Transcript Highlights:

• The way I look at it, private businesses contract with state agencies.
• Any taxing entity that does not consent is excluded from the increment district.
• The the the business entity always stand is to gain.
• If the people may decide, the entity may say, 'Hey, no, we're not gonna.
• Public entities are no different. They've also been facing the same issue.

Bills: HB3310, HB4311, HB3841, HB3024, HB3075

Keywords: purchasing, compliance, state employees, longevity pay, contract management, unclaimed property, service charges, property fund, accountability, government transparency, local development, economic impact, voter approval, tax increment financing, review committee, public finance, blight, salary increase, bonus limits, job performance

Transcript Highlights:

• But let me answer one other question you brought up, you know, about the, you know, being a private entity
• <00:09:47.120> entity<00:09:47.360> and<00:09:47.600> all know, being a private
• entity and all know, being a private entity and all that.<00:09:48.800> It's<00:09:48.959>
• private. That's handled by the houses. private. That's handled by the houses.
• <00:34:01.840> we<00:34:02.080> said private private aspect and and we said private

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, it does not apply to private social media activity. It doesn't apply to satire or parody.
• Uh it does not apply to private<00:01:14.080> social<00:01:14.400> media<00:01:14.720><
• <00:01:15.439> It private social media activity. It private social media activity.
• that liability doesn't attach to to run that liability doesn't attach to those<00:01:39.439> entities
• It only attached to the those entities.

Keywords: Technology - Room 210, 3 February, 2026; 11:30 A.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee heard a bill aimed at regulating artificial intelligence in qualified political advertisements. The sponsor explained that the measure applies only when an ad uses AI-generated image, audio, or video and is made on behalf of a candidate, committee, or other person in connection with an election or ballot issue. The bill would require clear disclosures: visible disclaimers for text or graphic ads, spoken disclaimers for audio ads, and both visual and spoken disclaimers for video ads. It was emphasized that the bill does not ban AI use in campaigns, does not regulate captions or written posts, does not apply to private social media activity, satire or parody, or news coverage/documentaries, and does not create criminal penalties. The sponsor also said liability would attach only to the person or committee that created the AI-generated ad, not to broadcasters or cable/satellite providers that air it. Penalties were described as up to $250 for a first violation by an individual, up to $1,000 for subsequent violations, and $1,000 per violation for committees. Enforcement would be available to the attorney general and to an injured or likely injured candidate, with venue in Hinds County or the county where the violation occurred or where voters were targeted. The sponsor said the attorney general’s office had been sent the bill and was monitoring it. During discussion, a senator praised the sponsor’s work and said the issue was already arising in practice. The sponsor then noted that, because the bill would have to return to the elections committee, an amendment would be added to adopt the universal definition of artificial intelligence and remove the current language for consistency. A motion to “sub pass” was made, and the committee proceeded to a vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• I do know that when it comes to the statutes in regards to exempt entities, In regards to exempt entities
• versus non-exempt entities, if you are an exempt entity and say you open up a coffee shop, and all of
• I have a private on one side of me, and I have a semi-private public on the other side of me.
• But a small or privately owned one.
• They are privately held. And they're not owned by the HOA. They are privately held by some LLC.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or any other entity.
• <05:24:35.840> entities<05:24:36.400> like different uh private entities like different
• uh private entities like utilities<05:24:37.400> or<05:24:37.600> Telecommunications utilities
• James Wallace said C-PACER is a private loan from a private lender to a privately owned commercial property
• It is still private loans.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, when I was in private practice, I was surprised coming from the state and going into private
• Another type of deduction is the charitable entity contribution deduction.
• level on the pass-through entity.
• So, you've got international, multinational entities saying.
• We're watching the effect that this new private economy is having.

Transcript Highlights:

• Work with those entities.
• I think they lowered the millage rate, but we have all these different taxing entities, and when they
• And my background, much like Ginger Delagal's, is I came from private practice representing both private-sector
• Another thing to note is that we represent the city as an entity.
• But in order to do it, our costs to you, the public entity and the taxpayers, are going to go up.

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee held its first meeting of the 2025 session and focused on an overview of county and municipal home rule powers and state preemption. After roll call and member introductions, Chair Alex Rizzo and Vice Chair Griff Griffiths explained the constitutional and statutory basis for local self-government, the distinction between charter and non-charter counties, and how express and implied preemption limit local authority. Griffiths emphasized that home rule gives local governments broad power to address community needs, but the Legislature can override that authority through clear preemption, with courts ultimately deciding disputes. Representatives Holcomb and LaMarca added that local issues should generally be addressed locally first, but statewide standards can be appropriate when uniformity is needed or local action is ineffective. The committee then heard from a panel representing counties, cities, business, and construction interests: Ginger Delegal of the Florida Association of Counties, Carolyn Johnson of the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Rebecca O'Hara of the Florida League of Cities, and Carol Bowen of Associated Builders and Contractors of Florida. Delegal and O'Hara argued that home rule is rooted in local autonomy, policy experimentation, and accountability to voters, and warned against broad or “vacuum” preemptions that remove local authority without replacing it with state regulation. Johnson and Bowen supported preemption when local rules create a patchwork that hurts statewide competitiveness, raises costs, or complicates business operations, citing examples such as labor rules, heat safety, permitting, and procurement preferences. The panel also discussed the 2023 local ordinances law, which requires business impact estimates and provides attorney’s fees in certain challenges, as a mechanism to resolve disputes locally before resorting to preemption. Members questioned the panel about the 2024 heat-safety preemption and how to protect workers in the absence of local ordinances. Business representatives said existing OSHA duties and industry best practices already require employers to provide safe conditions, while local governments and the state should avoid inconsistent standards across jurisdictions. Another discussion centered on construction permitting, licensing, and local boards that may slow projects and increase costs; Bowen suggested eliminating redundant local fees and barriers while preserving statewide licensing and enforcement against bad actors. No votes were taken, and the meeting remained informational, with the chair inviting continued discussion on when preemption is appropriate versus when local governments should retain authority.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any entities that need help in GIS mapping and others. The third is accounting.
• We recognize that a lot of these entities, it's a change.
• Six of them are public funding, three of them are private.
• One is getting the education out to these entities that this resource is available.
• You know, a statewide have A private company operate.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're not um ... nonprofit entity to create this um nonprofit entity to create this um endangered<00
• University of Hawaii, other entities University of Hawaii, other entities that<00:23:22.160>
• <00:23:34.200> that There are certainly other entities that There are certainly other entities
• Private landowners also do on lands.
• agreements between DLNR and private agreements between DLNR and private landowners<00:23:52.120>

Bills: SB3253, SB2401, SB3169, SB17, SB3014, SB3032, SB1432, SB2002, SB2972, SB3247

Keywords: conservation, endangered species, wildlife preservation, native birds, biodiversity, sanctuary, nonprofit, DLNR, agricultural district, land use, chapter 195D, chapter 205, chapter 42F, state funding, public purpose, habitat restoration, predator-free sanctuary, ecosystem restoration, Zealandia, wildlife refuge

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land heard testimony on SB 5253 SD2 relating to conservation and SB 2401 relating to regional shoreline mitigation district, with the chair emphasizing short testimony limits and the need to finish before session. On SB 5253, DLNR said it stood on its written testimony and answered questions about the bill’s proposed nonprofit endangered species sanctuary. Members asked whether existing entities or agreements, such as land trusts, private landowners, and DLNR safe harbor agreements, could accomplish similar conservation goals without creating a new entity. DLNR said similar work already exists, but it was not aware of a comparable sanctuary model in the state. A member also questioned language suggesting for-profit businesses in the sanctuary, and DLNR said the intent appeared to be sales of outreach or similar materials, though it agreed that such activities could be handled by a nonprofit. The bulk of the hearing focused on SB 2401, which would create a regional shoreline adaptation/mitigation framework. The Department of the Attorney General said it had concerns about inconsistent use of the terms “mitigation” and “adaptation,” warning of possible title-subject issues. DLNR said it was neutral on the terminology and more concerned with the substance, and noted that the bill would not waive permits; any plan would still require environmental review and applicable state and county permits. DLNR also supported OHA’s recommendation to consider impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during regional planning, and said the bill’s language on temporary shoreline protection measures could help address the gap between emergency permits and longer-term planning while avoiding a hardening-only approach. The Office of Planning supported the regional planning concept but noted it is not a regulatory agency and would need to work with DLNR and the Land Board. OHA supported the bill’s planning-based approach but recommended amendments to require assessment of impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices during plan development and to clarify that environmental review would still apply at the project level. Testifiers from the Ka‘anapali Steering Committee strongly supported the bill, saying it would provide a regional framework for ongoing erosion problems while preserving full regulatory authority and normal permitting, and they proposed amendments to standardize terminology, create a limited pathway for temporary shoreline protection, and address ownership and maintenance responsibilities. Members discussed the meaning of “mitigation” versus “adaptation,” the scope of shoreline hardening, and whether the bill would help the legislature take a broader, more holistic view of shoreline decisions. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• They leverage that already existing entity. Mr.
• And so I think there has been now a renewed focus on the private sector and private sector use.
• This model is used in many public and private entities in managing risks associated with AI throughout
• North Dakota doesn't have those types of entities.
• It's a little bit of an interesting entity.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Private sector companies following MoDOT-approved plans should not face years of litigation for incidents
• It would be on the private side or, you know, other municipalities, which... That, too. Yeah.
• Well, they're just one entity where you have all these contractors that the insurance folks will tell
• It's really very common for a public entity to be named as an additional insured on a contract.
• It's really very common for a public entity to be named as an additional insured on a contract.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, we have 11 administrative entities.
• So, other questions: the 11 administrative entities, do we have names of those?
• There's individuals that can go into a private training provider program.
• Two were private colleges or universities, and 37 were the private career education providers or eligible
• Administrative entities? Did they go through legislative audits?

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , authorized private contractor?
• entities to do this work?
• , authorized private... ...water manager is going to fund, even if there's a private, authorized private
• entities to do this work?
• Second, the state responsibility area, where Cal Fire is the lead state entity.

Summary: The subcommittee began by announcing a change in the agenda order, moving item 6 ahead of item 1 and then item 7, and noting there would be no votes taken on any items that day. Item 6 covered a proposed operational efficiencies control section for the Natural Resources Agency that would let multiple departments jointly fund landscape-scale or multi-jurisdictional projects and allow Finance to transfer climate bond funds to a lead state entity. The LAO said the proposal was reasonable but suggested the Legislature consider requiring summary notification on how it is used; Finance said it would consider that request. Item 7 focused on the 2026-27 biodiversity and nature-based solutions spending plan. Finance and the Wildlife Conservation Board described the climate bond funding for habitat restoration, wildlife crossings, public access, tribal nature-based solutions, and related work, including $111 million proposed for WCB and $30 million for Salton Sea habitat and public access projects. The LAO supported the overall approach but flagged the San Andreas Corridor Program as an area where the Legislature may want to specify geographic priorities. Members discussed the pace of Salton Sea work and whether the proposed projects would count toward disadvantaged community goals. Item 8 addressed Cal Fire’s aviation contract and staffing needs for wildfire response. Cal Fire said year-round fire activity, a larger and more complex aircraft fleet, and labor market pressures justified the proposed contract increase, including more mechanics, pilots, and maintenance support. The LAO recommended approval, saying the proposal addressed health and safety concerns. Members asked about contractor staffing, competition in the bidding process, and future technology for early fire detection and suppression. The committee then took up item 1 on golden mussel containment. Fish and Wildlife described the invasive species’ spread in the Delta, the task force and response framework, and a request for eight new positions funded by Prop. 4 to support control plans, outreach, monitoring, research, and coordination with partners and law enforcement. Members pressed the department on whether the state should fund more direct decontamination infrastructure and grants to local water managers, and on the realistic goal of containing the mussel. The chair and several members emphasized the urgency of the threat and requested an itemized breakdown of the $20 million request. The hearing then moved to a broader LAO overview of wildfire prevention and response funding, where the LAO summarized the state’s funding mix and warned that ongoing wildfire resilience funding will likely decline as one-time bond and GGRF funds are exhausted, prompting discussion of long-term funding options and the balance between prevention, suppression, and community hardening.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, members, entities contracted with the state statute allows entities contracted with the
• Finally, the bill provides a private cause of action to any... ...groups or independent entities.
• Mind you, this is just public, not private. Nothing having to do with vouchers, God forbid.
• In H.R. 1 that provides scholarships for private and public school students.
• prohibition, prohibits a municipality from imposing a fine or penalty on a business or commercial entity

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee heard a long series of Senate bills, mostly on third-read consent, covering education, public safety, health, courts, labor, and water. Several bills were briefly explained and then pulled from consent for further discussion, including measures on public records review standards (SB 1078), sexually explicit materials in schools/libraries (SB 1435 and SB 1567), burial costs in death cases (SB 1135), military flags in HOAs/COAs (SB 1184), court-ordered treatment guardianship (SB 1243), standardized state hiring (SB 1665), released-time religious instruction (SB 1741), firearm safety instruction in schools (SB 1424), student participation in extracurriculars after certain convictions (SB 1475), Celebrate Freedom Week (SB 1572), federal scholarship-granting organizations/vouchers (SB 1142), immigration-related arrest notifications (SB 1055), defamation standards (SB 1099), peace officer certification for military police veterans (SB 1107), mandatory reporting of child abuse/neglect directly to DCS (SB 1127), attorney licensing and discipline issues (SB 1148 and SB 1039), concealed weapons on college campuses (SB 1068), and firearm muffling devices/silencers (SB 1069). Members also raised constitutional, policy, and school-safety concerns on several of these bills, while supporters emphasized alternative pathways for students, veterans, and workers, and tighter reporting or licensing rules. Other bills were described without extended debate, including claims against the state for unpaid contracted services (SB 1097), workers’ compensation death benefits for surviving spouses who remarry (SB 1136), burial expense increases (SB 1135), state agency web pages for internal guidance (SB 1586), court-ordered treatment procedures and service of process in mental health cases (SB 1113), medical examiner authorization (SB 1123), tribal MOUs with DCS (SB 1125), controlled-substance scheduling conformity with federal classifications (SB 1188), EMT personal information protections (SB 1193), mammography notice updates (SB 1318), assisted-living referral disclosures (SB 1477), accommodation school GED instruction for 11th graders and students over 16 (SB 1166), credit enhancement board continuation (SB 1422), school district and charter school obligations related to religious release time (SB 1741), school firearm safety instruction (SB 1424), and school civics/freedom-week instruction (SB 1572). The committee also heard bills on CPA certification pathways (SB 1181), insurance adjuster licensing (SB 1415), county voter-registration rules online (SB 1040), campaign address privacy (SB 1259), federal land acquisition notification (SB 1281), water supply/demand assessments (SB 1202), environmental compatibility for power plants and small modular reactors (SB 1418), and groundwater recovery rules (SB 1785). The meeting ended with announcements and a brief recognition of Rep. Stephanie Hamilton with an “Affordability Award.” No final votes are shown in the transcript excerpt; instead, many bills were either left on consent, pulled for later discussion, or flagged for closed caucus. The chair then asked guests to leave so members could hold a closed caucus.

Transcript Highlights:

• . non-governmental entities.
• This bill responds to increasing conflicts between state policy and private accrediting organizations
• For decades, Texas colleges and universities have relied on private, federally recognized accreditors
• That is what we want to have—a mix of higher education represented on that new TAA entity.
• So I think at the end of the day, this is putting Texas in control of accrediting entities that. are

Bills: SB1998, SB646, SB2786, SB2076, SB2615, SB1961, SB1418, SB2647, SB1322, SB2788

Keywords: pediatrics, medical education, subsidiary, preceptorship, medical training, student programs, mental health, loan repayment, education funding, mental health professionals, healthcare access, Texas Success Initiative, exemption, public officers, employees, higher education, Capitol view, Austin, urban planning, construction

Transcript Highlights:

• These are public entities? Yes, sir. Thank you. They are public nonprofits.
• So while these are driveways from a private business, like H-E-B, or a private home, of course, the public
• Texas City is privately owned.
• Narrowed to an entity I authorize under that chapter, that would be different, right?
• The entity versus the activities, so... Okay. Hang on a second.

Bills: SB 682, SB 1013, SB 1369, SB 1422, SB 2001, SB 2080, SB 2366, SB 2705, SB 2841

Keywords: memorial highway, Captain Kevin Williams, Firefighter Austin Cheek, Smith County, transportation, pedestrian right-of-way, sidewalk users, bicycle safety, micromobility, electric scooter, motor-assisted scooter, electric personal assistive mobility device, skateboard, roller skates, driveway crossing, alley crossing, traffic safety, yield law, Texas Transportation Code, vehicle-pedestrian collision

Summary: The meeting of the committee focused on several bills aimed at enhancing the operational efficiency of Texas transportation and port authorities. Key discussions included the implications of SB2080, which seeks to streamline operations for navigation districts by raising procurement authority, exempting security discussions from recording requirements, and aligning Texas ports with national standards to foster economic growth. Senator Alvarado advocated fervently for the bill, emphasizing its positive impact on competitiveness with ports in states like Virginia and New Jersey. Public testimony reflected mixed responses, with strong support from industry representatives but opposition from some municipal authorities concerned about the potential overreach of port authorities into local development.

Transcript Highlights:

• Otherwise, a private citizen could just challenge a DA's judgment... that the evidence simply doesn't
• The only government agency entity that the Supreme Court would not have that power over.
• law enforcement, and private sector partners.
• Private sector... coordination, the SOC support, so on and so forth.
• Per entity or per occurrence? Yes. Okay. All right.

Keywords: legislation, Senate Joint Resolution 40, Senate Bill 871, constitutional amendment, emergency powers, governor authority, legislative oversight

Summary: The meeting focused on several crucial pieces of legislation, notably Senate Joint Resolution 40, which proposed a constitutional amendment to clarify the powers of the governor, the legislature, and the Supreme Court during emergencies. Senator Birdwell presented the resolution, emphasizing the need for legislative involvement during prolonged crises. It garnered broad support, passing with 29 votes in favor and only 1 against. Following this, Senate Bill 871, considered the enabling legislation, was also moved for discussion, with the aim of reinforcing the legislature's authority during emergencies while establishing clear guidelines for the governor's powers.

Transcript Highlights:

• whether you can buy elections and use giant accumulations of money that people accumulate in the private
• The big private auditors that work on audits in Minnesota, local government officials, and we have Bjorn
• You might see, again, like 21 entities dropping out of townships and over 100 entities dropping out of
• I think that we already work closely with the entities: the state department, highway department, and
• This bill, House File 1917, deals with the area of public data: what's private and what's not private

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not, however, have jurisdiction to say that the lands that are privately owned around it can be
• So, there are a number of private lakes and private waters like that, where you have someone who...
• I'm sure you might get some private phone calls when people are just asking questions further.
• Not that we're aware of without crossing private property that we own.
• It was a public entity open for 3 days a week. Yes, it was Friday, Saturday. Yes, sir.

Bills: HB471, HB473

Keywords: water authority, sewer management, fire protection, local governance, board of directors, local officers, water recreation, public access, water bodies, recreational use, water commissions, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Are they connecting all those entities between each other?
• Not every single entity throughout the state is on it.
• Some that are not on it have a private interface. That is rare.
• Some that are not on it have a private interface. That is rare.
• Because I remember kind of..." "...privately provided.

Summary: The committee met to review the Attorney General’s budget and related agency operations, beginning with Legislative Council staff walking members through compliance reports and a blue-sheet base budget document. Staff highlighted current-biennium items such as FTE changes, one-time appropriations, litigation funding, opioid settlement receipts, continuing appropriations, and major special and federal funds. Members asked for clarification on items including the Missing Indigenous People Grant Fund, the Internet Crimes Investigation Fund, and the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit grant funding. Assistant Attorney General Clare Ness then gave an overview of the office’s structure, staffing, and budget pressures. She emphasized the office’s broad statutory duties, the value of its legal services to state and local government, and concerns about attorney pay lagging behind other agencies. Members discussed whether attorney compensation should be benchmarked more consistently across state government and whether some legal work could be consolidated within the AG’s office. Ness also addressed questions about AG opinion turnaround times, boards-and-commissions training, the new-and-vacant FTE pool, operating expense cuts, office leases, and the state’s criminal justice information systems. The crime lab presentation drew significant attention. Director Jennifer Penner described severe space, safety, and infrastructure problems at the current lab, including cramped work areas, glycol leaks, outdated fire and burglar alarms, air-handling limits, and equipment failures that have delayed toxicology work. She said the 2024 study projected a much larger facility would be needed and that the preferred location would be near the current health department site, but in a new building. Members asked about possible evidence risks, backlog status, and whether the proposed building would solve the current problems; Penner said it would and noted backlogs have improved overall, though some delays remain. The committee also heard from the new Medicaid Fraud Control Unit director, who described the unit’s civil and criminal work, federal-state funding split, and examples of fraud such as billing for services not provided or upcoding. The gaming division reported continued growth in charitable gaming and e-tabs, with members expressing concern about large trust-account balances, site competition, and possible misuse of proceeds. Finally, BCI outlined its caseload, cybercrime work, missing Indigenous persons task force, and the surge in CSAM cyber tips; members asked about AI-generated CSAM, and the AG’s office noted that last session’s law increased penalties and expressly allowed AI-generated CSAM to be prosecuted like other CSAM. No formal votes or actions were taken beyond approval of the minutes.