Transcript Highlights:

• You've got some cities that have basically decriminalized marijuana, and the state is not happy with
• If we are for protecting the children, then we need to decriminalize to promote regulation, just the
• If you want to make it easier on law enforcement, then decriminalize cannabis possession.
• Even Texas A&M in the college has decriminalized marijuana on its campus to protect the students.

Summary: The House Committee on Public Health heard House Bill 5, a proposal to ban THC products outside the Texas Compassionate Use Program while allowing non-intoxicating CBD and CBG products under tighter regulation. Chair Van Deaver gave a lengthy background on the 2018 federal Farm Bill and Texas’s 2019 hemp law, arguing that the lack of guardrails allowed a large, unregulated THC market to develop. HB 5 would impose licensing fees, product registration, testing and inspection requirements, and restrictions intended to keep products away from children. Invited witnesses from law enforcement strongly supported the bill. Steve Dye of the Texas Police Chiefs Association and Brian Hawthorne of the Sheriffs’ Association of Texas argued that THC consumables are widely mislabeled, often far more potent than advertised, and linked to youth access, impaired driving, and organized crime. Both said regulation would be ineffective and would amount to legalization, while a ban would be easier for officers to enforce. They also emphasized support for the Texas Compassionate Use Program and said medical THC should remain available. Dr. Peter Stout of the Texas Association of Crime Lab Directors and Alice Amelot of Texas DPS testified as resource witnesses about forensic testing. They said current lab resources are already stretched thin, that quantitative testing for THC and related cannabinoids is expensive and time-consuming, and that a ban would simplify enforcement because labs could focus on presence/absence testing rather than concentration. Amelot said DPS labs are neutral on the bill but explained that mislabeled products and inaccurate certificates of analysis are common. Committee members asked about traffic safety, impairment, youth use, and the costs of enforcement and lab testing; witnesses repeatedly said the bill would reduce complexity for law enforcement but that any approach would still require more resources for labs.

Transcript Highlights:

• instead of treating it as a residual amount in drug paraphernalia, which this body correctly decriminalized
• correctly paraphernalia, which this body correctly paraphernalia, which this body correctly decriminalized
• decriminalized decriminalized previously.<01:38:37.679> Very<01:38:38.000> few<01:38:38.320

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Garcia continued: He said that under current law, possession of drug paraphernalia is already decriminalized
• <01:34:43.120> already drug paraphernalia is already drug paraphernalia is already decriminalized
• . decriminalized. decriminalized.
• :54.040> must Representative Garcia continued in opposition: “The argument that we must decriminalize

Keywords: 910, house, all

Bills: HB2936, HB2937, HB2951, HB2960, HB2979, HB2980, HB3062, HB3082, HB3087, HB3148, HB3152, HB3262, HB3264, HB3266, HB3268, HB3269, HB3278, HB3299, HB3544, HB3606, HB3678, HB3790, HB3903, HB3996, HB4139, HB4140, HB4142, HB4143, HB4144, HB4260, HB4272, HB4296, HB4324, HB4339, HB4341, HB4342

Keywords: HB2936, children, child protection, adoption, Oklahoma Adoption Code, gestational carrier, gestational agreement, surrogacy, intended parent, preplacement home study, home study, prospective adoptive parent, foster placement, child abuse, child neglect, child sexual abuse, child sexual exploitation, lewd molestation, sex offender registry, Oklahoma Sex Offenders Registration Act

Transcript Highlights:

• the only other issue that the committee got bogged down on, which was the legalization and the decriminalization
• c> the on which was the uh legalization and the on which was the uh legalization and the decriminalization
• 38.920> and<01:00:39.039> it<01:00:39.200> looks<01:00:39.440> like decriminalization
• and it looks like decriminalization and it looks like that's<01:00:39.920> in<01:00:40.079>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The discussion focused on a cannabis legalization/regulation bill and whether it should be retained for further study or moved forward. Members debated the fiscal impact, with one side emphasizing that the bill would cost about $7.1 million in the first two years before generating revenue, while supporters argued the House should make a statement in favor of legalization despite likely opposition from the Senate and governor. There was also disagreement over strategy: some said retaining the bill until closer to the next election would give the issue more visibility, while others said delaying would only avoid sending a bill the Senate was unlikely to take up anyway. A major point of contention was whether cannabis should be regulated by a new cannabis commission or placed under the Liquor Commission. Supporters of the Liquor Commission argued it already has enforcement infrastructure, especially for age restrictions, and could handle cannabis more efficiently without creating a new bureaucracy. Opponents said cannabis is a different industry that would require specialized expertise, and they objected to expanding the Liquor Commission, which they described as unpopular and costly. The committee also discussed past versions of the bill, including concerns about limited licenses and the perception that the earlier approach favored large businesses. Members reviewed specific provisions such as licensing fees, THC limits, and cultivation categories. One member noted a $10,000 fee for retail cannabis stores and cannabis product manufacturers authorized to perform extractions, while a smaller tier-one cultivator fee was described as a lower-cost option for small growers. There was also discussion of whether the bill would allow sales through general retail outlets or only dedicated cannabis stores, and whether plants and seeds were covered. No final vote or action was clearly recorded in the excerpt, but the main procedural question was whether to retain the bill for more work or advance it as written.

Transcript Highlights:

• course, pitched Proposition A, which had a host of very controversial items, including a move to decriminalize
• of course, in November 2024, the city of Dallas put Proposition R before voters seeking to also decriminalize

Bills: HB21, HB211, HB223, HB323, HB524, HB530, HB636, HB762, HB21, HB211, HB223

Keywords: housing finance, multifamily residential, low income, tax exemption, audit requirements, affordable housing, local government, development bonds, housing assistance, financial assistance, low income housing, community support, affordability, veterans housing, community involvement, air conditioning, tenant support, healthcare, elderly, taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• Proposition 47 passed in 2014 largely decriminalized most drug and property crimes.

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 287 through formal action decriminalized xylazine test strips and fentanyl test strips in August of
• HB 287 through formal action decriminalized xylazine test strips and fentanyl test strips in August of
• Uh HB 287 through formal action decriminalized<04:47:30.840> xylazine<04:47:31.400> test
• ><04:47:31.720> strips<04:47:32.160> it decriminalized xylazine test strips it decriminalized

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The decriminalization of fentanyl test strips is not enough to meet current and emerging threats posed
• The decriminalization of fentanyl test strips is not enough to meet current and emerging threats posed
• The decriminalization<02:55:02.399> of<02:55:02.560> fentinel<02:55:03.040> test
• decriminalization of fentinel test decriminalization of fentinel test strips<02:55:03.680> is

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs heard testimony on two immigration-enforcement bills: HB 1886 HD1 and HB 2540 HD1. HB 1886 would limit state and federal collaboration in immigration enforcement, require visible identification and restrictions on facial coverings for law enforcement officers, and create offenses for improper masking, lack of identification, and unauthorized civil immigration interrogation, arrest, or detention. HB 2540 would also limit state and federal collaboration, require law enforcement agencies to adopt and publicly post written civil immigration enforcement policies, prohibit stops or arrests based solely on immigration status, and restrict state and county participation in civil immigration enforcement in certain places. Most testimony supported both measures. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Office of the Public Defender, the ACLU of Hawaii, the Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, the Legal Clinic, and several private individuals said the bills would increase transparency, accountability, and community trust, and would help protect constitutional rights and reduce fear among immigrants and other community members. Several testifiers emphasized Hawaii’s history and the need to keep local law enforcement separate from federal immigration enforcement, while others said the bills would help people feel safer going to court, school, work, or public protests. A retired police officer also supported visible identification and uniform standards for officers, including federal agents operating in Hawaii. A few testifiers opposed the use of masked or unidentified officers and argued that local police should not be diverted from ordinary public safety duties to immigration enforcement. One ACLU witness noted that the federal government has increasingly used local and state agencies to expand immigration enforcement, and said the task-force provisions in the bills are important to prevent blurred lines between agencies. The committee did not take a final vote in the portion of the meeting provided, but it recorded very large numbers of supportive testimonies for both bills, with only a small number in opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 287, through a formal action, decriminalized xylodine fentanyl test strips in August of 2023, proving
• HB 287, through a formal action, decriminalized xylodine fentanyl test strips in August of 2023, proving
• Even the president has moved in the direction of decriminalizing this substance.
• Even the president has moved in the direction of decriminalizing this substance.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• disheartened by the fact the state marijuana dispensaries on every corner and has even pushed for decriminalizing

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing covered a wide range of Judiciary Committee bills, with much of the testimony focused on criminal justice, public safety, and civil asset forfeiture reform. Several lawmakers and advocates supported bills to increase penalties or create new offenses related to assaults on sports officials, assaults on transit workers, reckless discharge of firearms, fires and explosives, pill press machines, and drug-induced homicide. Testifiers described rising harassment and violence against youth sports officials and transit workers, as well as the fentanyl overdose crisis and the need for stronger tools to prosecute dealers whose conduct leads to death. Supporters of the sports-official and transit-worker bills emphasized declining referee availability and repeated assaults on commuter rail and MBTA workers. District attorneys also backed bills on reckless firearm discharge and fires/explosives, saying current law does not adequately address dangerous conduct that endangers bystanders. The committee also heard testimony on several proposals related to youth diversion and prison mitigation. Supporters of the youth court justice fund bill said youth courts are peer-led diversion programs with strong compliance and low recidivism, and argued for a stable funding source rather than annual earmarks. A representative from Bridgewater supported a prison mitigation fund for municipalities that host state prisons, saying the costs of public safety and emergency services are not fully covered. On gun policy, testimony split between supporters of a bill to ban in-state manufacture of assault-style rifles for civilian sale and opponents or skeptics of other firearm-related measures, including a bill on collateralizing firearms and a bill to increase penalties for drug trafficking combined with illegal firearm offenses. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to civil asset forfeiture reform. Advocates from the ACLU, CPCS, the Boston Bar Association, the Institute for Justice, and others supported bills to increase the burden of proof, improve transparency and reporting, require counsel, and limit or eliminate the current practice of directing forfeiture proceeds to law enforcement. They argued the current system creates perverse incentives, lacks adequate due process, and is insufficiently transparent. District Attorney Paul Tucker defended current forfeiture practices, saying his office has reporting and oversight, uses the funds for investigations and community programs, and warned that reducing forfeiture revenue would hinder crime fighting. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the hearing; the chairs repeatedly thanked witnesses and indicated the bills would remain under consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• putting in place the black and white legalization is allowed instead of allowing for the gray decriminalization
• putting in place the black-and-white legalization is allowed instead of allowing for the gray decriminalization
• 00:12:21.440> for<00:12:21.680> the<00:12:22.079> gray<00:12:22.800> decriminalization
• allowing for the gray decriminalization allowing for the gray decriminalization that<00:12:23.839

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• from the prosecutors who prosecute these cases and from the cities was that it would essentially decriminalize

Bills: HB2028, HB2047, HB2136, HB2244, HB2364, HB2406, HB2415, HB2557, HB2573, HB2589, HB2720, HB2749, HB2825, HB2861, HB2862, HB2870, HB2970, HB4070, HB4117, HCR2004, HCR2051

Keywords: community restitution, homelessness, indigence, court assessments, monetary obligations, forcible entry, detainer, writ of restitution, criminal trespass, judgment enforcement, civil terrorism, disorderly conduct, vandalism, political activism, public order, subversion, government security, evictions, judgment satisfaction, tenant rights

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2825, which would replace criminal enforcement tools for nonpayment of fines, fees, restitution, and related obligations with a civil collection process. Supporters, including the sponsor, argued it would streamline restitution collection and reduce costly incarceration, while opponents from victims’ rights groups, judges, and prosecutors said it would weaken victims’ constitutional rights and remove effective enforcement leverage. The chair adopted an amendment requiring a summons and clarifying that victims’ constitutional remedies are preserved, and the committee passed the bill 5-2. The committee then considered HB 4070, which would bar corporations from incorporating if an officer, director, or trustee had been convicted of sex or human trafficking, and would extend civil liability to those who facilitate trafficking. Supporters framed it as a “corporate death penalty” aimed at preventing trafficking through corporate governance, while the ACLU warned the facilitation language was vague and could sweep too broadly. After adopting the chair’s amendment defining “facilitate,” the committee passed the bill 5-2. The committee also unanimously recommended confirmation of Neil McDowell to the Arizona Board of Executive Clemency after hearing his background in corrections and his plans to review cases thoroughly and efficiently. Next, HB 2720 was heard, which would raise penalties for paying or agreeing to pay for sexual conduct, add a $200 assessment for the anti-human trafficking fund, and allow certain sex-trafficking victims convicted of prostitution to seal vacated records. Supporters, including law enforcement, prosecutors, and survivor advocates, said it would deter demand and help victims; opponents argued it could still sweep in trafficking victims and lacked sufficient safeguards. The committee passed the bill 4-3. The committee also heard HB 2028, a strike-everything amendment allowing community restitution in lieu of a $20 assessment for indigent homeless defendants, and HB 2047, which would increase trespass penalties for remaining in or returning to property after an eviction writ; both were discussed but no final vote is reflected in the transcript excerpt. Additional bills were introduced and heard later in the meeting, including HB 2136, which would create new offenses for “civil terrorism” and “subversion” and increase penalties for certain highway obstruction; the ACLU opposed it as viewpoint discrimination. HB 2406 would make images and recordings of abused children and deceased minors confidential and restrict dissemination and monetization; the sponsor said it was intended to prevent re-victimization and misuse of public records, while defense-side speakers asked for clearer access for defense teams. HB 2415 would tighten regulation of kratom products and specifically target concentrated 7-OH products; testimony sharply split between supporters who described public-health risks and opponents who said prohibition would harm consumers who use it for pain or recovery. The transcript ends before any final action on those later bills is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is vital for our legislators to create authentic pathways of decriminalizing poverty for families,

Bills: HB2041, HB2144, HB2239, HB2321, HB2371, HB2594, HB2661, HB2662, HB2793, HB2968, HB2995

Keywords: child neglect, financial resources, behavioral health, Christian Science treatment, parental rights, child support, preborn children, retroactive support, medical expenses, child welfare, child care, grant program, low-income, early learning, infrastructure, economic growth, security freeze, credit reporting, dependent children, parental notification

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2793, which would let cities and towns expedite annexations when 100% of the property owners request it, waive the 30-day waiting period and public hearing in those cases, and allow electronic newspaper notice and a single on-site posting for small single-parcel annexations. Buckeye testified in support, saying the bill would streamline uncontested annexations and reduce delay and cost, while a Tucson-area senator raised concerns that faster annexation can limit public awareness and input. The bill passed 4-3 for a due pass recommendation. HB 2041, which would prohibit a parent, guardian, or custodian from being treated as abusing or neglecting a child solely because poverty prevents them from providing supervision, clothing, food, shelter, or medical care, drew strong support from child welfare and anti-poverty advocates. Opponents argued the bill still leaves room for investigations based on poverty and should more fully remove poverty from the neglect definition. The committee also heard HB 2239, creating a child care grant program and infrastructure fund at DES; witnesses from northern Arizona and child care providers described shortages, workforce challenges, and the need for facilities and support. An amendment adding tax-credit language and opening eligibility to entities seeking to open child care facilities was adopted, and the amended bill passed 6-0 with one not voting. The committee then approved HB 2321, requiring DCS to place a credit freeze on a child’s credit report when the child enters care, by a 7-0 vote. HB 2371, allowing consenting divorcing parties without minor children to use AI-assisted arbitration and adding a separate amendment on therapeutic interventions in parenting cases, prompted questions about whether AI arbitration is currently used and whether the amendment was germane; it passed 4-3. HB 2594, concerning the Address Confidentiality Program in family court and making attempts to obtain protected address information a felony, passed unanimously after testimony from a survivor and advocates. HB 2661, which requires DCS to inform parents under investigation that they may delegate temporary guardianship and seek court relief, passed 4-3 after amendment removed attestation and documentation requirements. Finally, HB 2995, a major domestic-violence custody bill, was heard with extensive testimony from survivors, attorneys, and legal aid advocates. The bill removes the “significant” domestic violence threshold, adds coercive control to the analysis, requires domestic violence to be treated as contrary to the child’s best interests, and mandates detailed court findings; supporters said it addresses cases where abuse was minimized in custody decisions, while members raised concerns about evidentiary standards, implementation, and the risk of false allegations. The committee adopted a 13-page amendment and then gave the amended bill a due pass recommendation by a 4-3 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The measure decriminalized sidewalk vending and established an administrative penalty system to replace

Summary: The committee heard multiple bills, with extensive discussion focused on short-term rental regulation, street vending, park/public safety financing, transit-oriented housing fees, and demographic data collection. SB 346 would require short-term rental platforms to provide local governments with listing addresses and related information to help collect transient occupancy taxes and enforce local ordinances; supporters argued cities and counties need the data to identify unlicensed operators and recover taxes, while opposition from platforms raised privacy and due process concerns and said administrative subpoenas already exist. The bill was amended and passed 7-0 to the Judiciary Committee. SB 635, the Street Vendor Business Protection Act, sought to protect street vendors’ personal information from being shared in ways that could expose them to federal immigration enforcement; supporters described raids and fear in vendor communities, and the bill passed 6-1 to Public Safety. SB 499 would clarify that certain park and recreation facilities designated in local safety or hazard mitigation plans can qualify for fee deferral exemptions when they serve emergency or public safety functions; supporters said parks can serve as fire buffers, evacuation sites, and recovery hubs, while some housing advocates sought a clearer nexus to development impacts. The bill passed as amended 6-0 to Appropriations. SB 358, which would modernize traffic impact fee rules to better reflect lower automobile trip generation for walkable, transit-oriented housing, drew support from housing and transportation advocates and passed 8-0 to Appropriations. SB 515, aimed at improving demographic data collection and reporting by local governments and state entities, passed to Appropriations on a 4-0 vote. The committee also took up SB 276, presented by Assembly Member Stefani on behalf of Senator Wiener, which would allow San Francisco to create a permit-and-enforcement system for the sale of commonly stolen goods on sidewalks. Supporters said the measure is needed to address fencing operations and protect legitimate vendors, while emphasizing it is narrowly targeted and not aimed at food vendors or permitted sellers. The transcript ends during testimony on SB 276, with supporters from the Mission street vendor community and San Francisco Public Works describing enforcement problems and the need for clearer rules and city resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not even decriminalized. They don't have a medical program. They don't have any legal access.
• It's<02:29:20.720> not<02:29:20.880> even<02:29:21.040> decriminalized.
• <02:29:21.760> They<02:29:21.920> don't It's not even decriminalized.
• They don't It's not even decriminalized.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The traffic matters, decriminal matters, are also civil, so we handle those also.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard Governor’s Messages 796 and 797, both judicial confirmation nominations, but announced at the outset that no votes would be taken that day. The committee said it would hold the vote the next day in Room 225. For GM 796, Annalisa M. Bernard Lee was nominated to serve as circuit court judge for the Second Circuit (Maui) for a 10-year term. Supporters included former Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald, former judges, attorneys, and the Hawaii State Bar Association, all describing her as fair, hardworking, experienced on both criminal and civil matters, and active in the legal community. Judge Lee testified about her background as a Maui native, former public defender and prosecutor, and current district court judge, and said her experience on all sides of the courtroom shaped her commitment to fairness and access to justice. Senators asked about diversion, sentencing repeat offenders, and the role of a circuit court judge; Lee said she would consider cases individually, support diversion and pretrial collaboration where appropriate, and use judicial power to address underlying problems when possible. For GM 797, Michael K. Soong was nominated to the Fifth Circuit Court for Kauai and Niihau. Former Chief Justice Recktenwald and other supporters praised his long legal career, including service as a prosecutor, district court judge, and acting chief judge during a period when Kauai lacked a full-time circuit judge. They emphasized his courtroom control, common sense, community ties, and willingness to take on extra judicial committee work. Soong testified that he had served as a district court judge since 2017 and had recently been handling circuit court duties, including civil, criminal, and jury trial matters. He described the differences between district and circuit court, his experience presiding over complex trials, and his support for specialty courts such as drug court, veterans court, and mental health calendars. The Hawaii State Bar Association said it found him qualified after its review. No votes were taken on either nomination during this hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2024, Dallas passed a charter amendment decriminalizing possession of up to four ounces of marijuana

Keywords: legislation, Senate Joint Resolution 40, Senate Bill 871, constitutional amendment, emergency powers, governor authority, legislative oversight

Summary: The meeting focused on several crucial pieces of legislation, notably Senate Joint Resolution 40, which proposed a constitutional amendment to clarify the powers of the governor, the legislature, and the Supreme Court during emergencies. Senator Birdwell presented the resolution, emphasizing the need for legislative involvement during prolonged crises. It garnered broad support, passing with 29 votes in favor and only 1 against. Following this, Senate Bill 871, considered the enabling legislation, was also moved for discussion, with the aim of reinforcing the legislature's authority during emergencies while establishing clear guidelines for the governor's powers.

Transcript Highlights:

• It made it so drug possession was decriminalized overnight, and we had no way to enforce that in our

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The hearing resumed on day two of the Legislative Ethics Board fact-finding matter involving Representative Tara Simmons. After opening remarks and confirmation that board members had not engaged in outside research or ex parte communications, Simmons’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she improperly combined a legislative proviso for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and private conduct were intertwined and that the board had enough evidence to require a defense. After deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss and proceeded to hear defense testimony. The first defense witness, Sharon Navas, testified that she met Simmons through advocacy work, later hired her at the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), and maintained written employment policies intended to separate Simmons’s legislative role from her work for EEC. Navas said Simmons was never compensated for lobbying or legislative acts, that EEC paid her from unrestricted funds, and that Simmons did not work on the AEJG dashboard project or participate in the contract dispute with Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley. Navas described the proviso request and later contract issues as separate from Simmons’s legislative duties, and said she continued to pay invoices while the project was being completed. Simmons then testified about her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics advice before taking outside employment or pursuing provisos. She said she repeatedly consulted House ethics counsel and reviewed prior board decisions to ensure her outside work and legislative actions were separated. Simmons described her relationship with Anthony Powers, the dashboard project, the proviso process, and her understanding that the work was distinct from her legislative role. The hearing paused for lunch after part of Simmons’s direct examination, with testimony set to continue after the break.

Transcript Highlights:

• It made it so drug possession was decriminalized overnight, and we had no way to enforce that in our

Summary: The hearing resumed in the Legislative Ethics Board matter involving Tara Simmons after the board confirmed no ex parte communications had occurred overnight. Respondent’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she violated ethics rules by combining legislative support for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and personal dealings were intertwined. After a recess for deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss, and the hearing moved into the defense case. The first defense witness was Sharon Navas, executive director of the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC). Navas testified that she met Simmons in 2018, later hired her, and took steps to separate Simmons’s legislative duties from her work for EEC. She said Simmons was never paid for lobbying or legislative acts, that her compensation came from unrestricted funds, and that the organization used written ethics-compliance language and a formal scope of work. Navas also described the proviso-funded dashboard project involving Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley, testifying that Simmons was not involved in the project’s day-to-day work, did not attend the meetings about the dispute, and was not part of the alleged contract disagreement. On cross-examination, staff focused on the contract documents, the dashboard work, and whether the scope of work matched the parties’ understanding. Tara Simmons then testified in her own defense. She described her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics guidance from House counsel and board-related materials before taking outside employment or supporting provisos. She said she relied on prior ethics advice when separating her legislative role from outside work and when seeking provisos for AEJG and EEC. Simmons also addressed her relationship with Anthony Powers, describing it as a friendship rooted in criminal justice reform work and prior collaboration. The hearing was still in the middle of Simmons’s direct testimony when the transcript excerpt ended, with no final ruling on the merits or disposition of the allegations.