Bills: HB1952, HB1951, HB1929, HB2497, HB2208, HB2572, HB1953, HB2551, HB2549, HB1737, HB1628, HB1769, HB2493, HB2264, HB1997, HB2168, HB2427, HB1805, HB2180, HB2184, HB2219, HB2469, HB2233, HB2519, HB2141, HB1904, HB2201, HB2410, HB2007, HB2385, HB2444, HB2349, HB2235, HB1872, HB2416, HB2291, HB2292, HB2263, HB2359, HB2455, HB1509, HB1514, HB1515, HB1648, HB2164, HB2323, HB1825, HB2172, HB1888, HB2005, HB2387, HB2358, HB2119, HB2276, HB2472, HB1714, HB2325, HB1541, HB1960, HB2140, HB2315, HB2367, HB2388, HB1696, HB2333, HB2138, HB2332, HB2283, HB2059, HB2057, HB2589, HB2417, HB2337, HB1588, HB2217, HB2020, HB1915, HB1742, HB2026, HB1965, HB1546, HB2360, HB1563, HB1749, HB2614, HB1511, HB1753, HB1849, HB1641, HB2161, HB2194, HB1721, HB2284, HB2188, HB1897, HB1880, HB1573, HB1876, HB20, HB2137

Keywords: HB1952, Hawaii agriculture, University of Hawaii, CTAHR, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resilience, Kauai, agricultural research station, extension station, capital improvements, general obligation bonds, GO bonds, appropriation, ADA compliance, Americans with Disabilities Act, certified kitchen, greenhouse, laboratory, field research, cesspool decommissioning, invasive species

Bills: HB2139, HB1892, HB1893, HB1890, HB2335, HB2468, HB2091, HB2092, HB1878, HB2297, HB2127, HB1785, HB2345, HB2344, HB1780, HB1891, HB2398, HB1764, HB2564, HB1783, HB2567, HB1934, HB1778, HB1781, HB2621, HB2019, HB1803, HB2454, HB1811, HB1943, HB1589, HB1607, HB1851, HB2490, HB2546, HB2568, HB1972, HB2391, HB2575, HB1896, HB2399, HB2004, HB1894, HB2397, HB2498, HB2560, HB2310, HB2214, HB2167, HB2197, HB2116, HB1879, HB1596, HB2096, HB2298, HB2343, HB2566, HB1518, HB2044, HB2336, HB1603, HB1718, HB1740, HB1616, HB2171, HB2022, HB2347, HB1882, HB1708, HB2086, HB2154, HB2027, HB2179, HB1620, HB1913, HB2159, HB1597, HB2121, HB1864, HB2305, HB2576, HB1713, HB1729, HB1756, HB2122, HB2559, HB1743, HB1733, HB1868, HB1723, HB1711, HB1812, HB2515, HB1724, HB1604, HB2270, HB1722, HB1727, HB1920, HB1593

Keywords: invasive species, Queensland longhorn beetle, agriculture, environmental impact, University of Hawaii, Board of Education, Hawaii public schools, teacher representative, nonvoting member, bargaining unit 5, HSTA, teachers union, education governance, school board, executive session, collective bargaining, public school teacher, policy-making body, student representative, military representative

Transcript Highlights:

• Um I too surveyed my district.
• Um I too surveyed my district.
• Um I too surveyed<01:28:46.880> my<01:28:47.040> district.
• Uh this is what surveyed my district.
• For every question out to my district.

Bills: HB2117, HB2155, HB1832, HB1601, HB2297, HB2397, HB1893, HB2533, HB1890, HB2004, HB1810, HB2323, HB1691, HB1671, HB2619, HB1481, HB2314, HB2319, HB2214, HB2488, HB2009, HB2007, HB1964, HB2218, HB1535, HB1977, HB2054, HB2046, HB146, HB2094, HB2181, HB2515, HB2444, HB2385, HB1724, HB1733, HB2416, HB2001, HB1603, HB1753, HB2140, HB1962, HB1963, HB2096, HB1959, HB1960, HB2293, HB2288, HB1752, HB1573, HB469, HB2091, HB1851, HB1688, HB1696, HB2417, HB2375, HB2333, HB2152, HB1881, HB2395, HB1721, HB1921, HB1730, HB1697, HB1824, HB2282, HB2078, HB2321, HB2279, HB1522, HB2097, HB2433, HB2106, HB2274, HB2452, HB1764, HB2438, HB1860, HB2604, HB2118, HB2017, HB2216, HB1934, HB2454, HB2427, HB2207, HB1840, HB1644, HB1645, HB1946, HB1648, HB2324, HB1509, HB1514, HB1515, HB2164, HB2165, HB2283, HB2386

Keywords: arts education, data mapping, task force, creative economy, cultural preservation, workforce development, geographic information systems, agriculture, data collection, statistical program, sustainable practices, Hawaii, aquaculture, biosecurity, food security, sustainable seafood, regulatory framework, interagency coordination, environmental stewardship, invasive species

Transcript Highlights:

• District 39B: Sandra Feist present. District 40A: Kelly Mohler present. District 40B: vacant.
• District 44B: Leon Lillie present. fryberg<00:16:33.680> District fryberg District fryberg District
• :15.600> District craft District craft District 46b<00:17:17.839> Cheryl<00:17:18.559><
• Pinto District Pinto District 65a<00:22:21.880> samab<00:22:22.880> Hussein District District
• District 66B: Athena Hollins present. District 67A: Liz Lee present. District 67B: J.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Minnesota House convened for the opening of the legislative session, with Secretary of State Steve Simon calling the body to order, welcoming returning and newly elected members, and appointing Representative-elect Peggy Scott as clerk pro tem. Pastor Ben M. of Watermark Church in Stillwater, identified as the son-in-law of Speaker-designate Lisa Demuth, delivered the opening prayer, asking for blessing, unity, wisdom, mercy, and truth for members and their families. The members then recited the Pledge of Allegiance. The clerk pro tem conducted a roll call by district and recorded members present. After noting that 133 certificates of election were on file, Chief Judge Jennifer L. Frisch administered the oath of office to the members-elect, who swore to support the U.S. and Minnesota constitutions and faithfully discharge their duties. The House then congratulated the members. A subsequent quorum check found only 67 members present, which was not enough to meet the constitutional quorum requirement. The Secretary of State ruled that the House could not conduct further business because no quorum was present. After that ruling, a motion was made to appeal the no-quorum determination.

Transcript Highlights:

• Kagel District Kagel District 39b<00:15:23.320> Sandra<00:15:23.959> Feist District District
• <00:16:07.959> District Carroll District Carroll District 42b<00:16:10.040> Jenny District
• District 50A: Julie Green. District 50B: Steve Elkins. District 51A: Michael ...
• District 58B: Drew Roach. District 59A: Fue Lee. District 59B: Esther Agbaje.
• District 64B: Dave ... District 64B: Dave Pinto. District 65A: Samakab Hussein.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House convened for the opening of the 2025-2026 Minnesota legislative session. Secretary of State Steve Simon called the chamber to order, appointed a clerk pro tem, and Pastor Ben Mayatt delivered the prayer before the Pledge of Allegiance. The clerk then conducted the roll call, and after an initial dispute over quorum and authority, the House determined that 67 members were present, establishing a quorum. The main business was organizing the House. Members nominated and seconded Representative Lisa Demuth for Speaker, and she was elected on a 67-0 roll call vote. After taking the oath, Speaker Demuth delivered remarks emphasizing service, civility, bipartisan cooperation, accountability, and focusing on practical results for Minnesotans. The House also adopted a resolution accepting the findings in the District 40B election contest and declaring a vacancy there, and another resolution adopting temporary House rules for the session, including a committee structure and a fraud prevention/state government oversight committee. Members then adopted a resolution authorizing necessary House employees to continue working, and the Speaker announced appointments for Speaker pro tempore, Deputy Speaker pro tempore, and the House Committee on Rules and Legislative Administration. The House also approved permanent desk assignments for the Republican and DFL caucuses. The session ended with announcements about a reception and a Rules Committee meeting, followed by adjournment until noon on Wednesday, January 15, 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• District 27, in a similar way, is a very compact district, maybe one of the most compact districts on
• District.
• Congressional District 20 is the VRA district.
• Do you think District 27 complies with the Fair Districts Act, the proposed district?
• Do you think District 27 complies with the Fair Districts Act, the proposed district? Um, well.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the first district that I'm going to talk about is District 21, which is a district that you'll notice
• District 27, in a similar way, is a very compact district, maybe one of the most compact districts on
• because there was a district that came under on top of District 27, which in the enacted map is District
• Congressional District 20 is the VRA district.
• Do you think District 27 complies with the Fair Districts Act, the proposed district? Um, well.

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum present and took up a presentation from the Governor’s office on proposed congressional reapportionment. Executive Office of the Governor counsel Mo Jazeel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be used in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection principles and, in the executive branch’s view, are inseverable. Jason Parada then presented the proposed map, explaining that it was drawn using 2020 census block data, with county growth estimates used only as a guide, and that the plan was designed to be race-neutral while also considering compactness, county and municipal boundaries, and other traditional redistricting criteria. He said the map keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores comparable to the current map, and makes the largest changes in South Florida, with some districts remaining unchanged and others reconfigured around population shifts and geographic boundaries. Members questioned both presenters extensively about the legal basis for disregarding the Fair Districts Amendment, the use of partisan data, the absence of racial analysis, and whether the map truly reflects population growth. Jazeel said the executive branch’s position is that race-based provisions in the state constitution cannot be used if they conflict with the U.S. Constitution, and that the forthcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision in Louisiana v. Calais could further clarify the law. Parada said he did not use race in drawing the map, did use partisan information as one of several traditional criteria, and relied on 2020 census data for population equality. Senators also pressed him on who reviewed the map, why the public and legislators had limited time to review it, and whether the plan was intended to favor Republicans; Parada denied partisan intent and said he was the only person who moved lines on the map, though he consulted with other Executive Office of the Governor staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns that the map did not clearly reflect Florida’s recent population growth, that some districts remained highly irregular, and that the plan appeared to be based on a legal theory contingent on future court rulings. The presenters responded that congressional districts must be equal to the person, that growth estimates can only guide orientation rather than replace census data, and that the map was designed to preserve as much of the existing structure as possible while making the largest adjustments in South Florida. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the excerpted portion of the meeting, and the committee continued with questions and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the first district that I'm going to talk about is District 21, which is a district that you'll notice
• District 27, in a similar way, is a very compact district, maybe one of the most compact districts on
• because there was a district that came under, on top of District 27, which in the enacted map is District
• Congressional District 20 is the VRA district.
• Do you think District 27 complies with the Fair Districts Act, the proposed district? Um, well.

Summary: The Committee on Rules met with a quorum and heard a Governor’s Office presentation on a proposed congressional reapportionment map. The governor’s counsel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is legally permissible, that race should not be considered at all in drawing districts, and that the Florida Fair Districts provisions are inconsistent with federal equal protection law and should be treated as non-severable. The presentation also discussed the pending U.S. Supreme Court case Louisiana v. Callais and the Florida Supreme Court’s Black Voters Matter decision as part of the legal rationale for the map. Jason Parada, who said he drew the map alone, described the map as based on 2020 census block data, with county-level population estimates used only as a guide to identify faster-growing areas. He said the plan keeps 48 counties and 382 municipalities whole, has compactness scores similar to the current benchmark map, and uses traditional geographic and political boundaries such as roads, railways, county lines, and municipal lines. He walked through regional changes, emphasizing a race-neutral redesign that significantly altered South Florida, including changes to districts in Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade, and the Everglades, while leaving several northern districts largely unchanged. Members questioned the witnesses extensively about the legal theory, the use of partisan data, the role of race, population growth, and the timing and review of the map. The witnesses said partisan data was considered along with other traditional redistricting criteria, but race was not used. They also said they could not speak to who else reviewed the map beyond EOG staff and counsel. Several senators raised concerns about the map’s compactness, county and city splits, the apparent partisan effects, and the fact that the map was released shortly before the special session. No vote or final action on the map was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have District 24 and District 26 in there. We have all the districts to the south.
• District 19 is another district that may look a little bit different than the enacted district, but is
• From there, the final two districts that we have are District 15 and District 12.
• districts?
• District 22. District 22 shifted west. District 9 shifted west.

Summary: The Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting met to consider HB 1D, which would establish Florida’s congressional districts using the governor’s proposed map, EOG PCRP 26. Representative Persons-Mulicka briefly introduced the bill, and Jason Jazeel and Jason Pareda of the governor’s office presented the legal rationale and map details. Jazeel argued that mid-cycle congressional redistricting is not prohibited, that the governor’s position is to draw districts without considering race, and that federal equal-protection principles should control over state race-based redistricting provisions. Pareda said he drew the map alone using 2020 census data and census blocks, while also considering population growth estimates, traditional redistricting criteria, and county/city boundaries where feasible. Pareda described the map as race-neutral and said it keeps 48 counties whole, 382 cities whole, and has a boundary-analysis score of about 85.7%. He walked through regional changes, including major revisions in South Florida, adjustments in Central Florida, and changes in the Tampa Bay area, explaining that population shifts and the need for exact congressional population equality drove many of the district configurations. Members questioned the timing of the special session, the use of 2020 census data versus newer population estimates, the role of the legislature versus the governor, the legal basis for mid-decade redistricting, and whether the map complies with the Voting Rights Act and Fair Districts amendments. Motions to place witnesses under oath and to extend the committee meeting by 30 minutes both failed. During public testimony, every speaker who was heard opposed the map. Commenters argued that the proposal was a partisan power grab, would reduce Democratic and minority representation, and violated the Florida Constitution and voting rights protections. Several speakers criticized the short notice and lack of public input, while others said the map would confuse voters or split communities. The chair repeatedly reminded attendees to maintain decorum and limited each speaker to about one minute.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have two district types, regular districts and charter districts.
• district or charter district.
• We have two district types, regular districts and charter districts.
• district or charter district. between a regular district and a charter district, we will say regular
• district or charter district.

Summary: The joint education committee continued its adequacy study with a detailed Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on resource allocation, covering how Arkansas school districts and charters spend foundation and other funds on matrix and non-matrix items. Staff explained the methodology for mapping expenditures, the district and school categories used in the analysis, and key findings showing that districts spend more per student from all fund sources than the foundation amount alone. The presentation highlighted that classroom teachers account for the largest share of matrix spending, while operations and maintenance, student support staff, nurses, and other lines also drew significant attention. Members asked for additional breakdowns by district type, size, rural/urban status, and trend data, and several questions focused on how waivers affect funding and spending, especially for library media specialists and other positions. The committee then discussed non-matrix spending, including instructional aids, non-technology-related facilities, school safety, mental health services, dyslexia support, food service, gifted and talented, career and technical education, and other items not explicitly defined in the matrix. Staff reported that non-matrix spending exceeded $2 billion in 2025, with most of it coming from other fund sources, and that the top superintendent-identified unmet needs over recent surveys were mental health services, school safety, and dyslexia support. Members raised concerns about dyslexia identification and funding, possible over-identification, and whether some support costs are being coded in ways that obscure the true spending picture. There was also discussion of facilities funding, the building fund, and the Department of Education’s partnership program for school construction and maintenance, with staff agreeing to provide more information and potentially bring department officials back for a future meeting. Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly requested more granular data and clarifications, including waiver counts and funding impacts, trend lines for superintendent-reported needs, district-by-district spending spreadsheets, and definitions for certain matrix and accounting terms such as salary enhancement, LEA indebtedness, and other employee health insurance. The chair noted that the committee would continue the adequacy process over the coming months and use the worksheet in the binder to develop recommendations for the next biennium. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting; instead, the committee received the report, asked for follow-up data, and agreed to continue the discussion at future meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• c><00:24:47.840> PSO<00:24:48.600> program District to District to the PSO program District
• school district and the school district school district and the school district either<00:25:01.520
• the districts.
• by district.
• So some districts, some larger districts, may do it... district and then you know when I was in district

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee first approved the January 21st minutes by voice vote. Members then resumed a school finance overview focused on how Minnesota’s “base” budgeting system works and how future committee targets are set above or below that base by the Ways and Means chair, in consultation with fiscal staff. Staff emphasized that school funding decisions are tied to the state budget base and that changes made by the tax committee can affect school levies and school finance more broadly. The presentation then turned to property tax fundamentals. Staff explained that roughly 65% of school district revenue comes from state aid and about 20% from property taxes, with property tax revenue applying to school districts rather than charter schools. They reviewed the two main school tax bases—referendum market value and adjusted net tax capacity—along with class rates, sales ratios, and equalization. They also described tax credits, especially the school building bond agricultural credit, which helps reduce the property tax burden on agricultural land in Greater Minnesota. Members discussed student choice programs and how funding follows students. In response to questions from Representative Quam, staff explained postsecondary enrollment options (including direct enrollment and College in the Schools) and online learning, noting that funding generally follows the student to the serving institution or district. Staff also reviewed Minnesota’s pupil-counting system, including average daily membership and pupil weighting, and explained that students attending charter schools, other districts through open enrollment, or online programs are counted where they are served. The presentation concluded with broader school finance context: funding sources, equity and adequacy goals, constitutional and statutory authority, and the state’s school data systems (EUP/FARS, MARS, and STARS). Staff also began reviewing long-term enrollment trends, noting the impact of the baby boom, later growth from the mid-1980s through about 2000, and projected modest declines in public school enrollment through 2029.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our highest district average—what a district average is—if a school district has 10 FMARs in their system
• Aztec High School or Aztec School District. That's my school district. I had to mention that.
• I appreciate 20 districts, but we have to have 89 districts. What would it take to do that?
• Is it at the district level?
• We can tell which districts are and which districts aren't.

Transcript Highlights:

• IUs are assessed in one appraisal district versus other appraisal districts.
• appraisal district.
• on the school district or on the appraisal district?
• districts.
• We have seen some appraisal districts that'll have one school district out.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ...their choice in that district.
• Are there indents or concave areas within that district? And it punishes that district.
• And it punishes the district that has those sort of indents in the district.
• district.
• The court can look at the demographics of the district, its shape, the data behind the district.

Summary: The Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting met for an informational presentation from outside counsel Andy Bartos on the legal standards governing congressional redistricting. He reviewed federal Equal Protection principles, Florida’s non-diminishment provision, and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, explaining how race can be considered in redistricting but generally cannot be the predominant factor. He also discussed the Florida Constitution’s tiered standards, including the prohibition on intentional political favoritism, compactness, and the requirement to use existing political and geographical boundaries where feasible. Bartos focused on two recent or pending cases: the Florida Supreme Court’s Black Voters Matter decision, which upheld the legislature’s 2022 congressional map and held that the non-diminishment clause does not justify making race predominant absent specific identifiable discrimination, and Louisiana v. Callais, pending before the U.S. Supreme Court, which may further clarify whether race may be used predominantly to comply with the Voting Rights Act or whether Section 2 remains constitutional as applied. He also explained how courts assess compactness and intent, and how data such as the 2020 census, voter registration, turnout, and election results are used for voting-rights analysis. Members asked about what triggers redistricting, whether the legislature must redraw maps now, what data is available in the mapping tool, how intent is measured, and whether public input opportunities will be provided. Bartos said redistricting timing is largely a legislative judgment unless a court requires changes, that the committee can consider whether BVM or the eventual Callais decision warrants revisions, and that the Callais ruling will bind Louisiana directly but serve as precedent for other courts. No votes or legislative actions were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentation and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• water districts.
• My question is, is why it's obvious, ...soil districts and water districts.
• There are many types of special districts, and independent districts, fire districts, they all have certain
• , that hospital district, that fire district, whatever it may be.
• out the soil district.

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Subcommittee met and first took up CS/HB 973, a broad special districts bill focused heavily on soil and water conservation districts. The bill would dissolve 35 soil and water districts effective December 31, 2025, based on an OPAGA review that found widespread problems such as lack of revenue, inactive boards, poor notice practices, public records issues, and late financial reporting. It also would let special districts use state contracts, authorize FDLE background checks for district employees, preserve fire district taxing/service authority after annexation, extend liability protections for outdoor recreation on certain district lands, tighten eligibility for soil and water supervisors, and shift complaint review to the Commission on Ethics. Supporters argued the districts are often inactive, duplicative, and costly to review, while opponents said many districts provide local conservation, water quality, outreach, and volunteer services and should be given more time to remediate. Public testimony on HB 973 was mixed. Several soil and water district chairs and related advocates opposed the bill, saying their districts provide local conservation, flood, invasive species, education, and coordination services at little or no taxpayer cost, and that abolishing them would remove local representation and collaboration. The bill’s proponent, the Florida Association of Special Districts, supported the measure as a limited-government and accountability reform, arguing that districts with no revenue or contracts should not continue. Members debated whether the bill was relying on the OPAGA report while also eliminating future performance reviews, whether the Department of Agriculture could absorb the added responsibilities, and whether the districts should have been given more time to correct deficiencies. The committee ultimately voted the bill favorably, with one no vote from Representative Hinson. The committee then considered CS/HB 995, which applies to Monroe County and the Florida Keys. The bill would exempt Habitat for Humanity in the Keys from construction performance bond requirements for affordable housing, extend the Florida Keys land acquisition/set-aside authority in Florida Forever for 10 more years, and extend the hurricane evacuation time frame from 24 hours to 24.5 hours to allow up to 825 additional residential permit allocations, phased in over 10 years and directed largely toward vacant buildable lots and workforce housing. An amendment was adopted to codify the 825-unit allocation and the distribution framework. With no opposition offered on the bill, the committee reported HB 995 favorably by unanimous vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have two district types: regular districts and charter districts.
• district or charter district.
• We have two district types, regular districts and charter districts.
• district or charter district. between a regular district and a charter district, we will say regular
• district or charter district.

Summary: The House/Joint Education committee continued its adequacy study with a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on resource allocation, focusing first on matrix spending and then non-matrix spending. Staff explained the methodology for mapping APSCN expenditure data to matrix lines, reviewed district and school categories used in the analysis, and highlighted key findings: foundation funding covered a large share of matrix costs but total spending on matrix items exceeded foundation funding, with classroom teachers making up the largest share. Members asked for additional breakdowns on waivers, superintendent survey responses, trend data, and spending by district type, size, and rural/urban status. Staff also noted limitations in tracking two matrix lines—salary enhancement for other employees and all personnel health insurance—because of coding and definition issues. The committee then reviewed non-matrix expenditures, including instructional aides, facilities, school safety, mental health, dyslexia services, gifted and talented, and career and technical education. Staff reported that non-matrix spending remained above $2 billion over the last three years, with most of it coming from other funds rather than foundation funding. Members raised concerns about dyslexia identification and funding, mental health needs, school safety, food service, athletic transportation, and whether some items should be added to the matrix. The Department of Education clarified that the building fund reflects district-held funds for construction and maintenance projects, while the facilities partnership program is a separate state process for approved projects. In the final discussion, staff summarized total spending as more than $15,800 per student in 2025, with about 69% going to matrix resources and 31% to non-matrix resources. The chair explained the adequacy process and the committee’s role in setting future funding recommendations, and members discussed the recommendations worksheet included in the binder. The chair then proposed postponing the remainder of Part Two of the presentation until a May meeting after the fiscal session, along with inviting the Department of Education back for more detailed questions; with no objections, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have two district types, regular districts and charter districts.
• district or charter district.
• Between a regular district and a charter district, we will say regular district or charter district.
• It's 21% of total districts, 18% of regular districts, and 48% of charter districts.
• Looking at district key findings, regular districts spent more per student than charter districts on

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• District 13, Angelia Orr. District 14, Paul Dyson. District 15, Steve Toth.
• District 18 Janice Holt District 19 Ellen trox clear District 20 Terry M.
• Wilson District 21 Dade feeling District 22 Christian manual District 23 Terry Leo Wilson District 24
• Greg Bonin District 25 Cody Thane the suit District 26 Matt Morgan District 27 Ron Reynolds district
• District 117, Phillip Cortez. District 118. District 118, John Lujan III.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• District 28.
• Let's not create new districts or move the districts around. Let's put new districts in.
• district.
• Unless you saw something, what communities are in a district or are being moved from a district. district
• If it's four districts, if it's five districts, the ripple effect from redrawing even one district can

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Sewer District No. 12.
• water sewer district, is not currently served by the district, and where the public water and sewer district
• or other water districts.
• but for any special district.
• Does it say by the district? Does it say prepay? It says the district.

Keywords: 959, house, all