Transcript Highlights:

• Um, you know, the sections that's referenced in this bill were meant to protect kupunas.
• </c><00:09:22.000><c> in</c><00:09:22.080><c> this</c> the sections that's referenced in this the sections
• /c> to a felony if the person is more than 3 to a felony if the person is more than 3 years<00:14:59.480
• So, when you're talking about the difference in the age, the 3 years versus more than 3 years, it really
• /c><00:20:34.360><c> years</c> difference in the age, the 3 years difference in the age, the 3 years

Committee: House Human Services & Homelessness

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 963, which would make crimes against elders age 60 and over strict liability offenses by removing the requirement that the perpetrator knew or should have known the victim’s age. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the bill, arguing that removing the state-of-mind element would create unfair and subjective results and suggesting sentencing enhancements or broader vulnerability-based language instead. Supporters, including Sandy Wong and another testifier with elder-abuse experience, said the current knowledge requirement creates a loophole that lets offenders avoid the elder enhancement even when they target vulnerable older adults. No vote was taken on the measure in the portion provided. The committee also heard HB 384, which increases penalties for promoting minor-produced sexual images, extends probation terms for felony obscenity offenses, tolls the statute of limitations during a victim’s minority, and requires sex offender registration for certain felony obscenity offenses involving minors. The Public Defender opposed the bill as overly broad and warned of absurd results, while the Department of the Prosecuting Attorney supported it, saying the bill addresses sextortion and other exploitation cases where adults solicit images from minors and that the 3-year age-gap threshold preserves ordinary teen relationships. Committee members questioned whether the bill was aimed at adults only and whether the age-gap carveout was narrow enough; the prosecutor said it was intended to cover adult predators and not consensual peer conduct. No final action was reported. HB 1100, which renames the Neighbor Islands Blind and Visually Impaired Service Pilot Program to use “low vision” instead of “visually impaired,” was supported by the Department of Human Services and disability advocates, who said the current term is derogatory and that the change responds to the blind community. The department said it was beginning work on administrative rules and expected to seek an appropriation, with implementation hoped for in 2026. The committee then heard HB 1283, exempting paternity proceedings from mediation when domestic abuse is alleged; the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence and others supported it as consistent with divorce law and important for survivor safety. HB 689, creating safe harbor protections for survivors of sexual exploitation who seek medical or law enforcement help, drew support from HPD, Emua Alliance, the Judiciary, and others, who said it would prevent traffickers from using prostitution charges to silence victims. Finally, HB 383, reinstating mandatory minimum jail terms for successive violations of protective orders and removing the court’s ability to suspend those minimums, drew opposition from the Public Defender, who said some repeat violations stem from mental health or substance use issues, and support from the Prosecuting Attorney, who argued the bill treats protective orders like temporary restraining orders and preserves judicial discretion within a misdemeanor framework.

Transcript Highlights:

• , new sections, regarding assessments and tier logic for other programs.
• Additional sections, new sections, regarding assessments and tier logic for other programs—specifically
• , new sections, regarding assessments and tier logic for other programs. additional sections, new sections
• million in general revenue, $3 million federal funds, and then another $3 million, bringing a total..
• . ...revenue, $3 million federal funds, and then another $3 million, bringing a total of $9 million in

Summary: The committee first approved the prior meeting minutes and referred items C1 and C2 to the labor and environment subcommittees. It then took up a Department of Human Services rule package revising the Arkansas State Plan Personal Care Manual and the Arkansas Independent Assessment (ARIA) Manual. DHS said the revisions would repeal and replace the current manuals with streamlined versions, remove overlapping language, align processes across programs, and implement Act 853 by moving licensure and certification for personal care agencies from DHS to the Department of Health. For state plan personal care, DHS proposed replacing the current Optum independent assessment and six-month prior authorization cycle with a PCP referral and a personal care agency nurse assessment, plus a 12-month prior authorization, while keeping the 64-hour monthly cap. For ARIA, DHS said it would remove references to state plan personal care, clarify telehealth and in-person assessments, and update sections for PASS, ARChoices, Living Choices, and PACE. DHS officials argued the current process is expensive and not controlling utilization, citing a high approval rate and annual spending of more than $212 million for about 17,000 people. They said the change would save an estimated $6.173 million, reduce red tape, and better align personal care with other state plan services. Several members questioned whether PCPs should be used as gatekeepers for personal care, noting concerns about physician workload, possible delays in access, and conflict-of-interest issues if provider-employed nurses conduct assessments. Members also asked about the history of the Optum contract, whether DHS had tried to modify it, and whether the fiscal note accounted for training or provider impacts. DHS said training would be handled through an existing AFMC contract and that the proposal was developed after stakeholder engagement since June 2024. Some members expressed support for controlling costs and reducing unnecessary assessments, while others said the proposal could burden PCPs and undermine the independent assessment approach previously recommended by the Healthcare Reform Task Force. Questions also focused on how the change would affect new applicants and whether services would be delayed; DHS said it should not delay services and that the rule would not apply to PASS participants. After extended debate, a member moved to pull the rule down and work further with legislators on a revised approach. The agency agreed, and the meeting adjourned without advancing the rule.

Transcript Highlights:

• subjected nursing home facility records to new provisions in Section 408, 0.8, 3, 3, >> Thank you.
• late filed amendment which is bar code 3, 7, 5, 0, 7, 6, seeing opposition.
• Bar code 3, 7, 1, 9, 6, 2, and it is a delete all. Thank you.
• The amendment has to have that has 3 does 3 things.
• Each of those 3 legislative sessions generally optimistic, pro-life advocate.

Transcript Highlights:

• our... ...of the Florida House of Representatives by virtue of the authority vested in us by Article 3,
• Section 3(c), Florida Constitution, and Section 11.01, Florida Statutes, do hereby proclaim.
• 3, Section 3(c), Florida Constitution, and Section 11.01, Florida Statutes, at the Capitol in Tallahassee
• Section 3.
• It does not change the employee's contribution rate, which remains 3%.

Transcript Highlights:

• Testimony is limited to 3-4-3 against, 2-minute speaking limit. Period.
• Obstructing governmental operations pursuant to Section A, paragraph 3 is a classified felony.
• So it's changing it to a class five felony. ...to Section A, paragraph 3 is a classified felony.
• Chair, you have to read all three sections together. You cannot pick them apart one at a time. Mr.
• A of this section, that discusses what the posses are able to do.

Summary: The committee heard several public safety measures, beginning with HCR 2059, a resolution reaffirming support for county sheriffs and recognizing their constitutional authority in their jurisdictions. Supporters said it was a tribute to sheriffs’ work, especially in rural areas, while some members objected to language describing sheriffs as having “supreme constitutional authority,” calling it overly broad or tied to fringe legal theories. The resolution received a due-pass recommendation on an 8-3 vote. Members then considered HB 2811, which expands obstructing governmental operations to cover interference with a lawful arrest when violence or force is used. The sponsor said the bill closes a gap and should make such conduct a felony, while an opposing attorney argued existing statutes already cover much of the conduct and that the bill was duplicative and confusing. Despite concerns about the drafting and interaction of subsections, the bill received a do-pass recommendation. The committee also heard HB 4129, a proposed DPS-run mental health and wellness program for law enforcement funded with $15 million; the sponsor described it as confidential counseling and support for officers, but several members said it duplicated existing services and was too costly, and the sponsor ultimately withdrew the bill before a vote. The committee next took up HB 2270, which would expand protections for county seals and office insignia to include logos and other identifiers, and give sheriffs exclusive rights over posse names and dissolution. Sheriffs and county representatives said the bill was needed to prevent misuse of official names and to avoid litigation after disputes over posse identities; some members raised First Amendment and vagueness concerns about broad language such as “could imply” affiliation. The bill passed 12-1. HB 2416, a $20 million appropriation for border-related law enforcement support, drew strong support from sheriffs and county law enforcement groups who said the funds help with drug interdiction and border-related crime, and strong opposition from speakers who argued the money should go to schools, housing, health care, and other needs; it passed 7-5. Finally, the committee heard HB 4018, a strike-everything amendment clarifying sheriffs’ authority over volunteer posses and reserve organizations. MCSO and county officials said it was meant to clarify existing authority and protect public safety operations, while an opponent warned it could expand posse use into immigration enforcement and increase militarization. The committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and gave the bill a do-pass recommendation. HB 2253, barring retaliation against employees who testify in law enforcement disciplinary appeal proceedings, also passed after a chairman’s amendment removed one voiding provision. The transcript ends as the committee begins hearing HB 4044, which would create a Public Safety Parity Fund funded by forfeited digital assets and redirected investment deposits.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:40.360><c> 1</c> Health Services first of all sections 1 Health Services first of all sections
• /c><00:10:34.600><c> hours</c><00:10:34.880><c> of</c> Alone plus an additional 2 to 3 hours of Alone
• plus an additional 2 to 3 hours of documentation<00:10:36.000><c> once</c><00:10:36.320><c> back</c>
• Chair, mine is about section N as well.
• Chair, mine is about section N as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• And in Article 3, which has two sections, we provide flexibility for school boards in both funding and
• The second part of Article 3, Section 2, allows for mandate relief through the 2028-2029 school year.
• The second part of Article 3, Section 2, allows for mandate relief through the 2028-2029 school year.
• The second part of Article 3, Section 2, allows for mandate relief through the 2028-2029 school year.
• The second part of Article 3, Section 2, allows for mandate relief through the 2028-2029 school year.

Bills: HF6 , HF52 , HF53

Committee: House Education Finance

Keywords: education, literacy, science of reading, school performance, funding flexibility, innovation zones, equity and inclusion, HF52, New Germany, wastewater treatment, wastewater facility, sewer infrastructure, capital investment, bonding bill, state bonds, Public Facilities Authority, municipal infrastructure, water quality, sanitation, sewage treatment

Transcript Highlights:

• Next up, members will go to tab 3, CS for SB 706, by Members will go to tab 3, CS for SB 706 by Senator
• Section 3, a county may not expend funds, and then section 4 speaks to the commissioner...
• Section 3, a county may not expend funds, and then section 4 speaks to the commissioner Section 3, a
• It picks up with subsection 3.
• But that section is critically important as it relates to contracts.

Bills: S0484 , S0698 , S0706 , S0968 , S1118 , S1122 , S1134 , S1320 , S1342 , S1548 , S1614

Committee: Senate Community Affairs

Summary: The committee heard several housing, local government, utility, and transparency bills. SB 1342 on transportation infrastructure and land development regulations, by Sen. Rouson, was presented as a housing-affordability measure modeled on the Live Local Act for transit corridors. After adopting an amendment that removed the bill’s compelling-governmental-interest language in enforcement provisions, the committee heard testimony from local-government and housing interests both supporting and opposing the bill’s zoning preemption approach. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also reported favorably CS/SB 1614, by Sen. Leek, which was amended to remove stormwater and code-enforcement spending provisions and to tighten restrictions on local governments seeking state appropriations after audits or without required affirmations. SB 1548, the next Live Local Act iteration by Sen. Claddie Ude, was also reported favorably; it expands where Live Local projects may be located and adds fair-housing protections. SB 968 on home backup power systems, by Sen. McLean, was reported favorably after testimony from builders and energy-related stakeholders, with the sponsor noting he was still working on amendments to refine permit provisions. The committee then approved CS/SB 698, by Sen. Martin, which allows building permits for single-family homes to be issued before septic permits are finalized if application has been made, while still requiring septic approval before occupancy. Builders testified that septic permit delays were causing lengthy project delays and contract cancellations. The committee also reported favorably SB 1320, by Sen. Martin, requiring county tax-increase referenda to include a Department of Financial Services spending analysis if available; the sponsor said the goal was to give voters more standardized fiscal information, while opponents argued existing law already provides similar transparency. SB 484, by Sen. Avila, on data centers, was reported favorably after an amendment adding a knowledge requirement to the foreign-country-of-concern service prohibition; the bill addresses local planning authority, nondisclosure agreements, utility tariff requirements, and water-use limits for large data centers. The committee also reported favorably SB 1118, by Sen. Avila, creating a one-year public-records exemption for data-center location and proprietary information, with testimony split between economic-development supporters and transparency concerns. Finally, the committee took up SB 706, by Sen. Mayfield, preempting naming of major commercial service airports to the state and designating Palm Beach International Airport as Donald J. Trump International Airport subject to federal and trademark conditions; it was reported favorably after questions about local input and airport naming. The committee then heard extensive public testimony on SB 1134, by Sen. Yarbrough, which would prohibit counties and municipalities from funding, promoting, or taking official actions related to DEI and would create penalties and a private right of action for residents. The sponsor argued the bill was aimed at preventing taxpayer-funded DEI programs and cited examples from Jacksonville and other jurisdictions; opponents said the bill was vague, overbroad, and would chill local programs, public education, and civil-rights-related activities. The transcript ends during continued public testimony on SB 1134, with no final committee action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:56:39.840><c> Um</c> section as well as the other one. Um section as well as the other one.
• I have solar panels just 3 years in my house, and, uh, over the course of those 3 years, for every 10
• I have solar panels just 3 years in my house, and, uh, over the course of those 3 years, for every 10
• I have solar panels just 3 years in my house, and, uh, over the course of those 3 years, for every 10
• , uh which is the on uh section nine, uh which is the repeal<02:08:05.560><c> sections,</c> repeal sections

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• ,</c> into those individual sections, into those individual sections, uh<00:10:13.680><c> what</c><00
• And then section B starting on page uh or on line 11, you would just simply eliminate that section.
• </c> eliminate that section. eliminate that section.
• A, lines 7 through 9, section B on lines 11 through 15, and section C on lines 17 through 19, all on
• /c> Um and and so, really we're taking 2/3 Um and and so, really we're taking 2/3 of<00:24:47.040><c>

Bills: SF0052

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, I move to amend Senate Bill 1859 on page 4, lines 5 through 10, by deleting Section 3 in its entirety
• Chair, I move to amend Senate Bill 1333 on page 3, line 19, through page 4, line 4, by deleting Section
• 3 in its entirety, renumbering subsequent sections, and by amending the title to conform.
• 2 in its entirety, by renumbering subsequent sections... ...by deleting Section 2 in its entirety, renumbering
• subsequent sections, and amending the title to conform.

Bills: SB1189 , SB1295 , SB1297 , SB1330 , SB1333 , SB1338 , SB1341 , SB1344 , SB1355 , SB1377 , SB1378 , SB1546 , SB1859 , SB1946 , SB1990 , SB1998

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The committee met in an appropriations setting and first laid over Senate Bill 1946. It then advanced Senate Bill 1344, creating an insulin access affordability program at the Health Department, on a 19-1 vote. Senate Bill 1295, establishing a Domestic Violence Fatality Review Board revolving fund and database, was amended to delete a section and then passed 21-0. Senate Bill 1355, creating a program for memorials and headstones for eligible National Guard veterans, also passed unanimously. Members then advanced several other measures, including Senate Bill 1998 to help smaller towns qualify for quality events incentives, Senate Bill 1330 raising Pardon and Parole Board salaries, Senate Bill 1297 creating a decennial census revolving fund to support outreach for the 2030 census, and Senate Bill 1189 extending the school security fund for three more years at $50 million annually. The committee also passed Senate Bill 1338 making the Heroes Literacy Instructional Team permanent, and Senate Bill 1546 increasing scholarship support for teacher preparation students. Additional bills passed included Senate Bill 1378 creating the Olympics and Oklahoma Revolving Fund, Senate Bill 1859 creating an OSBI cyber crime and fraud unit fund, Senate Bill 1341 creating a Career Counseling Revolving Fund, Senate Bill 1377 directing DHS to provide bags for foster children’s belongings, and Senate Bill 1990 broadening the Incentive Evaluation Commission’s comparative analysis of incentives. Several bills had appropriations stripped by amendment at the chair’s request before passage, and the committee repeatedly discussed fiscal impacts, local matching expectations, transparency, and whether programs should remain state-funded or rely on local or philanthropic support. The meeting ended with adjournment and notice of a meeting the following week.

Transcript Highlights:

• We put in a new section, Section 6, and what Section 6 did is under the investigation clause of the Compact
• The new E is on page 33, and it is Section 3, and this was brilliant.
• So, Section 7 struck me as a little odd. It's on page 36, Section 7.
• Senate Bill 3, Senator Maestas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. Senate Bill 3 updates the...
• SB 3 strengthens existing tools without.

Bills: SB1 , SB3

Committee: Senate Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> free expression under article 1, section free expression under article 1, section 20<00:16:18.320
• 3.
• 3.
• I have talked to a on page 7, section 3.
• It's it's uh section bill.

Bills: HB0076 , HB0102 , HB0115

Committee: House Education

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a vote of 3-0. The consent calendar is on call. We have a vote of 3-0.
• We have a vote of 3 to 0. This bill is on call. Thank you.
• That bill has a vote of 3-0. It's on call. And you have another item.
• Okay, with a vote of 3 to 1, that bill is out. Thank you. With a vote of 3 to 1, that bill is out.
• With a vote of 3 to 1, that bill is out. Thank you. With a vote of 3 to 1, that bill is out.

Committee: Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, we will be probably going through section by section, making edits, probably adding some additional
• </c><00:02:48.080><c> each</c> go section by section and discuss each go section by section and discuss
• So, we're starting at the new section. Section two, Roman numeral 1. Right. Exactly. Exactly.
• So sections one or two. Anybody have any comments on these sections from the public?
• So sections one or two. Anybody Okay. So sections one or two.

Summary: The subcommittee opened discussion on SP 170 and worked through the bill section by section, focusing first on housing discrimination language and then on land-use and development provisions. On the housing section, members discussed adding “school enrollment status” or a similar term as a protected class to prevent municipalities from steering students into specific zones, especially in Durham. Some members questioned whether “status” was too vague and suggested “enrollment status” or “school enrollment status” for clarity. Public testimony raised concerns that adding a new protected class could have broader implications beyond this bill and could affect municipal zoning authority, while supporters argued the language was needed to prevent discrimination against students in housing access. The committee then heard testimony on provisions limiting municipal authority over septic test pits and well-siting requirements. DEES officials and a builder testified that state standards are already protective of groundwater and surface water and that some local requirements are more stringent than the state’s, adding cost and delay to housing projects. Supporters said uniform state standards would make housing development faster and more predictable. Opponents warned that local rules can protect aquifers, wellhead areas, and drinking water in specific communities, and that removing municipal flexibility could weaken those protections. The subcommittee appeared comfortable keeping these sections, though members discussed whether to clarify the language and whether some local review authority should remain. The meeting also covered road-length limits, caps on the number of lots on dead-end roads, and subdivision design rules. Members generally supported prohibiting municipalities from using maximum road length or lot caps to block development, with one amendment suggested to allow such limits where adequate water and sewer capacity is lacking. The committee also discussed allowing utilities and infrastructure such as septic systems, wells, electric systems, drainage structures, and shared leach fields to be placed in subdivision open space or perimeter buffers when those areas are not protected wetlands or shoreland. Finally, the committee reviewed a provision requiring municipalities to stamp and accept plan changes within three days after initial review, with members explaining that the goal is to prevent repeated, incremental changes from dragging out the approval process. No final votes were taken in the portion of the meeting provided, but members indicated general comfort with several sections as amended or clarified.

Transcript Highlights:

• with a new section.
• with a new section.
• with a new section.
• with a new section.
• </c><00:59:40.680><c> is</c><00:59:40.839><c> to</c> new section and this new section is to new section

Summary: The Finance Committee held a hearing on House Bill 619, which would appropriate $1 million to the Solid Waste Management Fund for matching grants to municipalities and businesses for waste diversion projects, with 50% of the money prioritized for food waste diversion. Representative Karen Ebel, the sponsor, said the fund would help New Hampshire meet its solid waste diversion goals, preserve landfill capacity, and support composting, recycling, and related local business activity. She cited New London’s composting program as an example, saying 172 families participated and 32 tons of food waste were diverted in 2024, reducing tipping and trucking costs. Committee members asked about possible alternative funding sources, including a surcharge on landfill tipping fees. Ebel said many other states use such surcharges to fund recycling and solid waste programs, while New Hampshire relies on general funds. She also said the current fund balance was about $900,000 because some money had been used for staffing, and that the grant program was still in rulemaking. Questions also focused on how household composting works and whether municipalities could generate revenue from compost; Ebel said participation is optional, most programs use buckets and transfer stations, and the main benefit is cost savings from reduced disposal rather than compost sales. Testimony in support came from the New Hampshire Municipal Association and the Northeast Resource Recovery Association. Both said municipalities are interested in food waste diversion and composting, that these programs can reduce long-term disposal costs and property tax pressure, and that there is growing demand for technical assistance and grant support. The Northeast Resource Recovery Association said food waste makes up about 24% of municipal and business waste, that fewer than two dozen communities and fewer than two dozen businesses currently offer such services, and that a City of Lebanon pilot program saw about 30% savings by composting on site. The Department of Environmental Services said it was not taking a position but is working on rulemaking for the grant program and expects strong interest from municipalities, private composters, farmers, and anaerobic digester operators. No vote or final action was taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• To the honorable members of the Florida Senate and House of Representatives: Whereas Article 3, Section
• 3(c)(1) of the Florida Constitution permits the governor to convene the Legislature in special session
• I, Ron DeSantis, Governor of the State of Florida, by virtue of the power invested in me by Article 3,
• Section 3, Section 1, the Legislature of the State of Florida is convened in special session, commencing
• Wednesday, June 3, 2026. Ron DeSantis, Governor. Reading of the proclamation, Mr. Speaker.

Summary: The House convened in special session after opening with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and the reading of Governor DeSantis’s proclamation calling the Legislature into special session from June 1 to June 3, 2026. A quorum was established with 96 members voting. No bills, resolutions, messages, or committee reports were on the desk at the time of the floor session. The Speaker announced the schedule for the special session, saying the State Affairs Committee would meet later that afternoon to consider the property tax bill and related policy, followed by the Rules and Ethics Committee that evening. The House then adopted a motion to receive reports, adjourn for committee and other House business, and reconvene Tuesday, June 2, 2026, at 9 a.m. or upon call of the Chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• THE SPEAKER'S The Speaker pro tempore: The Chair announces the Speaker's appointment pursuant to section
• 1238B-3 of the Floyd D.
• HOUSE OF JANUARY 3, 2025, OF THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUAL ON THE PART OF THE HOUSE OF THE UNITED STATES CHINA
• The Clerk: The Honorable the Speaker, House of Representatives, sir, pursuant to section 1238B-3 of the
• The Clerk: The Honorable the Speaker, House of Representatives, sir, pursuant to section 1238B-3 of the

Transcript Highlights:

• It would also, that's essentially section one. Um, thereafter this sets a default position.
• section one um thereafter<00:04:46.360><c> this</c><00:04:46.520><c> sets</c><00:04:46.759><c> a</c>
• The speaker noted that in section 1, subsection 2, subsection 3, if the fund goes from 100% funding and
• It does the same exact thing in all four sections.
• It does the same exact thing in all four sections.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from its January 27 meeting and then took up House Bill 694, which would create a default rule for the Teachers’ Retirement System health insurance trust fund once it reaches 100% funding, currently anticipated around 2027. The bill would redirect two funding streams now going to the health trust—state payments on behalf of local districts and other employer contributions—into TRS pension benefits if the health fund reaches and maintains full funding. The sponsor said this would add about $154 million annually to TRS pensions and would only serve as a default if no other plan is adopted later. Members asked whether the bill would shift the unfunded liability to teachers or affect employee contributions. The sponsor and staff said it would not shift liability to teachers and would not change the employee contribution; only the employer-side payments would be redirected. Several members asked about the meaning of actuarial 100% funding, whether the fund could fall back below 100%, and whether employee contributions might be reduced in the future. The sponsor said the bill is based on actuarial projections, would revert the money back to the health trust if funding fell below 100%, and does not prevent future legislative or board action. Senator Higdon and others spoke in support of discussing the issue, noting the 2010 shared-responsibility changes and the need for a default approach as full funding is reached. The committee then heard Senate Bill 183, which would amend Kentucky law governing proxy advisers used by retirement systems. The sponsor said the bill would require proxy advisers, when handling shareholder-sponsored proposals, to act solely in the interest of retirement system members and beneficiaries and to provide an economic analysis when voting against a company board’s recommendation. He argued the measure is aimed at proxy advisers such as ISS and Glass Lewis, which he said often advance ESG-related proposals not tied to shareholder value. A guest from APCIA said the bill is meant to distinguish proxy advisers from investment managers and to strengthen the 2023 law by requiring a clearer economic justification for votes that depart from board recommendations. Members asked how proxy advisers differ from other financial advisers, whether Kentucky uses them, and whether the bill would prevent pension funds from investing in companies with ESG factors if those investments are profitable. The sponsor and guest said the bill would not bar such investments; it is intended to regulate proxy voting recommendations, not investment decisions. They described the bill as a proactive measure to reinforce fiduciary responsibility and limit outside proxy influence on pension voting. No final vote on either bill was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section three under the 356A.
• That's sections two and four.
• </c> eliminating sections one and three. eliminating sections one and three.
• And then the final section is recourse. And then the final section is recourse.
• And then the final section is recourse. And then the final section is recourse.

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 25, which would allow New Hampshire state-chartered credit unions to choose, by member vote, to compensate their board members. Prime sponsor Senator Dan Innis said the bill is enabling only, does not require compensation, and is intended to align New Hampshire with other states that already permit this. He argued that credit union board service now requires more time and expertise, and that compensation could help attract stronger candidates and improve governance. Representatives from the Cooperative Credit Union Association and St. Mary’s Bank testified in support. They said the change would not create salaries, but could cover modest compensation or reimbursements such as daycare, education, cybersecurity, or accounting training. They emphasized that credit unions remain nonprofit and member-driven, that board members must be credit union members and elected by members, and that any compensation decision would be made by the membership at an annual meeting or through the credit union’s voting process. Witnesses also said the bill would help with recruitment and retention, especially as credit union operations have become more complex and digital, and noted that similar authority exists in 16 other states, including Rhode Island. Committee members asked about the historical reason credit unions were excluded, the amount and structure of compensation, whether there would be a cap, and how voting would work. Witnesses said the bill does not set a statutory maximum, but in practice the amount would be disclosed to members and set through the vote; they also described St. Mary’s Bank’s ballot process and said proxy or ballot procedures depend on each credit union’s bylaws. One witness noted that federally chartered credit unions are subject to different limits. After testimony and questions, the chair closed the public hearing on Senate Bill 25 and then moved on to Senate Bill 26.