Transcript Highlights:

• , the commitment hearing, and now we're in the commitment review hearing stages.
• at the commitment hearing.
• So, these commitment hearings must occur. the commitment hearing stage there is the commitment hearing
• > hearings.
• the evidentiary hearing.

Keywords: This meeting was split into two parts due to a technical issue. This is the complete meeting pulled from backups. Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:01 24RS HB198: “Angela’s Law”: 00:01:22 KRS Chapter 202C: 00:11:50 Eminent Domain: 00:54:35, 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the June 10, 2025 minutes, then took up House Bill 198, Angela’s Law, sponsored by Representative Samara Heavrin. The bill would add a new aggravating circumstance in death-penalty cases when an offender abuses the corpse of a kidnapping or murder victim by engaging in deviate sexual intercourse, sexual intercourse, or sexual contact. Representative Heavrin and the victim’s parents described the underlying case and argued the current law does not adequately account for postmortem sexual abuse, leaving the offender parole-eligible despite the family’s view that the conduct warranted harsher punishment. Several members expressed sympathy and support, and one member suggested the proposal should be drafted carefully so it would apply broadly enough to cover co-conspirators or multiple offenders. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided. The committee then heard an informational presentation on KRS Chapter 202C from Judge Lisa Payne Jones and Shauna Mitchell of the Kentucky Judicial Commission on Mental Health. They explained that Chapter 202C, enacted in 2021 to close a gap in the civil-commitment statutes, applies to respondents found incompetent to stand trial who are charged with qualifying serious offenses such as capital offenses, certain Class A and Class B felonies causing death or serious injury, rape in the first degree, or sodomy in the first degree. The process begins with a Commonwealth’s petition, followed by a prompt evidentiary hearing, appointment of a guardian ad litem, and then a commitment hearing if the offense is proven. The presenters outlined the procedural standards and recent statutory changes. At the evidentiary hearing, the Commonwealth must prove the charged offense by a preponderance of the evidence before a judge, with the respondent able to present defenses; if the Commonwealth fails, the respondent must be released. If the case proceeds, the commitment hearing requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of at least one involuntary-commitment criterion, and the hearing may be before a jury if requested. They noted that a 2024 amendment changed the commitment criteria from requiring all four factors to only one, and added language about recent criminal behavior and prior involuntary hospitalizations under Chapters 202A or 202B. If commitment is ordered, the respondent is placed in a designated forensic psychiatric facility, currently KCPC.

Transcript Highlights:

• Attendance roll call will be taken; do not register until you hear the bell.
• Hearing none, the question before you... Oh, amendment. Okay.
• Do not vote until you hear the bell.
• Do not vote until you hear the bell.
• Hearing none, so ordered. House Bill 2327.

Summary: The House convened, approved the prior journal, received gubernatorial communications, and then moved into an additional Committee of the Whole to consider Senate bills on two calendars. In that committee, members adopted floor and committee amendments and reported SB 1100, SB 1160, and SB 1178 out as amended. On the second calendar, the committee considered SB 1200, SB 1560, SB 1627, and SB 1723, adopting amendments on SB 1200, SB 1627, and SB 1723 and reporting all four measures out, while SB 1725 was retained on the calendar. The House then adopted the committee reports and sent the amended bills to engrossing or third reading as appropriate. The chamber then took up a long series of third-reading votes. Several bills passed with recorded votes and some member explanations focused on public safety, parental rights, school safety, health care, local control, property rights, and wildlife management. Among the measures that passed were SB 1013, SB 1015, SB 1046, SB 1094, SB 1095, SB 1124, SB 1186, SB 1214, SB 1275, SB 1280, SB 1315, SB 1318, SB 1205 on reconsideration, SB 1327, SB 1416, SB 1418, SB 1582, SB 1613, SB 1662, SB 1664, SB 1670, SB 1711, SB 1741, SB 1821, and several concurrent memorials. A number of bills failed, including SB 1052, SB 1170, SB 1457, SB 1074, SB 1540, SB 1649, and SB 1663. Debate on several bills drew pointed partisan and policy disagreements. Members opposing health-related bills argued they targeted LGBTQ people or medical decision-making, while supporters framed them as protecting children or bodily autonomy. On SB 1170, members said the bill contained a drafting error that would create extreme penalties and strain prison capacity. On SB 1280, supporters and opponents split over Mexican gray wolf management and federal conservation efforts. On SB 1199, the Salt River horse herd bill, members discussed herd management, heritage, property impacts, and a required emergency clause; it passed with the needed two-thirds majority. The House also adopted a group concurrence motion on numerous House bills and passed several House bills on final reading, including HB 2013, HB 2016, HB 2028, HB 2086, HB 2118, HB 2140, HB 2170, HB 2226, HB 2244, HB 2248, HB 2249, HB 2327, HB 2379, HB 2380, and others, forwarding them to the Governor.

Transcript Highlights:

• start the public hearing. start the public hearing.
• it's a it's a hearing of discovery. it's a it's a hearing of discovery.
• hearings. That's where it is now. hearings. That's where it is now.
• hearing.
• preliminary hearing. preliminary hearing.

Bills: SB118, SB203, HB420, HB414, HB363, HB405, HB261, HB263, HB327, HB348, HB228, HB282, SB273, HB7, SB296, SB199, SB47, SB204, HB80, HB11, HB192

Keywords: bail, offenses, constitutional amendment, criminal justice, law enforcement, public safety, dental insurance, medical loss ratio, premium regulation, insurance commissioner, rebate, consumer protection, Baldwin County, local bill, education funding, school tax, privilege license tax, county tax revenue, municipal school board, Baldwin County Board of Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you hear me? Yes.
• And then if you request a hearing, what type of hearing are you actually?
• A party requests a hearing.
• And then if you request a hearing, what type of hearing are you actually requesting?
• hearing, which means it is an evidentiary hearing, which makes a lot more time.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and reviewed a memorandum compiling member suggestions for possible legislation. The memo grouped ideas into topics including creation of a family court, expanded education for parents, attorneys, and judges, expedited hearings for parenting-time violations, limiting law enforcement involvement in custody disputes, creating parenting time expediters, and adopting more uniform court procedures. Members also discussed whether to form subcommittees, but the task force decided to continue working as a full committee rather than create subcommittees at this time. The committee then heard testimony from Dr. John Perez, a mental health professional, who described his personal custody experience and his professional work with families he believes have been affected by parental alienation. He argued for stronger education, faster court response times, and better tools to address intentional interference with parenting time. Members questioned him about his case history, the concept of parental alienation, and whether specialized family courts or judges with family-law training could help. Dr. Perez said a dedicated family court and faster hearings would likely have helped his situation. The task force spent substantial time discussing the possible creation of a family court. Judge Hovey supported the idea of a specialized family court or at least a study of one, saying family cases are distinct from ordinary adversarial litigation and that judges with family-law experience could better handle them. Several members agreed that a family court could improve consistency, expertise, and speed, but others cautioned that the task force’s current directive is focused on enforcement of existing orders rather than broader custody policy, and noted that voters had previously rejected equal shared parenting proposals. The group also discussed expedited procedures for parenting-time disputes, with Judge Hovey suggesting a 30-day hearing timeline may be workable. On education, members generally supported requiring parents to complete a parenting education course and adding educational materials explaining court process, child support, and what judges can and cannot do. Mr. McLean suggested a short instructional video for litigants and more family-law education for judges and attorneys, while Ms. Moldenhauer said education could be incorporated into scheduling orders or mediation orders. Members also discussed the Parents Forever course, including whether it should be mandatory in all counties and whether cost is a barrier; no vote was taken on any of these proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hearing must be recorded on video and broadcast.
• that a hearing is provided and that the hearing, of course, is open to the public.
• We would like an appeal in administrative hearings.
• And so have a hearing like this.
• they might hold a hearing.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The subcommittee met on Senate Bill 2224 and reviewed the latest Legislative Council draft, version 1006, which incorporated prior changes including the Christensen amendment, the executive session language, and a 30-day deadline for the Attorney General to issue an order. The Attorney General’s office then explained its proposed amendment, which would clarify that hearings could be held under existing administrative hearing procedures, apply the same process to all violations, and preserve the current appeal structure. The office also raised concerns about the bill’s requirement that hearings be video recorded and broadcast live, noting possible technology and budget limitations. Representative Koppelman responded that the purpose of the bill was to ensure a timely, transparent process and avoid long delays before a sanctioned party could get to court, arguing that the Legislative Council draft better addressed due process concerns. Representative Henderson agreed and said the draft version improved transparency and established a clearer timeline. During discussion, a cross-reference in the appeal section was identified as incorrect and was corrected to refer to Section 28-32-49 rather than Chapter 28-27, with clarification that the appeal path should remain tied to the Attorney General’s administrative determination. The committee then amended the motion to include the corrected cross-reference and approved the Legislative Council version 1006 as amended. The vote was unanimous, and the bill was prepared to be taken back to committee the next morning for further action. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Previous hearing left pending.
• Hearing none, so ordered. Okay.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, Senator Hinojosa?

Bills: SB2959, HB3096, HCR29, HCR56, HCR12, HCR55, HCR74, HCR78, HCR116, HCR117, HCR6, HCR50, HCR107, HCR80, HCR58, HCR70, HCR71, HCR72, HCR75, HCR93, HCR12, HCR6

Keywords: firearm safety, awareness month, public safety, responsible ownership, storage, recreational use, profound autism, awareness day, caregiver, disabilities, support, counseling, mental health, awareness, support services, community health, necrotizing enterocolitis, premature infants, breastfeeding, health awareness

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's hear. Let's hear. Okay, this is Crosby, Stills, Nash. We lost Neil Young.
• , but we hear you.
• Good to hear. Thank you, sir. Thank you, sir. Good to hear.
• Can't hear you very much though, so I'm okay. Can you hear me now? Just barely, yep.
• But can you hear me? Ah, here. Why don't we hear a few two-minute limit, but welcome.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy opened its hearing with testimony on several broadband, towing, and rideshare-related bills. The first major issue was H. 3470/S. 2259, which would add data privacy and integrity protections for transportation network driver information. Rideshare drivers and labor advocates strongly opposed the bill, saying it would delay implementation of Question 3, which Massachusetts voters approved to give rideshare drivers a path to unionize. Drivers described low pay, deactivations, harassment, safety risks, and the need for a union to negotiate fairer working conditions. Legal and labor experts testified that the bill was largely duplicative of existing law and regulations and would unnecessarily postpone drivers’ organizing rights. No vote was taken on the bill during the hearing. The committee also heard extensive testimony on broadband affordability and access bills, including S. 2318/H. 3527 and related measures. Supporters, including legislators, digital equity advocates, senior advocates, and service providers, said low-income households need a permanent affordable broadband option after the federal Affordable Connectivity Program ended. They argued that internet access is now essential for jobs, school, health care, housing, and daily life, and supported a flat-rate low-income plan around $15 per month with protections such as no installation fees or termination fees. Opponents from cable and wireless industry groups argued the bills would impose artificial price mandates, discourage investment, and reduce consumer choice, noting that providers already offer discounted programs. The committee also heard support for broadband deployment and pole-attachment streamlining bills, with providers and municipal broadband advocates saying permitting delays and pole access bottlenecks slow expansion and raise costs. Additional testimony covered H. 3566, which would exempt municipal broadband projects from surety bond requirements, and towing-related bills including S. 2235, H. 3507, H. 3516, and H. 3482. Insurance and anti-fraud witnesses supported stronger towing protections, saying some towers charge excessive fees and hold vehicles hostage, while one witness urged broader consumer safeguards. The hearing ended after the chairs shortened testimony to fit the room schedule, asked for final comments on remaining bills, and then adjourned by motion and voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Chair hears none. The motion is adopted.
• The Chair hears none. Motion is adopted.
• The Chair hears none. The Chair hears none. The Chair recognizes Dr. Oliverson. Thank you, Mr.
• The Chair hears none. The Chair hears none. The Chair recognizes Mr. Patterson. Mr.
• The Chair hears none, so ordered.

Bills: HB149, HB2017, HB705, HB223, HB 1056, HB2854, HB4623, HB3000, HB46, HB 117, HB3619, HB4464, HB5646, HCR84, HB500, HB2963, HB5509, HB1973, HB3909, HB718, HB252, HB5666, HB 119, HB346, HB5624, HB5658, HB5677, HB1545, HB3073, HB4081, HB 121, HB4236, HB3848, HB4144, HB40, HB5682, HB3697, HB3333, HB3642, HB20, HB549, HB2731, HB4233, HB4690, HB 127, HB2525, SB1637, SB1, SB1198, SB509, SB13, SB15, SB30, SB268, SB331, SB441, SB447, SB457, SB568, SB650, SB763, SB1540, SB1610, SB1660, SB2018, SB2024, SB2217, SB2337, SB2753, SB2900, SB2972, SB3059, HB14

Keywords: artificial intelligence, regulation, biometric data, ethical AI, consumer protection, AI governance, intoxication manslaughter, criminal penalties, community supervision, mandatory supervision, parole eligibility, Grayson's Law, cosmetology, licensure, interstate compact, state regulations, public safety, workforce mobility, municipality, procurement

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the Chief Hearing Officer and Agency Head of the Administrative Hearings Office.
• We're up to 3,440 hearings.
• Three main hearing types, those implied concern, are DWI licensure application hearings.
• the implied consent EWI hearings.
• , additional hearings.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none.
• Hearing none. Any objection Foundation? Hearing none.
• Hearing none. or their Husky tag? Nope. Hearing none.
• Hearing none. Do I hear a motion and a second?
• Hearing none. Friends of Rick Woodfield? Hearing none.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If you can hear me, Chairman? Yeah, we can hear you.
• Can you hear me? We can hear you. Yep. Go right ahead. Great.
• If you can hear me. We can hear you?
• So, Hunter Hamburlin, can you hear us? I can hear you. Can you guys hear me? Great. Loud and clear.
• So Hunter Hamblin, can you hear us? I can hear you? Can you guys hear me? Great. Loud and clear.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the Future of Payments and Sales Transactions by Credit Card and the Impacts for Small Businesses held a public hearing focused on interchange fees, sales tax and tip processing, chargebacks, fraud, surcharging, and the broader future of payment systems. Chair Paul Feeney and co-chair Rep. Jamie Murphy opened by explaining the commission’s charge and inviting testimony from small businesses, industry groups, banks, and policy experts. Representative Sean Garballey testified first, arguing that Massachusetts tourism depends on universal card acceptance and stable interchange, and urging the commission not to disrupt the current system ahead of major events expected to bring millions of visitors to the Commonwealth. A large portion of the hearing featured independent restaurant owners and advocates describing thin margins and the burden of paying percentage-based processing fees on sales tax and tips that are not business revenue. Jen Ziskin, Kristen Canty, Nancy Cushman, Kerry Colzer, and others said restaurants often operate on very small profits and that processing fees on taxes and gratuities can amount to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars annually. Ryan Lotz also urged reforms to chargebacks, including refunding chargeback fees when merchants prevail, requiring consumers to contact businesses before disputing charges, and limiting repeat abuse. Commission members pressed witnesses on whether tax and tip amounts could be separated at the point of sale, and several witnesses said current consumer card systems do not transmit that level of detail. Testimony from credit union, banking, and payments representatives largely opposed state-level changes that would carve out taxes or tips from interchange, warning of compliance burdens, higher costs, reduced rewards, and possible effects on fraud protection and access to credit. Alex Verine of America’s Credit Unions and Deb Peters and Keely McEwen of the Electronic Payments Coalition said the payment system is complex, that interchange funds fraud prevention and network infrastructure, and that new state mandates could create operational and legal uncertainty. Dan Swanson argued states have authority to act and pointed to Illinois litigation and federal court rulings, while Julian Morris and Brad Popolado emphasized the benefits of card acceptance, the decline of cash, and the need to consider other payment methods and check fraud as well. Several witnesses discussed international payment systems, instant payments, and QR standards as possible future directions. The chairs and members engaged in extended back-and-forth with witnesses about whether Massachusetts could exempt sales tax from swipe fees, whether surcharging should be revisited, and whether vendor compensation or other targeted relief might be more workable than broad changes to interchange. No votes were taken. At the close of the hearing, the chairs said the commission would hold one additional public hearing date to be determined, after which members would begin developing next steps and a report.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, rules are suspended.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• I didn’t hear what you said.
• Hearing none, rules are suspended. 2.01. Is there objection? Hearing none, rules are suspended.
• Hearing none, the amendment. Amendment No. 1, is there objection? Hearing none.

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, received the House message that HB 35 had passed, and heard a gubernatorial message submitting Trinity River Authority board appointments for Senate confirmation. The chamber also adopted a slate of Senate resolutions by voice vote and later postponed reading and referral of bills and resolutions until the end of the calendar. Several members introduced bills with brief explanations before the Senate took them up under suspension of the regular order. The body then considered and passed a series of measures, often by wide margins, including SB 2846 on wildlife disease control and quarantine authority; CS SB 1224 requiring school superintendents or directors to report certain employee misconduct to local law enforcement; CS SB 2310 on transparency for degree and transfer requirements at public colleges; SB 1502 limiting school districts’ ability to exceed voter-approval tax rates after a failed TRE; CS SB 1141 on notice requirements before full adversary hearings in child-protection cases; CS SB 2568 exempting certain flood-control reservoirs from TCEQ permitting; SB 1524 on confidentiality of information about weapons in foster homes; CS SB 2925 creating a task force on modernizing manufacturing; CS SB 2269 on dispute resolution and enforcement for long-term care facilities; CS SB 1266 on Medicaid provider enrollment and disenrollment notices; SB 243 on migrant labor housing standards; SB 2200 on overweight vehicles transporting hazardous materials; CS SB 2480 on the Texas Physician Health Program; CS SB 1585 restricting government contracts with companies tied to foreign adversaries; CS SB 2357 establishing maternal health training; and SB 1551 requiring accessible AED placement in public schools. The Senate also debated more contested bills. CS SB 2019, which would extend vaccine exemption rules to medical and veterinary students, advanced only partway after a divided vote. CS SB 1442, directing a study on veterinary telemedicine relationships, and CS SB 1241, which would allow the Higher Education Coordinating Board to study alternative college entrance exams, prompted extended questioning about agency authority and whether changes should return to the legislature before taking effect. CS SB 2753, which would integrate early voting and election day voting into a single in-person voting period, was amended and passed to engrossment despite opposition. CS SB 2201, dealing with gang and foreign terrorist organization intelligence databases, and CS SB 2514, creating a DPS hostile foreign adversaries unit, drew detailed debate over civil liberties and national security. CS SB 2422, aimed at limiting Texas Medical Board discipline related to COVID-19 treatments and practices, also advanced after lengthy discussion and a close vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The purpose of today's hearing is to lay out a bill and to hear public testimony on that bill.
• additional hearings.
• Hearing on July 25th, 2025. We had the North Texas hearing on July 26th, 2025.
• the House hearings.
• Hearing today.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 56 seeing none we will close the hearing 56 seeing none we will close the hearing and<00:11:07.160
• program for the deaf and hearted hearing program for the deaf and hearted hearing uh<00:33:19.320
• in New Hampshire with hearing in New Hampshire with hearing disabilities<00:33:32.279> which<
• Seeing none. hearted hearing program um as a hearted hearing program um as a designate<00:35:11.359><
• we'll get enough to have another hearing we'll get enough to have another hearing session<00:36:

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• impacts, but also hear from cities and counties and school boards, hear from the attorney general on
• <00:09:57.200> Um first hearing September 18th. Um first hearing September 18th.
• the hearings? the hearings? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes.
• <00:18:03.039> uh like any other committee hearing uh like any other committee hearing uh
• . hearing. hearing.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered. All right.

Bills: HB103

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee met to hear and act on a series of municipal utility district and municipal management district bills, most of them presented as template or cleanup measures. The committee first heard HB 5672, which redefined the boundaries of the Driftwood Conservation District in Hays County to match acreage added through landowner petitions; no one testified, and the bill was reported favorably and placed on the local and uncontested calendar. The committee then took up HB 5696 for the Reserve Municipal Management District in Mansfield, where Senator Birdwell explained a committee substitute that conformed the bill to the standard MMD template; the bill was left pending subject to call of the chair. Similar template or technical bills followed, including HB 5680 (Bayou Bell No. 1 MMD in Liberty County), HB 5654 (Montgomery County MUD No. 263), HB 5662 (Fort Bend County WCID No. 12 with road powers), HB 5658 (Craver Ranch MMD in Denton County), HB 5661 (Fort Bend County MUD No. 286), HB 5699 (an exclusion/contract provision for Harris County MUD No. 405), HB 5679 (Hills of Walnut Creek MUD in Parker County), HB 5437 (validation language for Austin County MUD No. 1), HB 5665 (Waller County MUD No. 70), HB 5656 (Fort Bend County MUD No. 263), HB 5670 (Montgomery County MUD No. 259), HB 5651 (Montgomery County WCID with drainage powers), HB 5682 (Comina Ranch MMD No. 1 in McKinney), HB 5320 (merging Starr County drainage-related districts), HB 5677 (Pura Vida MMD No. 1), and HB 5666 (Fencey Road MUD in Harris County). In each case, the sponsor described the district, acreage, location, and powers, and committee substitutes were often used to align the bills with the chamber’s standard template language or correct drafting errors. Public testimony was repeatedly opened and closed with no witnesses appearing for or against the bills. The committee consistently adopted committee substitutes when offered, then voted to report the measures favorably, usually with recommendations that they do pass and be printed, and to place them on the local and uncontested calendar. Most roll calls showed 4 or 5 ayes and 0 nays, with some members absent or not voting. HB 5680 and HB 5682 were reported with committee substitutes in lieu of the filed versions; HB 5658 was reported with a do-not-pass recommendation on the filed bill but do-pass on the substitute; HB 5677 was handled similarly as a companion/template cleanup measure. The committee also noted a few procedural issues, including quorum concerns early in the meeting and a mislabeled bill number that required clarification. At the end of the meeting, the committee adopted several motions in writing and then recessed to reconvene 15 minutes after adjournment of the floor, anticipating possible additional bills later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hearing none, so ordered.
• Hear the bell. The House will now proceed to vote. And hear the bell.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hearing no objection, the the calendar.
• > is<00:04:20.200> ordered Hearing none, the bill is ordered Hearing none, the bill is ordered
• Hearing none, the bill is auto title?
• Hearing<01:17:52.960> none.
• <01:17:55.240> Oh, Hearing none. Are you Are you up? Oh, Hearing none.

Keywords: House streaming session for Saturday, March 21, 2026, 957, house, all

Summary: The House convened with 126 members present, heard the prayer, approved the previous day’s journal, and then took up a series of Senate messages and committee reports. Senate bills on consent calendars 21 and 22 were read the first time and referred to committees. The House then adopted favorable reports, often without amendment, on a wide range of bills including workers’ compensation evaluation procedures (HB 1325), a state shark designation (HB 97), several local alcoholic beverages measures, commemorative months for Muslim American Heritage and Jewish American Heritage (HB 661), and local license commissioner changes in Anne Arundel, Worcester, Harford, Baltimore City, and Prince George’s counties. Several bills were amended before being ordered printed for third reading. HB 121 (Baltimore County alcohol sales) was amended to change the sponsor to the Baltimore County delegation. HB 1335 on Department of Information Technology workforce recruitment and retention was amended to convert the measure into a study and recommendations report. HB 1037 on PSC oversight of broadband and VoIP was similarly amended from direct oversight to a study and report. HB 1164 on water and sewage rate consolidation and limited-income mechanisms was amended to remove rate-consolidation provisions, require a PSC study, and delay implementation. HB 1381 on stopping or parking in bike lanes added exceptions for emergency, transit, disability pickup/drop-off, disabled vehicles, loading/unloading, and construction or maintenance; HB 1504 prioritized sidewalk and bicycle pathway projects near highways with complete streets or Vision Zero policies; HB 912 adjusted community cat trap-neuter-return rules; and HB 969 clarified electric vehicle charging billing and service fees. The most extended debate centered on HB 639, the Transportation Aviation Passenger Health and Safety Act. After amendments turned it into a reporting measure for fixed-base operators and aviation service companies regarding flights carrying detained individuals, warrants, refueling, and emergency-response documentation, members questioned its practical operation, safety implications, and possible federal preemption issues. The floor leader explained the bill as amended was intended to gather information for Maryland safety and emergency planning. On motion of the committee chair, the House agreed to special order HB 639 until the end of the session for further clarification. The House also amended and advanced HB 1063 on hunting management, including deer damage permits and Sunday hunting rules, and heard a brief statement from an Eastern Shore delegate about the Rural Caucus’s approach to offering amendments rather than opposing bills outright. The session ended with HB 972, creating the Maryland Fair and Agricultural Education Promise Fund, amended to rename the bill in honor of the late Delegate Charles Otto and to replace lottery funding with an annual appropriation; the House adopted the amendments and the favorable report.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you hear me? Would help if I unmuted; I can hear you. Okay, great, thank you.
• Public participation hearings are scheduled between April and May, and these are where the CPUC hears
• Public participation hearings are scheduled between April and May, and these are where the CPUC hears
• two hearings.
• I hear you. Catherine Brandenburg, representing Athletes and Entertainers for Kids. I hear you.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) to examine its history, current operation, and possible future changes in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the hearing was prompted in part by AT&T’s 2023 request for relief from COLR obligations and by broader concerns about public safety, affordability, universal service, and access to modern broadband and telecommunications. The first panel featured a telecommunications expert who traced COLR back to universal service principles and explained how states have handled COLR differently, including full deregulation, limited rural obligations, or transition pathways tied to competition and customer protections. Members asked about affordability, federal and state processes for service withdrawal, and whether COLR remains necessary given modern competition. CPUC staff then described California’s COLR framework, explaining that universal service rests on access, reliability/quality, and affordability, and that COLR requires carriers to provide basic service, including voice-grade calling, 911 access, relay services, and Lifeline. Staff said AT&T’s application sought relief in nearly all of its territory, but no replacement COLR came forward during the proceeding, and public participation hearings drew thousands of comments and strong concern from rural and vulnerable customers. The CPUC outlined its ongoing rulemaking to reconsider whether the 1996 COLR rules and 2012 basic-service definition still fit current conditions, with workshops and public hearings scheduled and a proposed decision expected later in the year or into 2026. Members pressed staff on geographic outreach, wireless coverage, whether broadband can be part of basic service, public safety during wildfires, and what reporting and complaint processes currently exist. In the final panel, industry and public-interest witnesses sharply disagreed. A U.S. Telecom representative argued COLR is outdated, costly, and copper-focused, and said reform should allow technology-neutral alternatives such as wireless, fiber, and satellite while preserving reliable voice and emergency access. The CPUC Public Advocates Office countered that COLR remains a necessary public safeguard, especially for rural and low-income customers, and argued that any transition should maintain or improve service, with public benefits such as broadband investment and continued protections for 911, disability access, and affordability. Committee members focused on the difference between an obligation to serve everyone and a mere option to serve, and on whether the Legislature should provide clearer guidance as the CPUC’s rulemaking moves forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those hearings have afforded the legislature an abundance of opportunities to hear the public's thoughts
• , a fifth hearing specifically for invited testimony at the Capitol, and then a sixth hearing at the
• We convened our second joint hearing.
• I'm glad to hear that.
• Countless hours putting together, making sure that we could hear what we needed to hear and probe and

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum call, invocation, and approval of the previous day’s journal, then observed a moment of silence after Senator Eckhardt referenced a mass shooting in Austin. The chamber also agreed to postpone reading and referral of bills until later in the day. Early procedural business included a motion not to print Senate Bill 3, which was adopted without objection. Later, Senator Mendez raised a parliamentary inquiry about moving flood relief bills to the top of the calendar, but the presiding officer said the order of business was up to the chair. The main floor action centered on Senate Bill 4, the congressional redistricting bill. Senator King laid out the bill, describing it as the companion to the House version, based on 2020 census data, and arguing it was legal, race-blind, more compact, and likely to elect more Republicans. Senators asked extensive questions about the process, public hearings, and the map’s effects on districts and communities. The Senate voted to suspend the regular order of business and the three-day rule, then passed SB 4 to engrossment and finally passed it, with the recorded votes showing 19 yeas and 2 nays. The Senate also took up Senate Bill 6, relating to abortion and civil liability for the manufacture and provision of abortion-inducing drugs. Senator Hughes argued the bill was needed to stop illegal abortion pills being mailed into Texas and harming women and unborn children. The Senate suspended the regular order of business and the three-day rule, passed the bill to engrossment, and then finally passed it, with the recorded votes showing 18 yeas, 10 nays, and one present not voting. A lengthy discussion followed on the committee substitute for Senate Bill 14, which would standardize law enforcement personnel and departmental files statewide. Senator King said the bill codifies a TCOLE model policy and limits public access to personnel files to substantiated misconduct, commendations, and evaluations, while keeping other records available through other legal processes. Senators Eckhardt, West, Hinojosa, and others questioned how the bill would affect transparency, meet-and-confer agreements, civilian review boards, and access to unsubstantiated complaints. An amendment by Senator Hinojosa of Dallas to narrow the bill to unfounded complaints failed, and SB 14 was then passed to engrossment on a vote of 18 yeas and 10 nays. The final major item was Senate Bill 1, the natural disaster omnibus bill responding to the July flooding. Senator Perry said the bill addresses camp and RV park safety, evacuation plans, emergency rooftop access, lines of succession for local emergency management, annual drills, volunteer management, drone restrictions over disaster areas, small-business recovery loans, and a statewide data hub for flood and weather monitoring. Senators Menendez, Eckhardt, and Kolkhorst asked about autopsies, volunteer background checks, liability, warning systems, floodplain mitigation, and coordination with FEMA and local governments. Perry said the bill focuses on preparation, response, and recovery, while broader prevention and mitigation issues may be addressed later. The transcript ends during this extended discussion, before final action on SB 1 is shown.