Transcript Highlights:

• With weapon screening in place, bad actors carrying dangerous weapons cannot enter the core buildings
• With weapon screening in place, carry.
• able to talk this time. able to talk this time.
• We have a really short window of time to try to get a lot of priorities done around here.
• uh cuz I looked, the amount of time uh cuz I looked, the amount of time allocated<00:18:50.560><

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3357, a bill to prohibit weapons on Minnesota State Capitol grounds, with exceptions for official protective personnel. The bill’s author and co-author argued it was needed to create a safer environment for legislators, staff, and the public in light of recent threats and violence, including the killing of Speaker Emerita Hortman and other threats directed at members. Supporters said the Capitol should be a place for discussion, not guns, and emphasized the emotional and safety concerns faced by lawmakers, especially women. Opposition testimony came from the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, which argued the bill would burden peaceable permit holders rather than violent criminals. Opponents said permit holders are highly vetted, commit crimes at very low rates, and should not be forced to choose between First and Second Amendment rights at the Capitol. Several Republican members echoed those concerns, saying the bill would create a confusing patchwork, fail to address threats outside the building, and infringe on lawful self-defense rights. One member also raised concerns about threats against legislators and questioned whether the bill’s assumptions about permit holders were supported by verifiable data. The discussion became contentious at points over procedure and interruptions, with the chair reminding members about decorum and allowing a roll call vote after repeated requests. The committee then voted 6-7, with one excused, against the motion to re-refer the bill to Public Safety. As a result, the motion did not prevail and House File 3357 was laid over.

Transcript Highlights:

• That was before the time.
• <00:04:14.319> Probably That was before the time. Probably That was before the time.
• We we went through tax reform some time We we went through tax reform some time ago.<00:15:40.000
• I time in meetings for for Medicaid.
• And um so with meeting at any time.

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call – 00:00:00 Introduction of Board Members – 00:02:04 Overview of the Purpose and Goals of the Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board – 00:12:46 Medicaid Legislative Update - 00:20:26 Discussion of Next Steps and Future Meeting Dates – 01:04:06 Adjournment – 01:06:37, 958, all

Summary: The first meeting of the Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board opened with Chair Ken Fleming and Co-Chair Rocky Adams welcoming members, explaining the board’s purpose, and introducing the diverse membership of legislators, providers, advocates, and state officials. Fleming said the board would meet monthly, allow public comment at the end of meetings, and operate transparently with materials posted online and distributed in advance. Both chairs emphasized that the board’s work would focus on improving Medicaid outcomes, efficiency, and oversight, while preparing for possible federal changes and avoiding premature assumptions about what Congress may do. Members then gave brief introductions describing their backgrounds in medicine, nursing, hospital administration, behavioral health, insurance, budgeting, pharmacy, and Medicaid administration. Several noted direct experience with Medicaid populations or managed care, including the Department for Medicaid Services commissioner, health plan representatives, hospital and clinic leaders, and legislators with health care backgrounds. The board also heard from Stephanie Bates of the LRC Office of Health Data Analytics, who said her office supports the General Assembly with health-related data, policy, and research and would serve as a resource to the board. Bates then began a presentation on Medicaid basics, explaining that House Bill 695 created the board and that the presentation would cover eligibility, enrollment, covered benefits, waivers, managed care, the budget, and the federal reconciliation bill. She described Medicaid eligibility as complex, noted that Kentucky had more than 1.4 million enrollees, and explained enrollment churn and the unwinding of pandemic-era continuous coverage. She also outlined mandatory and optional Medicaid benefits, the requirement that services be medically necessary and provided by enrolled providers, and the main waiver types used in Kentucky, including 1115, 1915(b), and 1915(c) waivers. No votes or formal actions were taken at this meeting beyond organizational setup and receiving the initial informational presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Routine is critical at all times.
• So now we pay MHAP under a fee time.
• <00:47:00.800> frame that during that time frame that during that time frame um<00:47:04.000
• <00:47:12.560> Most over time that's degraded. Most over time that's degraded.
• <00:52:29.760> uh division of Medicaid at the time. uh division of Medicaid at the time. uh

Keywords: Medicaid - Room 216, 4 February, 2026; 2:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee heard presentations on several Medicaid-related topics. First, a pharmacy representative discussed nonopioid pain medications as a way to reduce opioid dependence and overdose risk, emphasizing that options such as acetaminophen, NSAIDs, and topical diclofenac can be useful for pain management. She cautioned that nonopioids can still have risks and said any policy should avoid requiring patients to step through opioids before accessing safer alternatives, while still allowing reasonable step therapy among nonopioid options. The presenter said the goal is to keep patients from being pushed toward opioids by cost or insurance design. The committee also heard emotional testimony from parents of a child with Prader-Willi syndrome, who described the condition as a rare genetic disorder that causes severe, lifelong hyperphagia and requires rigid supervision and ongoing treatment. They argued that alternative funding programs can disrupt access to medically necessary drugs such as human growth hormone, forcing families into costly and uncertain coverage gaps. They asked lawmakers to ensure insurance coverage remains stable for rare disease patients and thanked Senator Blackwell for prior support of rare disease legislation. Next, a Livanova representative urged the committee to support higher Medicaid reimbursement for vagus nerve stimulator surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy. He said inadequate hospital reimbursement has reduced access in Mississippi, causing patients to travel long distances or go without treatment, and argued that better reimbursement would improve outcomes and save money over time. He cited studies showing seizure reductions, lower ER use, and a projected $2.8 million in five-year savings for Medicaid based on 40 patients, and asked that hospitals be reimbursed at 100% of Medicare rates for the procedure codes. Finally, a Medicaid official gave a broad overview of hospital payment structure, including fee-for-service, managed care, MHAP, DSH, UPL, provider taxes, and related funding mechanisms. She explained that hospital payments are interrelated and have shifted over time, with major changes tied to managed care, MHAP/UPL increases, and provider taxes. At the end of the discussion, the committee was running short on time and asked her to skip ahead to the provider tax component; no votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think it's time that our state deals with that issue.
• So it's not like the first time it happens; it's happening. I would you— >> Question.
• He has spoken to me several times on the floor about it.
• me several times on the floor about it. me several times on the floor about it.
• <00:32:57.919> when have one of these little screens when have one of these little screens

Keywords: Judiciary, Division B - Room 409, 2 February, 2026; 4:30 P.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee took up a series of criminal justice and public safety bills. Early discussion focused on immigration-related concerns and the costs of enforcement, with one senator pressing for data to support claims about crimes by undocumented immigrants and another citing specific cases and DPS removals of drivers with falsified CDLs. The committee also heard a bill requiring the sex marker on a driver’s license to match sex at birth; the sponsor said it was the same measure passed by the committee the prior year, and it received a title sufficient/do pass recommendation. Several bills addressed corrections and court procedures. One bill clarified that people in intervention court are subject to the sentencing judge’s sanctions and are not entitled to a separate technical-violation hearing like probationers or parolees; the sponsor said it would reduce, not increase, leniency, and the committee passed it. Another bill extended the statute of limitations for felonious assistance program fraud from five to ten years, citing the TANF fraud case and the need for more time to detect abuse in executive agency programs; it also passed. The committee then approved a bill allowing judges, after a hearing and specific findings, to order firearms removed in domestic violence cases and protective-order proceedings when the weapons pose a credible threat. The committee also advanced a bill increasing penalties for witness tampering, with the sponsor saying prosecutors wanted a stronger tool because defendants were sometimes willing to accept the current five-year penalty rather than face the underlying offense. Members discussed whether the bill covered intimidation versus tampering and whether the penalty should be tied to the underlying crime; a motion to reconsider/adjust the bill was adopted, and the bill ultimately received a do pass recommendation. Another measure increased fines for handheld mobile device violations while driving, especially in school and work zones, and members discussed whether the bill should be stronger and how any collected fines would be used; it passed. Finally, the committee approved a bill requiring reporting of certain convictions and adjudications to the Child Protective Services central registry, and ended by passing a bill increasing the fine for failing to use a screen on loads that can spill from vehicles and damage windshields, with members noting the fine had not been updated since 1974.

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me just ask for the Lord's blessing upon our time and then we'll kick off.
• our beloved state, all of us, and we commit this time to you in Christ's name.
• This is an amendment to extend the time and the funds.
• It's an annual license for a screening instrument to screen applicants. No questions, Mr. Chairman.
• So, next time we're not having to roll with this.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• asked that question a lot of times asked that question a lot of times because<00:17:53.000> the
• <00:35:40.440> just remote support for the first time just remote support for the first time
• House File 487 is a continuation of... time today um I am Isaiah fransen I am time today um I am Isaiah
• Thank you for your time, Mr. Chair.
• times for each child in a family.

Bills: HF1380, HF1166, HF487, HF1553, HF1472, HF258, HF1911

Keywords: psychiatric treatment, human services, mental health funding, per diem rate, Clay County, disability services, assistive technology, remote support, advocacy, training programs, HF487, Wellness in the Woods, Minnesota human services, grant funding, general fund appropriation, peer support, substance use recovery, addiction recovery, reentry services, reentry after incarceration

Transcript Highlights:

• So, thank you very much for that time.
• We have a a you very much for that time.
• to time.
• Additional screening by trained staff.
• only used for a short period of time. only used for a short period of time.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:03 Roll Call: 00:00:09 Agency Updates: 00:01:44 Juvenile Justice Advisory Board Update: 00:03:36 Department of Juvenile Justice Update: 00:23:10, 958, all

Summary: The Juvenile Justice Oversight Council approved the minutes from its November 8, 2024 meeting and welcomed new member Representative Nick Wilson. The council also heard an update from the Administrative Office of the Courts on a school attendance awareness campaign aimed at reducing truancy referrals to court, and a member requested a future, more detailed presentation on truancy trends. The council then received an update from the Juvenile Justice Advisory Board from Dr. David Frink and Elsie Berger. They described the board’s membership, meeting schedule, public access, annual report and three-year plan, and its role in helping Kentucky remain compliant with federal juvenile justice requirements so the state can receive Title II funding. They said the board reviews grant applications for community-based services, substance use, and early intervention programs, with about $584,000 in federal funds this year and a little over $600,000 expected next year. Members asked about participation, board vacancies, and how to engage with the board, and the presenters emphasized the importance of statewide representation and community input. The Department of Juvenile Justice then provided a broader update through Commissioner Randy White and Deputy Secretary Mona Wamik. White said DJJ is under an ongoing U.S. Department of Justice investigation focused on conditions in detention facilities, including use of force, isolation, abuse, mental health care, and special education, and said the department has cooperated with repeated information requests and site visits. He also reviewed recent legislative and administrative changes, including 2023 Senate Bill 162, regional detention planning, facility segregation requirements, staffing and salary investments, improved staffing levels, reduced mental health vacancies, and training efforts related to security threat groups. He said DJJ has made progress but continues to work on staffing, safety, and facility improvements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your time today.
• Thank you so much for your time.
• As noted, we've seen time and time again how even with community-supported projects there's a slip-up
• Thank you for your time. All set. Thank you for your time. Okay.
• It happens many times.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a lengthy hybrid hearing of the Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government, with testimony spanning local board training, animal welfare and enforcement, municipal charters, water district dissolution, and other home rule matters. Chairs Rausch and Lewis set strict time limits because of the large number of speakers and explained that written testimony would also be accepted. Members heard from local officials, advocates, municipal employees, and residents, with many bills receiving broad support from municipal and advocacy witnesses. Several speakers supported bills requiring or expanding training for local boards and commissions, including pre-service training for planning, zoning, and other land use boards. Supporters said training would help volunteers understand complex laws, improve consistency, reduce legal challenges, and speed up housing and development decisions. Related testimony also backed a bill to modernize historic district commissions and another to allow associate planning board members to serve more broadly when needed to maintain quorums. A major portion of the hearing focused on animal legislation. Witnesses supported bills to expand citations for cruel conditions beyond dogs, update dangerous dog procedures, improve animal health inspections and breeder oversight, strengthen tethering rules, and protect pet consumers. Animal control officers, humane organizations, and some victims of dog attacks described enforcement gaps and the need for clearer standards, while several dog trainers and the American Kennel Club opposed parts of the dangerous dog bill and tethering restrictions, arguing they would limit humane training tools and professional discretion. The committee also heard strong support for a bill to create a statewide pet shop and consumer protection framework. The committee also heard testimony on several local home rule petitions. Medford officials and residents strongly supported a new city charter that would replace the current at-large council with ward-based representation and periodic charter review. Wayland representatives supported a bill to preserve the library’s Millennium Fund as intended, Cambridge officials backed creation of an employment and job training trust, and Carver officials supported dissolving the North Carver Water District due to compliance and financial problems. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair repeatedly invited written testimony and follow-up materials.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now there is that issue of time and how much it takes.
• It is changing over time because it certainly does.
• I mean, it was a good time before, but now's a good time, too, now that this has happened.
• I'll leave time for your questions.
• It's been abandoned a long time.

Transcript Highlights:

• Read the bill a third time.
• Read the bill a third time.
• time.
• The bill requires the FHSAA to enforce ECG screening starting the first time for first-time participants
• I would never want my screen time shown.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, doctor and guest introductions, and then took up Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 168, the Tristan Murphy Act, on mental health. Senator Bradley described the bill as a major criminal justice and behavioral health reform measure that would expand pretrial mental health diversion, strengthen treatment-based probation conditions, broaden grant uses for mental health and substance abuse programs, add Hillsborough County to a forensic hospital diversion pilot, require certain DOC mental health evaluations, and create a Florida Behavioral Health Data Repository. Senators from both parties spoke in strong support, emphasizing treatment over incarceration, public safety, data collection, and the Murphy family’s role in advancing the bill. The Senate passed the bill 37-0 and then approved 37 co-sponsors. The chamber then received the Senate’s 2025-26 General Appropriations Bill, SB 2500, with Chair Hooper outlining a $117.4 billion budget that he said reduces spending, preserves reserves, and includes major investments in water quality, transportation, education infrastructure, and reporting requirements. Committee chairs summarized their portions: K-12 funding at $34.7 billion with increases for FEFP, scholarships, VPK, school hardening, and school safety; higher education at $11.5 billion with workforce, nursing, reading, autism, and student aid investments; health and human services with a $1.8 billion increase for Medicaid, mental health, opioid response, disability services, and veterans programs; criminal and civil justice at $7.6 billion for corrections, juvenile justice, law enforcement, courts, and judgeships; transportation/tourism/economic development at about $18 billion including roads, housing, Visit Florida, and cultural grants; and agriculture/environment/general government with major Everglades, water quality, citrus, food bank, and agency IT funding. Members then questioned several budget items, especially education funding formulas, the shift of scholarship dollars below the line, the impact on public school districts, AP/IB and other accelerated program funding, the APD wait list, opioid settlement spending, arts grants, and the My Safe Florida Home and condo pilot programs. Chairs generally said scholarship and accelerated-program dollars were being restructured for transparency and flexibility rather than cut, that school districts would still receive funding based on enrollment, and that APD and other human services issues would continue to be worked out in conference. The budget discussion concluded with remarks praising staff and noting a 4% across-the-board pay raise for state employees and targeted increases for law enforcement and firefighters, followed by a recognition for FAMU Day at the Capitol.

Transcript Highlights:

• So at the time, it was based on each district's local tax base.
• It took a long, long time. You do not need to memorize any of this.
• I'm telling you, this case just went on for a long time.
• So on the screen you'll see a number of issues that the court found at the time.
• it's different organizations at different times.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the previous minutes and then focused on an update from the Department of Education on early childhood programs, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ongoing work to review ABC slots, which have been flat for years at about 23,800 slots and roughly $114 million. They said about 1,000 slots statewide are currently unfilled despite a waiting list of more than 2,000 families, and the department is shifting toward paying based on enrollment rather than guaranteed slots. Members asked about school choice, income eligibility, year-round access, curriculum flexibility, transportation, and whether funding should be increased or rebalanced; the department said it is collecting data, may survey providers more formally, and is considering whether to modernize income thresholds, daily rates, and other program rules. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical information on income limits and other program details. The second major portion of the meeting was a legal presentation on the framework for Arkansas school adequacy by BLR education attorney Taylor Lloyd. She reviewed the constitutional basis for a “general, suitable, and efficient” public school system, the Dupree and Lake View cases, and the principle that adequacy and equity are different but related: adequacy asks what resources are needed, while equity asks whether those resources are distributed fairly. She explained that the General Assembly must define adequacy, study it, and react to evidence over time, and that the current adequacy definition includes curriculum and career/technical frameworks, the 38 mandatory Carnegie units, state testing standards, and sufficient funding. She also described the matrix as a funding tool, not a spending mandate, and noted that categorical funds are separate from the matrix. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum then gave the historical framework, tracing legislative responses from Dupree through Lake View and into the present. She highlighted major changes such as the creation of equalization funding, fiscal distress and academic distress laws, the adequacy study process, the Educational Adequacy Fund, facilities and transportation changes, declining enrollment and student growth funding, and later adjustments to teacher salaries, isolated funding, and categorical programs. She explained that the adequacy study has evolved through committee hearings, surveys, site visits, and outside consultants, and that recent changes include updates to accountability references and the addition or removal of certain funding categories. Members asked follow-up questions about how the matrix is used, whether homeschool or private-school funding raises comparable issues, whether stakeholders include private and homeschool participants, whether school board members should be surveyed, and whether the state should revisit average daily membership versus attendance-based funding. No votes were taken on the adequacy presentations, but the committee did agree to continue the early childhood discussion in a future subcommittee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• is transferred due to a former tenant's prior sale, which allows for any amount to be increased one time
• Like we did last time. And clearly last time it was a flawed process. It wasn't correct.
• And I'm worried that it might not be correct again this time. So I'll also be a no today.
• I'm going to share my screen. Madam Chair, there are four votes to recommend, two votes not.
• I'm going to share my screen. Madam Chair, there are four votes to recommend, two votes not.

Summary: The conference committee met on engrossed House Bill 1217 and received a staff briefing on the proposed conference striking amendment S-3395.2. Staff explained that the amendment would set rent increase limits under the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act at 7% plus CPI or 10%, whichever is less, retain and modify various exemptions, update notice requirements, add a July 1, 2040 expiration date, and require the Department of Commerce to create an online landlord resource center. For manufactured/mobile home tenancies, the amendment would limit rent increases to 5% in any 12-month period, adjust exemptions and notice provisions, and align enforcement language with the RLTA changes. The amendment also removes certain miscellaneous provisions from the Senate version, including a social vulnerability assessment and a JLARC review requirement. Representative Lowe raised a procedural point of order about whether the landlord resource center could be added in conference, but the chair ruled the point not well taken under Joint Rule 18. Senator Gainer asked for clarification about the landlord resource center and the referenced RCW 43.31.605; staff explained it would direct landlords to existing Commerce resources, including the landlord mitigation program and related subprograms, and noted that the resource center language was originally in the House bill. A motion was made to reject prior amendments, adopt striking amendment S-3395.2, and give the bill a do pass recommendation. Senator Gainer and Representative Lowe spoke in opposition, citing concerns about the bill’s balance, the landlord provisions, and the speed of the process. The committee then voted 4-2 to recommend the conference committee report, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're just going to do that one more time.
• DA Tucker, I know you have a time limit. Are we, what is your go time?
• And I do actually also want to, after that, see if we have time—and if we have time with regard to the
• There's not a set end time on the 20th.
• Obviously, we're dealing with a more expansive document this time, but I will say that the last time

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism met to hear testimony from Chief James Hicks of the Natick Police Department, who chairs the Municipal Police Training Committee, and Chief Thomas Fowler of the Salisbury Police Department. They described the statewide civil-rights-officer model for hate-crime response, the HEART Unit, and MPTC training authority under POST, and urged the commission to recommend incorporating the IHRA definition of antisemitism into police training and to fund that effort. Commissioners asked about how law enforcement should handle antisemitic incidents that may not rise to crimes, the 2022 Mapping Project, masking during protests, and the role of HART; the chiefs said departments can update training quickly, that every department should have a trained civil-rights officer, and that HART’s expertise should be integrated statewide. The commission also approved the October 16, 2025 minutes after correcting an initial procedural error. The rest of the meeting focused on the draft report, especially the prefatory statement and the definition section. Commissioners broadly praised the report’s scope and the chairs’ work, but offered many edits aimed at tightening language, reducing advocacy tone, and clarifying the “Massachusetts way” of combating antisemitism. Several members wanted stronger emphasis on Massachusetts values, education, moral leadership, and the distinction between hate incidents, hate crimes, and statutory offenses; others urged clearer references to constitutional protections, First Amendment limits, and Attorney General review of legal statements. There was also discussion of whether to keep or remove references to alternative definitions of antisemitism: some commissioners argued that only the IHRA definition should be centered, while others said acknowledging other definitions was factually important and would reflect the range of testimony. Commissioners also raised specific substantive edits for later sections, including adding examples such as the 2022 Mapping Project, strengthening language on online intimidation, academic boycotts, and divestment campaigns, and clarifying that some conduct may be hateful even if lawful. In the higher education section, members praised recommendations on mandatory training, bystander intervention, trauma-informed responses, mental health supports, and campus climate surveys, while suggesting a few technical edits and additional best-practice examples. No final votes were taken on the draft report during this portion; the chairs said they would incorporate feedback into a revised draft before the remaining meetings and eventual vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• So at the time, it was based on each district's local tax base.
• It took a long, long time. You do not need to memorize any of this.
• I'm telling you, this case just went on for a long time.
• So on the screen, you'll see a number of issues that the court found at the time.
• And so at times, it's in different organizations at different times.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the prior minutes and then shifted to an update from Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith on early childhood education, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. They said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ABC as a large state program with about 23,800 funded slots and roughly $114 million in annual appropriations. Department officials said they are reviewing slot allocations because about 1,000 seats are funded but unfilled, while more than 2,000 families are on waiting lists, and they plan to reduce or reallocate slots from providers that have not filled them over several years. They also said they are examining whether income thresholds, curriculum expectations, daily rates, and summer programming should be updated, and members raised concerns about access, local control, transportation, and whether the program should better align with K-12 choice and school readiness goals. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical data and other information for future discussion. The committee then received a legal presentation from BLR attorney Taylor Lloyd on the constitutional and statutory framework for education adequacy in Arkansas. She reviewed the Dupree and Lake View cases, explaining that the state must maintain a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools, and that adequacy and equity are distinct but related concepts. She emphasized that the General Assembly is responsible for defining adequacy, studying whether the system meets that standard, and reacting to the evidence, while the courts ultimately decide constitutional compliance. Lloyd also explained the current adequacy definition, the role of the matrix as a funding tool rather than a spending mandate, and the distinction between unrestricted foundation funding and restricted categorical funding. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum followed with a historical overview of how Arkansas responded to the court cases and developed the current adequacy process. She traced major legislative actions from the 1980s through the Lake View litigation, including the creation of funding formulas, categorical aid, isolated funding, declining enrollment funding, and the 2003-2004 adequacy study that led to the Continuing Adequacy Evaluation Act and the matrix used to set foundation funding. She also described later changes to the adequacy statute, the financial reporting requirements for districts, and the ongoing use of surveys, stakeholder testimony, and consultant studies in the biennial adequacy process. Members asked questions about whether private or homeschool programs could use public funds for expenses like utilities, whether stakeholders should include those groups, the difference between average daily membership and attendance, and whether school board members are surveyed; staff said those issues would need further research or were outside the scope of the presenters’ role.

Transcript Highlights:

• Often times, I hear people saying that...
• Times, um, I hear people saying that there's outside groups, outside entities that are getting involved
• I see the time stamp on this of 5:22 p.m. yesterday. I mean, I understand it's technical.
• Often times there may not be any issue out there, but if there's not transparency, people wonder, and
• Minnesota has a proudly part-time legislature.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• being allocated on a weighted full-time being allocated on a weighted full-time equivalent<00:04
• But it needs to be fixed so it doesn't have to happen every time we do a budget.
• So, PreK presentation's on your screen.
• So the first year, as you can see on your screen, is a planning year.
• first year as you can see on your screen first year as you can see on your screen is<00:20:26.880

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met without a quorum and first heard from Kentucky Department of Education officials on career and technical education funding. KDE explained that House Bill 499 created a CTE funding formula using 60% weighted full-time equivalent enrollment and 40% incentives, but House Bill 6’s budget language excluded area technology centers (ATCs) from that supplemental funding. KDE requested approval of an additional budget request of $14,789,352 in each fiscal year 2027 and 2028 to include ATCs in the formula and hold local districts harmless. Officials said ATCs serve students from 117 of Kentucky’s 171 districts and argued the change would reduce funding disparities and better reflect the return on investment from CTE programs, citing growth in dual credit and work-based learning participation. Members asked whether the issue would need to be revisited each budget cycle. KDE responded that the problem could be fixed by removing the notwithstanding language from the budget bill, which they said would allow ATCs to be included under the existing statute. Representative Klein supported the request, saying the current clause could lead to stagnation and that the committee should help the program continue to grow. No vote was taken on the CTE item during the portion of the meeting provided. The committee then heard a presentation from PreK for All on expanding preschool access in Kentucky. Advocates said the state’s preschool program has been funded since 1990 and currently serves about 14,200 children at roughly $84 million per year, but that many working families still fall into a coverage gap. They proposed expanding eligibility to 250% of the federal poverty line, which they said would add about 9,600 children at a cost of $40 million in year two, after a planning year. The proposal also included regulatory flexibility for classrooms and partnerships with private child care providers and nonprofits, with speakers emphasizing child care deserts in some counties and citing research that early learning improves kindergarten readiness and later outcomes. No action or vote was taken on the preschool proposal in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Please be mindful of the time when you come up to testify.
• We'll take it out of your time. Well, I've been crossing out... We'll take it out of your time.
• We were kind of behind the times on that, and I think we cannot be behind the times with artificial intelligence
• time here, and that's why I support H. 77.
• No, you take your time, and we'll— We're happy.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on several artificial intelligence bills, opening with remarks about the 9/11 anniversary and then broad statements from the co-chairs about AI’s promise and risks. Chair Farley-Bouvier and Senator Moore emphasized the need for guardrails, transparency, and worker and consumer protections, while Senator Finegold described Senate Bill 37, which would create a framework for AI model training with safety assessments, audits, incident reporting, Attorney General oversight, and workforce reporting. Members also discussed Massachusetts’ position relative to other states and the need for state action in the absence of federal regulation. A large portion of the hearing focused on the Fair Act, House 77 and Senate 35, which would limit workplace surveillance, restrict collection of biometric and location data, require notice and human review for automated employment decisions, and protect workers from retaliation. Labor leaders, including AFL-CIO, AFSCME, AFT, SEIU, building trades, and other worker representatives, testified in support, describing harms from bossware, automated benefits denials, hiring and promotion screening, scheduling, and monitoring in workplaces ranging from health care and education to manufacturing and construction. They argued that AI systems are already affecting wages, benefits, safety, and job security, and that Massachusetts should act now to set clear rules. The committee also heard testimony on House Bill 74, which would require informed consent and clear contract terms for digital replicas of voices and likenesses, with SAG-AFTRA representatives supporting the bill as a protection for performers and creators. Another major topic was Senate Bill 51 on social media algorithm accountability and transparency; child safety advocates, researchers, and a public health expert described harms from engagement-based algorithms, including exposure to harmful content, eating disorders, and youth mental health impacts, and supported independent audits and public reporting. A few industry and civil liberties witnesses supported regulation but urged balance, warning against overly burdensome rules while acknowledging the need for privacy, transparency, and accountability. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the hearing excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We’re going to try one more time. We did see your content.” “Going to try one more time.
• “We see you, but not your screen or your Prizo.” “Okay. You see me, but not my screen.
• Okay, we've got time for two more.
• It saves a lot of time.
• Simply put, AI can help our team members spend less time on repetitive, low-value work and more time

Summary: The committee held its first meeting on artificial intelligence and data centers, established a quorum, and heard introductory remarks from Majority Leader Hogue and the chair about the committee’s charge. Members said the goal was to build a factual foundation on AI, hear from experts and stakeholders, and develop practical North Dakota-focused recommendations rather than simply produce a large volume of bills. Legislative Council also reviewed interim committee rules and procedures before the informational presentations began. Staff and NCSL presenters then gave overviews of AI concepts and the state and federal policy landscape. The background memo and presentations covered AI categories and terms, state laws in areas such as consumer protection, algorithmic discrimination, deepfakes, chatbots, children’s safety, health, education, and government use, as well as data center siting and economic impacts. NCSL described a growing number of AI bills introduced and enacted across the states, with comprehensive laws in places like Utah, Colorado, Texas, California, and Illinois, and noted recurring issues around transparency, privacy, liability, and protections for minors. A major focus of the discussion was federal preemption and the tension between state regulation and national AI policy. NCSL said a recent White House executive order and related federal framework seek a light-touch, innovation-friendly national standard, with possible challenges to state laws and possible funding conditions tied to compliance, though no broad federal preemption has yet been enacted. Members asked about Commerce Clause concerns, industry pushback, oversight models, and whether AI policy is bipartisan; presenters said the issue cuts across party lines, with broad agreement on child safety and deepfake restrictions but more disagreement on broader regulatory approaches. No votes or formal actions were taken at the meeting, and the committee recessed briefly for technical issues during the second presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to try one more time. We did see your content. Going to try one more time.
• We see you, but not your screen or your Prizo. Okay. You see me, but not my screen.
• So, with that, I know you're short on time.
• Okay, we've got time for two more.
• Simply put, AI can help our team members spend less time on repetitive, low-value work and more time

Summary: The committee held its first meeting on artificial intelligence and data centers, establishing its purpose as a study and policy-development body rather than one aimed at producing many bills. Majority Leader Hogue urged members to move quickly, focus on federal and other states’ AI laws, consider possible federal preemption, child protections, and the siting and economic impacts of data centers. Committee leadership echoed that the goal is practical, balanced governance that protects North Dakota while allowing innovation to continue. Legislative Council staff provided a background memo and NCSL presented a detailed overview of AI concepts and the current state legislative landscape. The presentations distinguished narrow AI, generative AI, agentic AI, and theoretical AGI/ASI, and summarized major state policy themes: comprehensive AI laws in states such as Utah, Colorado, Texas, California, and Illinois; targeted laws on deepfakes, chatbots, health, education, notifications, and digital likeness; and growing use of appropriations and agency inventories. Members asked about Colorado’s repeal and reenactment, Texas’s sandbox and training provisions, oversight structures, and whether AI regulation is bipartisan; presenters said most issues cut across party lines, with broad agreement on child safety and deepfakes but more division on broader regulatory approaches. The federal update focused on executive orders, preemption, and congressional activity. NCSL described a White House framework favoring a single federal standard, a DOJ litigation task force, Commerce Department review of state laws, and possible funding conditions tied to state AI policy, though no formal state-law challenge had yet occurred. The presentation also covered a recent executive order creating a voluntary federal vetting process for advanced frontier models after safety concerns, and congressional proposals including a failed 10-year state moratorium, Senator Blackburn’s child-safety bills, the Kids Online Safety Act, a House-passed children’s digital safety package, a Senate data center moratorium proposal, and a House ratepayer/data-center bill. The committee took no formal action beyond receiving testimony and asking questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• . time. time.
• . time. time.
• . time. time.
• . time. time.
• . time. time.

Keywords: 916, all