Transcript Highlights:

• And essentially we review that.
• and the substantive review portion.
• But one thing: we're not talking about the substantive review.
• There's administratively complete, and then there's the substantive review.
• Having reviewed the bill in briefing but not in committee, I am... and I... Thank you.

Bills: HB2026 , HB2027 , HB2028 , HB2031 , HB2078 , HB2094 , HB2095 , HB2101 , HB2102 , HB2103 , HB2260 , HB2278 , HB2827 , HB2932 , HB2933 , HB2934 , HB2986 , HCM2009 , HCR2038

Committees: House Natural Resources, Energy & Water , House House Natural Resources, Energy & Water Committee of Reference

Keywords: assured water supply, groundwater, commingling, commingled water, water supply, Arizona Department of Water Resources, ADWR, active management area, AMA, subdivision plat, development approval, water rights, municipal provider, private water company, certificate of assured water supply, written commitment of water service, groundwater savings credits, gray water reuse, replenishment district, Central Arizona Project

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> house even with the non Dees reviews house even with the non Dees reviews that<00:34:57.240><c>
• </c> will have to have some of our review will have to have some of our review it's<00:35:17.920><c>
• I don't understand what these positions are actually doing, so we environmental review involves review
• </c> that these the demand for these reviews that these the demand for these reviews has<00:38:09.520
• review involves review for environmental review involves review for threatening<00:39:42.359><c> endangered

Summary: The Finance Division II work session focused on Fish and Game’s budget-revenue proposals and several statutory changes the department said it needs to support its operations. The department recommended raising the fisheries habitat fee and wildlife habitat fee to $5 each, estimating additional annual revenue of about $640,000 and $144,000 respectively. Members clarified that these are habitat fees added on top of licenses, not reduced by senior or youth license categories, and discussed the need for RSA changes to allow the revenue to be transferred into the Fish and Game Fund. The department also said it would work internally on any broader license fee increases through the commission process. The committee then reviewed proposals to cap several dedicated accounts and transfer excess balances to the unrestricted Fish and Game Fund. Those accounts included the fisheries and wildlife habitat funds and the game management account, with the department proposing a $750,000 cap on each and transfer of amounts above that threshold. The department said the cap was based on several years of expenditures and the fact that dedicated funds are often used as match for federal funds. Members asked for reports on fund activity and questioned whether the cap and mandatory transfer language should be “shall” or “may,” with the department indicating it would prefer “may” for flexibility. The committee also discussed a Pheasant Management Program account, where the department said current law limits use of the money to buying and propagating pheasants and it wants authority to use it for broader program management. A substantial portion of the meeting addressed Fish and Game’s environmental review unit and the transfer of ARPA-funded positions to DEES under the governor’s initiative. The department said four positions are currently ARPA-funded, that DEES supports keeping them in place through the end of the year, and that the transition will require time because environmental review work is intertwined across the agency. The department explained that before the ARPA positions, biologists handled the work and that current staffing has helped eliminate a backlog and meet deadlines. Members also discussed a proposal to expand environmental review fees beyond private developers to state, federal, municipal, and local governments, with the department saying it would need rulemaking and stakeholder input. Additional requests included authority to conduct raffles to raise funds, creation of a revolving account for donations and raffle proceeds, and repeal of the obsolete fish food sales statute because the vending machines are no longer functional and the account generates no revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and when I reviewed the testimony, I didn't see any statistical evidence that it, you know, where
• &gt;&gt; Um, &gt;&gt; Um, and<00:03:16.080><c> when</c><00:03:16.319><c> I</c><00:03:16.560><c> reviewed
• </c><00:03:16.959><c> the</c><00:03:17.200><c> testimony,</c><00:03:18.400><c> I</c> and when I reviewed
• the testimony, I and when I reviewed the testimony, I didn't<00:03:19.040><c> see</c><00:03:19.360><
• Ballard and asked him to just re-review the effectiveness of this, and what he wrote back was: I reviewed

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Subcommittee 4 on the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee will come to order.
• Brian Metzger, LAO: We reviewed this proposal and have no concerns. Okay.
• We are in the process of reviewing the final rules.
• be reviewing whether states meet all of those standards.
• We don't review it.

Transcript Highlights:

• We may also see a risk for errors in reviews due to having insufficient time for reviews.
• When did that process start, after you did your review and all?
• Review and all. Madam Chair, Bliss, Rep.
• When a bed opens, we will review the cases when they come to us.
• Madam Chair, how many are waiting for review?

Committee: House House Health & Human Services Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard several bills related largely to Arizona’s behavioral health and Access system, plus a fertility coverage mandate, a state hospital admissions bill, and a naturopathic scope-of-practice bill. SB 1114 would appropriate $1 million to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office for investigations into behavioral health patient brokering; the sponsor described ongoing fraud involving vulnerable Native American patients, while some members questioned why the Attorney General was not handling the work. The bill passed 10-1 with one present. SB 1116 would require claim denials and appeal determinations for American Indian Health Program behavioral health services to be reviewed by someone with at least two years of relevant clinical experience; Access said it was neutral but raised concerns about vague language and added staffing needs, and the bill passed 7-4 with one present. SB 1346 would require Access to notify providers of claim deficiencies within 72 hours and approve or deny corrected claims within 10 business days; supporters said it would reduce long delays and unpaid claims, while Access said it would need more staff and system changes. The bill passed 7-5. The committee also approved SB 1347, which requires insurance coverage for fertility preservation services for cancer patients of reproductive age whose treatment is likely to cause infertility, with a religious-employer exemption. Supporters, including cancer survivors and an advocacy representative, said the bill protects patients who must make rapid decisions before treatment begins; insurers were neutral. The bill passed unanimously 12-0. SB 1813 would require the Arizona State Hospital to admit patients based on clinical need rather than county of residence, effectively ending the Maricopa County cap tied to the Arnold v. Sarn settlement. Supporters argued the cap leaves seriously ill patients waiting in other facilities for long periods, while ADHS warned of possible litigation and rural access concerns; the bill passed 9-2 with one present. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 1178, which would allow naturopathic physicians to administer certain antibiotics, antivirals, and antifungals intravenously. The sponsor argued naturopaths should be able to practice to the full scope of their training amid physician shortages, while the Arizona Medical Association and osteopathic representatives opposed the bill, saying IV antimicrobials are high-risk therapies that require hospital-level training, monitoring, and stewardship. Testimony focused on patient safety, appropriate setting, and whether the bill should be narrowed or amended; no vote on SB 1178 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• They were attached to the meeting materials we got ahead of time for you to review.
• Meeting materials we got ahead of time for you to review. Do I have a motion? So moved. Thank you.
• I'm eager to review them.
• , I've reviewed a lot of these in the past, is it that there is, that there is, Since we've reviewed,
• So is it when we review or not?

Committee: Joint Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences

Summary: The Citizens Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on October 22, 2025, approved the September 22, 2025 meeting minutes, and reviewed a draft 2026 meeting schedule. The commission informally settled on four 2026 meeting dates: May 6, August 4, September 15, and October 20, with no vote required. One commissioner noted a possible travel conflict for the August meeting, but the schedule was accepted as planned. The bulk of the meeting focused on adopting commissioner comments and recommendations for tax preference reviews. Commissioners discussed and refined language on several items, including liquefied natural gas preferences, natural gas for transportation, energy sales to silicon smelters, nonprofit low-income housing development, veterans’ housing adaptations, and other preferences. Commissioner Forsyth recused himself from the natural gas for transportation and silicon smelter items, and the commission handled those separately. Staff clarified several technical questions about reporting requirements, the rationale for recommendations, and how to reconcile differing comments. The commission ultimately adopted the recommendations in multiple grouped votes, with unanimous approval on each vote. The commission also addressed a yellow-item recommendation related to reporting burden and another item concerning whether a preference is exempt from automatic expiration or subject to review. After discussion, the commission adopted revised consensus language for those items as well. No members of the public appeared to testify in person, and the chair reminded the public that written testimony could still be submitted by email or mail. The meeting concluded with thanks to staff and commissioners, and the next meeting was set for May 6, 2026, at 10 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• RS 33718, which goes into part of the big beautiful bill that established processes for Medicaid review
• Idaho agencies currently are required to periodically review rule chapters on a staggering eight-year
• What this bill would do is integrate AI-assisted analysis directly into Idaho's existing rule review
• , and at a fraction of the cost of the traditional manual review method.
• Still here, actually, there's a whole section on human review required that walks through everything

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• The committee also reviewed 20 deferred reports and 91 current reports.
• Fifty-seven education audit reports were included on the committee's agenda for review.
• Next, we have a review of reports from the City of Pine Bluff. Michelle Acre. Actually, sorry.
• Next, we have a review of reports from the City of Pine Bluff. Michelle Acre. Actually, sorry.
• Next, we have a review of reports from the City of Pine Bluff. Michelle Acre. Actually, sorry.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING

Summary: The Legislative Joint Auditing Committee approved the February 13 minutes and then heard several committee reports. The executive committee report noted that audit and special reports were scheduled for presentation, one requested report remained outstanding, and staff was asked to review selected Benton County circuit court case transfers. The committee also received and adopted reports from the counties and municipalities committee, the education committee, and the state agencies committee. Those reports covered delinquent private water and sewer audits, education audit reports, and state agency findings such as duplicate vendor payments, collateral issues, record-keeping problems, and vehicle log deficiencies. In each case, the committee voted to file or adopt the reports, with some reports deferred for follow-up or for officials to appear at a later meeting. A major portion of the meeting focused on the City of Pine Bluff’s 2024 financial audit. Auditors said the city received a clean opinion overall, but management letter findings identified serious issues in the mayor’s office, Parks and Recreation, and the finance department. The Parks and Recreation finding involved $179,629 in manual receipts that could not be traced to city deposits, missing receipts from several facilities, $48,415 in unallowable purchases, $13,000 in questionable purchases, altered invoices, unapproved vendors, and missing equipment; those matters were referred to the prosecuting attorney, attorney general, Governmental Bonding Board, and Arkansas State Police. The finance finding cited weak cash-receipting and bank-reconciliation procedures and late or missing deposits. City officials, including the mayor, finance director, and parks director, testified that the problems predated the current administration and said they had taken corrective steps. They described hiring a forensic audit firm, creating or updating standard operating procedures, improving receipting and deposit processes, adding procurement oversight, and moving Parks and Recreation to electronic or system-based receipting. Committee members questioned the officials about oversight, nonprofit relationships, and whether theft or system failures were to blame. After discussion, the committee voted to file the Pine Bluff report. The next meeting was announced for June 4-5, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also reduced that review time of applications by, I think, just over 85 days.
• So, in using our technology, we're able to visually look at the property, review applications, We're
• review.
• That selection committee takes that review, and we also go through a process of public meetings.
• So, to answer your question, we do a technical review.

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Committee met with a quorum and heard two Department of Agriculture presentations. First, the Director of Rural and Family Lands described the Rural and Family Lands Protection Program, which buys development rights through perpetual conservation easements on private agricultural land to preserve farming, wildlife habitat, water resources, and open space while keeping land taxable and avoiding state maintenance costs. He said the program has expanded rapidly since 2023 through streamlined applications, templates, and an online portal, increasing acreage protected from about 66,000 acres through 2022 to more than 210,000 acres, with a higher share in the Florida wildlife corridor. He also said review times were reduced by more than 85 days and that projects under $5 million can move faster under statutory authority. The department is seeking $200 million in nonrecurring funding on top of $100 million recurring, citing 203 existing projects and 224 new applications totaling nearly $2 billion in estimated need. Members asked about the scientific ranking process, South Florida participation, project prioritization, maintenance responsibilities, and whether landowners can exit the program; staff said land remains privately owned, easements are in perpetuity, and partnerships and cost-sharing are prioritized. The committee then heard from the Florida Forest Service director, who outlined the agency’s dual mission of wildfire response and land management. He said the service responds to roughly 2,200 to 2,500 wildfires annually, manages 38 state forests and one ranch totaling more than 1.1 million acres, and receives about 15 million visitors each year. He highlighted the impact of Senate Bill 1638 gaming compact funds, which provided $32 million for land management, recreation, equipment, roads, invasive species control, habitat restoration, prescribed burning, reforestation, and staffing support. He said Florida leads the nation in prescribed fire, with 277,818 acres burned on state forests last year and 2.47 million acres burned statewide, and noted ongoing restoration work such as Picayune Strand. He also described challenges including aging equipment, deferred maintenance, contractor availability, and timber market instability caused by hurricanes and mill closures, and suggested longer-term funding and a higher capital asset allowance. Members discussed timber markets, public communication and marketing, recreation fees, and coordination with other agencies and FDOT. The meeting ended with the chair noting that next week’s meeting would report out agency conversations and budget recommendations, and the committee rose.

Transcript Highlights:

• We review those notices.
• We can do a deeper cost-and-market impact review.
• These are about 40 under review for AB-869 reviews.
• All grant awards are subject to CMS review and approval.
• We’ll also update our medical survey tools to review compliance.

Summary: The hearing began with a stakeholder presentation from Let California Kids Hear urging coverage of pediatric hearing aids for children in the large group market. Advocates described the issue as a long-running developmental emergency, argued that existing state efforts have been inefficient, and said the new proposal would cover about 70% to 80% of affected children without new spending by redirecting existing dollars. Public commenters, including parents, audiologists, and children’s advocates, strongly supported the proposal and emphasized the need for timely access to sound. The chair thanked the group and noted hope for a future fix, including continued work on the exchange market. The Department of Finance then gave a broad budget warning about the state’s more than $20 billion structural deficit and said new investments must be weighed against out-year shortfalls. HCAI followed with an overview of its programs, including CalRx insulin and naloxone, reproductive health grants, the Office of Health Care Affordability, seismic hospital compliance, workforce programs, and the Data Exchange Framework. Members asked about geographic targeting of workforce funds, behavioral health pipeline programs, the status of the 21st Century Nursing Initiative, and future CalRx products such as EpiPens and GLP-1s. HCAI also described its enforcement approach for health care spending targets, saying the board would not change the targets in response to H.R. 1, and outlined the diaper access initiative, which will distribute diapers through hospitals in higher-need areas. Several HCAI budget items were discussed and held open, including additional expenditure authority, the transfer of the Data Exchange Framework and Office of the Patient Advocate, long-term care payment transparency staffing, and reporting on health care worker waiting periods. The department also presented its Behavioral Health Services Act workforce initiative and a proposed $100 million General Fund offset, which both the LAO and the chair questioned as unclear and potentially one-time in nature. HCAI said the final workforce plan would be adjusted after stakeholder consultation if the offset proceeds. The department also described the Rural Health Transformation Program, saying California received $233.6 million in federal funds, had to revise its proposal to satisfy CMS, and must obligate the money by October 30; the program will fund rural care models, workforce development, and technology, with grants rolled out on a phased basis. The Department of Managed Health Care then presented its budget and three legislative implementation requests: SB 41 on PBM reform, SB 306 on prior authorization transparency, and AB 1041 on provider credentialing timelines. Finally, the administration outlined a menopause care proposal requiring coverage and education for menopause-related services, provider training, and an outreach campaign, with DMHC requesting staffing and funding to implement and enforce the new requirements. Throughout the hearing, most items were held open for later action, and no final votes were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:45:18.160><c> committee</c> code review committee code review committee uh<00:45:20.480><c> that
• </c> review the records at that location. review the records at that location.
• </c> review committee to make that change. review committee to make that change.
• </c> review committee in the bill. review committee in the bill.
• </c> from the review commission. from the review commission. &gt;&gt; Okay. &gt;&gt; Okay.

Committee: House Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Summary: The committee heard opening remarks and ground rules from Chair David Tarnas, including a request for two-minute testimony limits, clear speaking, Zoom etiquette, and respectful conduct. The first measure taken up was HB 2062, relating to gun violence prevention, which would appropriate funds for enforcement of gun violence protective orders and for public awareness campaigns. Judiciary submitted written testimony recommending technical changes to clarify that it does not enforce laws and instead should be funded for personnel to process temporary restraining orders and gun violence protective orders; the Department of Law Enforcement supported the bill and said it is well positioned to conduct public education. Support also came from county and advocacy witnesses, including Moms Demand Action, Giffords Gun Owners for Safety, HGEA, and a retired police officer, while opposition testimony argued the measure raises due process and Fifth Amendment concerns and that education, not enforcement, should be the focus. The chair noted 37 testimonies in support, 103 in opposition, and three comments; no vote was taken in the portion provided. Testimony on HB 2062 emphasized both public safety and constitutional concerns. Supporters described the bill as a way to increase awareness of an existing legal tool, prevent suicides and shootings, and help law enforcement and the public understand gun violence protective orders. Opponents, including gun owners and firearms groups, argued that red flag laws can be abused, lack due process, and should not be expanded through state funding. A county neighborhood safety witness suggested an amendment to allow public, private, and nonprofit consultants to assist with training and implementation. Members asked a few questions, but the agencies with written testimony were not present, so the chair referred members to their submissions. The committee then moved to HB 2061, relating to firearms, which appropriates money for the state gun buyback program and requires at least two buyback events in each county. Written support was noted from the Department of Law Enforcement, Hawaii County Council, the County of Kauai Prosecuting Attorney, and the Hawaii State Association of Counties, with the latter emphasizing that buybacks are voluntary prevention tools that can reduce risk before crises escalate. Opposition came from the Mid-Pacific Pistol League, SDM Training Group/Bows and Bullets, and others; one witness argued buybacks are ineffective, costly, and can be vulnerable to misuse or black-market diversion, and suggested a year-round surrender option instead. The committee heard additional support from a retired police officer and from a gun violence survivor with Students Demand Action, but no final action or vote was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• hearing in their Sunset Review Report and the committee's Sunset Review Background Paper.
• SB 1368 addresses the issues discussed during the board sunset review hearing in their sunset review
• SB 1368 addresses the issues discussed during the board sunset review hearing in their sunset review
• Addresses the issues discussed during the board sunset review hearing in their sunset review report and
• the committee's sunset review background paper.

Committee: Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development

Transcript Highlights:

• Committee, did everybody get a chance to review the minutes of our last meeting?
• present that information to the committee, as she's been pretty involved in the drafting and the review
• Beth was pretty involved in the drafting and the review of that policy, so she’ll be able to field any
• The committee reviewed several practical clarifications and revisions to the documents.
• The committee reviewed alternative options that may be taken after a complaint is received.

Summary: Legislative Management met with a quorum, approved the July 11, 2025 minutes, and then considered recommendations from the Legislative Procedures and Arrangements Committee. Beth Dittes explained proposed special session rule changes, which largely mirror prior special session rules and are intended to speed floor action. The changes would allow faster second readings and transmission between chambers, replace regular standing committees with two joint committees for the special session—Joint Appropriations and Joint Policy—and limit bill introduction methods. The package also included delayed-effective-date changes for the next regular session, such as moving the agency and Supreme Court prefile deadline earlier and advancing several resolution deadlines. Liz Fordall then reviewed revisions to the legislative workplace harassment policy, including clarified definitions, longer intake and review deadlines, an option for informal resolution before a review panel, and clearer disclosure rules. The committee adopted the report and forwarded the rules and policy changes. The committee also approved tentative first-day special session agendas for both chambers, with a Speaker-requested revision to allow time to swear in new House members. Megan Gordon outlined the schedule: early Rules Committee meetings, morning floor sessions, a joint session for the governor’s State of the State, then meetings of the joint appropriations and policy committees, with optional later floor and committee time. Members discussed how the joint committees would handle bills and confirmed the process would mirror the prior special session. The agendas were adopted. Chairman Bekkedahl then reported for the Rural Health Transformation Committee, which had completed its work and recommended five bill drafts for the special session: a Presidential Physical Fitness Test requirement for schools, a nutrition component for physician continuing education, joining a physician assistant licensure compact, expanding pharmacist scope for lab testing and prescribing, and a two-year appropriations bill to cover the program through the next regular session. He explained the federal rural health transformation grant, the state’s application, funding restrictions, and the need to keep the bills aligned with CMS requirements to avoid funding reductions or clawbacks. DHS officials said the department would measure outcomes through required metrics, use templates for awards, and set up an Office of Health Transformation to track long-term impacts. The committee adopted the rural health report and forwarded the bills. Finally, members discussed special-session logistics. Legislative staff said employment committees would approve a limited number of staff, Legislative Management would serve as the delayed-bills committee, and a letter would be sent to legislators explaining the process and a suggested Friday noon drafting deadline for bills to be considered at the January 20 meeting. The committee also discussed how many bills might be introduced and how to assign the rural health bills to the House or Senate for origin. No formal vote was taken on those logistics, and the meeting adjourned with plans to reconvene on January 20.

Transcript Highlights:

• review, interfering with the administrative process, changing judicial review.
• Do we know when those first 76 started the review period on that?
• Do we know when those first 76 started the review period on that?
• in particular and your other review on a timetable and speed that along.
• We reviewed the May Revision proposals and didn't have any concerns.

Summary: The hearing opened with budget framing from the chair and the LAO, who said the May Revision addresses roughly a $14 billion budget problem and that the environment and transportation subcommittee’s proposals account for about $1.9 billion of the solution. The LAO urged members to focus on solutions that do not worsen out-year deficits, to preserve reserves, and to defer major policy changes that are not necessary to pass the budget, including the newly introduced water-related trailer bills. Members also raised concern about a late-dropped Olympic-related trailer bill, which the LAO likewise suggested should be deferred for fuller review. The first major item was the Delta Conveyance Project and related water quality control plan trailer bills. The administration argued the proposals would streamline permitting, water rights proceedings, judicial review, and land acquisition, and would clarify DWR’s bond authority for the project. DWR said the project is needed to protect water supply reliability against drought, earthquakes, sea level rise, and other climate-related disruptions, and that the tunnel would help move water when conditions are wet and safer for the environment. Committee members from both parties questioned the timing, the use of budget trailer bills for major policy changes, the scope of the CEQA and water-rights changes, the lack of a bond cap, cost growth, and eminent domain protections. The LAO recommended deferring both water trailer bills without prejudice. Public comment was sharply divided, with labor, water agencies, and some business groups supporting the project as climate adaptation and reliability infrastructure, while environmental, tribal, fishing, county, and community groups opposed it as an attempt to bypass public process and weaken protections. The committee then briefly heard the DMV’s Digital Experience Platform fee trailer bill, which would reinstate a $1 system improvement fee to help fund the vehicle-registration phase of the project. DMV said the fee would raise about $7 million annually and offset roughly $59 million to $60 million of project costs, while the LAO noted it would help but would not solve the Motor Vehicle Account’s broader structural gap. The hearing then moved to California High-Speed Rail, where the new CEO presented an updated plan and said the project remains a major climate and infrastructure investment. He reported a revised Merced-to-Bakersfield cost range of $34.9 billion to $38.5 billion, said the agency is trying to reduce risk through direct procurement of materials, and argued that stable annual funding is needed to avoid higher costs from delays.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we were able to review all the documents.
• Meanwhile, candidates have easy review.
• But we were able to review signature.
• Um, and so all that has to be reviewed, and yes, we do accept...
• We review those, but we let you see those as well.

Summary: The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission met on March 9, 2026, with a quorum present in person and one commissioner participating from Florida. The meeting began with the swearing-in of new commissioner Joe Palumbo, who briefly introduced himself and his family and business background. The commission then approved the February 2, 2026 minutes and approved the staff budget report, with staff noting the office remained within spending parameters. Staff gave an update on the heavy workload from re-registration and reporting season, saying roughly 4,500 re-registrations and about 10,000 total forms had been processed. They credited the new online payment portal with reducing manual work and discussed ongoing LRC technology work to build a new system for desktop use, online re-registration, payment processing, and a searchable register. Commissioners asked about the timeline and current paper-based process; staff said the system is being built from scratch and that, for now, forms are still often downloaded, completed, emailed or mailed, and manually entered by staff. The commission also reviewed financial disclosure processing. Staff said all required disclosures had been received except one outstanding candidate filing, and that the candidate was still officially running, so notice was being sent by certified mail under the statute. Staff explained that their review is for completeness rather than audit-level accuracy, and that disclosures from legislators, candidates, and certain upper-management/LRC officials are posted for public access. The commission then discussed its informal advisory opinions, including how staff tracks and organizes them, and praised staff for quick turnaround before voting to enter executive session to discuss confidential complaints and informal opinions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And our review of... chief of staff for the state auditor.
• And our review of They hadn't published notice of election at all.
• And our review of the bond documents requires that we are attesting that all laws have been complied
• There are a laundry list of other things... ...election provisions of our review will be met.
• There are others that we are aware of that weren't ever brought to us for review.

Committee: House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Summary: The Elections Committee met in executive session first and adopted a House Committee substitute for House Bill 2387, which combined HB 2387 and HB 2480. The substitute removed provisions on extending no-excuse in-person absentee voting and shortening the absentee voting window, shifted the presidential candidate filing fee to be set by state party committees, and added language to bind presidential delegates to primary results while allowing national party rules to control where required. Members discussed the legal basis for delegate binding, party input on the substitute, and the role of closed primaries, then the committee voted 10-2-1 to do pass HB 2387 as substituted. The committee also passed House Bill 1987 and House Concurrent Resolution 23 without opposition, and passed House Bill 1802 after members discussed election transparency and concerns about applying the measure uniformly across counties; the vote was 11-2. In public hearing, the committee heard House Bill 2605, which would update election notice requirements, especially for bond elections. Sponsor Rep. McGaugh and the State Auditor’s office said the bill would address technical publication errors that had jeopardized voter-approved bond issues by allowing notice defects to be cured if no election contest is filed within 30 days, while also allowing one newspaper publication and one direct mailing notice. Testimony from county clerks, school administrators, a fire district, the Missouri Press Association, and others generally supported the bill as a practical fix, though one witness urged broader website posting of notices. The hearing also covered House Bill 2301, a campaign finance cleanup bill that would clarify definitions and reporting rules in Chapter 130, especially for continuing committees and indirect political spending; the sponsor said it was intended to fix ambiguity from prior law, and the only testimony in favor called for additional restrictions on recurring donations and more transparency. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 1787, which would require schools used as polling places to treat election days as school holidays beginning in the 2026-27 school year. The sponsor said the bill was intended to improve child safety and could also help with staffing and voter participation, while members raised concerns about school calendars already being set and whether the mandate should instead be optional or delayed to a later school year. A witness in favor supported the safety goal but asked for local control and a later effective date. No opposition testimony was presented, and the committee adjourned after the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Going over to line 241 to 273 as it pertains to local governments and the administrative review.
• This bill punishes careful review.
• This bill punishes careful review.
• The required 60-day review and 30-day response is unreasonably short.
• by local planning boards, or any public hearings, and there's no review or approval by the Board of

Bills: S0330 , S0354 , S0504 , S0506 , S0526 , S0594 , S0840

Committee: Senate Community Affairs

Summary: The committee took up several bills related to public safety, housing, disaster recovery, construction, and land use. SB 330 clarified the heart disease presumption for firefighters, law enforcement, and correctional officers, aligned the definition of heart disease with medical practice, and allowed a transferring law enforcement officer to rely on a prior physical if the new agency does not provide one. An amendment stating the act serves an important state interest was adopted, and the bill passed unanimously after supportive testimony from law enforcement and fire groups. SB 594 expanded local housing assistance eligibility to residents of mobile home communities, including SHIP rental assistance for lot rent and rehabilitation/emergency repair programs for the home itself; it also passed unanimously after support from manufactured housing advocates. SB 840 revised the hurricane-related land use limits enacted in prior legislation by sunsetting certain temporary restrictions on June 30, 2026, narrowing the affected area from 100 miles to 50 miles from a storm track, and exempting certain planning, water, wastewater, stormwater, and flood-related decisions. The sponsor said the bill was intended to fix unintended consequences of prior hurricane recovery legislation, and the measure was reported favorably on a unanimous vote. SB 526 addressed commercial construction projects by prohibiting “no damages for delay” clauses in public construction contracts, directing the Florida Building Commission to create a uniform commercial permit application, requiring permit fee reductions when private providers are used, and adding mitigation to product approval categories; county representatives raised concerns about implementation and fees, but the bill passed favorably. The committee also approved SB 504 and SB 506, both by Senator Burgess, creating a framework for code inspector body camera use and a related public records exemption for recordings. Both were described as optional for local governments and were reported favorably without opposition. Finally, the committee considered CS/SB 354, a major “blue ribbon projects” bill creating a framework for very large developments that would reserve at least 60% of land for conservation, agriculture, recreation, utilities, and related uses in exchange for streamlined approval and state preemption over local land use controls. The bill drew extensive testimony both for and against, with supporters emphasizing housing supply and land preservation and opponents warning about local control, sprawl, infrastructure costs, and weak conservation protections. Two amendments were adopted to define reserve areas more specifically and address conservation easements, and the committee reported the bill favorably on a divided vote, with Senator Passidomo voting no.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's Parnam, Assistant General Counsel at Indigene, Anna Givens, Director of Financial Review. rate review
• Our view is that it's much more efficient to do a holistic review. view of everything at once.
• And that provision requires robust review, requires testimony, and requires... litigation over those
• I didn't get a chance to review it before, so. How do you read it?
• We also review rate cases. expenses incurred by the municipally owned utilities.

Bills: SB483 , SB522 , SB783 , SB1239 , SB1254 , SB1255 , SB1259 , SB1341 , SB1664 , SB1762 , SB1856 , SB1877 , SB1977

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Keywords: utility, proprietary information, customer data, data protection, electric service, customer information, emergency communication, electric utility, privacy, certification, public accountants, interstate licensing, accounting, regulatory amendment, energy efficiency, construction regulations, building codes, Texas, sustainability, cost-effectiveness

Summary: The Senate Business and Commerce Committee met with a quorum and first took up pending business, voting out several bills. Senate Bills 1697, 1569, 1202 as substituted, 1029, 1364, 1185, 924, 1008 as substituted, 264, 1376, and 1358 as substituted were reported favorably, with some sent to the local and uncontested calendar. The committee also adopted a substitute for SB 1202 and later corrected votes on several measures. SB 924 and SB 1376 drew some opposition, while the rest of the pending bills were reported without dissent or with limited nays. The committee then heard testimony on SB 1856, which would create an annual capacity-cost recovery rider for Entergy Texas customers in the MISO region. The author and Entergy argued the bill would better match rates to actual capacity costs and improve transparency, while the Texas Association of Manufacturers and the Public Utility Commission raised concerns about the short 10-day review period, rider proliferation, and the preference for full rate cases over piecemeal adjustments. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard and left pending SB 522 on CPA reciprocity, SB 1664 requiring TDUs to provide clearer, standalone rate-change disclosures, SB 1877 expanding OPUC’s access to market data, SB 1254 and SB 1255 as TDLR cleanup bills on professional employer organizations and mold assessors, SB 1341 updating manufactured housing rules, SB 1239 on sovereign debt and Texas governing law, and SB 1259 streamlining the surveyor-in-training licensing process. Additional bills discussed included SB 1977, which would cap recoverable legal expenses in electric, water, and sewer rate cases; OPUC and some consumer advocates supported the idea as a way to reduce ratepayer costs, while utility representatives warned it could discourage participation and increase rate shock. The committee also heard SB 1762 clarifying that geothermal energy conservation wells are not battery resources, and SB 783 allowing SECO to proceed with future energy-code rulemaking for state-funded buildings. Both drew supportive testimony from industry and environmental groups. All remaining bills heard during the meeting were left pending, and the committee recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next um, the panel process: we review cases from both DCBS and the Department of Public Health.
• In 2025, the panel reviewed 248 cases, comprised of 72 fatalities and 176 near fatalities.
• In 2025, the panel reviewed 248 cases, comprised of 72 fatalities and 176 near fatalities.
• The panel reviewed 55 cases of physical abuse, which was a 31% increase over the prior year.
• Everyone on the panel reviews each case.

Committee: Joint Families & Children

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> about safety if counties don't review about safety if counties don't review permits<00:15:50.680
• </c><00:19:08.640><c> those</c> inspectors come out, they review those inspectors come out, they review
• </c> transitioning to an automated review transitioning to an automated review process.<00:19:43.440>
• </c> you know, go backwards in your review you know, go backwards in your review time<00:20:15.800><c
• So, they review it on a weekly basis and they're reviewing the steps that they can do to reduce that.

Bills: HB1984 , HB1593 , HB2423 , HB1691 , HB2283 , HB2386 , HB1824 , HB1697 , HB2164 , HB2165

Committee: House Consumer Protection & Commerce

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1984 HD2, which would require government entities issuing building permits to create a self-certification process for certain behind-the-meter rooftop solar and energy storage systems, allowing approved applicants to proceed without waiting for standard permit review. The Public Utilities Commission and DLNR offered comments, and the Hawaii Solar Energy Association, Holoholo Energy, Photon Works Engineering, Malama Solar, RevoluSun, and others testified in strong support. Supporters said the bill would reduce permitting delays, lower costs, and help meet Hawaii’s renewable energy goals while still relying on licensed engineers, electricians, and county inspections for safety. Committee members asked about risk, existing county pilot programs, and whether self-certification had been used before; witnesses said the professional liability remains with licensed signers and that current automated review systems often flag minor issues that slow projects. The committee also noted 16 additional written testimonies in support. The committee then took up HB 1593 HD1, which would require HHFDC-financed affordable rental housing projects to allow residents to own or keep common household pets. The Hawaiian Humane Society testified that the bill is a top priority because housing restrictions are a major reason pets are surrendered and because many unhoused residents with pets avoid housing that does not allow animals. In response to questions, the Humane Society said concerns about pet-related damage are overstated, suggested pet behavior screening as a safeguard, and said it would be willing to work on broader private-market pet-friendly housing policies. Members raised concerns about whether allowing pets in public housing could create problems for residents who later transition to the private market, and the witness said California has a similar law and no major negative effects had been identified. Finally, the committee heard HB 2423 HD2, which would require that by January 1, 2028, diesel fuel sold in Hawaii for on-highway vehicles contain at least 5% biodiesel by volume. The Hawaii State Energy Office offered comments, and Hawaii Transportation Association and Pacific Biodiesel Technologies testified in support. Pacific Biodiesel argued the mandate would improve energy security, stabilize fuel prices amid global supply disruptions, and support local clean-fuel production. In response to questions, the company said its nameplate capacity is 5.5 million gallons per year and it has produced over 6 million gallons annually, but much of its output is tied up in standby generator contracts that can fluctuate. Witnesses said the mandate would provide a stable market signal and could support future investment in expanded local biodiesel production, including agricultural feedstock development and a possible second refinery. No votes or final actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.