Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:04.959> left last session's one-time Aid Bill left last session's one-time Aid Bill
• c> a<00:05:25.720> challenge this bill this bill resolves a challenge this bill this bill
• The witness responded: The way the bill is drafted, it's for communities that have their PSA mostly outside
• bill is drafted uh question the way the bill is drafted uh it's<00:15:26.199> for<00:15:26.680
• Representative Huitt continued: The way the bill is drafted, it's for communities that have their PSA

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 337, a bill addressing long-term funding for rural and Greater Minnesota EMS and ambulance services. The author offered the A2 amendment, moved to divide it, and the committee adopted lines 1.2 to 1.19 of the amendment. The bill, as amended, was described as creating a policy framework for identifying ambulance services with operating deficits, requiring financial audits, and setting up a future grant program, with the author emphasizing that the proposal was still being developed and was intended to be a long-term solution rather than a short-term fix. Testimony was largely supportive. Eric Simonson of the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities said the bill builds on last session’s one-time aid and would target grant dollars using state data, clarify eligible uses, allow audits, address uncompensated care and readiness costs, and require reporting back to the legislature. Mike Warner of the Red Wing Fire Department said his city’s ambulance service operates with a heavy government-funded payer mix and a persistent operating shortfall. Tim Meyer of Sanford Ambulance said low-volume rural services face widening revenue gaps, staffing pressures, and the loss of the volunteer model. Nathan Zacharias of the Association of Minnesota Counties and Kevin Lee of North Memorial Health also supported the bill, citing rising costs, staffing shortages, stagnant reimbursement, and the need for a sustainable statewide funding model. Members raised concerns about how the bill would work in practice, especially around communities that straddle metro and non-metro boundaries and around local control over grant dollars. Representative Pel asked how the eligibility language would apply to places like Northfield and New Prague; the author and a testifier said eligibility would depend on whether a service area is mostly outside the metro area, but acknowledged more review was needed. Representative Huitt argued the bill should give more local control and should address EMS as a statewide issue, not only a Greater Minnesota issue. Representative Ryer asked whether the bill would eventually include revenue recapture or another funding source, and the author said the proposal was still at an early stage and all options were being considered. The committee laid HF 337, as amended, over for possible inclusion in the omnibus bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Report your bill, Senate Bill 904, out as they do pass.
• Your bill out as a due pass. Senate Bill 2178. That is two bills where the bill.
• So this particular bill, Senate Bill 1651, is generally the cleanup bill for the Oklahoma.
• Report your bill. Senate Bill 1749 out as a due pass. That's it, the list Senate Bill 65.
• Bill 1562.

Bills: SB1983, SB444, SB1503, SB1561, SB592, SB1501, SB1946, SB1567, SB1833, SB2026, SB904, SB2178, SB1651, SB1558, SB1565, SB1553, SB1257, SB65, SB1749, SB1242, SB1642, SB640, SB667, SB1436, SB1484, SB1562, SB1794, SB1644, SB1533, SB933, SB1555

Keywords: SB1983, foster care, resource family partner, resource family partners, Department of Human Services, DHS, child welfare, foster homes, foster children, placement data, data sharing, de-identified data, aggregated data, sibling groups, placement disruptions, foster parent recruitment, foster parent retention, private child-placing agency, Title 10A, Oklahoma

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 272 would align the second bill, House Bill 2625, with the previous bill, House Bill 2624,
• The Senate on House Bill 272. We'll open public testimony on House Bill 272.
• for the bill.
• Bill is left pending at this time. Bill is left pending at this time.
• The committee substitute simply makes the bill a Legislative Council draft and makes a clarifying tweak

Bills: HB46, HB272

Keywords: local government spending cap, expenditure limit, political subdivision, property tax, ad valorem tax, budget cap, taxpayer protection, spending restraint, inflation adjustment, population growth, voter approval, supermajority vote, county budget, municipal budget, school district finance, junior college district, hospital district, special district, attorney general enforcement, local fiscal limits

Summary: The Senate Committee on State Affairs heard several House bills and took no final votes, leaving each bill pending after testimony. HB 272 would align venue and evidentiary rules for fraudulent use or possession of credit/debit card information with existing credit card abuse law; the sponsor said it would improve prosecutions, and the Texas Financial Crimes Intelligence Center supported it. HB 1661 would increase penalties for certain election-related offenses, including failure to distribute election supplies and early release of election results; no substantive opposition was heard. HB 551 would protect the residential addresses of people who receive campaign expenditures on public Texas Ethics Commission reports, similar to donor privacy protections, and a witness from Texas Eagle Forum later indicated support for the privacy change. The committee also heard HB 2820, which would raise the amount charitable bingo organizations may keep in operating capital from $50,000 to $100,000. The sponsor and a Texans for Charitable Bingo representative said inflation and operating costs have made the current cap too low and that the bill would help charities maintain stable operations without expanding gaming. HB 3181 would impose stronger consequences for repeated denial of court-ordered child possession and access, including limiting probation and requiring attorney’s fees after multiple contempt findings; a family court judge and a parent testified in support, while another witness argued the bill should be paired with stronger criminal enforcement and that parents already face high costs. HB 4157 would update Texas law for commercial spaceflight by recognizing liability waivers and preserving workers’ compensation rights; no one testified against it. The committee also heard HB 4145, which would let health care providers satisfy a timely billing requirement by sending bills to a patient’s legal representative in a personal injury case, closing what supporters described as a loophole in letter-of-protection situations. Finally, HB 46, relating to the Texas Compassionate Use Program, drew the most extensive discussion: supporters said it should expand access for legitimate medical cannabis patients and add more delivery methods and conditions, while opponents warned against broader marijuana expansion and questioned adding chronic pain and other conditions. The sponsor said he still supports the program and wants a balanced, regulated expansion, but noted the bill is still being worked on. All bills were left pending at the close of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, what this means to Senate Bill 9 is that this bill, this bill, Now, what this means to Senate Bill
• Would your bill in Senate Bill 7 kind of then give us...
• Committee Substitute Senate Bill 15 is a combination of Senate Bill 15.
• Committee Substitute Senate Bill 15 is a combination of Senate Bill 15 as filed in Senate Bill 2611 from
• Newly added to this bill are disabled persons, which were not in the draft during the regular session

Summary: The Senate convened with an invocation and then handled several procedural matters, including a failed motion to excuse Senator Johnson’s absence after a roll-call vote. The chamber also postponed the reading and referral of bills until later in the calendar and adopted motions allowing the Education K-16 Committee to meet while the Senate was in session. The Senate then recessed until 4:00 p.m. Wednesday, August 6. The main floor action centered on Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 9, which lowers the voter-approval tax rate for certain cities and counties from 3.5% to 2.5% for maintenance and operations. Senator Bettencourt argued the bill would slow local property tax growth and align city and county limits more closely with school district limits, while Senators Hinojosa and Menendez raised concerns about reduced local revenue, public safety funding, and the short time for cities to assess the impact. The Senate suspended the regular order, passed the bill to engrossment, suspended the constitutional three-day rule, and finally passed SB 9, with a clarification later entered that the final passage vote was 18-3. The Senate also took up Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 7, the Texas Women’s Privacy Act, which sets state policy for the use of certain spaces and facilities according to biological sex and creates enforcement mechanisms for state agencies and political subdivisions. Supporters said the bill was needed to protect women and children in restrooms, locker rooms, shelters, prisons, and schools, while opponents questioned the scope, enforcement, civil penalties, and possible conflicts with federal law and local control. After extensive questioning, the chamber adopted a clarifying amendment, suspended the three-day rule, and finally passed SB 7 by a vote of 19-2. Finally, the Senate passed Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 15, which addresses deed fraud and real property theft by tightening recording requirements for certain property documents and creating new criminal offenses for real property theft and fraud. Senator Hinojosa explained that the bill combined civil and criminal provisions, added photo ID requirements for in-person filings, and included restitution and enhanced penalties for certain victims and properties; a floor amendment made cleanup changes, removed a training mandate, and clarified that electronic and mail filings were not affected. The Senate adopted the amendment, suspended the three-day rule, and passed SB 15 unanimously, 21-0.

Transcript Highlights:

• He said this was never a bill. It is an introduced bill.
• and other bills.
• This was signed before all these bills were drafted, so we don't know what was coming to us when this
• agreement was drafted before these bills were finished.
• together, and this bill will be a functioning bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• first issue: the Department of State Hospitals, budget overview, budget change proposals, and trailer bill
• an overview of the 2025-26 state hospital budget, a summary of budget change proposals and trailer bill
• And so we also released today our draft of what that integrated plan...
• So we also released today our draft of what that integrated plan is going to look like, and that'll be
• for the work that their mental health workers are. and we know. ...not bill for the work that their

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Of course, comments from interested persons and then developing any recommendations or bill drafts necessary
• We can discuss them now, and do we want to possibly have a bill draft prepared for the main advisory
• drafts for the subcommittee to consider and recommend bill drafts to the full committee.
• First of all, before I ask for a bill draft, I'm going to ask Legislative Council to put together a bill
• But I just, before we asked for a bill draft, I would.

Summary: The subcommittee of the Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee met to begin its study of whether the content of the real estate tax statement should be revised to improve transparency. Legislative Council staff reviewed the study directive from HB 1176 and the statutory requirements for tax statements, including required line items such as true and full value, mill levy, legislative tax relief, primary residence credit, legacy fund share, discounts for early payment, and special assessments. The Tax Department then explained how the current uniform statewide statement is prescribed and approved, and noted that changes are typically driven by statute and implemented collaboratively with counties and vendors. County officials from NDACO, including auditors from McKenzie and Richland counties, described the full annual property tax timeline from budgeting through mailing final statements. They explained how counties gather budgets, calculate levies, verify taxable values, handle centrally assessed property, and prepare required notices and statements. They also said public attendance at budget hearings is generally very low, though the notices and statements generate some calls, mostly about whether attendance is required or why taxes are changing. Several members questioned the usefulness of the legislative tax relief line and the complexity of the 5% discount calculation, and county officials said the current process can be confusing and depends on manual data entry and coordination among counties, vendors, and taxing districts. The committee also discussed assessment frequency, valuation equalization, the 3% cap, and whether more frequent reassessment would reduce large jumps in taxable value. County officials said they try to use rotating reassessments and sales-ratio reviews to keep values within statutory tolerance, but staffing, training, and local market changes make the work difficult. NDACO staff estimated, based on a small county survey, that tax statement preparation and mailing costs average about 74 cents per statement, with outsourcing generally cheaper than in-house printing, and said HB 1176 added some mailing and administrative costs even if the tax statement itself did not change dramatically. Software vendors from CPT and Tyler then began presentations showing how their systems handle budgeting, valuation notices, tax statement generation, primary residence credit processing, and levy worksheets, emphasizing that many of the required calculations and reports are still manually entered or verified by county staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• So did you need any discussion within this draft that nailed that down?
• So the ethics bill, just for everybody's information, did pass.
• So the ethics bill, just for everybody's information, did pass.
• But the House wanted to use our bill to do stuff that wasn't part of the agreed-on bill, and they wanted
• about the bill on that, which doesn't make any sense.

Summary: The committee approved the minutes as corrected and noted there were no employment disclosure forms. It then discussed a draft advisory opinion on legislative stickers, pens, business cards, and similar items. Members agreed the opinion should identify historically provided items as presumptively within normal legislative conduct, but add clearer language that such items still cannot be used in a campaign-related way or otherwise conflict with ethics rules on use of public resources. Staff said Legislative Support Services and administration would be the main points of review for questionable requests, and the draft would be revised for board review. The committee also reviewed a second advisory opinion request about legislative and caucus staff interacting with caucus social media posts. The discussion focused on whether staff may like or engage with posts about legislation or policy positions. Members generally agreed that liking or otherwise engaging with caucus posts could be viewed as support and could create ethics problems, especially because social media content remains online and could later be tied to legislation. The draft was to be revised to draw clearer lines for compliance. Members then discussed a long-running project to review and either retain or retire older advisory opinions, and agreed to continue and complete that review process. They also discussed the recently passed ethics bill and supported issuing an ethics alert summarizing major changes, including concerns about a House amendment affecting social media and website references during the election year activity period. Finally, the committee approved spending about $19,171 to digitize archived case files into searchable format, with members expressing support for moving away from paper records. After public business ended, the committee adjourned the public session and planned to reconvene in executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• stuff representative Pearson has a bill stuff representative Pearson has a bill in<00:03:43.640>
• So that's the consolidation bill.
• c> consolidation Bill we have a bill consolidation Bill we have a bill uh<00:14:41.560> from<00
• changes and then there's a fourth bill changes and then there's a fourth bill that<00:15:02.959>
• are all early bills.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held an orientation for new and returning members of the House committee on agencies and administration, with introductions from members and staff. Chair Carol Maguire outlined her expectations for hearings: keep questions focused on the bill, be respectful to witnesses, and use the committee’s orientation opportunities to learn about the jail staff, retirement system, and Office of Professional Licensure. Members also discussed related assignments on other bodies, including the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules and the Joint Committee on Employee Classification, and noted that some members already serve on those panels. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the State Building Code and the committee’s upcoming workload. Members explained how the state code is intended to provide a common baseline while allowing limited local options, and why municipalities must formally adopt and publish any local amendments. They reviewed several anticipated bills: a consolidation bill to gather building-code enforcement materials in one place, a bill to update the state energy code, a bill to restrict municipal adoption of building-code changes, and a bill to update the electrical code. Members also discussed how building codes apply to older homes and commercial buildings, and why code updates are important for safety and clarity. The chair said the committee had 36 bills currently scheduled, including many early bills that must move by March 6 because they will be heard by two committees. She said the committee would use subcommittees for harder bills, with three subcommittees this year: pensions, licensing, and likely state building code. She also outlined the hearing schedule, including lighter bills on February 12 and the expectation of executive sessions later in the month. No votes were taken during the orientation, but members were told that public hearings do not require a quorum and that hard copies of bills would be distributed by committee staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there anyone else on this bill who wish to testify? For the bill or with concern?
• This bill helps those people out. This bill helps those people out.
• , but this bill as it's drafted<00:05:14.160> is<00:05:14.280> not<00:05:14.440> a
• cut under this bill. cut under this bill.
• I just don't think this bill does that. It is a very expensive bill.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• 'Where's the bill?
• Where's the bill?'
• And then the date the bill is drafted should tie into whether it's a 30 or 60 day session because there
• Some may be a language change that was wrong in the bill because it came drafted that way.
• Is there a way to write a bill to where, I guess there's a way to write a bill for anything we want.

Transcript Highlights:

• , that the only time that I asked for next week would be to review the finalized draft of that bill to
• Yeah, we've got the two bills. Yeah, we've got the two bills to add together from last time, too.
• Yep, I would support hoghousing the bill, Mr. Chairman, and just have the study be the bill.
• Didn't we have a bill last session?
• Yeah, it's a bill. We have to vote.

Bills: SB2399

Keywords: mental health, psychiatric treatment, reimbursement, medical assistance, legislative report, 908, all

Summary: The Senate Appropriations HR Division met to work through amendments and budget items in House Bill 2012/HB 1004, focusing first on long-term care, disability services, and behavioral health. Members discussed competing approaches to a four-plex for medically complex individuals, a value-based care payment withhold for nursing facilities, accreditation requirements for providers, a study of developmental disability services, and funding for Family Voices and Ann Carlson-related services. Several amendments were accepted or set aside after discussion, including a study amendment for disability services and a Family Voices grant amendment that was adjusted to remove “one-time” language so it could continue as an ongoing grant. The committee also agreed to keep or defer some items for conference committee, including the youth crisis stabilization pilot and other long-term care proposals. A major discussion centered on the state hospital project. Members debated whether the $330 million project should remain in the DHS budget or be moved to the OMB budget for construction management. After discussion of costs, alternates, and the role of a steering committee and BND loan language, the committee agreed to remove the state hospital funding and related loan language from the DHS budget while leaving the steering committee language in place. The committee also considered a proposed Altru grant for additional beds and settled on a smaller planning-focused approach, with a $1 million grant and a line of credit concept to be refined later. The committee then turned to behavioral health items, including QRTP funding, nursing home behavioral health training, and a youth crisis stabilization pilot. Members generally supported keeping the QRTP funding level, but were divided on the nursing home behavioral health training and the crisis stabilization pilot, with some preferring to leave those issues for conference committee. The division also reviewed the HHS block grant and underfunding structure, with Donna Ackland explaining salary, vacancy, and flexibility calculations; the committee discussed adjusting the underfund and revenue assumptions but did not finalize every number before moving on. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 1577 on wastewater treatment grants. Senator Davison moved to hoghouse the bill into a study-focused version using the proposed amendment language, and the motion passed. The committee then moved HB 1577 as amended with a do pass recommendation; the roll call passed with Senators Cleary, Davison, Dever, and Mathern voting yes, and Senator Magrum not recorded as voting. The meeting adjourned with plans to return later in the day to continue budget work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next bill: House Bill 345, House Draft 1, relating to the state shrimp.
• <00:49:57.040> draft<00:49:57.319> 1 bill House Bill 345 house draft 1 bill House Bill
• Next bill: House Bill 1069, House Draft 1, relating to education.
• Final bill: House Bill 1343, House Draft 1. House Bill 1343, House Draft 1, relating to education.
• Bill 118, House Draft 1.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs heard several measures, beginning with HB 194, which would designate May 22 as Maritime Day. Testimony from labor, health, and community groups was in support, and the committee later recommended passage of the bill as is, with several members voting yes and some reserving or being excused. HB 458 would designate April 27 as Brother Joseph Dutton Day; the Department of Accounting and General Services, the Joseph Dutton Guild, and a descendant all supported it, and the committee recommended passage with technical amendments. HB 957 would designate the first Friday in May as Lā‘au Day; support came from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Hawaii Farm Bureau, and many individuals, and the committee recommended passage as is. HB 345 would establish the ʻōpae ula as the state shrimp to promote awareness and protection of anchialine ecosystems; DLNR, Kuaʻāina Ulu ʻAu, and other supporters testified, and the committee recommended passage with technical amendments. The committee also heard HB 901, which would allow public charter schools to appeal directly to the Board of Education on certain operational, governance, or funding matters. The Attorney General and the Public Charter School Commission offered technical comments and suggested amendments, while the commission described its current monitoring and renewal process and said it works closely with schools over the life of a charter contract. Members raised concerns about whether the bill would shift too much work to the Board of Education, and one member voted no when the committee later moved the bill with the Attorney General’s amendments. HB 1066 would add Head Start-related ex officio members to the Early Learning Board; the Early Learning Board and the Executive Office on Early Learning supported it, explaining the changes were needed to align with the federal Head Start Act, and the committee moved it forward without opposition. HB 1069 would add voting members from the Department of Education and Board of Education to the School Facilities Authority Board. DOE and the School Facilities Authority supported the change as a way to strengthen collaboration, though questions from members focused on the current communication process between the agencies. HB 1343 would require the Board of Education to adopt a policy banning student phone and related device use during school hours; the committee noted written testimony in support and then moved to decision-making. At the end of the meeting, the committee adopted recommendations to pass HB 194, HB 458 with technical amendments, HB 957, HB 345 with technical amendments, HB 901 with amendments, HB 1066, HB 1069, and HB 1343.

Transcript Highlights:

• goes through 13 14 is the other bill goes through 13 14 is the other bill which<01:12:17.600>
• that that bill." that that bill."
• Do you want to bring forward that draft as a potential non-germanate amendment to a Senate bill?
• to um to a Senate bill? to um to a Senate bill?
• It also bill right on line six?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Legislative Oversight Committee met to review statewide education improvement and assessment issues under RSA 193-C:8-a, with the chair focusing on curriculum frameworks, academic standards, and resource elements tied to the state’s adequate education statutes. The chair walked through the statutory relationship between minimum standards for public school approval, academic standards, and local control of curriculum, noting that New Hampshire law requires curriculum frameworks to guide what students should know and be able to do while leaving districts flexibility in instruction. He also raised concerns that some subject areas appear to have current frameworks or standards while others do not, and suggested the committee may need to consider an amendment creating a curriculum frameworks and academic standards coordinator at the Department of Education. Nate Green, director of the Division of Education Analytics and Resources, explained that the terms “academic standards” and “curriculum frameworks” have evolved over time and are often used interchangeably, but can mean different things depending on the subject area. He said the state’s more prescriptive standards largely developed after No Child Left Behind, especially in math, ELA, and science, while older or less-tested subjects such as arts, physical education, and health often retained looser framework-style documents. Green outlined one possible approach of standardizing terminology, but also said New Hampshire could instead define curriculum frameworks separately as a combination of standards, curriculum, and instructional approaches. He emphasized that state standards must support statewide consistency and assessment, while local districts retain control over how they teach. Committee members discussed how these distinctions affect different grade levels and subjects, using examples from math and science to show that minimum standards are broad while academic standards are more specific and grade-level based. Green described how science standards are organized by physical science, life science, and earth/space science across grade bands, while math standards are more directly tied to individual grades. No votes were taken and no formal action was reported during this portion of the meeting; the discussion remained informational and exploratory as members considered whether statutory language or departmental organization should be updated.

Transcript Highlights:

• I didn't have time to actually give you a bill draft.
• I didn't have time to actually give you a bill draft.
• These two drafts were drafted by Mr. Richards for me. These two drafts were drafted by Mr.
• So let's look at first the bill draft 2000. And my goal with this one is to try to...
• And then the next bill that I'm proposing, Bill 1000, or draft 1000, is basically asking the Department

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the prior minutes and opening remarks from NDSU President David Stewart, who emphasized NDSU’s land-grant mission of statewide service through teaching, research, and extension. He highlighted the university’s role in agriculture, water, soil health, and community outreach, and pointed to examples of research commercialization such as Lilac Agriculture’s work on nitrogen-fixing microbes for crops. He also said he is still early in his tenure and intends to spend time listening and learning across the state. The committee then received a detailed presentation on a state irrigation and drainage study from Tom Bodine on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring. The study estimated that North Dakota could develop about 1.3 million additional irrigated acres, with major potential in counties such as McLean, Williams, Sargent, Burleigh, Mountrail, McKenzie, McIntosh, Dunn, and Bottineau. Testimony stressed the economic benefits of irrigation for crop yields, value-added processing, dairy, and potato production, while members also discussed water availability, aquifers, downstream water use, and the need for more flexible permitting. The drainage portion of the study found significant economic benefits from legal drains, and staff explained that the impacts were calculated through increased productivity and related input purchases. Greg Lardy then gave NDSU’s required agriculture update, saying agriculture accounts for more than $41 billion in annual economic activity, one in five jobs, and about 25 percent of state GDP. He reviewed the role of SBAR, the statewide research-extension network, new crop varieties, virtual fencing, AI and weather-network tools, and Extension’s county partnerships and youth programs. He also outlined NDSU’s priorities for the next session: restoring proposed budget cuts, increasing operating support, and addressing deferred maintenance. Members asked about storage shed construction, NDSU’s relationship with Grand Farm, and whether NDSU could help with water-related research tied to drainage and aquifers. The committee also heard from the North Dakota Water Resources Research Institute and a professor on water and data centers, who described graduate fellowships, a water workforce certificate program, and research on data center cooling, water use, and “Legendary Harvest” concepts that would reuse waste heat for greenhouse or aquaculture production. Questions focused on whether the cooling systems were closed-loop, who would own any related production facilities, and whether the project was still only a feasibility study. Finally, North Dakota AgTech described its NSF-funded “engine” project, saying it has brought millions in federal investment to the state, supported startups and on-farm trials, and is focused on commercialization, workforce development, and helping producers lower input costs and improve profitability.

Transcript Highlights:

• Pleased to co-sponsor the bill.
• While this bill is contingent on funding, this House saw an earlier bill by Assemblymember Soria that
• that could help with this bill.
• could help with this bill.
• Move the bill. Second. A motion and second. Roll. File number one. Move the bill. Second.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee heard several bills, with SB 811 pulled by the author and deferred to a later hearing. The committee first took up SB 501 by Senator Allen, which would expand California’s battery extended producer responsibility program to include medium-format batteries such as those used in e-bikes, scooters, lawn equipment, and portable power systems. Supporters from local governments, stewardship organizations, and recycling groups said the bill would reduce fire risks, worker hazards, and disposal costs; opposition was limited, with some industry groups seeking clarification or expressing neutrality after amendments. The bill was moved out of committee on a do-pass vote, with one no vote recorded from Assemblymember Ellis and later additional ayes added after quorum was established. The committee then heard SB 1125 by Senator Menjivar, which would create a statewide low-income drinking water rate assistance program administered by the State Water Resources Control Board, contingent on funding. The author and supporters argued that many Californians face water debt and that public water systems lack a statewide affordability program because of Proposition 218 constraints. Water agencies, environmental justice groups, and local governments testified in strong support, and there was no opposition. The bill passed the committee on a do-pass vote, again with one no vote from Assemblymember Ellis and later additional ayes after quorum. SB 1259 by Senator Blakespear, as amended, would require petroleum refineries to provide advance closure, cleanup, and cost information to the state to improve planning for refinery transitions and site remediation. Supporters, including the City of Benicia and environmental groups, said communities need transparency and early planning to avoid leaving local governments and workers with cleanup and redevelopment uncertainty. Opponents, including the Western States Petroleum Association, the State Building and Construction Trades Council, and business groups, argued the bill was burdensome, duplicative of existing regulation, and could send the wrong signal to remaining refineries. After extensive discussion, the committee approved SB 1259 on a do-pass-as-amended vote to the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee. The consent calendar, including SB 1253 and SJR 13, also passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• While this bill is contingent on funding, this House saw an earlier bill by Assemblymember Soria that
• And that is really all that the bill does.
• Unfortunately, this bill takes us backwards and proposes to plan our demise. This bill is onerous.
• Which was a previous version of the bill.
• Move the bill. Second. A motion and second. Roll. Item one. Move the bill. Second.

Summary: The Assembly Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials Committee heard three main bills after initially lacking a quorum and deferring the consent calendar. SB 501 by Senator Allen would expand California’s battery extended producer responsibility program to include medium-format batteries, such as those used in e-bikes, lawn equipment, and portable power systems. Supporters from local governments, recycling groups, environmental organizations, and battery stewardship interests said the bill would reduce fire risks, improve collection and recycling, and close a gap in existing law. One industry witness sought clarification about off-highway vehicles and a battery association requested guardrails for mixed battery formats; the California Retailers Association moved from opposition to neutral after discussions with the author. SB 1125 by Senator Menjivar would create a statewide, state-funded low-income drinking water rate assistance program administered by the State Water Resources Control Board, contingent on funding. The author and supporters said many Californians face water debt and that the bill would help address affordability while working around Proposition 218 limits on local ratepayer-funded assistance. Water districts, local governments, environmental justice groups, and conservation organizations testified in support, and there was no opposition. SB 1259 by Senator Blakespear, as amended, would require refineries to provide advance information on closure, cleanup costs, and timelines to help communities plan for refinery transitions and remediation. Supporters, including the City of Benicia, environmental justice groups, and advocacy organizations, argued that communities need transparency before closures occur and that other energy sectors already provide similar planning information. Opponents from labor, petroleum, and business groups argued the bill was unnecessary, burdensome, and could discourage refinery investment or signal premature decline of the industry. After extensive debate, the committee voted to pass SB 1259 as amended to the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee, and also approved SB 501 and SB 1125; the consent calendar items SB 1253 and SJR 13 were adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so Senator Biteman is currently presenting bills in another committee and Senator Salazar is chairing
• currently presenting bills um in another currently presenting bills um in another committee<00:01:43.360
• Madam Chairman, I move for adoption of Senate Rule 159 as drafted, and I'll offer an amendment. >> Madam
• Madam Chairman, I move for adoption of Senate Rule 159 as drafted, and I'll offer an amendment. >> Is
• Madam Chairman, I move for adoption of Senate Rule 159 as drafted, and I'll offer an amendment. >> Is

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The Senate Rules Committee met on February 13 to continue work on proposed Senate Rule 15-9, a rule prohibiting campaign contributions. Members discussed two parts of the rule: one barring any solicitation, offer, delivery, or acceptance of campaign contributions in areas under the control of the President of the Senate at any time, and another barring senators from knowingly soliciting or accepting contributions by affirmative act during regular or special session. Senator Rothfuss suggested clarifying the session-related language by adding the word “legislative” before “campaign” in paragraph B, while leaving paragraph A broad. The chair explained the distinction between the two provisions and opened the meeting for public comment, but none was offered. Senator Rothfuss moved to adopt the rule and offered the amendment; Senator Guru seconded it. The amendment passed unanimously, and the committee then voted to adopt the rule as amended, with Senators Guru and Rothfuss voting aye and the chair announcing the vote passed before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• That bill established a key framework, With some changes to it in 2021.
• received in response to the first draft.
• We'll look forward to reviewing the updated draft language once that's available.
• So I really want to ask LAO to provide an initial draft of some trailer bill language that really seeks
• And so I asked I asked LAO to work with us to help draft some trailer bill language, asking you to provide

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held an informational hearing on child welfare, foster care, child support, and related prevention efforts. The chair opened by emphasizing mandated reporting reform, foster care system improvements, and community-based prevention, and noted that no votes would be taken. Public testimony focused first on mandated reporting, where a lived-experience advocate and several organizations argued that the current system overreports families, especially Black, Native, and Latino families, causes trauma, and should be reformed through standardized training, clearer thresholds, and stronger community supports rather than more hotline referrals. Casey Family Programs cited data showing nearly 90% of reports are unsubstantiated, while CDSS said it is already forming a Mandated Reporting Advisory Committee, updating training, and exploring community pathways and possible changes to the list of mandated reporters. CWDA and SEIU supported training and alternative response concepts but stressed child safety, county capacity, funding, and the need for careful implementation and accountability. The committee then discussed a proposal to create a foster care multi-agency office within the California Health and Human Services Agency, led by a chief foster youth advocate with authority to coordinate across departments. Advocates said foster youth often need services from education, health, housing, and behavioral health systems that do not coordinate well, and argued that a central office with real authority could improve placement stability and access to services. CDSS responded that existing structures already provide coordination, including AB 2083 interagency teams, the Child Welfare Council, complex care steering committees, and the foster care ombudsperson, but said it was open to technical assistance. Members raised concerns about whether the new office would have enough authority and funding to avoid becoming another layer of bureaucracy, and the chair emphasized the need for real “teeth” and better interagency action. The final major topic was the continuation and expansion of Promise Neighborhoods. A community leader described strong early results from the state-funded neighborhoods, including improved kindergarten readiness, reduced chronic absenteeism, higher graduation rates, food access, housing supports, and mental health services, but warned that current funding sunsets in June 2025 and that a fiscal cliff could jeopardize staff and services. CDSS said the four funded neighborhoods have reported positive outcomes and valuable flexibility, but also noted challenges with one-time funding, student mental health, and long-term planning. Assemblymember Mia Bonta urged continued investment, saying the place-based model is difficult to rebuild once lost, and the chair asked LAO to help identify the minimum funding needed to preserve the existing infrastructure while evaluation results are still pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• That concludes a presentation of the bill. Will there be questions on the bill?
• bill number is.
• That concludes the explanation of the bill. Will there be questions on the bill?
• Vice Chair Gise votes aye on her bill. Vice Chair Gise votes aye on her bill.
• Those are all the House bills. We'll be back for Senate bills.

Keywords: 914, all