Transcript Highlights:

• And so we looked at transactional gold in particular.
• We support the building of a framework where transactions can be conducted.
• That with questions the transaction.
• Ali, I understand how you could have a transaction in gold just like you can have a transaction in Crypto
• but optional so that people can choose whether or not they're going to transact.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we looked at transactional gold in particular.
• Oakes was testifying about, and is really how to make it transactional.
• It's really the transactional part of it.
• So, transactionally, I understand how you can have a transaction in gold, just like you can have a transaction
• to transact.

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Summary: The committee first took up SB 794, as amended by a late-filed strike-all, which would require a human being to make insurance claim denial decisions and prohibit artificial intelligence from being the sole basis for a denial. The sponsor said the bill was intended to preserve human oversight while allowing innovation in claims processing. Public testimony included support from the Florida Insurance Consumer Advocate and the Florida Medical Association, along with one speaker urging additional protections for homeowners. The committee adopted the strike-all and reported SB 794 favorably with committee substitutes. Members then heard SB 134, which removes the $500 threshold on the sales tax exemption for bullion, making sales of gold, silver, and platinum bullion fully exempt and eliminating certain dealer documentation requirements. Supporters argued the change would reduce a regressive tax and help consumers preserve savings; the sponsor estimated a revenue impact of about $300,000. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also adopted a strike-all on SB 888, which directs the Office of Insurance Regulation to create a more consumer-friendly homeowners insurance website with premium comparison information, market data, rate filing access, and educational resources. The sponsor and Leader Boyd said the goal was to improve transparency and help consumers navigate a stabilizing market. SB 888 was reported favorably with committee substitutes. The final bill heard was SB 1578, covering mammograms and supplemental breast cancer screenings. The sponsor said it would expand coverage requirements in ACA plans and private insurance policies, including annual mammograms for women ages 40 to 50 and supplemental screening coverage, while noting Medicaid already provides these services. The Florida Insurance Consumer Advocate waived in support, and the bill was reported favorably. After the bills, the committee held a lengthy panel discussion on gold and silver as legal tender and transactional money, with testimony from officials from Utah and Florida, industry representatives, and advocacy groups. Panelists discussed constitutional authority, consumer protections, depository oversight, taxation issues, and possible transactional platforms for precious metals. No further action was taken after the discussion, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This would increase the daily transaction limits.
• It would replace the $2,000 daily transaction limit with a transaction limit of $2,500 for new customers
• The second amendment by Chair Wallen, Claude 450, this would increase the daily transaction limits.
• It would replace the 2,000 daily transaction limit with a transaction limit of $2,500 for new customers
• So instead of being the greater of $5 or 15% of the transaction, the law would not limit those fees;

Bills: SB6178 , SB5831

Committee: House Consumer Protection & Business

Keywords: SB6178, property insurance, insurance claims, assignment of benefits, AOB, post-loss assignment, post-loss benefits, homeowners insurance, policyholder, insured, restoration contractor, mitigation contractor, public adjuster, insurance commissioner, claims handling, consumer protection, void and unenforceable, Washington insurance code, chapter 48 RCW, civil penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• It's an overview of buy now, pay later transactions.
• And the average dollar amount for the total of transactions was $848.
• But I think on the face of it, That total of transaction was $848.
• But retail installment transactions are transactions where a retail buyer purchases goods or services
• Or a credit card transaction.

Summary: The Consumer Protection and Business Committee held a work session on buy now, pay later (BNPL) transactions, focusing on how the products work, how they are used in Washington, and whether existing state law adequately protects consumers. Department of Financial Institutions staff described BNPL as short-term, usually no-interest installment financing offered at checkout, often with automatic payments, late fees, and varying credit-reporting practices. Members asked how BNPL compares with payday lending and earned wage access, whether it is effectively a loan or credit product, and whether Washington law already covers it. DFI explained that some BNPL structures may fall into a legal gray area under the Retail Installment Sales of Goods and Services Act because pay-in-four products may not meet the statute’s “more than four installments” language, while other structures may be covered; they also noted the Attorney General can enforce the act. DFI and committee members discussed consumer risks such as overextension, automatic debits, and lack of standardized disclosures, and DFI said it would follow up with additional data on defaults and related issues. Molly Gallagher of the Poverty Action Network and Nadine Chabrier of the Center for Responsible Lending argued that BNPL can help consumers but also poses significant risks, especially for lower-income consumers and consumers of color who already carry debt or use other alternative financial products. They said BNPL use has grown rapidly, often involves multiple simultaneous loans across providers, and can lead to overdrafts, late fees, and difficulty tracking obligations because payments are spread across different schedules. They emphasized concerns about weak disclosures, limited dispute protections, automatic payment structures, credit reporting inconsistencies, consumer overextension, and data privacy/dark-pattern marketing. They also described federal retrenchment, including the CFPB’s withdrawal of an interpretive rule that would have treated BNPL like a digital credit card, and pointed to state responses in places like New York, California, and Maryland. Committee members signaled interest in possible Washington legislation and stronger state oversight. Retail and business witnesses offered a more favorable view of BNPL as a cash-flow and sales tool. A Washington Retail Association representative described BNPL as an evolution of layaway and credit-card-style installment purchasing, noting that merchants receive payment up front minus fees while consumers get goods or services immediately and repay over time. A representative from a business using deferred-payment financing said the tool helps customers obtain equipment and helps the business manage inventory and cash flow, while NFIB said small businesses also use BNPL to bridge expenses and avoid higher-interest credit card debt. Members asked about merchant fees, consumer education, and whether BNPL is being used for impulse purchases or essential expenses like rent, car repairs, medical care, and travel. The chair concluded by saying the committee intends to pursue regulatory language and continue working with stakeholders, while also hearing from retailers to avoid eliminating legitimate financing tools.

Transcript Highlights:

• They understand how that's going to transact.
• Just as eBay brokers the transaction between a seller and a buyer, just as Lyft or Uber brokers the transaction
• And this is an example of a credit transaction.
• Is there still not enough money in a transaction where you can exclude 6.25% from a 2% transaction fee
• The Illinois law calls for a $1,000 per transaction fine.

Summary: The Special Commission on the future of payments and sales transactions by credit card heard extensive testimony from credit union, banking, retail, restaurant, and payments-industry representatives about proposals to limit interchange fees, especially on the tax and tip portions of transactions. Several witnesses opposed state-level restrictions, arguing they would create a patchwork of rules, burden state-chartered institutions, raise compliance complexity, and ultimately reduce resources for fraud prevention, cybersecurity, rewards, and access to credit. Others, including retail and merchant advocates, said swipe fees are a significant and growing cost for small businesses and that states should consider reforms such as limiting fees on taxes and tips, allowing surcharging, improving transparency in merchant contracts, and studying collection costs more closely. Witnesses also discussed recent legal and regulatory developments, including Illinois’s interchange-fee law, OCC and NCUA interim rules, and the ongoing Visa/Mastercard antitrust settlement. Industry representatives said the Illinois law has been delayed and is likely preempted for most transactions, while merchant advocates argued the state efforts and court rulings show that networks and banks do not set fees competitively. The proposed antitrust settlement was described by some as a meaningful but limited merchant victory, with temporary fee reductions and expanded surcharge/steering rights, while others said it still falls short of structural reform. The commission members pressed witnesses on the practical effects of fees, the cost of cash, whether merchants can pass costs through, and whether small businesses are actually seeing benefits from the current system. Members repeatedly emphasized the need for a fair middle ground that protects both small businesses and the payment system. No substantive votes or policy actions were taken beyond accepting testimony, and the meeting ended with adjournment after all scheduled witnesses had spoken.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill the committee passed last year had a $1,000 daily transaction limit.
• Fraud is driven by deception, not transaction size.
• Fraud is driven by deception, not transaction size.
• Fraud is driven by deception, not transaction size.
• Fraud is driven by deception, not transaction size.

Bills: SB6178 , SB5831

Committee: House Consumer Protection & Business

Keywords: SB6178, property insurance, insurance claims, assignment of benefits, AOB, post-loss assignment, post-loss benefits, homeowners insurance, policyholder, insured, restoration contractor, mitigation contractor, public adjuster, insurance commissioner, claims handling, consumer protection, void and unenforceable, Washington insurance code, chapter 48 RCW, civil penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm sure is, you know, to take out the nominal amount.
• is</c> Representative Muse said one of the biggest concerns from last year was the inclusion of a nominal
• Representative Muse said one of the biggest concerns from last year was the inclusion of a nominal amount
• :04:44.240><c> it</c><01:04:44.319><c> was</c><01:04:44.520><c> the</c><01:04:44.760><c> idea</c> nominal
• amount so uh it was the idea nominal amount so uh it was the idea that<01:04:45.640><c> somebody</c>

Committee: House Criminal Justice and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• I also appreciate your consideration of our nomination approval. Thank you very much.
• I also appreciate your consideration of our nomination approval.
• I also appreciate your consideration of our nomination approval. Thank you.
• U appreciate your consideration of also U appreciate your consideration of our<00:12:28.079><c> nomination
• </c><00:12:28.720><c> approval</c> our nomination approval our nomination approval thank<00:12:30.160

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, this is those transactions.
• $5,000 transaction $5,000 transaction has<01:11:34.320><c> a</c><01:11:34.480><c> firsttime</c><01:11
• </c> have them make that first transaction have them make that first transaction coach<01:12:15.199><
• <01:55:18.000><c> transaction</c><01:55:18.639><c> in</c><01:55:18.880><c> the</c> transaction transaction
• </c> are doing that on every transaction. are doing that on every transaction.

Committee: Senate Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• Parties to the transaction must provide written notice of the change to the Attorney General.
• but must make such a request within 30 days of receiving notice of the transaction.
• That's Chapter 74.45 RCW for transactions involving a covered material change transaction.
• As worded, there are other transactions that are covered as well under the bill.
• What's a transaction? What's a change of ownership? What's a change of control?

Summary: The committee held public hearings on House Bill 2255, House Bill 2548, and House Bill 2320. HB 2255 would regulate third-party litigation funding by requiring disclosure of funders and agreements, prohibiting funder control over litigation, capping funder recovery at 25%, and creating enforcement remedies. Supporters, including the sponsor, insurance groups, and liability reform advocates, described it as a transparency and consumer-protection measure that could improve court efficiency and reduce costs. Opponents, including the Washington State Association for Justice and the commercial litigation funding industry, argued it would burden plaintiffs, reveal protected work product, chill access to justice, and create satellite litigation. No vote was taken; the chair closed the hearing and asked testifiers to submit written comments. HB 2548 would expand state oversight of health care market transactions by broadening the types of mergers, acquisitions, asset sales, and ownership/control changes that trigger notice to the Attorney General, pausing transactions until information requests are substantially complied with, expanding interagency data sharing, and revoking nonprofit status in certain transactions. Supporters, including patient advocates, nurses, the Office of the Insurance Commissioner, the Attorney General’s office, physicians, and individual health care workers, said private equity and consolidation are driving higher costs, reduced access, and lower quality. Opponents from the Washington State Hospital Association and MultiCare said the bill is unclear, may contain drafting errors, does not adequately target private equity structures, and could create problems around nonprofit status and charitable assets. The hearing ended with the committee moving on to the next bill. HB 2320 would update Washington’s ghost gun laws to address 3D-printed firearms, CNC manufacturing, digital firearm manufacturing code, and the sale of machines marketed for firearm production, and would make certain violations per se Consumer Protection Act violations. The sponsor and supporters, including school officials, gun violence prevention advocates, a trauma survivor, a 3D-printing industry representative, and others, said the bill closes a public safety loophole and responds to the growing availability of untraceable weapons. Opponents, including the NRA, makerspace representatives, and some industry witnesses, argued the bill is overbroad, may sweep in lawful 3D-printing and CNC activity, raises First, Second, and Fifth Amendment concerns, and could create uncertainty through rebuttable presumptions and the CPA provisions. The transcript ends during the HB 2320 hearing, with additional testimony panels still to come and no final committee action recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill the committee passed last year had a $1,000 daily transaction limit.
• $5 or 15% of the U.S. dollar equivalent of virtual currency in the transaction.
• monitoring and transaction analytics software as part of their compliance program.
• through Bitcoin Depot and 95% of the transactions through CoinFlip were fraudulent.
• Fraud is driven by deception, not transaction size.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on several insurance and consumer protection bills. On engrossed substitute Senate Bill 5928, staff and the Office of the Insurance Commissioner described wildfire risk score and model disclosure requirements for homeowners, including notices when policies are nonrenewed, canceled, or premiums are adversely affected, plus insurer website disclosures about mitigation discounts and rate filing transparency. Supporters, including the OIC, AARP, the mayor of Medical Lake, and a fire chief, said the bill would improve transparency, help homeowners understand and reduce wildfire risk, and protect consumers facing cancellations and rising premiums. Industry witnesses said they supported the goal but warned the bill could add regulatory cost and complexity, and some urged narrower, simpler disclosure language and a delayed implementation date. On engrossed substitute Senate Bill 6031, which would expand the insurance fraud program and create a standalone Class B felony for insurance fraud, the OIC and AARP supported the bill as a tool against organized fraud and restitution for victims. A criminal defense representative raised concerns that the new felony language overlaps with existing misdemeanor insurance fraud law and could create conflicting statutes and harsher penalties for the same conduct. The committee also heard testimony that the bill had already incorporated amendments limiting criminal investigators’ role in regulatory investigations and focusing them on complex schemes. The committee then heard substitute Senate Bill 6248 on travel insurance, described as largely mirroring a House bill already passed by the committee. Testimony from the travel insurance industry said agreed-upon amendments had been incorporated, including changes addressing conflict-of-interest concerns, and urged the bill’s advancement. Finally, the committee heard substitute Senate Bill 6079, which would create the Strengthen Washington Homes grant program to fund wildfire home-hardening and prohibit insurers from using wildfire risk as a disqualifying factor for homes meeting IBHS wildfire-prepared standards. The OIC, fire commissioners, AARP, and the prime sponsor supported the bill as a way to reduce nonrenewals and improve insurability, while insurers opposed Section 7, arguing it could interfere with underwriting and should be removed if the bill is to remain a grant program. The committee also began hearing engrossed Senate Bill 5280 on virtual currency kiosks, with staff and the Department of Financial Institutions describing daily transaction caps, fee limits, disclosures, and receipts to curb fraud; consumer protection and law enforcement witnesses supported the bill, while industry witnesses raised concerns about burdens on compliant businesses and passive retail hosts.

Transcript Highlights:

• So they're charging us 2% to 3% for Visa and MasterCard transactions, 3% to 4% for American Express transactions
• The amount of cost per $100 of transaction fees has been declining over the last 20 years. $100 of transaction
• Debit transactions are limited by federal law and how much each transaction costs.
• Transaction speeds are double in an electronic transaction compared to a cash transaction.
• I represent the Electronic Transactions Association.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services heard testimony on several bills focused on financial security, banking regulation, and payment-card fees. Treasurer Deborah Goldberg supported the Massachusetts baby bonds proposal (H. 48) and also endorsed bills on matched savings (H. 1158/S. 737) and retirement planning/Secure Choice (H. 1143/S. 722), arguing these measures would help address wealth inequality, build assets, and improve retirement readiness. Supporters of baby bonds included policy experts and health advocates from Children’s Health Watch and Boston Medical Center, who said early-life asset building could improve long-term economic and health outcomes for children in low-income families. AARP also urged passage of the retirement planning bill, citing the large share of private-sector workers without access to an employer retirement plan. Representative Donato testified for H. 1143, describing it as a voluntary retirement-savings opportunity for workers at small employers. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3933, concerning the Massachusetts Credit Union Share Insurance Corporation, from former Bank Commissioner Mike Hanson, who defended the state’s full deposit insurance system for credit unions and savings institutions as a longstanding consumer-protection model. The Massachusetts Bankers Association raised concerns about the bill’s technical provisions and broader credit union/bank competitive issues, while the Cooperative Credit Union Association supported related legislation allowing modest compensation for credit union directors (S. 821/H. 1338) and flexibility for state financial institutions to grow through partnerships (S. 723). Bankers opposed those credit union bills, arguing they would upset a level playing field and blur long-standing distinctions between banks and credit unions. A major portion of the hearing focused on H. 1259/S. 688, which would prohibit card interchange fees on the tax and gratuity portions of restaurant transactions. Restaurant owners and the Massachusetts Restaurant Association testified in favor, saying the fees are a significant and growing expense, especially as most customers now pay by card; they argued the bills would save restaurants money without affecting state revenue. Credit union, banking, and payments-industry representatives opposed the bills, saying interchange helps fund fraud protection and payment infrastructure, that the proposal would create compliance burdens and likely litigation, and that it would mainly affect Massachusetts-chartered institutions while national banks could be preempted. Committee members noted that a commission on payment-card fees is being established and said the issue would be studied further. The hearing also included support for a separate bill on virtual credit cards for dental providers, with dentists saying automatic virtual-card payments impose hidden processing fees and fraud risks.

Transcript Highlights:

• The three vendors that were highlighted in that audit, what they offer, I would agree, is nominal, or
• I believe is a nominal fee for the ability to keep students and staff safe.
• I believe that the nominal fee that's associated with them will, arguably, save lives, and we should
• I believe that the nominal fee that's associated with them will in arguably save lives, and we should

Bills: SB1071 , SB1315 , SB1317 , SB1416 , SB1493 , SB1537 , SB1542 , SB1584 , SB1626 , SB1740 , SB1751 , SB1804 , SCR1047 , SCR1049

Committees: Senate Public Safety , Senate Senate Public Safety Committee of Reference

Keywords: Arizona Rangers, statutory repeal, security, state law, regulatory changes, school safety, interoperable communications, law enforcement, emergency response, funding, reentry programs, criminal justice, grants, recidivism, attorney general, missing children, kidnapping, reporting requirements, child safety, training

Transcript Highlights:

• So are there any nominations? Representative W. I nominate Representative Griffin to be chair.
• Are there any other nominations? Well then, all in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No.
• So take nominations for that position. I see you. All in favor? I am. Okay. Okay.

Summary: The committee organized itself by electing Representative Griffin as chair and a senator as vice chair, then approved the prior meeting minutes. Director Young then gave status updates on several ongoing performance audits. The New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights audit was reported complete, with presentations already made to the fiscal committee and House Judiciary. The special education oversight audit is still in progress, with 17 observations already sent to the department, responses received on 14, partial concurrence on 12, and a full draft report expected in late summer or early fall. The education freedom accounts audit is also underway, with fieldwork focused on eligibility controls and expenses; staffing shortages at the department have slowed the work, and a draft report is hoped for in the fall. The Doorway program audit is in the planning phase, with a report targeted for the end of the year. Members then discussed whether the committee should do more follow-up on completed audits. Several members said audits often identify issues that remain unresolved for years, and suggested a more active review process, similar to the Health and Human Services Oversight Committee, where agencies would return to report on what audit findings have been fixed and what remains outstanding. Staff noted that any such follow-up would take time away from new audit work, but said they were willing to consider the committee’s direction. Members also discussed using Transparency New Hampshire updates and agency self-reporting to help track progress, and there was general agreement to move toward a system of periodic follow-up on recent audits. The committee also reviewed suspended and potential audit topics. Two Department of Health and Human Services audits, involving the Bureau of Elderly and Adult Services and out-of-date placements, remain suspended because of ongoing litigation. Two other DHS topics, contract management and the Bureau of Developmental Services, remain on the potential audit list. A member raised a possible Fish and Game topic based on constituent concerns, but agreed to wait after speaking with the new director. The committee concluded by agreeing that the audit division should compile a list of audits completed in the last 10 years, with members to identify which ones they want to revisit first.

Transcript Highlights:

• They understand how that's going to transact.
• Just as eBay brokers the transaction between a seller and a buyer, just as Lyft or Uber brokers the transaction
• And this is an example of a credit transaction.
• Is there still not enough money in a transaction where you can exclude 6.25% from a 2% transaction fee
• The Illinois law calls for a $1,000 per transaction fine.

Summary: The Special Commission on the future of credit card payments and their impacts on small businesses heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, payment industry groups, and a credit card issuer. Much of the discussion focused on proposed state laws that would limit interchange fees on the tax and tip portions of transactions, especially Illinois’s Interchange Fee Prohibition Act and similar efforts in other states. Witnesses opposing the proposals argued that interchange helps fund fraud protection, cybersecurity, rewards, and access to credit, and warned that state-by-state rules would create a patchwork that could harm state-chartered banks and credit unions, raise compliance costs, and reduce consumer access to credit. Supporters of reform argued that swipe fees are a significant burden on merchants, especially small businesses, and that current pricing is opaque and often bundled with other processor charges. Several witnesses emphasized that the current payment system provides major benefits to merchants and consumers, including security, convenience, faster settlement, online commerce, and broader access to credit. One witness from Capital One said the industry’s losses from fraud and default are substantial and that interchange helps offset those risks; he also noted that merchants already have some tools, such as surcharging where allowed and negotiating clearer processor contracts. Retail representatives and the National Retail Federation countered that small businesses are under pressure from many costs and that interchange and related fees remain a real pain point, with some urging the commission to consider reforms that would return more money to businesses without disrupting the system. There was also discussion of the recent Visa/Mastercard antitrust settlement, with industry witnesses describing it as a significant merchant win that includes temporary rate reductions, more surcharge flexibility, and the ability to decline certain card tiers. No votes were taken. The meeting concluded after all scheduled testimony was heard, with the commission chair saying the session had been productive and that the committee would continue gathering testimony and written comments before making recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Parties to the transaction must provide written notice of the change to the Attorney General.
• but must make such a request within 30 days of receiving notice of the transaction.
• That's chapter 74.45 RCW for transactions involving a covered material change transaction.
• As worded, there are other transactions that are covered as well under the bill.
• What's a transaction? What's a change of ownership? What's a change of control?

Bills: HB2255 , HB2320 , HB2548

Committee: House Civil Rights & Judiciary

Keywords: litigation finance, legal funding, lawsuit, financial services, access to justice, firearm regulation, manufacturing, safety standards, background checks, license requirements, health care market standards, hospital consolidation, merger review, health care transaction notice, attorney general review, antitrust, provider organizations, hospital systems, contracting affiliation, material change

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:11:29.120><c> and</c> control on their own transactions and control on their own transactions
• amounts in the transaction, or the asset types in the transaction.
• </c> confidential transactions by default. confidential transactions by default.
• </c> asset types in the transaction. asset types in the transaction.
• this transaction be allowed?

Summary: The meeting began with roll call and approval of the prior meeting minutes, which passed unanimously. Members then introduced the day’s presentations, including one on the Canton network and another on tokenizing real-world assets, with a focus on how blockchain systems can support regulated financial institutions and asset tokenization. Julie, the director of policy and government affairs at Digital Asset, presented on the Canton network, describing it as a privacy-enabled public blockchain designed for regulated finance. She said tokenization should preserve the same legal and economic rights as the underlying asset, and argued that blockchain-based books and records can shorten settlement times, improve 24/7 trading, and reduce friction in capital markets. She identified three main barriers to institutional adoption of public blockchains: lack of privacy, limited throughput/scalability, and lack of control for compliance purposes such as freezing assets, pausing transactions, and meeting AML/sanctions obligations. She explained Canton’s structure as a public, permissionless network with application-level privacy controls, a global synchronizer, and super validators chosen by vote. She also highlighted current ecosystem participants and use cases, including Broadridge, Circle, and the DTCC’s planned tokenization of U.S. Treasuries on the network. Members and online participants asked about the relationship between tokenized assets and the Clarity Act, tokenized deposits, safeguards for faster settlement, and whether the platform could be used for municipal or property records. Julie said Digital Asset was not taking a position on rewards, but supported clearer statutory definitions because tokenized securities should carry the same rights as the underlying assets and investors need to know whether a token is a true tokenized security or a synthetic/reference token. She said the company is agnostic on whether the cash leg is stablecoins or tokenized deposits, though it expects both to develop. In response to concerns about rapid settlement, she pointed to institution-level permissions and SEC disclosure expectations as safeguards. She also said the technology could be used for other records, including potentially property-related records, if those assets can be tokenized.

Transcript Highlights:

• another to be sure that all of the papers are transferred to the new court and that the fees, which are nominal
• These are good amendments that maintain the bill's goal of making annuity transactions more timely and
• Parker, relating to the filing of a fraudulent financing statement in relation to certain secured transactions
• These are good amendments that maintain the bill's goal of making annuity transactions more timely and

Bills: SB15 , SB646 , SB800 , SB790 , SB748 , SB571 , SB1957 , SB1923 , SB1896 , SB1760 , SB1335 , SB2368 , SB2477 , SB2587 , SB2986 , SB2965 , SB1563 , SB1467 , SB1164 , SB1137 , SB614 , SB705 , SB918 , SB955 , SB869 , SB850 , SB863 , SB1055 , SB2206 , SB457 , SB2337 , SB1610 , SB1362 , SB926 , SB1494 , SB251 , SB456 , SB500 , SB1307 , SB2615 , SB2995 , SB2321 , SB2972 , SB973 , SB865 , SB506 , SB1522 , SB1558 , SB510 , SB667 , SB763 , SB2073 , SB1858 , SB1660 , SB2900 , SB1433 , SB1540 , SB1964 , SB1300 , SB1644 , SB2217 , SB2373 , SB2431 , SB1758 , SB974 , SB2480 , SB3039 , SB3047 , SB2781 , SB826 , SB766 , SB527 , SB1946 , SB2885 , SB1243 , SB2610 , SB857 , SB2501 , SB66 , SB268 , SB331 , SB1302 , SB519 , SB2807 , SB13 , SB7 , SB1718 , SB1567 , SB1233 , SB413 , SB2177 , SB30 , SB2024 , SJR1 , SCR27 , SB2018 , SB1580 , SB2121 , SB1049 , SB1266 , SB1400 , SB1596 , SB2753 , SB2221 , SB1719 , SCR9 , SB204 , SB437 , SB568 , SB612 , SB672 , SB710 , SB823 , SB876 , SB904 , SB905 , SB968 , SB1084 , SB1207 , SB1230 , SB1313 , SB1504 , SB1790 , SB2232 , SB2366 , SB2367 , SB2398 , SB2515 , SB2520 , SB2589 , SB2786 , SB2790 , SB3048 , SB3050 , SB3052 , SB3053 , SB3056 , SB3029 , SCR3 , SCR18 , SCR30 , HCR146 , HCR148 , HCR149 , HCR153 , HCR155 , HCR157 , HB5560 , HB762 , HB1584 , HB 107 , HB 114 , HB138 , HB4386 , HB2495 , HB581 , HB3348 , HB5323 , HB4341 , HB6 , HB2712 , HB171 , HB3153 , HB143 , HB2688 , HB3464 , HB449 , HB3486 , HB4263 , HB2 , HB1522 , HB24 , HB 1237 , HB2637 , HB3126 , HB3233 , HB4310 , HB3487 , HCR9 , HB5331 , HB1397 , HB163 , HB3250 , HB3071 , HB3463 , HB5033 , HB35 , HB3824 , HB216 , HB4226 , HB3512 , HB18 , HB5154 , HB 103 , HB851 , HB647 , HB4520 , HB3016 , HB2313 , HB2818 , HB2851 , HB4486 , HB4264 , HB1500 , HB5081 , HB2974 , HB2080 , HB4384 , HB5659 , HB493 , HB4903 , HB2516 , HB4488 , HB4530 , HB3689 , HB145 , HB43 , HB5247 , HB2221 , HB5671 , HB700 , HB3711 , HB 120 , SB17 , SB1637 , SB1833 , SB2155 , SB21 , SB2778 , SB379

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

Transcript Highlights:

• This is decision-making only on two judicial nominations that we heard yesterday.
• If you're... we won't be voting today on this nomination.
• We are in complete and unequivocal support of Justice Devens' nomination.
• We are in complete and unequivocal support of Justice Devens' nomination.
• We're coming back in on the R 940 agenda for nomination for Chief Justice.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The Judiciary Committee first took up decision-making on two judicial nominations heard the previous day. Governor’s Message 796, naming Annalisa En Bernard Lee as Circuit Court Judge for the Second Circuit (Maui County), and Governor’s Message 797, naming Michael K. Soong as Circuit Court Judge for the Fifth Circuit (Kauai), were both recommended for consent and adopted by unanimous roll-call votes. The committee then heard testimony on Governor’s Message 801, the nomination of Vladimir P. Devens as Chief Justice of the Hawaii State Supreme Court. Support came from the Governor’s office, Honolulu Prosecutor Steve Alm, Honolulu Managing Director Michael Formby, the Hawaii Association for Justice, United Public Workers, HGEA/AFL-CIO, the Hawaii Filipino Lawyers Association, labor and trade unions, retired Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald, retired judges, bar and court officials, and many other individuals and organizations. Supporters emphasized Devens’ legal experience, work ethic, labor-law background, community ties, mentorship, and ability to manage the judiciary and address the appellate backlog. A few speakers opposed the nomination, including Chuck Freedman, who raised concerns about union influence and potential conflicts, and others who submitted opposition testimony. Devens also testified, describing his Honolulu upbringing, education at UC Berkeley, six years with the police department, and more than 30 years in private practice before joining the Supreme Court. He said the chief justice role is primarily an administrative one, highlighted his experience with bar and judicial administration committees, and identified reducing the appellate backlog as a major priority. No vote was taken on GM 801 during this portion of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, no one else other than the governor's message nominating Andrew Savaiano.
• </c><00:05:19.280><c> Andrew</c> governor's message um nominating Andrew governor's message um nominating
• So, first up for GM 555, Chair's recommendation is to advise and consent to the nomination of Margaret
• </c><00:08:04.880><c> of</c><00:08:05.120><c> Andrew</c> and consent to the nomination of Andrew and
• consent to the nomination of Andrew Savaiano<00:08:06.120><c> for</c><00:08:06.280><c> the</c><00:08:

Summary: The committee first took up gubernatorial message nominations. Margaret Jackson was heard for reappointment to the State Council on Mental Health, where she said her lived experience with family members facing schizophrenia, houselessness, and substance use issues motivates her service. Andrew Savaiano was heard for the Juvenile Justice State Advisory Council and said he wanted to continue elevating youth voice and lived experience. Tao Yan was heard for the Board of Certification of Operating Personnel in Wastewater Treatment Plants and emphasized the importance of wastewater treatment to public health and the environment. The Department of Health testified in support of the nominations, and the committee later adopted chair recommendations to advise and consent to all three nominations, noting Senator Favela’s excuse and no recorded objections. The committee then heard HB 1853 relating to dementia. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support from state agencies, advocacy groups, caregivers, and individuals with lived experience, including a person living with Alzheimer’s and his caregiver spouse, who described the value of early diagnosis and coordinated support. Supporters said the bill would expand memory care navigation and access, especially on neighbor islands and in rural areas, and help families connect to resources earlier. One member raised concerns about the cost and scale of the proposed program, asking about the number and cost of dementia specialists and noting broader budget pressures, but the bill remained under discussion with no final action shown in the transcript. The committee also heard HB 1591 relating to health care, which would expand the preceptor tax credit to additional health professions, including physician assistant students and PAs, with testimony in support from nursing, public health, medical, and provider organizations. Supporters argued the measure would help address workforce shortages and improve training opportunities for local and economically disadvantaged students. A committee member asked about the aggregate cost of the credit and whether the existing credit had been fully utilized; the chair noted the bill was being kept narrower than broader proposals because of fiscal concerns. The transcript then moved to HB 1961 relating to health care access near facilities, with supporters arguing it protects access to legal reproductive health care and opponents saying it is unnecessary, vague, and burdensome on free speech and protest activity. No final vote on the bills appears in the excerpt provided.