Transcript Highlights:

• amending something, and we don't have an emergency procedure outside of that interim motion.
• amending something, and we don't have an emergency procedure outside of that interim motion.
• amending something, and we don't have an emergency procedure outside of that interim motion.
• amending something, and we don't have an emergency procedure outside of that interim motion.
• amending something, and we don't have an emergency procedure outside of that interim motion.

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met to approve prior minutes and then worked through draft legislation related to a possible family court study committee. The group discussed the proposed 15-member committee’s makeup in detail, including whether to add parent representation, judges, family law section members, child support, clerks of court, domestic violence advocates, and other stakeholders. The task force ultimately agreed to keep the committee at 15 members, reduce the legislative membership from eight to six, add two judges from different districts, add two family law section members with rural and urban representation, include one parent subject to a custody order, and replace the mental health professional with a clerk of court representative appointed through the trial court administrator’s office. The draft was also revised to keep domestic violence advocacy representation and to clarify that the study could consider juvenile court issues as part of the family court umbrella. The committee voted to approve the revised draft and recommend it to Legislative Management, with one recorded “no” vote from Judge Hovey after the meeting resumed. The task force then turned to a second draft dealing with requiring participation in a family transition program, which was renamed in discussion to a parenting education course. Members debated whether the bill should simply refer to an existing program like Parents Forever or instead specify broader education about the court process, parental rights, co-parenting, and related issues. Some members supported the requirement as a way to reduce conflict and improve understanding of the system, while others raised concerns about vague language, cost to parents, lack of exemptions, and whether the bill was too open-ended or potentially duplicative of other legislation. The discussion became lengthy and unresolved, with the drafter noting that more specific direction would be needed to revise the bill. The transcript cuts off before a final vote or action on this second draft is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> or motions. or motions.
• , which are pretty much mirror of the federal rules of civil procedure, we have mechanisms for motions
• Um, tailoring, of course, to Wyoming procedures, but that's my motion. >> Okay. >> Second. >> It has
• </c> procedures, but that's my motion. procedures, but that's my motion. &gt;&gt; Okay.
• Do you like that motion? motion? motion?

Committee: Joint Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• We're talking about the procedure in enacting it.
• We're talking about the procedure and adapting it.
• But my intent is for the procedural legal questions.
• And I see that language starting in line 27, procedural defect.
• to dismiss, motions to change venue.

Committees: House Judiciary , House Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence

Transcript Highlights:

• All in favor of the interimm study<00:44:28.000><c> motion</c> study motion study motion say<00:44:30.079
• the consent motion of the consent motion &gt;&gt; I.
• motion?
• motion?
• All in favor of the consent<00:48:30.319><c> motion.</c> consent motion. consent motion.

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• We're talking about the procedure and adapting it.
• We're talking about the procedure and adapting it.
• But my intent is for the procedural legal questions.
• I'm a representative criminal defendant, and I file a motion to dismiss that the “Motion to dismiss alleges
• to dismiss, motions to change venue?

Committee: House Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence

Summary: The committee first met in executive session and approved House Bill 2666, Representative Keithley’s anti-SLAPP bill, on an 8-4 vote after a brief clarification that it was the anti-SLAPP measure being considered. The committee then held a public hearing on House Bill 3054, also by Representative Keithley, which would shift Cole County appellate venue to the Eastern District for workload balancing and require certain challenges to the enactment or validity of statutes and regulations to be filed originally in Cole County to reduce forum shopping. Representative Keithley said the bill was intended to centralize procedural and constitutional challenges tied to lawmaking or rulemaking in Jefferson City, not to move ordinary fact-based civil cases. Committee members pressed him on whether the language would also sweep in personal injury, medical malpractice, or criminal cases, and several expressed concern that the bill was broader than intended and could create venue fights or burden litigants. Keithley acknowledged the language might need clarification, especially regarding whether it could affect cases with constitutional counts in otherwise ordinary civil actions. Opposition testimony came from the Missouri Association of Trial Attorneys and the Missouri Circuit Judges Association. Both groups said the bill, as drafted, was too broad and could unintentionally move many cases to Cole County, including cases where constitutional challenges are commonly pleaded, and possibly criminal matters because of the “notwithstanding” clause. They also warned it could encourage new venue disputes and undermine expected local venue. The Judicial Conference of Missouri offered to provide data on case types if the committee wanted more information. No further action was taken on HB 3054, and the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• the procedural motions that are pending.
• There are also two procedural motions, more or less a combined one filed by enforcement counsel with
• The procedural motion, uh, those can be ruled on, uh, by the chair.
• to dismiss and then the chair would issue his ruling on the procedural motions. council just in one
• c> um two procedural motions um two procedural motions more<00:08:45.680><c> or</c><00:08:45.839><c>

Summary: The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission met on October 14, 2025, with a quorum present and approved the minutes from the September 9 meeting. The commission then turned to an appeal in consolidated matters 2024 LEC 3 and 2024 LEC 6, with the chair clarifying that the appeal would be heard in open session before any closed deliberations. The hearing officer outlined that the respondent had filed a renewed motion to dismiss on different grounds than a prior motion denied at the last meeting. Enforcement counsel noted that a response had been filed and said additional discovery issues remained, including records and possible witnesses identified in responses. The chair and counsel also identified two procedural motions pending from enforcement: a motion to compel production and a motion to continue or postpone the hearing date. The commission discussed the procedural posture and whether the parties needed to make further argument, with the chair indicating the substantive motion to dismiss would be decided by the commission and the procedural motions could be ruled on by the chair. Before moving into executive session, the commission took a motion and second to enter closed session to discuss the pending motions and related discovery matters. The transcript cuts off during the vote on that motion, so no final ruling on the dismissal, discovery, continuance, or executive-session deliberations is shown in the provided excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So you have a substitute motion then? Yes. Okay. Yes. Any comments on the substitute motion?
• Motion fails. Now your motion. And now we are back to the substitute motion, which is to hold H.R.
• The motion fails? That one's failed. I mean? He probably, yeah. The motion fails by one vote.
• Motion passes. Thank you. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Motion passes.
• Are there any comments on that motion? Are there any comments on that motion?

Committee: House Judiciary, Rules and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd make that motion. This draft. I'd make that motion. Okay. Motion by Ms.
• amending something, and we don't have an emergency procedure outside of that interim motion.
• So having the Supreme Court look to adopt rules of procedure that deal with emergency motions outside
• Motion fails. Okay, motion failed.
• Is there a motion? So move? Yes. Motion. So moved? Yes. Okay. Motion to recommend the draft.

Committee: Joint Child Custody Review Task Force

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior minutes, and then took up draft legislation to create a future interim committee to study the feasibility of a family court in North Dakota. Beth outlined the draft’s purpose, proposed 15-member membership, and the study topics, including constitutional authority, court structure, jurisdiction, fiscal impact, implementation, and possible phased-in approaches. Members discussed committee composition at length, ultimately agreeing to keep the committee at 15 by reducing legislative members from eight to six, adding two judges from different judicial districts, two family law section members with rural/urban representation, one parent subject to a custody order, and a clerk of court representative; the self-help, mental health, and domestic violence positions were debated, with domestic violence advocacy retained and some other positions removed or replaced. The committee also agreed to include analysis of state and local fiscal impacts and efficiencies, and to keep the provision on procedural rules in the draft. The revised draft was approved and recommended to Legislative Management, with one recorded no vote from Judge Hovey after the fact. The committee then turned to a second draft dealing with mandatory participation in a family transition program in contested parental-rights cases. Members first clarified that the term should be changed to a more general “parenting education course,” rather than a named private program, and discussed whether the bill should also require education about court process and family-law procedures. Some members argued the bill should specify content such as co-parenting, parental alienation, harassment, disorderly conduct, removal of a child from the jurisdiction, and contempt consequences, while others objected that the proposal was too vague, could impose costs without clear limits or waivers, and might amount to compelled legal advice or an undefined private program. Several members said the bill needed more specificity before it could be presented, and the discussion became increasingly divided over whether to keep the draft at all. The transcript ends amid that debate, with no final action yet taken on the second draft.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd make that motion. I'd make that motion. Okay. Motion by Ms.
• amending something, and we don't have an emergency procedure outside of that interim motion.
• So having the Supreme Court look to adopt rules of procedure that deal with emergency motions outside
• Motion fails. Okay, motion failed.
• Is there a motion? So move? Yes. Motion. So move? Yes. Okay. Motion to recommend the draft.

Committee: Joint Child Custody Review Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:13:25.440><c> on</c> consider or make a similar motion on consider or make a similar motion on
• </c><00:13:36.040><c> was</c> governed by that underlying motion was governed by that underlying motion
• procedural procedural question<00:14:03.920><c> really</c><00:14:04.240><c> important</c><00:14:04.639
• </c> right to vote on procedural right to vote on procedural issues<00:15:49.279><c> as</c><00:15:49.480
• It was a procedural motion, no matter what could have been the result, like had I ruled differently,

Committee: Senate Rules and Administration - Subcommittee on Ethical Conduct

Transcript Highlights:

• Motion carries." "...by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed?
• So on the bill itself, page one, Procedures Act.
• operating procedures.
• So the procedures are still... ...transparency in terms of the procedures.
• Just for a motion when you're ready. A motion is in order, Senator.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• The motion prevails.
• The motion prevails.
• The motion prevails. Members, we will now call on Senator Marty for your motion.
• On that motion, all in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. The motion prevails.
• And remember, this is a procedural issue, and whether the Frentz motion, point of order—I keep saying

Transcript Highlights:

• Do I have a motion on the amendment? All right, we got a motion.
• Is there a motion? Who makes a motion? Who makes a motion?
• Do I have a motion? I make a motion to move favorably. All right.
• I make a motion. I make a motion to voluntarily defer.
• I make a motion to voluntarily deferred I make a motion to voluntarily defer I make a motion to voluntarily

Bills: HR2 , HR37 , HR61 , HCR11 , HCR64 , HB89 , HB183 , HB341 , HB371 , HB451 , HB480 , HB520 , HB541 , HB579 , HB597 , HB816 , HB1004 , HB1064 , HB1165 , SB44

Committee: House Judiciary

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first took up House Bill 1165, which was converted into a substitute bill to reorganize the Avoyelles Parish court system by creating two city courts, one for Marksville and one for Bunkie, and expanding their jurisdiction parishwide, including small claims and certain misdemeanor, civil, and juvenile matters. The sponsor and supporting judges said the change would better use existing courts and improve access to justice, while the district attorney opposed it, arguing it would not help the criminal docket, could create staffing and constitutional issues, and needed more study. After questions about voting districts, appellate procedure, and minority vote dilution, the committee adopted the substitute and reported the bill favorably. The committee then heard House Bill 1064 creating a domestic violence intervention court pilot program in the 19th Judicial District, with testimony from the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council and the YWCA describing a specialty court model focused on accountability, victim services, and wraparound support. The bill was reported favorably. House Bill 341, clarifying law enforcement officer rights during administrative investigations, was amended to specify administrative matters and reported with amendments. House Concurrent Resolution 64, as amended, expanded a study of behavioral health courts to include additional parishes and a later reporting deadline, and was reported favorably. House Bill 579, the sexual assault survivor bill of rights, was amended to strengthen notice, confidentiality, and funding provisions and then reported favorably. Later, House Bill 1004, which would have raised the jurisdictional threshold for justice of the peace courts from $5,000 to $7,500, drew significant opposition from city court judges who warned of unintended consequences, including different evidentiary standards, possible attorney-representation issues for entities, and added burdens on district courts. Supporters framed it as an inflation adjustment and access-to-justice measure, but after debate the committee voted 5-11 to defer the bill. House Bill 183, limiting courthouse cell phone bans in fee-payment areas, was amended and then failed on a 7-7 tie with the chair voting no. The committee also reported favorably House Bill 451 on ATC hearing notices, House Bill 541 on micro distillers via substitute, Senate Bill 44 on tactical medical professionals’ firearms, House Resolution 37 honoring veterans who served in Honduras, and House Bill 89 requiring a district attorney office to pay certain retirees’ health premiums from its own funds. Several other bills were voluntarily deferred, and the meeting ended with a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Speaker, I second the motion.
• The motion is carried. Representative Kahaloa for the motion to reconsider.
• </c> motion to reconsider. motion to reconsider.
• The motion is carried.
• The motion is carried.

Bills: HB389 , HB469 , HB1510 , HB1573 , HB1705 , HB1858 , HB1875 , HB1946 , HB1961 , HB1962 , HB2001 , HB2093 , HB2096 , HB2097

Keywords: HB389, uncrewed aircraft, drone, drones, UAS, unmanned aerial vehicle, misuse of uncrewed aircraft, criminal offense, felony enhancement, drone crime, public safety, police, deputy sheriff, fire department, intoxicated operation, registration number tampering, property damage, bodily injury, Honolulu Prosecuting Attorney Package, Hawaii Revised Statutes

Transcript Highlights:

• Motion passes, or excuse me, but accept the report. I make a motion.
• Is that a motion? Representative Dalby? It is a motion. Second. Any discussion on the motion?
• And I make a motion. Any discussion on the motion?
• Any discussion on the motion? All in favor? Second. Any discussion on the motion?
• I agree with your motion. All right, do we have a second on the motion? Second.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES

Summary: The committee approved the prior minutes and then received a series of audit and compliance updates. Staff reported on delinquent private water and sewer reports, delinquent 2013-2023 water reports, and several municipal accounting code noncompliance cases. Denning and Gum Springs were recommended to be removed from the 60-day clock after staff visits showed improved records, while Fargo, Lead Hill, Almy, Jericho, Haynes, Biggers, Gilmore, and Holly Grove were discussed for repeat findings involving missing audits, poor bookkeeping, unpaid or misapplied street funds, deficit balances, and other accounting deficiencies. Several of these entities were given additional time or had reports filed without objection, while others were deferred for later review. Fargo’s mayor said the town had been understaffed and was working to improve its accounting systems; the committee voted to defer the matter to the August meeting. Lead Hill’s mayor described efforts to complete overdue water audits and improve office procedures, and the committee also postponed action for 60 days. Almy’s mayor and recorder-treasurer were present, and the committee placed the town on the 60-day clock for repeat accounting issues. Biggers and Gilmore both acknowledged long-running audit problems and said they were working with auditors and the IRS; their reports were filed. Holly Grove’s treasurer said she had only recently taken the position, and that report was filed as well. The committee spent considerable time on the street-fund misuse cases for Jericho and Haynes. Jericho was found to have exceeded the statutory threshold tied to fines and costs, with staff noting the town had since become current on its repayment plan; the committee deferred the report to September. Haynes was also behind on its repayment plan for street funds, with staff saying the town had recently made up the shortfall and was current as of the meeting, but the committee still deferred the report to September. Members and staff also discussed how the speed-trap law is applied, whether certain fines and costs count toward the threshold, and the role of the prosecuting attorney in deciding whether to take further action. The committee then reviewed a special report on the Pulaski County Regional Solid Waste Management District, which had six findings involving board approval of payroll and contracts, credit card documentation, vehicle and cell phone use, competitive bidding, electronic funds controls, and unusually high advertising spending. District Director Craig Douglas said the board had delegated some authority, that receipts were missing during a temporary staffing gap, and that advertising was needed to educate the public; he also defended the sale of trailers and other equipment as a way to exit the trailer business. Several members questioned the explanations and the low resale value of equipment, but the committee ultimately deferred the report to September. The meeting also included a recognition of accounting students interning with audit staff and a final set of actions on deferred water and sewer reports: 11 were filed, seven were deferred for lack of proper responses, and a private report on Shannon Hills Water, Sewer, and Fire Department was noted as involving misappropriation by an office manager and inadequate internal controls.

Transcript Highlights:

• If not, I make a motion we adopt the report. Thank you. Any questions? All right, motion to adopt.
• I have a substitute motion. I'll entertain that motion.
• Motion passes. Did we have a second on that motion? All right. Thank you. Senator Hammer seconded.
• The motion passes. Thank you. The motion passes. All right, the motion passes. Thank you.
• Do I have a motion to file this? Seeing none. All right. Do I have a motion to file this report?

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING

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

Transcript Highlights:

• For the procedural committees, the only procedural committees that would remain if these rules were adopted
• If you have a motion to accept the report of the Legislative Procedures and Arrangements Committee, the
• Is there a motion to adopt the report of the Legislative Procedures and Arrangements Committee?
• Motion carried. Okay, thank you, committee. Yes. And Weiss. Motion carried.
• Motion carried, Mr. Chairman. Yes. Marie? Yes. And Wise. Motion carried, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Do I have a motion on the amendment? All right, we got a motion.
• Is there a motion? Who makes a motion? You got a motion to report the substitute bill?
• Do I have a motion? I make a motion to move favorably. All right.
• I make a motion. I make a motion to voluntarily defer.
• And I'll make a motion for to approve. Is it there's a motion made to approve?

Bills: HR2 , HR37 , HR61 , HCR11 , HCR64 , HB89 , HB183 , HB341 , HB371 , HB451 , HB480 , HB520 , HB541 , HB579 , HB597 , HB816 , HB1004 , HB1064 , HB1165 , SB44

Committee: House Judiciary

Keywords: transparency, accountability, Justice Department, FBI, Jeffrey Epstein, victim protection, investigation, public trust, HR37, House Resolution 37, Honduras veterans, Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, military medal, veteran recognition, Congress memorialization, U.S. veterans, foreign deployment, 1981 to 1992, military service awards, combat support

Transcript Highlights:

• The motion is adopted.
• King for a motion.
• Morgan for a motion. I move to reconsider in support of the motion.
• procedures.
• Motion the gentlelady's time has expired. Motion to extend time.

Bills: HJR144 , HJR218 , HB40 , HB 101 , HB 112 , HB146 , HB168 , HB214 , HB413 , HB1523 , HB493 , HB521 , HB594 , HB557 , HB305 , HB549 , HB854 , HB 1057 , HB 1052 , HB842 , HB3174 , HB3311 , HB2486 , HB3196 , HB824 , HB 1039 , HB2529 , HB2713 , HB4936 , HB4995 , HB4830 , HB4864 , HB5219 , HB5263 , HB5154 , HB2674 , HB5525 , HB5623 , HB2545 , HB2587 , HB2625 , HB5520 , HB5436 , HB4926 , HB1573 , HB5165 , HB4811 , HB5081 , HB4755 , HB3179 , HB4310 , HB4611 , HB2159 , HB4626 , HB3637 , HB3153 , HB3066 , HB2786 , HB2966 , HB638 , HB640 , HB876 , HB497 , HB5539 , HB4809 , HB5308 , HB4687 , HB4070 , HB4421 , HB4412 , HB3284 , HB3369 , HB3420 , HB3449 , HB4098 , HB4281 , HB4120 , HB4504 , HB4370 , HB 1106 , HB2370 , HB2404 , HB3863 , HB2407 , HB2253 , HB2273 , HB2040 , HB1586 , HB3788 , HB3993 , HB4690 , HB4309 , HB4696 , HB2308 , HB 1142 , HB1533 , HB1621 , HB2242 , HB2012 , HB2193 , HB2442 , HB2464 , HB2348 , HB2313 , HB2289 , HB1942 , HB2011 , HB1629 , HB2993 , HB3592 , HB3824 , HB4076 , HB4535 , HB4623 , HB4773 , HB 1091 , HB5115 , HB5515 , HB3372 , HB5659 , HCR118 , HB 1233 , HB2239 , HB2379 , HB2863 , HB3368 , HB3787 , HB3815 , HB3898 , HB4023 , HB4285 , HB4329 , HB4331 , HB4429 , HB4646 , HB4904 , HB5200 , HB5320 , HB5651 , HB5662 , HB5668 , HB5670 , HB5672 , HB5674 , HB5676 , HB5679 , HB5688 , HCR108

Keywords: regional mobility, transportation authority, local law, constitutional amendment, public projects, Texas energy fund, energy efficiency, retail electric customers, electric generating facilities, business court, civil procedure, litigation, jurisdiction, arbitration, Texas State Guard, task force, professionalization, state missions, critical infrastructure, science park district

Transcript Highlights:

• There being 133 eyes's and zero nazs, the motion is passed and the amendment is adopted.
• There being 133 ayes and zero nays, the motion is passed and the amendment is adopted.
• </c> perform a variety of procedures perform a variety of procedures clinically.<00:10:43.279><c> In<
• </c><00:10:56.560><c> At</c> procedures in a clinical setting. At procedures in a clinical setting.
• The field of eye care faces procedures.