Transcript Highlights:

• This includes overall timeliness and the quality of the eligibility determinations.
• Is it just for pre-eligibility determinations? Your Honor, yes.
• Your Honor, is there anything before the final determination is made?
• that the right determination was made.
• And make that determination, and there's not the manual input. I was going to say, Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• make that determination. make that determination.
• So that's determining then what the cost of foundation. So the statute determines the cost.
• determined under the 21186 law. determined under the 21186 law. foundation.<00:34:26.720> We<
• determine what is a foundational cost. determine what is a foundational cost.
• that average cost is then determined that average cost is then determined that<00:36:52.320>

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Health and Human Services met to review budget items carved out in the prior session budget, including long-term care surveyor contracts, funding for local health departments, and expansion of the central laboratory. The committee approved the June 4 minutes and then heard an update from the Office of Inspector General’s Division of Health Care on long-term care certification surveys and complaint investigations. Officials said the $1 million annual appropriation for contracted survey work, along with salary increases and other resources, helped the state reduce its backlog. They reported that Kentucky completed 101 long-term care certification surveys in fiscal year 2024, up from 28 in fiscal year 2023, and had completed 186 surveys by July 7, 2025, with a goal of 40 to 50 more before the end of fiscal year 2025. Outstanding complaints fell from 1,565 at the end of fiscal year 2024 to 695 by July 7, 2025, and outstanding priority-one or immediate-jeopardy complaints were reduced to zero. Members asked about the definition of priority-one cases, survey timing, the number of facilities still overdue, vacancy rates, federal funding reliance, and the use of contract surveyors. Officials said priority-one cases involve serious harm or high risk of harm, that surveys are required within a 12- to 15.7-month window, and that the agency now has 40 contract surveyors and an outside team option. Several members praised the progress but warned that delays in surveys can endanger residents and urged continued funding and monitoring. The committee then began hearing from Mike Tuggle of the Department of Public Health on the Public Health Transformation Initiative, with Tuggle noting the legislation’s importance to public health financing. The transcript cuts off as he began his remarks.

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not change the rules regarding determinate commitments.
• Those are your determined cases.
• It does not impact determinate sentence.
• Another issue I have is the expansion of determinate sentence offenses.
• Assault public servant can become a determinate sentence offense.

Transcript Highlights:

• How do we make that determination?
• How do we make that determination?
• dismissal for solely Brady determination dismissal for solely Brady determination do<00:18:22.280
• <00:48:06.640> are these Brady Giglio determinations are these Brady Giglio determinations
• looks at that information and determines looks at that information and determines whether<00:48:

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, internally, that's how we determine nominal sensitivity.
• So, internally, that's how we determine nominal sensitivity.
• , not really making your own determination?
• 55:34.559> own<00:55:34.640> determination making your own determination making your own
• their finding and then um determine their finding and then um determine whether<01:39:50.560>

Bills: HB2611, HB2102, HB1710, HB1868, HB1920, HB1812, HB1733, HB1715, HB1723, HB1724, HB1727, HB1711

Keywords: HB2611, Hawaii antitrust, rental housing, rent price-fixing, algorithmic pricing, algorithmic rent-setting, property management software, pricing algorithms, rent coordination, price-fixing, collusion, cartel, multifamily housing, landlord software, occupancy levels, lease terms, Attorney General, public education program, consumer protection, housing affordability

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no objective process for determining the hours.
• So please help us keep self-determination. Thank you.
• They need services like IHSS and self-determination.
• Thanks to self-determination, his life has changed.
• And self-determination.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the governor’s IHSS budget proposals and then took public testimony from the administration, LAO, county representatives, labor, consumer advocates, and an aging/disability advocacy group. The administration described IHSS as a large Medi-Cal long-term services program serving more than 900,000 recipients and proposed three changes: shifting some growth costs tied to authorized hours per case to counties, eliminating the statewide backup provider system, and aligning IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations. The administration also discussed the earlier CFCO reassessment penalty change for counties and said overdue reassessments had dropped significantly. LAO said the governor’s overall IHSS cost estimates appeared reasonable, but raised concerns about the hours-per-case cost shift, including unclear root causes for growth, limited county control over statewide averages, and uncertainty about the eventual savings. County Welfare Directors Association, SEIU, and consumer/advocacy witnesses opposed the hours cost shift, arguing counties use state tools, the proposal would pressure counties to cut services, and it could harm older adults and people with disabilities by increasing institutionalization and shifting costs elsewhere. The chair and members repeatedly questioned the rationale for the proposal, the lack of a defined baseline, and whether the current assessment tools or MOE structure should instead be revisited. On the backup provider system, the administration said the program is underused and costly to administer relative to service spending, while LAO suggested the Legislature consider whether administrative costs could be reduced instead of eliminating it. County, labor, and consumer witnesses opposed the cut, saying the system is a critical emergency safety net even if utilization is low, especially for rural areas and people with complex needs. Members also asked about data quality, county backup systems, and whether consumers know the program exists. On the Medi-Cal/IHSS alignment proposal, the administration said automation would stop General Fund-only spending when recipients lose Medi-Cal and restore IHSS automatically when Medi-Cal is regained; LAO and others noted the proposal had been rejected before and urged better notices and safeguards. Witnesses warned that automatic termination could create gaps in care and unpaid work for providers, while the department said counties already manually terminate in some cases and that automation is ready if approved. No votes were taken in the excerpt, and the chair indicated the committee would continue with public comment and later items before a hard adjournment time.

Transcript Highlights:

• MY NEXT QUESTION IS IN REGARD TO THE DETERMINATION OF THE PROGRAMS.
• TASKED TO LOOK AT WERE PROVIDED BY THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS TO MAKE THESE DETERMINATIONS?
• Tant: THE METRICS OF TERMINATION WHAT DETERMINES DETERMINATION?
• Rayner: ALONG WITH THAT I KNOW WHEN THEY ARE DETERMINING OR THE BOARD HAS MADE RECOMMENDATIONS TO DETERMINE
• THEY DETERMINED.

Transcript Highlights:

• We cannot change the rules regarding determinate commitments.
• rated or less likely if they're on a determinate syndicate?
• Those are your determined cases. You have a lot of cases.
• Indeterminate and determinate kids, right?
• It can become a determined sentence offense.

Bills: HB31, HB3360

Keywords: juvenile justice, community supervision, felony offenses, treatment of children, juvenile facilities, chemical dispensing device, solitary confinement, rehabilitation, criminal proceedings, delinquency, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We did receive a determination a couple of Ray Mabee said the Coast Guard permit determination is what
• Basically, they were given a determination for a lift span.
• in their earlier determination.
• Guard had in their earlier determination.
• You didn't answer who's going to make that determination.

Summary: The Joint Oregon-Washington Legislative Action Committee met for a work session and public hearing on the Interstate 5 bridge replacement program. Program staff outlined major milestones, including the recent biological opinion, the Coast Guard’s opening of a public comment period on the Navigation Impact Report, expected decisions in early 2026 on navigational clearance and the final supplemental environmental impact statement, and a possible amended record of decision in 2026. They also discussed the Bridge Investment Program grant amendment deadline, the need for an initial finance plan, and ongoing community outreach and contractor engagement. Greg Johnson announced he was stepping down as program administrator, and Carly Francis introduced herself as interim administrator. A large portion of the meeting focused on design and cost questions. Staff said the program is studying fixed and movable spans, single- and double-deck configurations, and one versus two auxiliary lanes, with final recommendations to be made through the federal environmental process. They said the Coast Guard’s decision is central to what bridge configuration is permittable and to the timing of the updated cost estimate, which has not yet been released. Members pressed for more detail on cost drivers, potential impacts to businesses upriver, and whether the states would need to seek additional funding. Staff said they had reached agreements with four impacted river users, but the underlying evaluation materials are protected and not publicly releasable. The committee also reviewed transit-related questions. Staff explained that light rail remains part of the modified locally preferred alternative and that ridership and operations estimates are being updated using federal modeling methods. They said projected opening-day transit operations and maintenance costs have dropped from an earlier estimate of $21.8 million to about $10.3 million annually because the current model assumes lower frequency, with Oregon and Washington shares split by geography and fare recovery. Members raised concerns about TriMet’s financial stability and the need for a funding plan by fall 2027, ahead of a planned federal transit funding application in fall 2028. During public testimony, several speakers criticized the delay in releasing a new cost estimate and argued the project scope should be reduced if costs continue to rise. Testifiers from City Observatory and the Just Crossing Alliance said the project appears to be avoiding bad news, urged the committee to consider scope reductions, and questioned whether the active transportation and freeway components align with the project’s core purpose. The meeting ended with thanks to Johnson for his service and a transition to public hearing testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• That request was determined to be about 12.3 million dollars and how we determine that 12.3 million dollars
• Some I and what we call re determination for SR programs to determine what's our they currently make.
• And so that was all determined through a request for application process and districts determining the
• So that's the end of the year data to determine who's data.
• So that's the end of the year data to determine who's eligible to participate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Slide seven shows how the tax is determined for an individual property.
• <00:14:24.240> by<00:14:24.399> the determined by the determined by the legislature<00:
• So how need gets determined within the formula varies by city size.
• <00:23:26.520> within taxes so how need gets determined within taxes so how need gets determined
• <00:24:22.720> need groups and the formula determines need groups and the formula determines

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Tax Committee met to hear a House Research presentation from Jared Swanson on Minnesota’s property tax system. Before the presentation, the chair announced that the committee would put the governor’s budget on hold until the department could provide the information needed for a proper hearing. The committee then approved the prior meeting minutes without objection. Swanson gave an overview of how property taxes are structured and collected in Minnesota, explaining that the state uses a levy-based system in which local governments set levies and counties collect and distribute payments. He described the property tax cycle, the difference between referendum market value and net tax capacity, and how classification rates shift tax burdens among property types. He also outlined the state general property tax, noting it is split between commercial-industrial property and seasonal recreational property, and reviewed how Minnesota compares with other states, with residential taxes generally around the middle and commercial-industrial taxes relatively higher. The presentation also covered major property tax relief and aid programs. Swanson explained three broad relief mechanisms: shifting burdens through exclusions and classification rates, state-paid credits and refunds, and state aid to local governments or levy reductions. He discussed local government aid (LGA), township aid, and county program aid (CPA), including their funding levels, formulas, and general-purpose nature. Members asked why some cities receive no LGA and how the funds may be used; Swanson said cities with strong tax bases often receive zero aid and that the money generally can be used for the same purposes as property tax revenue. No votes were taken on the presentation itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• They can they can be determined how go through an eligibility determination and if eligible be enrolled
• We've determined that nothing further is warranted.
• Determination of ruled out which means we determine that there is not a preponderance of evidence that
• Investigation, but ultimately we cannot determine whether abuse or neglect occurred or we can determine
• a disposition of unable to determine.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Department of Children and Families determines eligibility for Medicaid, while the Agency for Health
• But Ricardo demonstrated remarkable determination.
• This includes overall timeliness and the quality of the eligibility determinations.
• The quality control review is not always determining the accuracy of the department's determination made
• So we're not being monitored on how we determine eligibility determinations.

Summary: The Human Services Subcommittee met to receive implementation briefings on House Bill 1267, which was enacted to address benefit cliffs and help public assistance recipients move toward economic self-sufficiency. The Department of Children and Families reviewed SNAP, Temporary Cash Assistance (TCA), and Medicaid-related eligibility and work requirements, including who must participate in work activities, the role of Florida Commerce and CareerSource Florida, and the new standardized intake and exit surveys required by the law. Members also discussed the TCA program’s household-based structure, the 48-month adult limit, and how work requirements differ for SNAP and TCA participants. Florida Commerce and CareerSource Florida then reported on implementation of HB 1267, including the CLIFF financial forecasting tool, case management changes, and survey data collected from welfare transition participants. They said intake surveys showed common barriers such as child care, transportation, and flexible work schedules, while exit surveys showed many participants were employed or had gained credentials, though response rates were low because the surveys are voluntary. A local workforce board, CareerSource Tampa Bay, described using CLIFF in case management and shared a success story about a participant who completed training, earned certifications, and moved into employment. The committee also heard a separate DCF briefing on the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act and its impact on SNAP. DCF said the law expands able-bodied adult without dependents requirements, changes non-citizen eligibility, ends future SNAP-Ed funding, increases state administrative cost sharing, and may require states to share in benefit costs if payment error rates remain above federal thresholds. Members focused heavily on Florida’s SNAP payment error rate, which DCF said was 15.13% for federal fiscal year 2024 and 12.60% for 2023, with the state currently on a corrective action plan. DCF described steps to reduce errors, including more verification of rent and utility expenses, improved income matching, staff training, and system modernization. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• Their objective medical expertise and supporting determinations of maltreatment.
• If CPT involvement is warranted, the referral must also ...be made within 24 hours of that determination
• “So the caseloads are determined based upon active caseloads.
• So it’s not the CPI making a determination. It’s not the court.”
• So it’s not the CPI making a determination. It’s not the court.” “The end.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs held a panel discussion on Florida’s child protection teams (CPTs), child advocacy centers (CACs), and the related roles of DCF, DOH, and law enforcement. Testimony from DCF, the Department of Health, a local CAC director, the Florida Network of Children’s Advocacy Centers, a Pinellas County CPT nurse practitioner, and a Jacksonville sheriff’s sergeant described how the system is intended to work: hotline reports are screened by DCF, mandatory referrals are sent to CPT, forensic interviews and medical exams are coordinated through CPT/CACs, and multidisciplinary teams share findings with law enforcement and prosecutors. Speakers emphasized the value of co-location, telemedicine, multidisciplinary staffings, and trauma-informed practices to reduce repeated interviews and improve child safety and case outcomes. Committee members focused heavily on communication breakdowns, staffing shortages, and delays in response times. Senators raised Jordan’s Law and asked what had been done to improve coordination among DCF, CPT, and law enforcement. Several members questioned whether the promised 24-hour response standard is being met in practice, citing reports of delayed referrals, delayed forensic interviews, and bottlenecks that can affect medical evaluations and criminal investigations. Law enforcement testimony from Jacksonville described cases where CPT interviews were scheduled one to two weeks out and reports were not received for weeks, while DCF acknowledged average CPI caseloads of about 12 investigations and turnover commonly occurring within 12 to 18 months. The panel also discussed access gaps and funding concerns. The Florida Network of CACs said Florida has 26 member centers, with some counties lacking CAC coverage and some centers having closed due to funding challenges. Speakers said CACs are voluntary but critical for integrated services, and that workforce shortages in medical and mental health providers limit expansion. DCF and DOH representatives said they would provide follow-up information on the number of CPT medical staff and other requested data. No bills were voted on; the meeting ended with committee members requesting additional information and recommendations for statutory and budgetary changes, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's an easy determination for the tenured level faculty.
• It's a much more difficult determination for an adjunct.
• So, how do you determine? I mean, is it you just go down the list? And, I mean, it seems vague.
• Making that determination is much more difficult.
• And it's only if they contested that that determination has to be made.

Transcript Highlights:

• So when a slot becomes available, they can, they can be determined, go through an eligibility determination
• Everybody has an eligibility determination every year. So, in the waivers, it's two parts.
• That's used for determining eligibility.
• , um, about the outcome of their eligibility determination.
• whether abuse or neglect occurred, or we can determine that it did occur, but we cannot determine who

Transcript Highlights:

• to determine that we should do a study to determine what<00:44:34.079> those<00:44:34.359>
• <00:44:44.440> some determines some determines some [Music] [Music] [Music] parameters<00:44:47.079
• It would be more that we would determine the compliance and alignment with chapter 165.
• To be afforded the protections in the bill, the department would have to determine it.
• That we would determine the compliance and alignment with chapter 165.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Agriculture and Environment Committee heard five bills on January 24, 2025. SB 1 would phase out disposable air filters and require reusable air filters by 2030; testimony was limited, with one supporter urging clearer definitions of fiberglass and paper and several opponents listed, and the committee later deferred the bill indefinitely for lack of support testimony. SB 13 would create an aquaculture investment tax credit beginning in 2026; state agencies and several industry groups supported it, while the Tax Foundation raised concerns about loose definitions, internal inconsistencies, and blanks that made the bill hard to estimate or vet. The committee passed SB 13 with amendments and technical changes, and deferred its effective date to July 1, 2015 as stated on the record. SB 177 would shift aquatic livestock import and movement permitting to the Department of Agriculture’s Animal Industry Division, require a risk-based assessment and biocontainment standards, and seek a $1 million appropriation for research and staffing. The Department of Agriculture said the bill would help expand aquaculture while managing risks to native species; aquaculture and farm groups supported it, while Animal Rights Hawaii was listed in opposition. The committee passed SB 177 with amendments, blanking the appropriation for committee report consideration, and deferred its effective date to July 1, 2050. SB 184 would raise the beverage container deposit and refund from 5 cents to 10 cents. Supporters said the higher deposit could improve recycling and environmental outcomes, while opponents, including the Tax Foundation, cited fraud concerns, the program’s existing fund balance, and practical challenges in redemption; the Department of Human Services also noted potential impacts on blind vendors. The committee took the bill up but deferred decision-making until Monday, January 27, 2025, at 10:01 p.m. in Room 224. The committee also heard SB 250, which would increase the income tax credit for interisland transportation costs for agricultural products. Agricultural and industry witnesses supported the bill as a way to offset rising shipping costs and preserve access to markets, while the Tax Foundation preferred direct appropriations over tax credits and objected to missing bill details. The committee passed SB 250 with amendments from the Department of Agriculture and deferred its effective date to July 1, 2050. Separately, a joint hearing on SB 240, the Right to Farm bill, drew mixed testimony: the Department of Agriculture supported further study and raised concerns about the bill’s fragmented approach, while farm, cattle, and other industry witnesses split between support for protecting customary Native Hawaiian subsistence farming and opposition to excluding CAFOs and certain business structures. No vote was taken on SB 240 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Their objective medical expertise and supporting determinations of maltreatment.
• Much information as possible to determine if a forensic interview is necessary.
• So the caseloads are determined based upon active caseloads.
• When cases have been, when a determination has been made that a child...
• So it's not the CPI making a determination. It's not the court. Right. Yeah, that's not.

Summary: The Children, Families, and Elder Affairs Committee held a panel discussion on Florida’s child protection teams (CPTs), child advocacy centers (CACs), and related state systems. Testimony came from the Department of Children and Families, the Department of Health, a local CAC director, the Florida Network of Children’s Advocacy Centers, a CPT medical lead, and a Jacksonville sheriff’s sergeant. Witnesses described how DCF investigations, CPT medical and forensic services, CAC multidisciplinary coordination, and law enforcement work together to assess abuse allegations, provide interviews and exams, and connect children and families to services. Several speakers highlighted telemedicine, co-location, and Jacksonville’s specialized investigative model as examples of stronger coordination. Committee members focused heavily on communication gaps, staffing shortages, and delays in forensic interviews and medical evaluations. Senators asked about implementation of Jordan’s Law, the timing of DCF and law enforcement notifications, whether law enforcement is always included in decisions about forensic interviews, and how quickly children are seen after a report. DCF and DOH representatives said referrals are generally made within 24 hours and that multidisciplinary staffings are used to share information, but law enforcement described cases where interviews were scheduled weeks out or reports arrived late, creating problems for probable cause and safety decisions. Members also raised concerns about turnover among CPIs and CPT staff, caseloads, and the need for more specialty providers. CAC representatives said the model reduces trauma by bringing services together in one place, but noted uneven access across the state, especially in rural areas and in counties without CACs. They said sustainable funding and workforce development are needed to maintain and expand services, and one speaker noted that some CACs have closed due to funding challenges. DCF said there are about 1,500 CPIs statewide and an average active caseload of about 12 per investigator, while CPTs serve roughly 22,000 to 23,000 children annually. The committee did not take any formal vote or action, but members requested follow-up information on staffing numbers, communication practices, CAC locations, and recommendations for statutory or budget changes. The meeting ended with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:48:04.880> eligible that file and are determined eligible that file and are determined
• :47.040> monetaries is determining those monetaries is determining those monetaries correctly.
• program in which you're determining program in which you're determining exactly<00:49:46.000>
• <00:51:00.960> the base period earnings to determine the base period earnings to determine
• So who determines that? Because right now the claimant doesn't determine anything, right?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• all moving files, but it was determined all moving files, but it was determined that<00:10:42.160
• state law librarian to kind of determine state law librarian to kind of determine you<00:27:16.640
• 47.280> are,<00:55:47.520> then is determined that they are, then is determined that they
• I think it's always hard to determine I think it's always hard to determine right<01:27:13.600><
• prosecutors by the court to determine prosecutors by the court to determine whether<01:31:57.600

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:01 Recognition of New Members: 00:01:17 Disaster Response: 00:01:41 Pretrial Discussion: 00:31:25, 958, all

Summary: The committee first established a quorum, approved the minutes from the November 7, 2024 meeting, and then heard an update on disaster response and courthouse recovery efforts after the April flooding. Representatives from the Administrative Office of the Courts, the Franklin County Circuit and District Court Clerk’s office, and the Franklin Circuit Court described damage in Perry, Hardin, and especially Franklin counties. Perry County had limited roof and water infiltration issues with no operational impact. Hardin County’s justice center basement took about 18 inches of water, affecting court records and mechanical/electrical equipment, and court operations were briefly suspended. Franklin County’s courthouse was far more severely damaged, with about four feet of water on the first floor, forcing relocation of court operations to temporary sites, including AOC space and the regional jail for custody proceedings. Witnesses said damaged files from Hardin and Franklin counties were removed, sent to an out-of-state vendor for drying and remediation, and would be returned or destroyed as appropriate. They estimated combined costs for file restoration, building repair, and remediation at about $11 million, with insurance through KCOJ/KO expected to cover only part of the losses and FEMA reimbursement still pending a federal disaster declaration. They also said the Franklin County courthouse’s first floor remains gutted, electrical panels and HVAC systems need major replacement, and the second and third floors may be used temporarily once power and data are restored. Members asked about roof damage in Hardin County, the status of FEMA applications, digitization of court records, and whether Senate Bill 25 restricted funds could be used to cover the funding gap; staff said the funds cannot be spent without General Assembly authorization. The committee also discussed broader record-retention and e-filing issues, with members noting the limits of paper filing and the need for better digitization as a backup in emergencies. AOC staff said they are working with the Supreme Court and state law librarian on what records can be digitized and how long hard copies must still be retained. After the disaster-response presentation, the committee moved on to a separate informational presentation on pre-trial services, with introductions from the executive officer of pre-trial services, the president of the Kentucky District Judges Association, a circuit judge, and the manager of pre-trial services, who began explaining how the pre-trial system works for newer committee members.