Video & Transcript Research : 'remote notarization'

Page 71 of 175
NH

New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session

Senate Health and Human Services (03/11/2026)

Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:
  • And this is just a section where we authorize remote work for a variety of professions.
  • So what remote processing is, um, I look at like Amazon, for instance.
  • This just makes sure that the LAPs can do that remotely as well, um, add some clarity.
  • We appreciate the clarification about rules around license availability, remote processing, and labeling
  • We appreciate the clarification about rules around license availability, remote processing, and labeling
Keywords: 1191, senate, all
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

Committee on Environment, Climate and Legacy - 03/27/25

Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:
  • And we do have a remote voter, but under our rules, the remote voter doesn't indicate their vote for
  • <01:25:55.520> voter,<01:25:55.920> but And um we do have a remote voter, but And um
  • we do have a remote voter, but under<01:25:56.320> our<01:25:56.560> rules,<01:25:57.040
  • > the<01:25:57.280> remote<01:25:57.679> voter under our rules, the remote voter
  • under our rules, the remote voter doesn't<01:25:59.199> um<01:26:00.080> indicate<01:26
Keywords: 1187, senate, all
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection - 02/13/25

Commerce and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:
  • weatherization folks who are out doing different weatherization activities, and then a third are remote
  • weatherization folks who are out doing different weatherization activities, and then a third are remote
  • weatherization folks who are out doing different weatherization activities, and then a third are remote
  • <00:37:41.160> are<00:37:41.680> um<00:37:41.960> fully<00:37:42.319> remote
  • <00:37:43.200> and then they they are um fully remote and then they they are um fully remote
Keywords: 1187, senate, all
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Committee on Transportation - 02/12/25

Transportation

Transcript Highlights:
  • > uh<00:04:43.440> joining<00:04:43.840> us<00:04:44.600> uh Joining us remotely
  • We have joining us remotely Mark Fzone from Scenic America, and then we'll invite Jeanie Wum and John
  • We have joining us remotely Mark Fzone from Scenic America, and then we'll invite Jeanie Wum and John
  • We have joining us remotely Mark Fzone from Scenic America, and then we'll invite Jeanie Wum and John
  • um we have uh joining us REM remotely um we have uh joining us REM remotely mark<01:20:55.400>
Keywords: 1187, senate, all
NH

New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session

House Science, Technology and Energy (01/27/2026)

Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:
  • Um, but I don't think it's necessary to remotely control people's thermostats or do that sort of thing
  • <01:15:53.440> you charging or your thermostat remotely you charging or your thermostat remotely
  • It's common with Wi-Fi routers, video game controllers, baby monitors, remote controls.
  • controllers, uh baby monitors, um remote controllers, uh baby monitors, um remote controls.<01:26
  • You know, every time I look at one of these devices, whether it's a remote control for your TV or any
Keywords: 1189, house, all
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

House Floor Session 5/13/25 - Part 1

Minnesota House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • The clerk will call the name of the members voting remotely. Hussein, go ahead. Hussein is here.
Keywords: 1183, house
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

Committee on Environment, Climate and Legacy - 05/01/25

Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:
  • Any remote member? Okay, everyone's here.
Keywords: 1187, senate, all
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Floor Session Mar 12th, 2025

Minnesota House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • The clerk will call the name of the member participating remotely. Okay. Lee F. present.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House passes HF289 2/27/25

Minnesota House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • If not, the clerk will take the role. role e The clerk will call the name of the members voting remotely
Keywords: 1183, house
NH

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

House Science, Technology and Energy (01/27/2025)

Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:
  • If it's, if you're talking about SMRs, they're going to be manufactured remotely for the most part, so
  • If it's, if you're talking about SMRs, they're going to be manufactured remotely for the most part, so
  • <00:09:36.600> for going to be manufactured remotely for going to be manufactured remotely
  • It provides better access to remote learning opportunities through the internet, hotspots, etc.
  • Care it provides better access to remote Care it provides better access to remote learning<05:01
Keywords: 1189, house, all
MA

Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session

Joint Committee on Transportation Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm

Joint Committee on Transportation

Transcript Highlights:
  • Testimony will be both taken in person and for the remote participants in the order that they have signed
  • Also, just wanted to briefly recognize that Senator O'Connor of the committee has joined us remotely
  • I'd also just briefly like to recognize Senator Brownsberger is joining remotely as a member of the committee
Keywords: 995, all
Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a hybrid hearing on the governor’s Ride Safe Act, S. 3077, and related micromobility bills. Chairs and administration officials described the bill as a statewide, speed-based framework for e-bikes, scooters, mopeds, and similar devices, intended to replace outdated device categories with clearer rules for age limits, helmets, equipment, operating locations, registration, insurance for higher-speed devices, and restrictions on tampering. They also emphasized improved crash-data collection, a working group for future updates, and battery safety standards such as UL certification to reduce fire risk. Committee members asked about enforcement, shared-use paths, commuter rail accommodations, battery storage, and how the bill would apply to other vehicles like quads; the administration said some issues would need further study or follow-up. Testimony from advocates, municipal officials, and commission members was mixed but generally supportive of clearer statewide rules. Transportation and safety advocates backed the speed-based tier system but urged additional measures, including a default speed limit on shared-use paths, automated enforcement, and more funding for Complete Streets and Shared Streets programs. Bike shop and police representatives said current laws are confusing for riders and law enforcement and that better definitions and data reporting are needed. Several speakers stressed that enforcement and education will be critical, and that local patchwork rules are difficult to apply consistently. Medical testimony strongly supported tighter protections for young riders. Pediatric emergency and trauma doctors described a sharp rise in serious injuries and deaths involving e-bikes and scooters, including severe pediatric cases, and urged amendments adding a minimum age for faster devices and a universal helmet requirement. They argued that the force and weight of these devices make crashes more dangerous than conventional bicycles and pointed to past Massachusetts safety laws as evidence that age and equipment restrictions can reduce injuries. Some public testimony opposed the bill as written, especially from moped commuters who argued that gas-powered mopeds are being treated differently from comparable electric devices and should be included in the framework. They called for clearer rules on bike-lane access, insurance, parking, and statewide standards for mopeds as vulnerable road users. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony and questions only.
MA
Transcript Highlights:
  • Our next speaker, I believe, is remote. Our next speaker, I believe, is remote: Jean Kempthorne.
  • , for this opportunity to address the subcommittee and for the courtesy of allowing me to appear remotely
Keywords: 995, all
Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on whether the Office of the State Auditor may constitutionally audit the Massachusetts Legislature under Chapter 250 of the Acts of 2024 and what such an audit could include under generally accepted government auditing standards. Chair Cindy Friedman opened by explaining the background: voters approved Ballot Question 1 in November 2024, the law took effect in January 2025, and the Auditor then initiated audits of both chambers. The chair said the subcommittee was seeking expert testimony because the proposed audit scope, constitutionality, and possible bias concerns remained unresolved. Public testimony was invited, but no members of the public pre-registered; written testimony remained open for a short period after the hearing. The hearing then proceeded with invited experts on constitutional law/state government and auditing-related issues. Professor Lawrence Friedman testified that the ballot initiative’s approval by the Attorney General and by voters did not resolve constitutional questions, and he argued Chapter 250 violates the Massachusetts Constitution. He said the Legislature has constitutional authority to set its own rules and manage its proceedings, and that an executive-branch audit would intrude on legislative deliberation, speech and debate protections, and separation of powers. He also warned that even audits of supposedly administrative matters could become a vehicle for repeated document demands and litigation that would indirectly burden legislative functioning. In questioning, senators pressed him on the line between administrative and deliberative functions, the role of the Attorney General versus the courts, the possibility of retroactive audit scope, and whether prior legislative consent to audits mattered; he said prior consent would not bind future legislatures and that constitutionality is ultimately for the courts. Professor Ray La Raja also opposed the audit, framing it as a threat to institutional independence and representative democracy. He argued that allowing an executive-branch official to audit the Legislature without consent would upset separation of powers, chill internal debate, and create a precedent for broader executive intrusion. He said voters often support “transparency” reforms without fully appreciating institutional consequences, and that legislatures should defend their autonomy, especially amid what he described as broader executive overreach nationally. Senators asked about chilling effects, the practical distinction between administrative and core legislative functions, and whether the courts or the Legislature should resolve the issue; he said the courts would ultimately adjudicate disputes, but the Legislature should not waive its constitutional authority lightly. Jean Kempthorne took the opposite view, arguing the audit is permissible and should proceed. She said the state auditor is a constitutional officer accountable directly to the people, that the audit power can be expanded by statute, and that separation of powers does not require watertight compartments. She contended the audit would not displace core legislative powers because the auditor can only evaluate operations, report findings, and make recommendations. She also argued the Legislature itself already conducts audits of other branches, so it is inconsistent to claim an audit of the Legislature is unconstitutional. In response to senators’ questions, she said there are guardrails against truly intrusive requests, but that the administrative-versus-legislative distinction is not a workable bright line; she suggested disputes should be handled case by case, with objections, negotiation, or litigation if specific requests go too far. No votes or formal actions were taken at the hearing.
ND
Transcript Highlights:
  • Offhand, do you know if there is an option to dial in, like remotely or something like that?
  • Offhand, do you know if there is an option to dial in, like, remotely or something like that?
  • No, I was just going to say I will bring that question about remote in to our next meeting next week,
Summary: The committee met in Grand Forks, approved the February 26 minutes by voice vote, and recessed for a tour of Minnkota Power Cooperative before hearing presentations on large energy consumers and related infrastructure issues. The first presentation, from the North Dakota Transmission Authority, focused on the need for better local decision-making tools for counties, townships, and planning and zoning boards facing major projects such as transmission lines, pipelines, data centers, wind, solar, and large-scale agriculture. The speaker urged more objective, data-driven analysis, noted that local officials often have limited time and resources, and said the state should support training and tools through groups like the League of Cities and the Association of Counties. Members asked about proactive outreach, data center ordinances, and how to avoid subsidizing large loads or causing reliability problems. The Division of Air Quality then discussed environmental oversight of data centers, emphasizing that North Dakota’s air remains among the cleanest in the country and that the agency’s role is limited to air, water discharge, stormwater, and waste—not zoning or water use. The presentation explained that data centers generally have low direct emissions but may rely on diesel backup generators when the grid is unavailable, which creates air-quality concerns; the department said it is requiring air monitors at some projects to collect real-world data and guide future decisions. Members asked about generator emissions, misinformation, monitoring costs, and staffing succession, and the agency said permit applicants pay for the monitors while the state handles some QA work. The Department of Water Resources followed with an overview of North Dakota water law and data center water use. The director explained the state’s prior-appropriation system, the public-interest review for permits, and the large overall water supply available from groundwater and the Missouri River. He said most proposed data centers use closed-loop cooling systems and generally request relatively small amounts of water compared with other uses such as power plants, irrigation, and oilfield operations, and that even a worst-case data center scenario would use only a tiny fraction of Missouri River flow. Questions focused on downstream impacts and comparisons to fracking water use, and the director said the state’s use is too small to materially affect downstream users. Later, McLean County State’s Attorney Ladd-Erickson testified online about data center zoning and permitting. He asked the committee to have Legislative Council gather information on how other states handle data center permitting and to keep the topic on the interim agenda. He argued that local zoning should remain local, but said counties lack the technical and legal resources to manage complex reclamation or bonding requirements and that state-level enabling legislation may be more appropriate. He also recommended eliminating tax incentives for data centers. The committee chair said staff would prepare a document on other states’ zoning and permitting approaches. After a lunch recess, the committee reconvened at the EERC, where CEO Charles Gorecki gave an overview of the center’s 75 years of work and its role in oil and gas, carbon management, and other energy technologies, highlighting enhanced oil recovery and carbon dioxide utilization as major opportunities for future production and tax revenue.
ND

North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Child Custody Review Task Force Apr 13th, 2026

Transcript Highlights:
  • A question on the remote. A question on the remote? Yes, Mr. Chairman.
  • if, you know, the judge wanted somebody who lives out of state to attend in person, as opposed to remotely
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.
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

03/03/2026 - House Floor Session

Arizona House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • Prior to the Wayfair decision, which allowed for taxation of remote sales, you could only be taxed in
  • had continued to be the treatment of taxation for Arizona businesses, notwithstanding the fact that remote
  • Now, remote sales are taxed at the location of the purchaser of the product.
Keywords: 1182, all
Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, guest introductions, and recognition of Arizona School Board Association members and local school board representatives visiting the Capitol for Advocacy Day. Members also honored the House Doctor of the Day, Dr. Heather Serran, and approved the journal and attendance. The chamber then moved through a large number of Senate messages and House calendar items, including committee assignments and first and second readings of many bills. A major floor action was the unanimous adoption of SCR 1054 honoring former Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, followed by remarks remembering his public service and consumer-protection work. The House also agreed to return SB 1278 to the Senate for reconsideration and referred several House bills to an additional Committee of the Whole for further amendment. In Committee of the Whole, members considered and advanced numerous bills, including HB 2055, 2150, 2426, 2456, 2457, 2728, 2755, 2918, and 2923, with several floor amendments adopted. HB 2728 drew the most debate over Department of Economic Security continuation and added policy changes affecting SNAP, unemployment, and eligibility verification; after a divided question and recorded vote, it received a do-pass recommendation by 32-25. The House also advanced HB 2134, 2142, 2289, 2290, 2331, 2379, 2397, 4026, and 4033 in later Committee of the Whole sessions, with discussion focused on school safety funding and governance, school board training, HOA disclosure reforms, tax sourcing clarity, and bond disclosure language. Several bills were retained on the calendar, including HB 4041, HB 2444, HB 4018, and HB 4070. In final third-reading votes, HB 2053, HB 2327, and HB 2416 passed; HB 2175 and HB 2492 failed; and HB 2805, which would make school board races partisan, was under debate at the end of the transcript amid strong arguments both for and against increasing partisanship in school board elections.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • And then working remotely, right?
  • For an employer like ag or construction, you're not going to be able to offer maybe remote work that
  • anecdotal, but the patterns are consistent with the stories that we heard about increasing flexibility of remote
Summary: The California State Assembly Select Committee on Child Care Costs held its first hearing to examine the state of child care access, affordability, and provider compensation. Chair Cecilia Aguiar-Curry and other members described child care as essential infrastructure for working families and the economy, noting that costs are unaffordable for many households and that providers are underpaid. Early testimony came from a San Francisco parent, Quinn Chung, who described the difficulty of finding safe care and the financial and career sacrifices caused by lack of child care, and from Tuolumne County provider Anita Viscini, who detailed her monthly costs, low margins, and the need to work weekends and teach CPR classes to make ends meet. Assemblymembers also emphasized the crisis in rural communities and the need for a long-term strategy. The first policy panel featured Jennifer Troia of the California Department of Social Services, Laura Pryor of the California Budget and Policy Center, and Alexa Frankenberg of Child Care Providers United. Troia said the state has nearly doubled child care funding in five years, expanded subsidy slots, and reached a new tentative three-year agreement with providers that includes cost-of-living adjustments, stabilization payments, and continued work on an alternative rate methodology and single rate structure. Pryor argued that despite funding gains, child care remains too expensive, only a fraction of eligible children receive subsidies, and provider wages remain far below comparable jobs, worsening racial and gender inequities. Frankenberg said the tentative agreement is progress but not enough, calling for a true cost-of-care system, fair wages, paid time off, better support for emergency and nontraditional care, and stronger integration of family child care into the mixed-delivery system. Members asked about why the crisis persists, how the alternative methodology will work, how family fees and sliding-scale help are being used, and why middle-income families still struggle. The panel said the problem reflects long-term underinvestment, a broken market, and a system that still leaves many families without access. The committee also heard an economic panel from Ashley Hoffman of the California Chamber of Commerce and Sarah Bone of the Public Policy Institute of California. Hoffman described employer child care benefits and public-private partnership models in other states, including shared-cost programs and local chamber efforts. Bone said child care costs reduce family financial security and labor force participation, especially for mothers of young children, and estimated that if mothers of young children worked at the same rate as mothers of older children, more than 80,000 additional women could be in the workforce each year. In the final panel, parent and provider advocates, including Jennifer Greppie and Black Californians United for Early Care and Education co-founder Keisha Doyle, argued for fully funding child care, ending waiting lists, protecting culturally affirming care, and addressing racial inequities and private equity’s role in the sector.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • expanding, working to maximize the use of telehealth visits, asynchronous messaging visits, and other remote
  • expanding, working to maximize the use of telehealth visits, asynchronous messaging visits, and other remote
  • also serving as trusted ears on the ground to bring forward community concerns, even in the most remote
Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s Medi-Cal program and on community health effects from recent immigration enforcement actions. Committee leaders said H.R. 1 would sharply reduce federal funding, increase administrative burdens, and worsen access to care, especially for Medi-Cal enrollees, immigrant families, rural communities, and reproductive health patients. The second half of the hearing examined how ICE raids and related federal actions are creating fear, reducing clinic and emergency department use, and disrupting children’s access to schools and early childhood education. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined the main H.R. 1 provisions affecting Medi-Cal: work requirements, semiannual eligibility redeterminations, shorter retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal support for emergency and lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for prohibited abortion providers. She estimated millions could lose coverage, with tens of billions of dollars in federal funding at risk. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warned the defunding provision could force clinic closures, service reductions, and loss of access to family planning, STI testing, and cancer screenings. The California Hospital Association said the financing changes could cut hospital revenue by tens of billions over 10 years and threaten access, especially for rural and safety-net hospitals. The Western Center on Law and Poverty argued the law would increase churn, paperwork, and uninsured rates, disproportionately harming working adults and people experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation timelines, notification systems, administrative costs, the effect on immigrant eligibility, and whether California could delay or mitigate some provisions. Bass said the state was still assessing federal guidance, planning county and provider outreach, and exploring a possible delay for work requirements and a transition period for provider-tax changes. Members also discussed how state budget actions may need to be revisited in light of H.R. 1, and how California might preserve access through state-only funding or other policy changes. In the second panel, CHIRLA, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Children’s Partnership described the health consequences of immigration enforcement. Speakers said raids and data-sharing fears are causing anxiety, trauma, and avoidance of care, with Los Angeles County reporting declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits after enforcement actions. The Children’s Partnership said school and early childhood absences are rising in some communities and that enforcement is undermining children’s emotional well-being and access to education. Members asked for more data and discussed possible state protections, telehealth, mobile care, and legal and policy responses to reduce fear and preserve access to health and education services.
CA
Transcript Highlights:
  • , a study showed that CDCR is highly susceptible to climate hazards because they are located near remote
  • Incarcerated people are especially vulnerable to extreme weather conditions. ...remote areas and have
  • In addition, some collective bargaining agreements actually request remote training for flexibility and
Summary: The committee heard several labor-related bills, with AB 1424, AB 1340, AB 288, and AB 746 all advancing on due-pass motions to Appropriations after testimony and roll calls. AB 1424 would require climate resiliency and extreme-heat protections in CDCR facilities; supporters described dangerous heat conditions for incarcerated workers and staff, while no opposition testified. AB 1340 would allow rideshare drivers to unionize and collectively bargain; drivers, labor groups, and researchers testified that app-based work is low-paid and unstable, while TechNet, Uber, Lyft, and other business groups argued the bill conflicts with Proposition 22 and could raise costs. AB 288 would let PERB step in when federal labor remedies are unavailable; supporters said it is needed because of NLRB dysfunction, while the Chamber of Commerce raised preemption and enforcement concerns. AB 746 would create an inmate cooperative program and a green reentry reserve; supporters framed it as a recidivism-reduction and reentry strategy, and there was no opposition testimony. The committee also heard AB 858, which would extend hotel and hospitality worker recall rights after declared emergencies and extend existing COVID-era protections. Hospitality workers and unions supported the bill as a way to protect jobs after pandemics, wildfires, and other disasters, while hotel, chamber, retail, restaurant, trucking, travel, and attractions groups opposed it, saying the current recall rules were meant to sunset and that the bill would create broad liabilities and hiring complications. The bill was moved to Appropriations but remained on call after the roll. AB 291, creating a credentialed educator apprenticeship program to address teacher shortages and improve diversity, drew support from education groups and stakeholders who said apprenticeships could lower preparation costs and provide better support; it was also moved to Appropriations and placed on call. Later, the committee took up AB 1104, a solar-energy bill intended to clarify that private solar customers are not “awarding bodies” and to ease certain business-to-business solar transactions while preserving prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements for contractors. Supporters said the current interpretation has chilled commercial solar adoption and harmed jobs, while opponents from electrical workers, PG&E, and others warned about expanded “over-the-fence” power sales and the need for clearer limits. Members questioned the lack of a definition of “small,” and the bill was held without a second. The committee also heard AB 338, which seeks $50 million for Los Angeles and Ventura wildfire workforce recovery; the author and county officials described major job loss and business destruction and said the funds would support displaced workers and rebuilding, with the testimony continuing beyond the excerpt provided.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Senate Session Apr 3rd, 2025

Texas Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • Senate Bill 2615 by Creighton, relating to restricting remote work by employees of public institutions
  • Senate Bill 2615 by Creighton, relating to restricting remote work by employees of public institutions
  • Senate Bill 2615 by Creighton, relating to restricting remote work by employees of public institutions
Bills: SJR 12, SCR 39, SB 27, SB 29, SB 241, SB 406, SB 414, SB 464, SB 568, SB 578, SB 609, SB 660, SB 689, SB 693, SB 785, SB 857, SB 879, SB 921, SB 922, SB 955, SB 985, SB 993, SB 996, SB 1008, SB 1035, SB 1036, SB 1059, SB 1098, SB 1120, SB 1122, SB 1147, SB 1188, SB 1197, SB 1209, SB 1227, SB 1245, SB 1267, SB 1307, SB 1321, SB 1332, SB 1386, SB 1396, SB 1453, SB 1484, SB 1494, SB 1536, SB 1537, SB 1596, SB 1610, SB 1664, SB 1741, SB 1814, SB 1822, SB 1841, SB 1948, SB 2065, SB 2155, SB 2188, SB 2230, SB 2406, SB 2407, SJR 36, SJR 12, SJR 81, SJR 50, SCR 22, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 406, SB 689, SB 765, SB 62, SB 666, SB 888, SB 687, SB 847, SB 1248, SB 504, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 241, SB 304, SB 1023, SB 204, SB 609, SB 670, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 1539, SB 447, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 1215, SB 1302, SB 583, SB 673, SB 681, SB 1172, SB 955, SB 957, SB 1120, SB 541, SB 266, SB 1415, SB 53, SB 1352, SB 785, SB 1450, SB 1502, SB 1566, SB 414, SB 1062, SB 711, SB 746, SB 1404, SB 1448, SB 507, SB 1026, SB 1349, SB 1355, SB 1433, SB 1434, SB 1596, SB 1403, SB 667, SB 1059, SB 1567, SB 310, SB 311, SB 505, SB 1209, SB 1210, SB 1470, SB 264, SB 1029, SB 1358, SB 1364, SB 1569, SB 1376, SB 1228, SB 519, SB 1350, SB 462, SB 827, SB 1585, SB 1396, SB 1484, SB 1273, SB 1741, SB 927, SB 1227, SB 1229, SB 1353, SB 1464, SB 1709, SB 1729, SB 1733, SB 1744, SB 1772, SB 1841, SB 2188, SB 1147, SB 879, SB 1008, SB 1536, SB 2016, SB 1453, SB 1173, SB 1163, SB 996, SB 27, SB 568, SB 1370, SB 1321, SB 1101, SB 860, SB 993, SB 693, SB 1610, SB 1537, SB 1332, SB 1307, SB 963, SB 493, SB 922, SB 984, SB 619, SB 1098, SB 1122, SB 455, SB 522, SB 1057, SB 1239, SB 1254, SB 1255, SB 1259, SB 1341, SB 1664, SB 1877, SB 464, SB 1277, SB 32, SB 732, SB 660, SB 731, SB 921, SB 268, SB 1822, SB 1188, SB 1589, SB 397, SB 2230, SB 1058, SB 1036, SB 1267, SB 2112, SB 1930, SB 532, SB 1035, SB 2155, SB 508, SB 29, SB 292, SB 291, SB 901, SB 1333, SB 1436, SB 1494, SB 964, SB 779, SB 1378, SB 2312, SB 1719, SB 1386, SB 287, SB 2143, SB 1245, SB 261, SB 1247, SB 1948, SB 2406, SB 2407, SB 1882, SB 1197, SB 1814, SB 618, SB 38, SB 393, SB 2065, SB 1371, SB 1394, SB 1365, SB 2243, SB 2226, SB 2039, SB 1919, SB 1895, SB 1598, SB 1493, SB 1810, SB 1791, SB 1706, SB 1644, SB 1238, SB 783, SB 458, SB 22, SB 651, SB 897, SB 1809, SB 1080, SB 745, SB 826, SB 989, SB 1320, SB 1437, SB 2320, SB 2289, SB 1171, SB 664, SB 1637, SB 27, SB 29, SB 857, SB 879, SB 922, SB 1098, SB 1453, SB 1536, SB 1741, SB 2188, SB 2230, SB 406, SB 689, SJR 12, SR 358, SR 361, SR 362, SR 368, SJR 74, SJR 76, SB 2408, SB 2409, SB 2461, SB 2462, SB 2463, SB 2464, SB 2465, SB 2466, SB 2467, SB 2468, SB 2469, SB 2470, SB 2471, SB 2472, SB 2473, SB 2474, SB 2475, SB 2476, SB 2477, SB 2478, SB 2479, SB 2480, SB 2481, SB 2482, SB 2483, SB 2484, SB 2485, SB 2486, SB 2487, SB 2488, SB 2489, SB 2490, SB 2491, SB 2492, SB 2493, SB 2494, SB 2495, SB 2496, SB 2497, SB 2498, SB 2499, SB 2500, SB 2501, SB 2502, SB 2503, SB 2504, SB 2505, SB 2506, SB 2507, SB 2508, SB 2509, SB 2510, SB 2511, SB 2512, SB 2513, SB 2514, SB 2515, SB 2516, SB 2517, SB 2518, SB 2519, SB 2520, SB 2521, SB 2522, SB 2523, SB 2524, SB 2525, SB 2526, SB 2527, SB 2528, SB 2529, SB 2530, SB 2531, SB 2532, SB 2533, SB 2534, SB 2535, SB 2536, SB 2537, SB 2538, SB 2539, SB 2540, SB 2541, SB 2542, SB 2543, SB 2544, SB 2545, SB 2546, SB 2547, SB 2548, SB 2549, SB 2550, SB 2551, SB 2552, SB 2553, SB 2554, SB 2555, SB 2556, SB 2557, SB 2558, SB 2560, SB 2561, SB 2562, SB 2563, SB 2565, SB 2566, SB 2567, SB 2568, SB 2569, SB 2570, SB 2571, SB 2572, SB 2573, SB 2574, SB 2575, SB 2576, SB 2577, SB 2578, SB 2579, SB 2580, SB 2581, SB 2582, SB 2583, SB 2584, SB 2585, SB 2586, SB 2587, SB 2588, SB 2589, SB 2590, SB 2591, SB 2592, SB 2593, SB 2594, SB 2595, SB 2596, SB 2597, SB 2598, SB 2599, SB 2600, SB 2601, SB 2602, SB 2603, SB 2604, SB 2605, SB 2606, SB 2607, SB 2608, SB 2609, SB 2610, SB 2611, SB 2612, SB 2613, SB 2614, SB 2615, SB 2616, SB 2617, SB 2618, SB 2619, SB 2620, SB 2621, SB 2622, SB 2625, SB 2626, SB 2627, SB 2628, SB 2629, SB 2630, SB 2631, SB 2632, SB 2633, SB 2634, SB 2635, SB 2636, SB 2637, SB 2638, SB 2639, SB 2640, SB 2641, SB 2642, SB 2643, SB 2644, SB 2645, SB 2646, SB 2647, SB 2648, SB 2649, SB 2650, SB 2651, SB 2652, SB 2653, SB 2654, SB 2655, SB 2656, SB 2657, SB 2658, SB 2659, SB 2660, SB 2661, SB 2662, SB 2663, SB 2664, SB 2665, SB 2666, SB 2667, SB 2668, SB 2669, SB 2670, SB 2671, SB 2672, SB 2673, SB 2674, SB 2675, SB 2676, SB 2677, SB 2678, SB 2679, SB 2680, SB 2681, SB 2682, SB 2683, SB 2684, SB 2685, SB 2686, SB 2687, SB 2688, SB 2689, SB 2690, SB 2691, SB 2692, SB 2693, SB 2694, SB 2695, SB 2696, SB 2697, SB 2698, SB 2699, SB 2700, SB 2701, SB 2702, SB 2703, SB 2704, SB 2705, SB 2706, SB 2707, SB 2708, SB 2709, SB 2710, SB 2711, SB 2712, SB 2713, SB 2714, SB 2715, SB 2716, SB 2717, SB 2718, SB 2719, SB 2720, SB 2721, SB 2723, SB 2724, SB 2725, SB 2726, SB 2727, SB 2728, SB 2729, SB 2730, SB 2731, SB 2732, SB 2733, SB 2734, SB 2735, SB 2736, SB 2737, SB 2738, SB 2739, SB 2740, SB 2741, SB 2742, SB 2743, SB 2744, SB 2745, SB 2746, SB 2747, SB 2748, SB 2749, SB 2750, SB 2751, SB 2752, SB 2753, SB 2754, SB 2755, SB 2756, SB 2757, SB 2758, SB 2759, SB 2760, SB 2761, SB 2762, SB 2763, SB 2764, SB 2765, SB 2766, SB 2767, SB 2768, SB 2769, SB 2770, SB 2771, SB 2772, SB 2773, SB 2774, SB 2775, SB 2776, SB 2777, SB 2778, SB 2779, SB 2780, SB 2781, SB 2782, SB 2783, SB 2784, SB 2785, SB 2786, SB 2787, SB 2788, SB 2789, SB 2790, SB 2791, SB 2792, SB 2793, SB 2794, SB 2795, SB 2796, SB 2797, SB 2798, SB 2799, SB 2800, SB 2967, SB 3034, HJR 1, HJR 4, HB 9, HB 13, HB 22, HB 135, HB 143, HB 195, HB 908, HB 1392, SB 861, SB 1013, SJR 74, SJR 76, SB 2408, SB 2409, SB 2461, SB 2462, SB 2463, SB 2464, SB 2465, SB 2466, SB 2467, SB 2468, SB 2469, SB 2470, SB 2471, SB 2472, SB 2473, SB 2474, SB 2475, SB 2476, SB 2477, SB 2478, SB 2479, SB 2480, SB 2481, SB 2482, SB 2483, SB 2484, SB 2485, SB 2486, SB 2487, SB 2488, SB 2489, SB 2490, SB 2491, SB 2492, SB 2493, SB 2494, SB 2495, SB 2496, SB 2497, SB 2498, SB 2499, SB 2500, SB 2501, SB 2502, SB 2503, SB 2504, SB 2505, SB 2506, SB 2507, SB 2508, SB 2509, SB 2510, SB 2511, SB 2512, SB 2513, SB 2514, SB 2515, SB 2516, SB 2517, SB 2518, SB 2519, SB 2520, SB 2521, SB 2522, SB 2523, SB 2524, SB 2525, SB 2526, SB 2527, SB 2528, SB 2529, SB 2530, SB 2531, SB 2532, SB 2533, SB 2534, SB 2535, SB 2536, SB 2537, SB 2538, SB 2539, SB 2540, SB 2541, SB 2542, SB 2543, SB 2544, SB 2545, SB 2546, SB 2547, SB 2548, SB 2549, SB 2550, SB 2551, SB 2552, SB 2553, SB 2554, SB 2555, SB 2556, SB 2557, SB 2558, SB 2560, SB 2561, SB 2562, SB 2563, SB 2565, SB 2566, SB 2567, SB 2568, SB 2569, SB 2570, SB 2571, SB 2572, SB 2573, SB 2574, SB 2575, SB 2576, SB 2577, SB 2578, SB 2579, SB 2580, SB 2581, SB 2582, SB 2583, SB 2584, SB 2585, SB 2586, SB 2587, SB 2588, SB 2589, SB 2590, SB 2591, SB 2592, SB 2593, SB 2594, SB 2595, SB 2596, SB 2597, SB 2598, SB 2599, SB 2600, SB 2601, SB 2602, SB 2603, SB 2604, SB 2605, SB 2606, SB 2607, SB 2608, SB 2609, SB 2610, SB 2611, SB 2612, SB 2613, SB 2614, SB 2615, SB 2616, SB 2617, SB 2618, SB 2619, SB 2620, SB 2621, SB 2622, SB 2625, SB 2626, SB 2627, SB 2628, SB 2629, SB 2630, SB 2631, SB 2632, SB 2633, SB 2634, SB 2635, SB 2636, SB 2637, SB 2638, SB 2639, SB 2640, SB 2641, SB 2642, SB 2643, SB 2644, SB 2645, SB 2646, SB 2647, SB 2648, SB 2649, SB 2650, SB 2651, SB 2652, SB 2653, SB 2654, SB 2655, SB 2656, SB 2657, SB 2658, SB 2659, SB 2660, SB 2661, SB 2662, SB 2663, SB 2664, SB 2665, SB 2666, SB 2667, SB 2668, SB 2669, SB 2670, SB 2671, SB 2672, SB 2673, SB 2674, SB 2675, SB 2676, SB 2677, SB 2678, SB 2679, SB 2680, SB 2681, SB 2682, SB 2683, SB 2684, SB 2685, SB 2686, SB 2687, SB 2688, SB 2689, SB 2690, SB 2691, SB 2692, SB 2693, SB 2694, SB 2695, SB 2696, SB 2697, SB 2698, SB 2699, SB 2700, SB 2701, SB 2702, SB 2703, SB 2704, SB 2705, SB 2706, SB 2707, SB 2708, SB 2709, SB 2710, SB 2711, SB 2712, SB 2713, SB 2714, SB 2715, SB 2716, SB 2717, SB 2718, SB 2719, SB 2720, SB 2721, SB 2723, SB 2724, SB 2725, SB 2726, SB 2727, SB 2728, SB 2729, SB 2730, SB 2731, SB 2732, SB 2733, SB 2734, SB 2735, SB 2736, SB 2737, SB 2738, SB 2739, SB 2740, SB 2741, SB 2742, SB 2743, SB 2744, SB 2745, SB 2746, SB 2747, SB 2748, SB 2749, SB 2750, SB 2751, SB 2752, SB 2753, SB 2754, SB 2755, SB 2756, SB 2757, SB 2758, SB 2759, SB 2760, SB 2761, SB 2762, SB 2763, SB 2764, SB 2765, SB 2766, SB 2767, SB 2768, SB 2769, SB 2770, SB 2771, SB 2772, SB 2773, SB 2774, SB 2775, SB 2776, SB 2777, SB 2778, SB 2779, SB 2780, SB 2781, SB 2782, SB 2783, SB 2784, SB 2785, SB 2786, SB 2787, SB 2788, SB 2789, SB 2790, SB 2791, SB 2792, SB 2793, SB 2794, SB 2795, SB 2796, SB 2797, SB 2798, SB 2799, SB 2800, SB 2967, SB 3034, HJR 1, HJR 4, HB 9, HB 13, HB 22, HB 135, HB 143, HB 195, HB 908, HB 1392, SB 861, SB 1013
Summary: This meeting of the committee included comprehensive discussions about several bills, most notably SB24 and SB2043. The committee received public testimony both supporting and opposing SB24, illustrating the contentious nature of the proposed legislation. Many witnesses expressed their concerns about how the bill might impact marginalized communities, highlighting the need for a nuanced approach to the issues being addressed. The chair facilitated a respectful dialogue, reminding participants to focus on the facts rather than personal anecdotes.