Transcript Highlights:

• report yesterday, strongly disagree with the fact that just throwing more money without very clear guidelines
• Just throwing more money without very clear guidelines and accountability that's enforceable makes any
• A good compromise, like this piece of legislation, is like a good sentence, says the former high school
• funding or staffing, not based on what's best for students, and we do need solid research-based guidelines
• The goal is simple: to recommend class size guidelines that help ensure meaningful instruction, individualized

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard AB 84, a charter school accountability measure focused on non-classroom-based charter schools and fraud prevention. The author and supporters said the bill was intended to respond to the A3 charter fraud case and related scandals by strengthening audits, transparency, authorizer oversight, and funding determination rules, while ensuring public education dollars are used for public education. Supporters included FCMAT, CSEA, CTA, and CSBA, who argued the bill would improve oversight and protect taxpayers. Opponents, including the California Charter Schools Association, Green Dot, many charter parents, educators, and charter operators, said the bill was too broad, would impose major new costs and bureaucracy on all charter schools, and could reduce options for families, especially those using flexible, homeschool, or special-needs charter programs. After extensive testimony and committee discussion, the bill passed on a 5-1 vote and was sent to Appropriations, with the item left open for additional votes. The committee then approved a consent calendar of 11 education bills, including AB 542, AB 563, AB 731, AB 753, AB 784, AB 964, AB 988, AB 1034, AB 1233, AB 1255, and AB 1381, all moving to Appropriations. The consent calendar passed unanimously. Later, the committee heard AB 1454, a literacy and reading instruction bill authored by Assembly Members Rubio and Revis. The bill would require the state to create professional development resources for evidence-based literacy instruction, update English language arts and English language development instructional materials, and revise administrator preparation standards to include literacy training. The authors and a broad coalition of supporters, including CTA, EdVoice, Families in Schools, Decoding Dyslexia, school administrators, and parent advocates, described the measure as a compromise aimed at improving reading outcomes and addressing California’s literacy crisis. There was no opposition testimony at the hearing, and members voiced strong support for the bill and its collaborative approach.

Transcript Highlights:

• And you'd be surprised how if you sentence someone, and you don't have to sentence them to a long amount
• And you'd be surprised how, if you sentence someone, and you don't have to sentence them to a long amount
• They have to sentence you to jail. Okay. Does the...
• them, and then probate the sentence, and they give them probation every time.
• Exactly, because you can sentence someone for up to six months in jail.

Bills: HB46, HB272

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

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

Transcript Highlights:

• That’s the second sentence of G.
• That’s the second sentence of G.
• You know that because in the first sentence of subsection G, or the first sentence of paragraph 7 for
• So the first sentence is about school district employees, but the second sentence, it isn’t silent on
• The first sentence withstands an entire article here, and the second sentence blows up the constitutional

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This changes the age for which individuals are eligible for life without parole sentences from 18 years
• to a term of life without sentenced to a term of life without parole<00:23:35.320> and<00:23:
• laws not just specific to all sentencing laws not just specific ones<00:23:39.039> mentioned<
• <00:23:55.520> of intended to prohibit the sentencing of intended to prohibit the sentencing
• <00:24:01.919> of intended to prohibit the sentencing of intended to prohibit the sentencing

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on several bills covering criminal justice, elections, and wildfire-related settlement funding. HB 103 would raise the age cutoff for life-without-parole eligibility from 18 to 21; supporters included the Public Defender and others, while prosecutors and some others opposed it. HB 11 would allow civil claims against people or businesses profiting from sexual exploitation or sex trafficking; it drew mostly support but was not ready for a vote and was deferred for further questions. HB 132 would expand a state-initiated expungement pilot to include possession of any Schedule V substance; the Public Defender, ACLU, and oversight groups supported it, with one opponent, and committee questions focused on what substances and how many cases would be affected. HB 145 would require the Hawaii Criminal Justice Data Center to transmit expungement orders to the Judiciary to implement Act 159; the Judiciary and Public Defender supported it, and members discussed technical issues involving multiple defendants and multiple charges. HB 369, a campaign finance housekeeping bill on excess cash contributions, and HB 408, which aligns voter registration-by-mail deadlines with current law, both received support and no opposition of note. The committee also heard HB 1175, which creates appropriations and a trust fund for Maui wildfire settlement claims; the Attorney General’s office, Maui County Council, and Tax Foundation supported it, while one senator said he would vote no because of concerns about House leadership. HB 386, which conforms drug possession thresholds for methamphetamine, heroin, morphine, and cocaine, was supported by law enforcement and prosecutors. HB 134 would require electronic filing of nomination papers; the Elections Office supported it but asked that any convenience fee be authorized in statute, while one witness opposed it over security and cost concerns. After testimony and questions, the committee took up decision-making and passed HB 103 with amendments, deferred HB 11, and passed HB 132, HB 145, HB 369, HB 408, HB 1175, HB 386, and HB 134, with HB 134 amended to clarify no additional charge for electronic filing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Would you add a sentence that said the outcomes of the study commission on special education are needed
• So on page 12, in the last paragraph, second sentence, >> Thank you.
• "This is in the sentence that says..."
• "The previous sentence."
• oh the previous sentence oh the previous sentence >> [snorts] >> [snorts] >> [

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed and approved the prior day’s minutes after making several corrections, including changing references to the “majority report,” fixing wording and spelling in the special education section, clarifying language about NAPE scores, and correcting a funding figure from 2,000 to 20,000. Members also agreed to add a sentence noting that the conclusions of the special education study commission should be considered in any consolidation plan. The minutes were then adopted unanimously. The committee then worked through the minority report, making edits to soften or clarify language. Changes included replacing “partisan” with “participation,” revising a statement about test scores so it reflected that “the minority believes” some committee members lacked a complete understanding, and adding “the minority believes” before a statement that the structure of education funding is inequitable because of its reliance on local property taxes. Members also discussed whether some wording was factual or opinion-based, and agreed to leave some comments in place or make minor wording adjustments. After discussion, the committee voted on the final report of the majority of the committee, with edits and appendices, and approved it by a 5-2 vote. Representatives Damon and Bricky voted no. Members noted that a minority report would also be included in the final materials. Finally, the committee authorized the committee assistant to make technical corrections, fix remaining typos, and include the minutes of the meeting, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• , or some people felt that there was a light sentence, he felt that his child had a light sentence or
• County where there was a light sentence County where there was a light sentence or<00:14:05.560>
• He felt that his child light sentence.
• So um perpetrator had a light sentence.
• Yeah, that's past the sentence.

Keywords: Judiciary, Division B - Room 409, 3 March, 2026; 9:00 A.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1131, which would revise penalties for procuring prostitution by increasing the misdemeanor fine from $200 to $1,000, increasing the felony fine from $1,000 to $2,000, and adding 100 hours of community service. Representative Ford explained that the bill had been changed from an earlier version that made the first offense a felony. The committee approved the bill after brief discussion. Members then discussed a strike-all for House Bill 1613, a drug trafficking bill that had been amended to add a pill-count threshold for aggravated trafficking and to include language addressing abortion-inducing drugs. The added provisions would make certain conduct involving abortion-inducing drugs a felony punishable by one to ten years and would authorize the Attorney General to seek civil enforcement. Senators raised questions about whether the House and Senate versions were identical, and one member expressed concern about mail-order abortion pills and the lack of medical oversight. Another senator raised a concern about the definition of "clinically diagnosable pregnancy" and ectopic pregnancies. The committee adopted the strike-all and passed the bill. House Bill 525, dealing with sexual battery sentencing, drew the most extended debate. Representative Rimac said the bill was prompted by constituent concerns about what he viewed as lenient sentences in a few cases and would add minimum sentences of five years for a first offense and ten years for a second offense. After discussion, the committee adopted a friendly amendment narrowing the bill by striking language related to age-difference provisions, with members noting that those provisions could affect cases not intended to be covered. Several senators then debated whether mandatory minimums were appropriate, with some arguing the bill was needed to ensure meaningful punishment for sexual battery and others arguing it would remove judicial discretion and respond to a small number of outlier cases. The committee ultimately passed the bill as amended. The committee also considered House Bill 538, which would require political subdivisions to cooperate with immigration detainers and give the Attorney General enforcement authority, but only after adding a reverse repealer. Senators raised concerns about possible sovereign-immunity issues and the breadth of the cooperation language, while others urged narrowing the bill to avoid unintended consequences. The committee adopted the strike-all and passed the bill. At the end of the meeting, the chairman introduced House Bill 1612, a Department of Public Safety restructuring bill, and noted that Commissioner Tindell would present it with a possible conceptual amendment, but that bill was not yet discussed in the portion of the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• That sentence is coming out. The paragraph two lines 89 is going to stay in.
• That sentence is coming out. The paragraph two, lines 89, is going to stay in.
• That sentence is coming out. The paragraph two, lines 89, is going to stay in.
• That sentence is coming out. to six. That sentence is coming out.
• That sentence is coming out.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:01 SB 132 Discussion 00:44 SB 132 Vote 07:10 SB 33 Discussion 08:30 SB 33 Vote 17:24 SB 85 Discussion 18:08 SB 85 Vote 25:58 Adjournment: 26:38, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 132, which would clarify that state law does not limit local governments’ authority to regulate businesses affiliated with licensed massage therapists. The sponsor and supporting testimony from a police chief and the Kentucky League of Cities said the bill is aimed at helping cities respond to complaints about suspected illegal activity, including possible human trafficking, by expressly allowing local ordinances on zoning, licensing, inspections, advertising, hours, and sanitation. The bill also increases the penalty for practicing massage therapy without a license from a class B to a class A misdemeanor and makes each unlicensed session a separate offense, while preserving existing protections for trafficking victims. The committee then heard Senate Bill 33, which addresses recovery residence centers. Senator Thomas said the bill responds to fraudulent or noncompliant recovery homes operating without proper certification and creating neighborhood problems. The measure would require recovery residences to notify cities when they apply for and receive certification, report certain ownership and contact information, and allow cities to keep a registry so they can identify certified facilities. Testimony from the Kentucky Alliance of Recovery Residences supported the bill’s enforcement goals but objected to making addresses public, citing safety concerns for vulnerable residents; the sponsor agreed to remove the public-record language through a floor amendment. The committee passed the bill favorably 8-0. Finally, the committee considered Senate Bill 85, which would allow state retirement benefits to be directed to a special needs trust. The sponsor and co-sponsor said the bill is intended to help state employees provide for a dependent with special needs after the employee’s death without affecting eligibility for waiver or other benefits. A witness from the Kentucky Alliance of Recovery Residences supported the concept and noted the importance of clear language, while Senator McDaniel raised a technical concern about whether the bill could allow benefits to be directed to an unintended beneficiary. The sponsor said the language would be reviewed and clarified if needed. The committee approved the bill 8-0 with favorable expression and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It just reorganizes the sentence structure. There's no real substantive change there.
• There's a sentence added that says witnesses participating can turn off their cameras if they're having
• 7.2 uh it just reorganizes the sentence 7.2 uh it just reorganizes the sentence structure<00:03:
• uh there's a sentence added that says<00:04:59.720> Witnesses<00:05:00.320> participating<
• There is a sentence added that says this can be done by sending something via the list serve.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the specific language that they proposed, um, there were two sentences.
• The first sentence sounds fine.
• <00:05:27.039> The<00:05:27.280> first<00:05:27.440> sentence were two sentences
• The first sentence were two sentences. The first sentence sounds<00:05:28.240> fine.
• The second sentence was I sounds fine.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met to reconsider its prior vote on SB 148 and then take up a substitute amendment. The chair explained that members from both caucuses, along with the ranking member, were generally in agreement on the process: first a motion to reconsider, then a vote on amendment 20251922H, followed by a vote on the bill. He also noted late input from the attorney general’s office seeking language to ensure the bill would not affect criminal prosecutions, and said the final floor amendment language would be worked out with that office but would remain under legislative control. Representative Coutab moved to reconsider the committee’s earlier vote on SB 148, and the motion passed by show of hands, 16-1, with the chair not voting. Representative Manos then moved amendment 20251922H, described as a substitute for the Birch-Lin amendment that removed a paragraph on page 2, lines 17-19. The amendment was adopted unanimously, 17-0. The committee then voted on the main motion, to ought to pass SB 148 as amended. Members spoke in support, describing the bill as heavily revised through extensive work and research, with one member crediting Representative Coutab’s research for helping shape the revised proposal. The roll call passed 17-0. The chair said the bill could not go on consent because a floor amendment would be needed, and the committee would keep members apprised of the final language. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• You said it would be sentenced by the court.
• under Section 38, can the judge... ...SENTENCE THE OFFENDER TO LIFE IN PRISON?
• Pre and post-sentencing situation, is that what you're talking about?
• Can murder and rape a child, and the judge can sentence them to just a prison sentence, and they will
• The court stated we hold this sentencing scheme unconstitutional.

Transcript Highlights:

• sentences from 18 years of age or older to 21 years of age.
• all sentencing laws.
• sentences from 18 years of age or older to 21 years of age.
• all sentencing laws.
• <01:32:07.080> questions<01:32:07.360> or sentence questions or sentence questions or concerns

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 114, which would create a presidential preference primary for the 2028 election. The Office of Elections said the bill would cost about $4.1 million. Supporters, including the Hawaii Democratic Party and the League of Women Voters, favored moving the process to a state-run primary, while several opponents, including the Hawaiian Islands Republican Women and multiple individual testifiers, argued it would be too expensive, would shift control away from the parties, and would replace volunteer-run caucuses with a mail-in system. Committee members questioned the chief election officer about election timing, certification, and how a primary might be scheduled with other elections. Testimony was recorded as 11 in support, 41 opposed, and 3 comments, and no vote was taken in the excerpt. The committee then took up SB 725, which would require judges to make findings about a defendant’s ability to afford bail. Judiciary and Attorney General witnesses asked that the bill be deferred or amended, saying the Judicial Council is already reviewing pretrial bail reform and that the bill’s language could create practical problems for police, sheriffs, and courts. Supporters, including the Correctional System Oversight Commission, the public defender, the Community Alliance on Prisons, the ACLU of Hawaii, and disability rights advocates, said cash bail disproportionately harms low-income defendants, increases pretrial detention costs, and should require clearer findings and records. Opponents included the Hawaii County prosecuting attorney. Members questioned how bail is initially set, what records exist, and whether the bill would change current practice; Judiciary witnesses said initial bail decisions are often made by police or judges and later reviewed on the record, while supporters argued the bill would strengthen front-end due process. The ACLU said it supported the bill with amendments, including clearer standards for ability to pay and written findings. The committee also began hearing SB 733, a proposed constitutional amendment to establish a continuous legislative session. Early testimony was strongly supportive, with advocates arguing that the current 60-day session limits public participation, makes it hard for working people to testify, and prevents lawmakers from collaborating effectively. Supporters said a year-round model could improve transparency, reduce duplicate bills, and better accommodate neighbor island legislators. The excerpt ends during the opening testimony on SB 733, before any committee action or vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• So help me pre-sentence investigation.
• <00:24:16.480> I The pre-sentence investigation report, I The pre-sentence investigation report
• So at the sentencing phase, we're no longer just going to hear arguments.
• <00:32:10.000> uh an opportunity uh at the sentencing uh an opportunity uh at the sentencing
• It sentenced her, too. It sentenced me, too. This bill gives families a better chance. It helps.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee heard Senate Bill 122, which would allow certain defendants who are caretakers of dependent children to ask a sentencing court to consider parenting classes and family counseling as part of an alternative sentence, alongside existing options like probation and treatment programs. Representative Nick Wilson, the House sponsor, said the bill was aimed at helping families affected by the opioid crisis, especially in Appalachia, and described it as a way to support parents who want to get clean and rebuild family stability. He emphasized that the bill would apply only on a defendant’s motion, would not be automatic, and would exclude violent offenders, domestic violence-related cases, child-victim cases, and cases where probation or similar relief is otherwise prohibited. Committee members raised concerns that the bill could create a two-tiered system of justice or add unnecessary procedure because judges already consider family circumstances through presentence investigations and sentencing discretion. One senator said he would support the bill but worried it privileged defendants with children over those without. Another member argued the bill was unnecessary because judges and prosecutors already have these options available and because it could add another hearing to an already overloaded court system. Supporters responded that the family unit should be given greater weight and that the bill would simply make that consideration more explicit. Judge Julie Ward, joined by Judge Jeremy Maddox, testified against the bill as written. She said judges already receive presentence reports, hear offender statements, and consider caregiving responsibilities, and that family court already addresses children’s needs when custody issues arise. Her main objections were that parenting services are not available in all communities, may cost money, and that the bill would require evidentiary hearings and potentially create equal protection problems by giving preferential treatment to caretakers. She urged the sponsors to work on revised language instead of passing the bill in its current form. Senator Wheeler said he would vote for the bill and noted that a floor amendment would be offered to address access to confidential juvenile “J cases” in presentence reports, since probation and parole do not have that access. He said the amendment was intended to make sure sentencing judges have the information they need. The discussion ended without a final committee vote in the transcript, but the bill remained under consideration with possible amendment and further revision.

Transcript Highlights:

• He was sentenced to three years in TDC, less than three years.
• They'll serve out a short sentence, like three weekends, and they're out of jail.
• If he receives a prison sentence, right?
• Once sentenced to stay in jail, the case is closed, and courts do not monitor rehabilitative progress
• They can check a box that says that this person is being sentenced today that they If they earn it in

Bills: HB1482, HB2017, HB2103, HB2341, HB2756

Keywords: community supervision, repeat offenders, intoxication, Texas Penal Code, criminal justice reform, intoxication manslaughter, criminal penalties, mandatory supervision, parole eligibility, Grayson's Law, mental health, trauma, jailers, law enforcement, occupational health, diligent participation, state jail felony, time credits, rehabilitation programs, de-escalation

Transcript Highlights:

• So adult sentences are becoming more prevalent in JR.
• Our length of stay is also increasing for adult sentences in JR.
• This is just another representation of the sentence type of youth in JR placement.
• Challenges at Green Hill School if their sentence extends beyond their 17th birthday.
• when sentences are extended beyond the statutory minimum, and this is where JR has control.

Summary: The committee began with a work session on juvenile rehabilitation institution capacity, services, and staffing. DCYF Assistant Secretary Jennifer Redmond described overcrowding at Green Hill School and Echo Glen, driven by longer adult-style sentences extending past age 25, limited community placements, and small facility sizes. She said Green Hill remains above safe operating capacity, but staffing, injuries, large-scale aggression, and use-of-force incidents have improved over the past year. She also discussed Harbor Heights, a new 46-bed flex facility that had opened with 22 youth and would expand once a medical trailer arrives, as well as community transition services, vocational programming, behavior management reforms, and a request for more resources for mental health-focused facilities and staffing. Members asked about success metrics, developmental disability screening and supports, college access at Echo Glen, Mission Creek planning, and gender-responsive programming; Redmond said JR uses assessments, family involvement, and specialized living units, and that some requested funding had already been secured for returning a girls’ program at Echo Glen. The committee then heard from Team Child and the Youth Action Coalition. Greta Schultz said youth perspectives should guide system reforms and identified key concerns: overuse of sentence extensions, underuse of community transition services, continued criminal referrals from Green Hill to Lewis County, limited family contact, inadequate mental health access, and unequal education opportunities, especially for young women at Echo Glen. Justella Gonzalez, a former system-involved youth, said her time in county and state facilities was harmful, with staff mistreatment, poor education, limited therapy access, and humiliating restraint practices; she also said girls at Echo Glen lacked the same college opportunities as boys at Green Hill. Committee members asked for follow-up on county versus state experiences and on telehealth mental health services. The next presentation covered county-level services for youth involved or at risk of involvement with the justice system, led by juvenile court administrators Christine Simon-Smeyer and Judge Rachel Anderson. They outlined the juvenile court continuum from prevention and truancy work through diversion, detention alternatives, community supervision, and disposition alternatives, emphasizing evidence-based, trauma-informed, and restorative practices. Clark County was used as an example of a court that partners closely with schools and community providers, uses risk assessments and wraparound behavioral health probation, and offers detention alternatives without electronic home monitoring. They said most courts do not use detention for status offenses, but instead use court involvement to connect youth to services. They also described funding, noting that courts rely on a mix of state block grant and local dollars, and that recent cuts to early intervention funding reduced programming and staff hours. Members asked about detention for truancy, developmental disability identification, restorative justice practices, and the juvenile block grant. Finally, DCYF Assistant Secretary Nicole Rose and Katie Warren of the Washington State Association of Head Start and ECAP discussed child care and early learning impacts from recent policy and budget changes. Rose said Fair Start for Kids investments had increased child care access, provider participation, and kindergarten readiness, with more than 60,000 children in Working Connections care and rising ECAP enrollment and provider capacity. She said recent reductions will raise most family copays in 2026, delay eligibility expansions, eliminate some expanded eligibility categories, reduce ECAP slots by about 3,000, delay entitlement timelines, and cut provider supports such as rate increases for centers, complex-needs grants, trauma-informed and dual-language incentives, and infant/early childhood mental health consultation. Warren emphasized ECAP’s role in family stability, workforce participation, and reducing poverty, and noted its two-generation approach to supporting both children and parents.

Transcript Highlights:

• What is the present sentence structure?
• But it would be a minimum of 25 years sentence? Yes, sir.
• The jury’s already giving those sentences the right amount of severity.
• The jury's already giving those sentences the right amount of severity.
• Go ahead and finish your last sentence. I'm sorry.

Bills: HB75, HB108

Keywords: building standards, youth camps, floodplains, safety regulations, environmental policies, drainage utilities, flood management, land use regulation, county authority, drainage fees

Summary: The committee heard a series of criminal justice and public safety bills, with most measures focused on tougher penalties, victim protections, and procedural changes. Bills discussed included HB 75, requiring magistrates to make written findings when denying probable cause despite believing an arrestee committed an offense; HB 413, limiting pretrial detention so it cannot exceed the maximum jail term for the charged offense, with competency-related exceptions; HB 1422, expanding sexual assault survivor protections and increasing penalties for certain sexual offenses and voyeurism; HB 2073, increasing penalties for violating protective orders or bond conditions while armed; HB 2593, raising indecent assault penalties against elderly or disabled victims; HB 108, enhancing punishment when body armor is used during violent crimes; HB 3816, expanding cruelty-to-livestock offenses to include unlawful controlled-substance administration; HB 2854, requiring parole officers to notify hospitals or law enforcement when violent parolees visit hospital premises; HB 1871, increasing punishment for attempted capital murder of a peace officer and making such offenders ineligible for parole; HB 3463, clarifying notice methods in theft-of-service cases; HB 2348, allowing video-recorded depositions of elderly or disabled witnesses; HB 2594, expanding venue options for cybercrime and digital theft prosecutions; HB 2761, clarifying that children cannot be deemed to consent to prostitution-related offenses; HB 3185, authorizing administrative subpoenas in cybercrime investigations; HB 2017, increasing penalties for certain intoxication manslaughter cases involving undocumented immigrants with prior DWI convictions; HB 2306, making certain trafficking offenses ineligible for parole; HB 1607, allowing a rear-only license plate when a vehicle lacks a front bracket; HB 1828, creating a legislative leave pool for TDCJ correctional officers; and HB 3664, requiring prospective grand jurors to complete training and proposing additional changes to grand jury procedure in a future substitute. The committee also took up HB 3073, the Summer Willis Act, which would clarify consent in sexual assault law and address intoxication-related incapacity; the committee substitute narrowed the language to situations where the perpetrator knows the other person cannot consent because of intoxication or impairment, while removing withdrawal-of-consent and “reasonably should know” language from the House version. Several bills were laid out with committee substitutes adopted, including HB 3463, HB 2594, HB 3073, and HB 3073’s substitute, and most bills were left pending after no invited or public testimony or after hearing testimony. Public testimony was especially extensive on HB 3073, with survivors, advocates, and prosecutors supporting broader consent language, while some prosecutors said the substitute was an improvement but still favored the House version’s broader protections. HB 3664 drew significant opposition from district attorneys, who argued that mandatory transcription or recording of grand jury testimony would be costly, chill grand juror questioning, and complicate timely presentations; concerns were also raised about new-evidence requirements and grand jury shopping. No final votes were taken on the bills discussed in the transcript, and the committee recessed partway through to return to the floor before continuing its hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We struck that entire sentence. We did the same thing in letter B on page three.
• We struck<02:09:42.639> that<02:09:42.880> entire<02:09:43.360> sentence.
• We did the struck that entire sentence.
• On page four, there was that sentence.
• struck starting with the the sentence struck starting with the the sentence that<02:10:45.280>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me read the last sentence: 'And after the effective date of this chapter, no institution of higher
• from an let me read the last sentence from an let me read the last sentence from<02:31:05.240>
• Also, the student fraternity and sorority councils have due process guidelines in place as well, and
• title 9 guidelines or regulations that<02:46:24.439> are<02:46:24.640> changing<02:46:
• <02:46:48.160> were recollection is that the guidelines were recollection is that the guidelines

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on HB 366, which would increase school building aid for eligible projects. Representative Cahill, the prime sponsor, said the bill would raise the annual minimum from $50 million to $60 million and help address a long backlog of school construction and renovation needs after years of a moratorium on applications. He argued that districts forced to build during the moratorium were left to shoulder costs through local property taxes, and he cited examples such as Londonderry, Claremont, and other communities with aging or inadequate facilities. He also said the current aid structure, including paying 80% upfront and 20% at completion, concentrates too much spending at once and limits how many projects can be funded. Several committee members asked about the fairness and structure of the program. Representative Maguire questioned whether aid should be distributed more broadly to all districts rather than only a few selected projects, and Representative Luneau noted that the committee would also be considering related bills on catastrophic aid, special education aid, and the school foundation formula. Cahill responded that building aid has historically been targeted to property-poor communities and that the state should be a reliable partner in school construction. He also said the bill includes a small retroactive component for communities that built during the moratorium, which he described as a compromise. Testimony in support came from Representative Cluder, who described Claremont’s Stevens High School project as a case where a bond issue narrowly failed and the city later had to fund renovations without state aid, contributing to high property taxes. He said the bill would help property-poor communities and urged passage. Tony Weinstein of New Market also supported the bill, saying his community had serious facility and safety needs, had moved forward with scaled-back renovations during the moratorium, and still faced debt-service burdens without state participation. Robert Thompson, superintendent in Hampstead, testified that his district needs an addition for overcrowding, safety, and special education space, and said building aid would help reduce out-of-district placements and transportation costs. No vote was taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have the option as lawmakers to not sentence people to life in prison without parole.
• We can just sentence them to life in prison.
• We can just sentence them to life in prison.
• So he got a life sentence without parole to death. Without parole to death, right.
• <00:57:48.000> for support reducing prison sentences for support reducing prison sentences

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So your concern is a run-on sentence? No, Mr. Speaker, not at all.
• That’s the second sentence of G.
• You know that because in the first sentence of subsection G, or the first sentence of paragraph 7 for
• So the first sentence is about school district employees, but the second sentence is not silent on it
• The first sentence not withstands an entire article here, and the second sentence... ...here, and the

Summary: The committee met to review and adopt Legislative Council ballot measure analyses, with members repeatedly reminded that the hearing was limited to the accuracy, clarity, and impartiality of the summaries and not the merits of the underlying proposals. Steve Premack explained the statutory role of the analyses in the publicity pamphlet, and staff presented draft language for several measures. The committee considered and voted on multiple amendments, often debating whether proposed wording was clearer or instead crossed into advocacy or added unnecessary legal detail. For SCR 1004, members debated amendments to more closely mirror the measure’s text and to add language about electric vehicles and mileage, but several proposed changes were rejected. The analysis was ultimately adopted by an 8-6 roll call. HCR 2021 was then adopted without amendment by the same 8-6 margin. For HCR 2055, members debated whether the summary should say the Department of Homeland Security must “do everything” or “use all lawful means available,” and whether to add language about cartels acting “individually or collectively”; both amendments were rejected and the analysis was adopted 8-6. The committee next took up SCR 1004 on photo enforcement systems, where members proposed amendments to clarify that the measure would apply to red light cameras, to add “thereafter” regarding recurring voter approval, and to specify that approval would occur at the general election; those amendments failed, and the analysis was adopted 8-6. On SCR 1032, dealing with instructional expenses and classroom site fund reductions, members debated adding a definition of the Classroom Site Fund and spelling out the waiver process in more detail; both amendments failed, and the analysis was adopted 8-6. Finally, on HCR 2001 regarding citizenship identification and early voting, members rejected amendments that would have added background on current law, clarified that mail voting would be affected, added severability and revenue-source language, and struck the measure’s short title; the discussion was lengthy and at times contentious, but the transcript ends before a final roll-call vote on that measure is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• When somebody is convicted of a crime, the sentencing judge will have a pre-sentence investigation done
• When somebody is convicted of a crime, the sentencing judge will have a pre-sentence investigation done
• When somebody is convicted of a crime, the sentencing judge will have a pre-sentence investigation done
• When somebody is convicted of a crime, the sentencing judge will have a pre-sentence investigation done
• When somebody is convicted of a crime, the sentencing judge will have a pre-sentence investigation done

Keywords: 916, all