855, SB863, SB37, SB819, SB2078, SB2252, SB1962, SB2253, SB825, SB1577, SB1184, SB2018, SB2206, SB1901, SB1030, SB2368, SB1963, SB1960, SB1643, SB1625, SB1299, SB841, SB668, SB584, SB231, SB2411, SB1085, SB2431, SB2231, SB1490, SB530, SB34, SB1261, SB552, SB1099, SB1646, SB2180, SB1804, SB1937, SB1936, SB2569, SB1372, SB1208, SB1124, SB1506, SB1806, SB1868, SB2361, SB2314, SB769, SB1409, SB2122, SB434, SB1214, SB1951, SB2183, SB2046, SB1667, SB1870, SB1727, SB2405, SB2127, SB1975, SB1760, SB1734, SB1335, SB2066, SB2129, SB2246, SB2439, SB1624, SB1244, SB1468, SB2717, SB1612, SB1262, SB604, SB2395, SB2185, SB1832, SB1745, SB1746, SB2207, SB2023, SB1784, SB1524, SB626, SB528, SB437, SB269, SB1137, SB968, SB636, SB747, SB1325, SB1789, SB1455, SB2056, SB75, SB1940, SB2052, SB1927, SB2010, SB1579, SB2068, SB3034, SB844, SB1920, SB1177, SB1558, SB1236, SB1044, SB926, SB884, SB463, SB331, SB227, SB240, SB517, SB1200, SB1410, SB1626, SB1845, SB1863, SB2216, SB2681, SB1717, SB2053, SB546, SB2141, SB2949, SB2323, SB2200, SB2332, SB2199, SB1642, SB1150, SB1757, SB2050, SB1138, SB2051, SB2626, SB2458, SB1864, SB30, SB2201, SB1862, SB1583, SB1583, SB1055, SB2660, SB1898, SB2662, SB2662, SB2161, SB2161, SB2964, SB2881, SB1065, SB1065, SB801, SB2743, SB2533, SB2533, SB1413, SB1413

Keywords: constitutional amendment, veto override, legislature power, governor, Texas Constitution, Texas, moving image industry, incentive program, film production, grant funding, job creation, economic development, wildfire, wildfire mitigation, wildfire prevention, volunteer fire department, Texas A&M Forest Service, West Texas A&M University, prescribed burning, fuel loading

Transcript Highlights:

• In many cases, these individuals lack decision-making capacity.
• In some cases, that delay can prove fatal.
• Limiting enforcement to the AG also means that if he cannot take the case, then no one can take the case
• So in any case, I appreciate you being forward.
• What is considered feasible in this case?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Would you just please hang around in case we need you again. Thank you very much.
• Um, that's the case for both our dozers and our motor graders at this point. Uh, so Mr.
• You might hang around too just in case something pops up if you can. We will move on.
• In either case, Texas has operational control of the aircraft. The operator doesn't.
• Oh, depending on the type of aircraft, you can go from anywhere from 60 days to 180 days.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it depends on the platform. But to put a fine point on it talking to industry experts.
• That's the case for both our dozers and our motor graders at this point. So Mr.
• In this case, some or all the aircraft can be subleased to other states to offset costs.
• Oh, that's a question that, depending on what you'd be asking for...
• So in some cases they're so close, so we will get you some zoomed in images of that area.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You cannot take into account any of these protected classes, as should be the case.
• But now classes, as should be the case.
• percolates and depending on the aquifers in the municipality.
• percolates and depending on the aquifers in the municipality.
• <00:55:17.040> on depending on depending on when<00:55:20.240> defense<00:55:21.520>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee on SB 170 opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and then worked through the bill section by section, focusing first on a housing-related provision that would prohibit municipalities from requiring occupants to be related by blood or marriage. The chair proposed adding “school enrollment status” as a protected class to prevent towns from limiting where students may live, especially in Durham. Members debated whether that phrase was too vague and whether “educational status,” “enrollment status,” or “school enrollment status” was the best wording. Public testimony raised concerns that adding a new protected class could have broader implications under the state’s anti-discrimination law and could also affect municipal zoning authority, while supporters argued the bill was aimed at preventing local rules that restrict student housing and group living arrangements. The subcommittee did not take a final vote on that language during the discussion. The committee then turned to land-use and subdivision provisions. The Department of Environmental Services testified that its test-pit and related land-development rules are already protective of groundwater and surface water, and that municipalities sometimes impose stricter setbacks or other requirements locally. Builders and housing advocates argued that more stringent local requirements for test pits, well siting, and related approvals add time and cost and can impede housing development, while some municipal concerns were raised about aquifer and wellhead protection overlay districts and local groundwater safeguards. Public testimony also supported making state standards uniform across municipalities, though one speaker noted that local and state review processes can differ and that the bill could simplify approvals. The subcommittee also discussed a road-length provision, with one member supporting limits on municipal caps that could impede development and another suggesting a possible water-and-sewer-capacity qualifier. Additional sections were explained as allowing utilities and infrastructure to be placed in subdivision open spaces or perimeter buffers, and requiring municipalities to act quickly on plan changes after initial review. The chair indicated support for several of the sections as drafted, and the discussion ended with the committee moving through the remaining provisions without recorded final votes in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if that's the case, we'll certainly never hit 2.5% on it.
• In some cases, they have graveyards out there. And so...
• In some cases, they have graveyards out there.
• So because there's been court cases, there's been studies, there's just been court cases, there's been
• It all depends on the applicant, what they're trying to accomplish.

Summary: The committee first considered several local property-transfer and wildlife/fisheries bills, including SB 229 (Bojeur Parish property transfer), SB 71 (Lafayette Parish property transfer), and a series of Department of Wildlife and Fisheries measures. SB 203 simplified possession rules for fish on multi-day trips and remote camps; SB 429 created an administrative path to register “orphan” boats with lapsed registrations; SB 204 removed a residency-based restriction on certain commercial fishing gear licenses; SB 205 reduced duplicate registration requirements for federally documented boats; SB 213 clarified titling rules for vessels and outboard motors; and SB 257 removed Social Security number requirements from certain commercial fishing tags. Each of these bills was reported favorable, generally without objection, after brief explanations from sponsors and department counsel about reducing red tape, improving enforcement, or modernizing records. The committee also heard SB 214, which would allow the Teche-Vermilion Fresh Water District to stop pumping during an imminent flood threat identified by the National Weather Service or GOSEP, addressing liability concerns and giving local officials more flexibility in emergencies. SB 274, as amended, required lead hazard risk assessments for certain child care, early learning, and pre-kindergarten facilities and required hazards found in assessments to be addressed before licensing. Both bills were reported favorable. SB 379, a technical reorganization bill for the Department of Conservation and Energy, received two amendment sets: one changing investment language and another standardizing judicial-review procedures and online notice requirements; it was reported favorable after those amendments. The committee then adopted HCR 62, urging FEMA to review flood maps every five years instead of every ten and to better account for local flood-protection projects, with members discussing the burden of flood insurance and the need for FEMA to recognize levees, pump stations, and elevated homes. HCR 78 was also reported favorable, memorializing Congress to pass the American Seafood Competitiveness Act of 2026 in support of Louisiana’s seafood industry. HB 662, as substituted, was reported favorable after being rewritten to codify the department’s internal protocol for seized sick, injured, or orphaned wildlife, prioritizing release, rehabilitation, placement, and euthanasia as a last resort. Finally, the committee considered two more contentious items. HR 216, which urged repudiation of the Louisiana Climate Action Plan of 2022, drew extended debate over whether the plan had been adopted without legislative input and whether it could affect permits or future policy; after discussion, the sponsor voluntarily deferred the resolution to return with a revised approach focused on a legislative hearing or review. SCR 24, dealing with chronic wasting disease rules, was introduced with amendments that would raise the prevalence threshold, cap samples, allow zone removal after three years without new detections, and lift baiting/feed prohibitions above a higher prevalence level; the transcript cuts off before final action on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• We know that Trump is using the case of Kilmar-Brigo-Garcia to test his own limits.
• As he argued those cases, his reputation grew.
• But it is clear in the cases about which we know that due process has been denied.
• In his closing argument in that case, the case involving the British soldiers, Adams said, 'Facts are
• He has made judges dependent on his will alone.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate convened with routine opening business, including the Pledge of Allegiance and the filing of several reports, such as the Parole Board’s 2023 annual report and a fiscal year 2025 prior-year deficiency report from the Comptroller. Those reports were ordered placed on file. The remainder of the session was devoted almost entirely to a series of brief statements by the Senate President and many senators responding to what they described as federal actions under the Trump administration, especially immigration enforcement without due process, court defiance, and broader threats to democratic norms. Senators repeatedly condemned the detention and deportation of immigrants, students, researchers, and even some U.S. citizens, citing specific Massachusetts cases including Ramesa Ozturk of Tufts, Juan Francisco Mendez, Sunua Petrova, and others. Members also raised concerns about cuts to federal funding affecting Massachusetts, including NIH and university research, asthma prevention, education, climate resilience, and veterans’ services. Several senators tied these issues to the state’s economy, higher education, health care, and immigrant communities, and many invoked Massachusetts and American history to argue for due process, the rule of law, and resistance to authoritarianism. A few policy responses were mentioned, including support for increasing funding for the Attorney General to handle lawsuits, and references to bills or proposals such as the Immigrant Legal Defense Act, the Dignity Not Deportation Act, the Safe Communities Act, and the Location Shield Act. The Senate President also referenced the chamber’s broader “Response 2025” initiative. No substantive legislation was debated or voted on during the statements themselves, aside from the adoption of an order to adjourn and the setting of the next meeting for Thursday at 11:00 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, it's a 2000 Hawaii Supreme Court case.
• of the case.
• Um, it depends on... It can take a while. It depends on the specific permit in question.
• It is a contested case process.
• The likelihood of a contested case, several contested cases, is high.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In this case, the three-mile radius was $74,000.
• However, I do not anticipate this number would be lower in a lot of cases.
• In this case, everything else stays static except the sales price goes up.
• sales price of that area and still make a profit or a gain in this case.
• It's also coming from an agricultural seller in most cases.

Transcript Highlights:

• So essentially, we handle on average about 17,000 some case assignments per year.
• and deflect case or deflect cases from prosecution in certain appropriate circumstances. ...or deflect
• cases from prosecution in certain appropriate circumstances.
• Section 3 provides a cross-reference on case evaluation and supervision.
• On case evaluation and supervision fees, Section 4 allows DOCR to perform a risk assessment in case evaluation

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to review fiscal aspects of House Bills 1417 and 1425, both part of a broader criminal justice reentry package. HB 1417 would eliminate the $35 public defender application fee and end court-ordered reimbursement of indigent defense costs, while also removing the $55 monthly community supervision fee. Testimony from the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents and the Department of Corrections said the bill would replace lost revenue with general fund appropriations of about $310,000 for indigent defense and $1.5 million for supervision fees, and that the fees are rarely collected and can hinder reentry. Representative Clemene said the bill is intended to reduce barriers to successful community reintegration and improve data and supervision practices. HB 1425 would create and fund front-end diversion, deflection, and pretrial services programs. Supporters described it as allowing prosecutors and local jurisdictions to divert appropriate low-level offenders from prosecution, establish deflection programs for people with behavioral health needs, and expand pretrial services. The bill includes a pilot program in three counties, a $1 million appropriation to DOCR for one FTE and contracts with local providers, $750,000 to DHS for treatment services, and $55,000 for a study of pretrial services cost savings. Committee members asked several questions about how the pilot counties would be chosen, how the consultant study would be procured, and what services the DHS funds would cover. The committee also heard House Bill 1603, which would provide a $500,000 matching grant for Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act compliance, with $100,000 available to each of North Dakota’s five tribes if matched. Sponsor testimony said the funds would support a Historical Society NAGPRA compliance committee and help catalog and repatriate human remains and cultural items in coordination with tribes. After questions about the federal mandate and the difficulty of identifying artifacts, the committee voted 4-0 to give HB 1603 a do-pass recommendation, with Senator Meyer assigned to carry it forward.