Transcript Highlights:

• All right, we'll continue our back discussion. We're going to get it started.
• So I'll give it back to Dan at this point.
• We're doing it on the back end of things.
• You could come back to me in the chair. We could circulate it.
• David back there, good job to you. ...guys.

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, let's come back to the room then.
• And then on Friday, we could bring it back with the amendment.
• And then on Friday, we'll have you back first on the agenda.
• It gives people an opportunity to go back, Mr.
• Seeing no one, let's come back to our room.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me get back to you on that.
• I know he has to come back at some point because his bag is in my office. He's going to be back.
• Okay, well, I don't want to take you back then.
• For example, when I got back, I was in leadership for four years before then I got back into leadership
• and then I got back on the legislative council.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll bring it back to the committee. Any questions? Mr. DiMaio.
• This bill puts money back into people's pockets.
• away from the government and gets it back into their pockets.
• I'm just suggesting we shouldn't be taking... ...back away from the government and gets it back into
• And also we can go back three years...

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation held its first regular hearing of the 2025-26 session, adopted its proposed committee rules on a 5-0 vote, and reinstated a suspense file for bills with fiscal impacts over the committee threshold. The chair explained that only AB 418 would be eligible for an immediate vote, while several other measures would be held for suspense consideration because of budget constraints. AB 330 was pulled by the author. AB 418 by Wilson, which would create a clearer process and administrative remedy for county Chapter 8 tax sales, received support from county tax collectors and housing and taxpayer groups. Supporters said the bill would add transparency, due process, and a noticed public hearing for negotiated sales of tax-defaulted properties, while helping counties dispose of low-value or problematic properties more efficiently. The committee voted 6-0 to send AB 418 to Appropriations. Several other bills were heard and then referred to suspense: AB 27 by Chau, which would exclude Chiquita Canyon landfill relief payments from gross income and protect recipients’ eligibility for public benefits, drew strong support from affected residents and environmental advocates; AB 258 by Conley would increase funding for California fairs, with supporters emphasizing fairs’ emergency-response role; AB 397 by Gonzalez would expand the California Young Child Tax Credit into a broader child tax credit for older children; and AB 398 by Aaron would set a $300 minimum refundable Cal EITC benefit. The committee also heard AB 231 by Tye, which would offer a tax credit to microbusinesses that hire formerly incarcerated people, and it too was referred to suspense after supportive testimony from reentry and small-business advocates.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We are back on the bill.
• We are back on the bill.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of member introductions recognizing interns, pages, volunteers, and the retirement of Pastor Gary Austin from the sergeant’s office. Leadership also announced that budget talks with the House were continuing and that senators would not need to plan on being in next week, suggesting progress toward a budget framework. After routine floor business, the chamber took up a major third-reading measure on citizen initiatives and several education bills, followed later by returning messages from the House on health and school-safety measures. The most extensive debate centered on the citizen initiative bill, which sponsors said was intended to protect the constitutional amendment process from fraud and abuse based on election-crime investigations and a large state report on petition fraud. Supporters argued the bill would add reasonable guardrails, prevent misuse of public funds, and preserve integrity while still allowing grassroots participation. Opponents from both parties argued it would make citizen-led amendments much harder by adding costs, deadlines, criminal penalties, and administrative burdens that would chill participation and favor wealthy or corporate interests. After lengthy debate, the Senate voted 28-10 to pass the bill. The chamber then passed several education measures with little or no opposition, including bills tied to Bright Futures, dual enrollment, Florida ABLE, teacher preparation, and other education policy updates, all by 38-0. Later, the Senate concurred in House amendments on a stem cell therapy bill, an EKG requirement for student athletes, and a cardiac emergency bill, each passing 37-0. The House also sent back a school safety bill with amendments affecting child care facility partnerships with law enforcement, temporary door locks during active assailant incidents, supervision windows, and funding for panic alarm systems; the transcript ends as that bill is being explained.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We are back on the bill.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of member introductions recognizing interns, pages, and a retiring Senate employee. Leadership also announced that budget talks with the House were continuing and that senators should not plan to be in next week, with hopes of sharing more budget news soon. The chamber then moved to third reading and took up a major bill on citizen initiatives and constitutional amendments, with sponsors saying it was needed to address documented petition fraud and to protect the integrity of the process. That bill drew extensive debate. Supporters argued that recent investigations showed widespread fraud in petition gathering, that the measure would add reasonable guardrails, and that it would prevent taxpayer-funded government messaging from being used to influence ballot measures. Opponents said the bill would make it much harder for ordinary Floridians to place amendments on the ballot by adding costs, deadlines, registration requirements, fines, and felony exposure, and they warned it would chill grassroots participation and effectively favor wealthy or corporate-backed campaigns. After debate, the Senate passed the bill 28-10. The Senate then adopted several House amendments and concurred on a series of education and public-safety measures, including bills on stem cell therapy, student-athlete electrocardiograms, cardiac emergency planning in schools, school safety, Bright Futures and other education policy items, and educator preparation. Most of those measures passed unanimously or with overwhelming support, and the chamber also recognized additional interns and a long-serving education advocate before recessing and returning to continue with House messages.

Transcript Highlights:

• But can we get back to those that are on Prop. 36?
• Bringing it back to the dais, any comments, questions? Mr.
• Bringing it back to the dais.
• Bringing it back to the dice.
• Bringing it back to the dais. Any comments or questions?

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you back up?
• Can you back up?
• to for DHS to point back to.
• So that also further complicates it because there's nothing to go back to for DHS to point back to.
• But it would go back out for a 30-day public comment and back through Public Health and this body.

Summary: The Arkansas Administrative Rules Subcommittee met to review a large slate of agency rules and related reports. The chair announced that several items were stricken from the agenda and that the maternal health providers and remote monitoring rules were pulled by the agency. The committee filed reports on emergency rules, ALC subcommittee rule reviews, and administrative directives, then moved through agency rules from the Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce/Insurance, Department of Corrections, and multiple divisions of the Department of Human Services. Most rules were explained as technical updates or implementations of 2025 legislation and were approved without objection. Examples included repeal of obsolete equine ID-chip rules, updates to agriculture financing and pesticide rules, removal of duplicative workers’ compensation plan language, a unified visitation rule for correctional facilities, DHS marketing rules for PASS programs, a comprehensive DCFS policy manual revision, Medicaid-related changes for fictive kin, ABLE accounts, presumptive eligibility for pregnant women, SNAP work requirements and alien eligibility, coverage for certain incarcerated youth, nurse aide training updates, and permanent rules for state employee insurance and procurement. The committee also approved requests to exclude the Insurance Department from rulemaking requirements for Act 772 on forced organ harvesting and for restorative reproductive medicine, with the department saying it would issue rules later when more guidance is available. The most extended discussion concerned DHS’s dental Medicaid rate rule under Act 1025. Members and witnesses debated whether the statute’s language covered only oral surgeons or also general dentists performing oral surgery procedures, and whether the rate increase should apply more broadly to the services rather than the provider title. DHS said it was following the black-letter language of the law and could not confirm a broader interpretation without further approvals and funding, while legislators and a Dental Association representative said the intent was to increase payment for the services, especially in rural areas. Members also discussed the possibility of fixing the language in a future session or through a new rule if approvals and CMS review allow. Despite the concerns, the committee approved the rule. The meeting ended with approval of rule review reports and monthly updates, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to jump a little bit ahead on the report and go back to ...go back to December.
• I mean, roughly, I think it's because when we pay back, it's more like 125 when we charge back.
• I mean, roughly, I think it's because when we pay back, it's more like 125 when we charge back.
• back.
• So if you look at, like, on that back to the first page, So if you look at, like, on that back to the

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to begin its study of charitable gaming and the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations, a study directed by Senate Bill 2334. Legislative Council gave an overview of the constitutional and statutory framework for charitable gaming, site authorizations, rent limits, proceeds, and recent legislative changes. The Attorney General’s Gaming Division then clarified the financial flow of gaming, explaining that in fiscal year 2025 North Dakota had about $2.5 billion in gross gaming proceeds, with roughly 88-90% paid back in prizes and about $256 million available to organizations after taxes; most of that activity came from electronic pull tabs. Members asked for more detail on winnings, replays, rent, and the breakdown of manufacturer/distributor revenues, and the AG’s office agreed to provide supplemental information. The committee also heard from the League of Cities and the Association of Counties about local site authorization. Cities said they have a limited role in approving gaming sites, can adopt policies after public hearing, may charge up to $100, and can set certain conditions, including local nexus requirements, but cannot require donations or force a specific charity or site. The League said it had worked with stakeholders on a model policy to provide more consistency, though members raised concerns that local requirements could become too restrictive for charities serving broader areas. Counties said the issue is mostly a city matter, with little county involvement beyond minimal site fees and general site approval. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance testified in support of the study and provided IRS-related material suggesting charities may use asset diversification, while emphasizing it had not taken a position on whether charities should own bars. Members questioned whether bar ownership is being used for site stability or to channel charitable gaming dollars, and whether city policies might disadvantage charities with broader missions. The committee also discussed the relationship between gaming organizations, manufacturers, and distributors, including restrictions on incentives and interference, and asked for more information on those entities and their ownership. Later in the meeting, the Racing Commission gave its regular update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, ADW providers, purse and promotion funds, a new TRPB contract, and concerns about cease-and-desist actions from other states. Finally, the State Hospital superintendent briefly reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, including the SORT team, training, and security assistance for the hospital campus.

Transcript Highlights:

• So good to have you back.
• Were they here so that we don't have to call them back, or we can call them back?
• Were they here so that we don't have to call them back, or we can call them back?
• Were they here so that we don't have to call them back, or we can call them back?
• Were they here so that we don't have to call them back, or we can call them back?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• >> Oh, you went back. >> Oh, you went back.
• We've went back and looked at the history. Some of these go back to 1929.
• We've went back and looked at the history. Some of these go back to 1929.
• >> Back<01:45:15.760> then. >> Back then. >> Back then.
• We can come back. answer here. We can come back.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Dedicated Funds met to review inactive and dedicated accounts, note prior legislation that had passed, and begin its annual review of agency funds. Members discussed several inactive funds, including some HHS-related accounts, a law enforcement memorial fund, and possible cleanup of accounting references where funds had been reorganized or merged. Staff noted that some newer funds may simply not have started receiving revenue yet, and the committee agreed to follow up on specific accounts later rather than address everything immediately. The committee then heard from Fish and Game on its dedicated funds. Topics included the statewide public boat access account, which is used for boat ramp and access-site maintenance and is supported by boat registration fees and federal funds; the ORV education, training, and enforcement account, which has declined over time and may need attention because revenue depends heavily on weather and snowmobile use; and the search and rescue account, which is funded by Hike Safe cards, a $1 fee from boat and OHRV registrations, and court-ordered fees. Fish and Game also explained that the conservation license plate fund had been merged into the non-game species management account, which is supported by donations, federal funds, and a statutory general fund transfer, and that pheasants are treated as game species under a separate program. The committee spent considerable time on the lifetime license account, an off-book Treasury-held account that collects lifetime license sales and returns funds to Fish and Game based on annual sales plus 9% of the fund balance. Members questioned why the account’s presentation did not clearly show the transfer as a revenue reduction and suggested the reporting format needed cleanup so the flow of money would be easier to understand. Fish and Game said the account is operating properly and that the transfer to the unrestricted Fish and Game fund exceeded $400,000 in the most recent year. The committee also reviewed the publications and fundraising revolving fund, which keeps a $100,000 balance for inventory purchases and transfers excess year-end funds to the unrestricted Fish and Game fund; members again raised concerns that the reporting format did not clearly show the transfer, and staff said they could add a note or other clarification.

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, I yield back. Speaker, I yield back.
• I yield back. VI strong. I yield back.
• I yield back. Gentleman Medicaid budget. I yield back.
• I yield back. communities. I yield back.
• I yield back. you want a democracy? I yield back.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, April 29, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• One more back, if I can go back one more. There we go. The result was they didn't grow.
• Now they've come back.
• To get it back.
• And it was a proposal that was put forth back in an amendment. I mean, the idea goes back to 2007.
• Just a few years back.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Atlantic sea scallop fishery, with particular attention to Massachusetts ports, federal scallop management, the proposed reopening of the Northern Edge on Georges Bank, and permit stacking/consolidation. The chair opened by noting the hearing would take written and oral testimony, that time was limited, and that the discussion was intended to inform legislative engagement with federal regulators rather than decide the issue directly. Dan McCarron of the Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries and Dr. Kate O’Keefe of the New England Fishery Management Council outlined the federal management structure under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the role of annual catch limits and rotational closures, and the economic importance of scallops to New Bedford, Gloucester, and other Massachusetts ports. O’Keefe said the council’s current scallop framework is based on annual management, research surveys, and public input, and that recent environmental changes and uncertainty are affecting catch advice and biomass. Dr. O’Keefe and later Dr. Kevin Stokesbury of UMass Dartmouth described the fishery’s recent condition: abundance has increased in some areas, but biomass has fallen because many scallops are still too small to harvest, and changing ocean conditions and natural mortality are affecting the stock. They said the Northern Edge action was considered as a joint scallop/habitat framework but was discontinued in 2024 because the council could not reconcile competing objectives involving scallop yield, habitat protection, and impacts on other species such as cod, lobster, and herring. Stokesbury emphasized the long-running collaborative survey work with industry, said the fishery remains highly productive, and argued that the science supports careful rotational management and that the Northern Edge could be highly productive for scallops, though he acknowledged habitat tradeoffs. Committee members pressed both witnesses on why the issue had remained unresolved for so long and whether the council could revisit it through a future framework. Representatives of the Sustainable Scalloping Fund, including attorney Drew Kavage, John Lees, Sam Blasley, and Tony Alvernes, urged support for reopening the Northern Edge and for permit stacking, which would allow more than one scallop permit on a vessel while keeping ownership caps in place. They argued the fishery is a major economic driver, that industry-funded research has supported sustainable management, and that stacking would help family-owned operators reduce costs, improve safety, and avoid financial distress. They also stressed the need to protect working waterfront infrastructure in New Bedford and other ports. The chair said he was not opposed to stacking in principle but wanted to avoid a slippery slope toward excessive consolidation or private equity control; he noted that any stacking change would require an amendment to the fishery management plan or federal action. No votes were taken, and the hearing concluded with an invitation for continued engagement and future updates on the council process.

Transcript Highlights:

• back to taxpayers, $9 billion. back to taxpayers, $9 billion.
• refuses to give back to ratepayers. refuses to give back to ratepayers.
• um<00:13:27.360> Representative will circle back to um Representative will circle back
• Why don't we give it back in great.
• <00:38:18.560> for<00:38:18.720> our also charge us back for our also charge us back

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House debated a motion to suspend the rules so House File 76 could be recalled from committee, given second and third readings, and brought to final passage. The bill, carried by Representative Greenman, would limit the amount of investor-owned utility executive compensation that can be charged back to Minnesota ratepayers, with the cap tied to the governor’s salary. Supporters argued that utility customers should pay for service, not lavish CEO pay, and cited Xcel Energy’s recent CEO raise, high utility bills, and growing energy affordability burdens on Minnesota households. They said shareholders, not ratepayers, should bear executive compensation costs and pointed to similar action in Colorado as evidence the policy could work without driving executives away. Several members questioned the bill’s practical impact and cost estimates. Representative Swedzinski asked how much the measure would affect individual ratepayers and suggested the amount was relatively small, while also arguing that the state should focus on larger reforms and other available funds. Representative Greenman responded that the exact per-customer impact was not before the body but emphasized that millions of dollars in executive compensation were being passed through to customers. Representative Acomb and Representative Craft supported the bill, describing investor-owned utilities as monopolies that already earn strong returns and saying the proposal would shift costs from ratepayers to shareholders. Opponents argued the bill was not serious policy and would not meaningfully lower bills, warning it could discourage talent and comparing it to broader state spending and governance issues. Representative Niska said the proposal amounted to “class warfare,” argued utilities need to pay competitively to attract competent leadership, and urged a no vote. The debate also included repeated points of order after members criticized one another personally; the presiding officer reminded members to confine remarks to the motion. A roll call and a call of the house were requested during the debate, but the transcript provided does not include the final vote result.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our water is in the back of the room. Coffee is in the back of the room as well.
• , come back and do another school.
• So she went back to another school. She went back, then she did a three-day school.
• come back and do another school so she went back to another school she went back then she did a three
• We go back, I guess, to the early '90s.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Oklahoma school safety from Commissioner Tipton, OSSI director Mike Fike, OACTIC director Alan Young, OSBI lieutenant Isiles Keene, and Rogers County Sheriff Scott Walton. The main focus was a statewide school-safety framework built around response, prevention, and recovery. Witnesses described training law enforcement in the LASER active-shooter response model, adding A-TURK training for coordinated law enforcement/fire/EMS response, expanding run-hide-fight and Stop the Bleed instruction for educators and staff, conducting risk and vulnerability assessments, and using the Rave panic-button system and the ProtectOK tip app to speed reporting and dispatch. They also emphasized behavioral threat assessment and management (BTAM) teams as a prevention tool to identify and support at-risk students before violence occurs. Members asked about administrator and teacher training, school counselor involvement, how apps are deployed on personal versus school devices, and whether schools are actually using the programs. Witnesses said administrators, counselors, and SROs should be part of BTAM, that training is most effective when it is realistic and repeated, and that Rave is geofenced and typically invited onto devices by schools. Several members stressed that school leaders must buy in for safety plans to work, and one member raised concerns about traumatic training and the need for mental-health support as part of prevention. Witnesses said mental-health referral and monitoring are part of BTAM, but the school and local partners must manage the process. OSBI’s lieutenant added broader context, comparing school safety to fire safety and noting that Oklahoma still lacks some statutory requirements for intruder drills and stronger penalties for school threats. He also discussed possible future tools such as surveillance analytics, gunshot detection, ballistic-rated doors and walls, and better access controls, while warning that technology should supplement, not replace, basic safety systems and training. Sheriff Walton closed by describing rural response challenges and his foundation’s effort to place ballistic shields in schools and police cars, arguing that human resources and rapid communication remain the biggest gaps. No votes or formal actions were taken in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam President, House Bill 1193 is also known as the Back the Blue grant.
• Madam President, House Bill 1193 again is the Back the Blue grant.
• We put it back for now for discussion.
• And then when that got killed on the floor, it went back to a bill.
• that we had, did report back a do not pass on this bill.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Senate met with a quorum present and handled a mix of conference committee appointments, appropriations bills, policy bills, and House amendments. Early in the session, the chamber appointed conference committees for SB 2399 and for House-amended SBs 2213 and 2354, and also named conference committees for HB 103, HB 1308, and HB 1169. The Senate then took up several appropriations measures, including HB 1612, which creates the North Dakota Center for Aerospace Medicine at UND; the Senate adopted an amendment shifting the funding to a one-time $250,000 Community Health Trust Fund appropriation with a required $250,000 match from other sources, and the bill passed 39-7. HB 1193, the “Back the Blue” grant, was amended to make the funding one-time and focus on officer retention, then passed 41-5. HB 1329, a government spending database proposal for school districts, was amended into a legislative study and passed 42-4. HB 1020, the water budget, received extensive amendments reducing and reallocating funding across major water projects, adding studies and oversight changes, and passed 45-0 with the emergency clause. HB 1581, a tribal tourism grant, also passed 40-6. The Senate rejected HB 1330, which would have authorized divestment from direct investments in Chinese companies; after debate over the prudent investor rule, trade impacts, and whether the bill singled out one nation in law, it failed 20-26. HB 1534, limiting property valuation increases, and HB 1266, adjusting the disabled veterans property tax credit, both failed unanimously or nearly so after committee recommendations against them. HB 1566, which would have created a regulatory framework for a product discussed as kratom, was amended on the floor to convert it into a study and then passed 31-15. The chamber also passed HB 2241 on charter schools after a House amendment changed the funding formula to the statewide average from the prior year, and HB 2022, the indigent legal counsel budget, after House changes added funding flexibility, offset lost fee revenue, and included a study on a public defender office. The Senate concurred in several House amendments and then passed a number of Senate bills. SB 2375, allowing joint negotiations between dental providers and insurers under Attorney General oversight, passed 44-2. SB 2251, clarifying that open records requests during state audits should be referred to the audited agency, passed 46-0. SB 2159, related to nuclear energy research, passed 43-3 after House amendments required Industrial Commission approval and consultation with the radioactive waste advisory council. SB 2155, changing gratis antelope license rules, passed 30-16 after debate over landowner rights and tag distribution. SB 251, setting fees and an audit for the Private Investigative and Security Board, passed 44-2. SB 2280, the prior authorization health insurance bill, passed 43-3 with a House-added study and consumer protections. SB 2023, the Racing Commission budget, passed 41-5 after a House change made internship funding one-time. SB 2232, changing prenatal substance exposure reporting requirements and related toxicology rules, passed 44-2. SB 2241, authorizing public charter schools, passed 39-7. The session ended while the Senate was still processing SB 2022’s final passage vote, but the bill had already cleared concurrence on House amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• I will bring it back to the committee.
• Go right back to the information.
• I’ve got different—one of my uncles is a genealogist who traced back family going way, way back.
• I do want to kind of go back.
• I'll get him back there. Senator, I'll get him back. I'll get him back there. I'm here.

Summary: The committee met as a subcommittee without quorum at first, then later established quorum and continued hearing several bills. SB 27, the annual CARE Court cleanup bill, would require courts to consider CARE referral for certain misdemeanor defendants found incompetent to stand trial, combine some hearings, allow limited data sharing among licensed medical professionals, and expand eligibility to include mood disorders with psychotic features. Supporters said it would clarify the meaning of “clinically stabilized,” streamline the process, and help more severely ill people receive treatment; opponents argued it would expand CARE Court too broadly, strain county resources, and divert attention from housing and voluntary services. The bill passed to the Health Committee on a roll call vote and was placed on call. SB 82, dealing with so-called “infinite arbitration clauses,” would limit consumer contract arbitration provisions to disputes arising from the product or service actually purchased. The author and supporters said the bill would stop companies from forcing arbitration in unrelated claims and would not ban arbitration itself. Opponents from business and banking groups argued the language was too restrictive, could create litigation over related transactions, and should be clarified as prospective only. The committee approved the bill and placed it on call after a roll call vote. The committee then heard two reparations-related bills. SB 437 would direct CSU to develop a genealogical methodology and framework for verifying descendants of enslaved people, with oversight, reporting, and guardrails tied to recently allocated state funding. Supporters said the bill would create a fair, evidence-based process; opponents, including professional genealogists and reparations advocates, argued the work is already well understood, the bill is unnecessary, and it could delay action. SB 518 would create a Bureau for Descendants of American Slavery within state government, with divisions for genealogy, property reclamation, outreach, and legal affairs. Supporters framed it as needed infrastructure to implement reparations recommendations; opponents objected to locating it in the Department of Justice, warned about data privacy and law enforcement control, and criticized the inclusion of broader communities. Both bills were moved to Appropriations and placed on call. The committee also heard SB 52, the End AI Rent Hikes Act, which would prohibit the use of algorithms to collude on and artificially inflate rental prices; the author and supporters described it as a response to AI-assisted rent fixing in California’s housing market.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, we're not going back and forth.
• I would go back. Thank you. It can be a funding challenge at the same time. Madam, I would go back.
• We'll come back to you.
• And they give back to the community.
• More money that they're getting back.

Summary: The joint appropriations committee met on April 28 to review the FY 2027 budget package, including the general appropriations feed bills (HB 4138 and SB 1831) and related budget reconciliation measures. Staff described the budget as including about $17.96 billion in general fund appropriations, a one-time transfer of state monies to increase revenues, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general fund budgets, and several one-time restorations or continuations for items such as school facilities, child care, child safety, corrections stipends, and public safety operating costs. Members spent much of the meeting debating how the across-the-board cuts would be implemented, which programs might be affected, and how fund sweeps from prior-year appropriations and special funds would work, including questions about universities, public safety, rural hospitals, transportation grants, the Corporation Commission, and health insurance costs for state employees and troopers. A major point of discussion was the impact on universities and higher education. Arizona Board of Regents representatives said the proposed reductions and fund sweeps would affect already obligated dollars, research, staffing, and student aid programs, and could force difficult decisions about programs such as the Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and other pass-through funds. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the cuts could lead to tuition increases or reductions in services, while majority members emphasized that agencies and the executive branch should decide how to absorb the reductions. Another major topic was health care and the state employee health plan: staff explained that the budget includes a $228 million general fund infusion to stabilize the plan, while a separate reconciliation bill would raise employee premiums over three years. Members also discussed whether the budget’s changes to AHCCCS/Access and hospital eligibility rules could increase costs for hospitals and reduce coverage. Public testimony largely opposed the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, and local governments argued that the proposal would shift costs onto working families, reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care, and rural infrastructure, and protect tax benefits for data centers and higher-income taxpayers. A mayor from Globe asked for state help after severe flooding damaged roads, water lines, and homes, while a motorcycle safety advocate asked the committee to review a DPS motorcycle safety fund appropriation. Committee members and staff repeatedly clarified that some items discussed were one-time appropriations not continued into FY 2027, that some fund sweeps were from unspent or unencumbered balances, and that the committee planned to take a mass roll-call vote on the budget bills at the end of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• You guys hear me in the back? Okay, they can? Okay, okay, okay, good.
• Recently, the State Police has been running exams in back-to-back years and has resorted to combining
• He immediately went back to work.
• They didn't want to come back, you know.
• I live in Newton, which also passed Back from the Brink.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security held a public hearing on a wide range of bills affecting law enforcement, corrections, fire services, emergency management, telecommunicators, and sex offender policy. Testimony strongly focused on proposals to restore an education incentive for Massachusetts State Police troopers hired after the Quinn Bill was repealed, with State Police Association witnesses arguing the current system creates unfair pay disparities, hurts recruitment and retention, and leaves newer troopers earning less than some supervisors with the same or less education. They urged favorable reports on H. 2651, S. 1759, and S. 1783. A separate witness also supported H. 2627, a sheriff’s pay-parity bill, while suggesting amendments to avoid distinctions between correction officers and jail officers and warning that the proposal should not be viewed as a funding issue alone. The committee also heard testimony on public safety and oversight bills. A rape survivor testified in support of S. 1663, arguing that municipal fire or police personnel convicted of sex offenses should not remain in positions of public trust. Senator Miranda testified in support of S. 1723, S. 1724, and S. 1727, which would create correctional officer training/accountability standards, a correctional inspector general, and privileged communication with legislators for incarcerated people; he said the bills respond to misconduct and lack of independent oversight in the Department of Correction. In contrast, the Fire Chiefs Association and Professional Fire Fighters opposed H. 2572/S. 1668/S. 1740 on emergency management, saying the bill was developed without enough collaboration, lacked local-control safeguards, and could undermine incident command and local decision-making during disasters. Several panels supported other public safety measures. The Fire Chiefs Association and PFFM backed S. 1641 and S. 1744 to create a Massachusetts Public Safety Building Authority to help fund fire station and municipal public safety building projects, and supported S. 1647 to implement the Walsh-Kennedy Commission recommendations on hot works and welding safety, including tougher penalties and training requirements. Witnesses also supported H. 2664/S. 1736 to create a hoisting machinery regulations board, saying current licensing standards for heavy equipment are too minimal. Another panel backed H. 2663/S. 1761 to classify 911 telecommunicators as first responders, citing stress, burnout, and the expanding role of dispatchers. Finally, an attorney from CPCS testified in opposition to S. 1752, warning that expanded sex offender residency restrictions would likely increase homelessness, make supervision harder, and raise constitutional concerns based on prior court rulings.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll come back. I like your idea. We'll come back. Thank you. All right. Perfect.
• And then it may be we need to circle back up because I know we've kind of bounced back and forth.
• And it may be we need to circle back up because I know we've kind of bounced back and forth.
• We will have to get back with you.
• We'll get back with you.

Summary: The committee first considered revisions to the JBC rules, which staff said were all prompted by acts passed in the 2025 legislative session. The rules were adopted without objection. Members then received a balanced budget presentation from DFA Secretary Jim Hudson on the governor’s FY27 proposal, which he said was built around three priorities: limiting state government growth, continuing investments in education, and advancing income tax cuts. He highlighted major additions for education funding, EFA growth, pay plan costs, higher education productivity funding, drug task forces, corrections medical costs, the governor’s 1033 initiative, SNAP error-rate reduction, and Medicaid sustainability, while also explaining a new A/B funding category structure intended to prioritize recurring costs and preserve room for tax cuts. Members questioned Hudson about the cost of income tax reductions, the constitutional balanced-budget requirement, education funding, the Educational Adequacy Fund, Medicaid trust fund balances, and the impact of federal changes on Medicaid and SNAP. Hudson said each tenth of a percent income tax cut would cost about $58 million, the budget remained balanced, public education would still receive historic increases, and the Medicaid trust fund would be monitored closely with additional set-asides proposed. He also said the FY27 SNAP administrative cost increase would be about $18 million. The committee then heard from the Division of Higher Education, which reported institutions were 2.61% more productive overall and that the budget recommendation followed the statutory productivity formula. Questions focused on why some institutions were receiving decreases or large increases, how the formula works, and how the new return-on-investment metric and committee composition would affect future funding. The committee approved several higher education-related actions, including personnel changes for nine institutions and special language for North Arkansas College’s move into the University of Arkansas system. Staff then walked members through the higher education appropriation summary, explaining large percentage increases at several institutions were tied to federal funds or corrected carry-forward issues, including the U of A School of Mathematical, Sciences and the Arts, South Arkansas College, SAU Tech, ASU Mountain Home, and ASU Newport. Members also discussed UAPB’s 1890 extension program and the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture’s land-grant matching funds; officials said UAPB’s recommendation was being aligned with actual spending and that the Division of Agriculture’s Smith-Lever and Hatch matches were included within its overall appropriation. The committee ultimately adopted the Higher Education Coordinating Board’s recommendations for all institutions and then moved on to the Department of Corrections section, with the chair outlining how the committee would proceed through those appropriations by section.