Transcript Highlights:

• Read the House bill the first and second time by title.
• House Bill 1D, a bill to be entitled an act establishing the congressional districts of the state.
• House Bill 1D, a bill to be entitled an act establishing the congressional districts of the state.
• House Bill 1D, a bill to be entitled an act establishing the congressional districts of the state.
• House Bill 1D, a bill to be entitled an act establishing the congressional districts of the state.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session and took up Senate Bill 8D, later substituting identical House Bill 1D, to establish Florida’s congressional districts. The opening prayer and Pledge of Allegiance were followed by procedural remarks, then extensive floor discussion focused almost entirely on the redistricting proposal, its timing, and its legal basis. Senator Gaetz, explaining the bill, said the Governor had transmitted the map two days earlier, argued that mid-decade congressional redistricting is not prohibited by law, and said the Governor’s stated reasons were to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts. He also said the legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal. Much of the debate centered on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Louisiana decision and whether it affected Florida’s Fair Districts Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Senators Smith, Rouson, Sharief, Polsky, Arrington, Bracey Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and others questioned the short notice, lack of public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony, and whether the map diluted minority voting strength or fragmented communities of interest. Gaetz repeatedly said he was not offering legal opinions, that the Governor’s counsel believed the Fair Districts race-based provisions were inconsistent with federal law, and that any legal challenge would be for the courts. He also said the Governor’s mapmaker reported using census and demographic data, along with political data as one of many inputs, and claimed the map’s compactness was comparable to the current map. A motion by Senator Smith to temporarily postpone consideration of the bill failed on a 12-23 vote. After the Senate returned from a 30-minute break to review the new Supreme Court decision, debate continued. The chamber then substituted HB 1D for SB 8D, read the House bill, and advanced it to third reading. The transcript ends during debate on final passage, with Senators Rouson and Bernard speaking in opposition and arguing the map was procedurally rushed, legally vulnerable, and politically motivated.

Transcript Highlights:

• Usually the CIP bill is what we call our jobs bill, but this session it's also our housing bill.
• It's a housing bill. It's a bonds bill.
• It's a housing bill. It's a bonds bill.
• It's a housing bill. It's a bonds bill.
• So I encourage all of our members to vote for this bill, this housing bill, this jobs bill, and us keeping

Transcript Highlights:

• You have due pass House Bill. By your vote of nine yes, three no, House Bill 1752 has due pass.
• Player vote 9 yes, 3? No, you have due passed House Bill 1759. I now move the House Bill 1812.
• for House Bill 3035.
• when Senate Bill 3 was done.
• 2 for House Bill 2780.

Committee: House Rules - Legislative

Transcript Highlights:

• the House and convey the bill to the governor House Bill 2086 House Bill 2086 amending section 36 6881
• House Bill 2174. And convey the bill to the governor. House Bill 2174.
• House Bill 249. House Bill 249. House Bill 249.
• House Bill 2379, amending Section 15-302, A.R.S., in Title 15, Chapter 3, Article 3, relating to school
• House Bill...

Transcript Highlights:

• But this amendment is actually House Bill 3470.
• So this is House Bill 2408.
• I now move that the House Committee substitute for Senate Substitute No. 3 for Senate Bill 1062 be voted
• No. 3 for Senate Bill 1062 do pass.
• Further testimony in support of House Bill 11 or sorry, Senate Bill 1119.

Committee: House General Laws

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, I'd like to cut up item number four, House Bill 3, and make the usual motions."
• Speaker, I'd like to cut up item number four, House Bill 3, and make the usual motions."
• Speaker, I'd like to cut up item number four, House Bill 3, and make the usual motions."
• Speaker, I'd like to ask for immediate release on House Bill 3.
• Gentleman's request is for immediate release on House Bill 3. Is there any objection?

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill, too. So, it's it's the store House Bill, too.
• The next line discusses House Bill 318. House Bill 318 was enacted last year.
• bills that the House had and retained their bills but still put them in House Bill 2. going to have
• House Bill Two, especially were put into House Bill Two, especially bills<01:57:12.239><c> uh</c><01
• that they have." included in House Bill Two. included in House Bill Two.

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2275, an act authorizing the town of Wellesley to amend the income threshold for senior real
• House Bill 4143, an act amending the charter of the town of Hoppington to incorporate a property...
• House Bill 4292. Question comes on passing the bills to be enacted. All those in favor say aye.
• The Committee on Rules, on the House bill relative to certain powers of the Board of Water Commissioners
• The Committee on Rules, to whom was heard the House bill authorizing the Cotuit Fire District to raise

Transcript Highlights:

• So now we're moving on to Senate House Bill 200.
• , House Bill 200 is a bill that incentivizes the construction of starter homes.
• Now we are moving on to House Bill 165, and then we're going to do House Bill 285. I know...
• And then we're going to do House Bill 285.
• So that was the Veterans Bill that we took—House Bill 285 was that one.

Committee: Senate Senate Tax, Business & Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• I support this bill.
• from 3% to 30%.
• This bill also...
• Tonga-Pai. 6 to 0, that bill is out. All right. I think we still have our last bill.
• That bill is out. All right, members, that wraps up the bills we have.

Committee: House Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair and members of the committee, House Bill 200 is a bill that incentivizes the construction
• Chair and members of the committee, House Bill 200 is a bill that incentivizes the construction of starter
• I'm sorry, House Bill 154. Not Senate Bill 154. I'm sorry. I didn't mean that. House Bill 154.
• House Bill 285 is a priority bill put together with collaboration with New Mexico counties, the Tax and
• We are on House Bill 165. Oh, I marked the wrong page, didn't I?

Summary: The committee first heard SB 283, a workforce housing bill that would let local governments designate housing shortage areas and use metropolitan redevelopment tools, including property tax stabilization, to encourage construction and preservation of “missing middle” housing. Supporters said it would preserve local control, increase supply, and help teachers, nurses, first responders, and young workers afford housing. Opponents raised concerns about gentrification, redevelopment in neighborhoods, and whether the affordability requirements were strong enough. After questions about local designation, affordability percentages, and the 14-year term, the committee passed the Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee substitute for SB 283 on an 8-0 vote. The committee then considered HB 103, which would keep the residential property tax cap in place when zoning changes occur, so long as the property’s use remains residential. Supporters argued the bill would protect homeowners from tax spikes caused by rezoning and preserve stability for seniors and families. Committee discussion focused on how zoning changes affect valuation, what counts as an upzone, and how assessors currently apply the law. The bill passed on a 6-1 vote. HB 200, a starter-home incentive bill, was heard next. The bill would provide zero-interest loans through the Mortgage Finance Authority to reduce the cost of newly built starter homes, with higher subsidy amounts in Santa Fe, Taos, and Los Alamos. Supporters said it would help young families, retirees, and first-time buyers and encourage construction of smaller homes. Several senators questioned whether the subsidy would simply raise prices, whether the loan structure was the best tool, and whether the program would work equally well across the state. The committee vote ended in a tie, so the bill was held and placed at the top of the next agenda. The committee also passed HB 154 and HB 285 by unanimous votes. HB 154 was approved 6-1 after little discussion. HB 285, a veterans property tax cleanup bill, clarifies how exemptions apply when more than one veteran in a household has a disability rating; it passed 7-0. HB 165, which expands the C-PACE program to include certain economic development projects working through industrial revenue bond arrangements, also passed 8-0 after sponsors said the change was an oversight fix. After HB 165, the committee lost quorum and recessed, with remaining items bumped to the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I support this bill.
• from 3% to 30%.
• This bill also...
• Tongapaw. 6 to 0, that bill is out. All right. I think we still have our last bill.
• That bill is out. All right, members, that wraps up the bills we have.

Summary: The Assembly Human Services Committee heard a lengthy agenda focused largely on CalWORKs, child care access, early childhood supports, and family stability. Measures discussed included AB 1655, which would protect CalWORKs benefits for families when a child or family member is temporarily absent due to immigration detention; AB 1746, which would require counties to give CalWORKs applicants the actual child care request form and respond within 10 days; and AB 1755, which would repeal the CalWORKs 100-hour work penalty for two-parent families. Supporters across these bills emphasized reducing poverty, preventing administrative barriers, and avoiding punishments that can destabilize working families. No opposition witnesses appeared on these items. All three bills were moved forward on party-line or near-unanimous votes, with committee amendments accepted where noted. The committee also heard AB 2072, creating a state contingency fund to keep CalFresh and WIC benefits flowing during a federal shutdown, with support from the California Retailers Association and anti-poverty groups; AB 2429, which would make targeted changes to the early childhood mental health consultation model by making one screener optional and reducing required observations; AB 1969, the "It Takes a Village Act," establishing a grant program for cradle-to-career place-based partnerships; and AB 2092, giving the Department of Social Services lead authority over an early childhood integrated data system and creating an interagency governance structure. Testimony on these bills stressed the need for coordinated services, better data, and more flexible implementation. Each advanced out of committee, with AB 1969 receiving the most discussion and a split vote before later being finalized on the record. Two additional bills addressed county administration and emergency aid. AB 2278 would authorize a Contra Costa County pilot to test technology to speed IHSS eligibility and reassessments amid heavy caseloads and penalties, while AB 2567 would let counties issue emergency CalWORKs aid without first requiring applicants to apply for all other potentially available income sources. Both were presented as ways to reduce delays and help families in crisis faster. The committee also approved a consent calendar containing several other measures. At the end of the hearing, the committee returned to open votes and finalized the roll on all items before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are there any questions on the bill? Any appearance forms? Is there any debate on the bill?
• We're back on the bill as amended. Are there any questions on the bill as amended?
• This strike-all aligns the bill with the House companion and refocuses the school teacher training and
• We're back on the bill as amended. Are there any questions on the bill as amended?
• We're back on the bill as amended. Are there any questions on the bill as amended?

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education Pre-K through 12 considered three bills and reported each favorably. SB 1318, by Senator Rodriguez, made a technical clarification to the Florida tax credit scholarship program so that when a scholarship account is closed, any remaining funds revert but do not revert to the state. The bill was passed without debate or amendments. The committee then heard CS for SB 1690, by Senator Claudio, which updates child care and early learning laws, including transparency, accountability, terminology, and regulation of before- and after-school programs. An amendment was adopted to clarify rulemaking authority by specifying the State Board of Education rather than the Department of Education. Senator Berman raised a concern about the bill’s removal of a parent-notification requirement related to leaving children in vehicles, and the sponsor said she would follow up. The committee then voted the bill favorably. Finally, the committee considered CS for SB 182, by Senator Jones, on school teacher training and mentoring programs. A strike-all amendment was adopted that refocused the program on schools with D or F grades, allowed districts and charter schools to place mentors, tightened mentor qualifications, authorized stipends up to $3,000, and directed the Department of Education to set standards and create a contract template. Supportive appearance forms were filed by Nancy Lothar and Orange County Public Schools. The bill was reported favorably, and the meeting ended with remarks thanking staff and recognizing Kathy Missouri for her service.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill before the committee is House Bill 1095, relative to alternative power sources in nursing facilities
• Members, this is House Bill 926 by Representative Baham.
• Members, this is House Bill 1227 by Representative DeWitt and provides relative to the physician peer
• Chairman and members, the bill before the committee is House Bill 1217 by Representative Eccles, relative
• Members, this is House Bill 1028 by Representative Lyons.

Bills: HB689 , HB742 , HB926 , HB946 , HB948 , HB1028 , HB1095 , HB1114 , HB1121 , HB1155 , HB1185 , HB1217 , HB1220 , HB1227 , HCR76

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Keywords: public assistance, child welfare, benefit adjustment, DCFS, LDH, fraud detection, household reporting, Medicaid, immunization, healthcare eligibility, Family Independence Temporary Assistance Program, health policy, vaccination requirements, vaccination status, vaccine mandate, medical freedom, medical autonomy, public buildings, public access, government services

Transcript Highlights:

• Engrossed House Bill 2317.
• We'll take the following bills in the following order: House Bill 2426, House Bill 2242, House Bill 2510
• House Bill 2426, clerk will read. House Bill 2426, clerk will read.
• The Clerk will read: House Bill 1152, Firearms Storage; House Bill 1250; House Bill 2604, vehicle transfers
• The Clerk will read: House Bill 1152, Firearms Storage; House Bill 1250; House Bill 2604, vehicle transfers

Bills: HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1002 , HB1065 , HB1155 , HB1916 , HB2264 , HB1078 , HB1687 , HB1701 , HB1717 , HB1795 , HB1859 , HB2088 , HB2091 , HB2107 , HB2109 , HB2110 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2151 , HB2152 , HB2155 , HB2165 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2228 , HB2229 , HB2230 , HB2235 , HB2238 , HB2242 , HB2245 , HB2249 , HB2253 , HB2254 , HB2269 , HB2272 , HB2283 , HB2304 , HB2317 , HB2340 , HB2343 , HB2385 , HB2406 , HB2417 , HB2426 , HB2445 , HB2452 , HB2472 , HB2492 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB2606 , HB2664 , HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1065 , HB1717 , HB1795 , HB1859 , HB2107 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2151 , HB2155 , HB2165 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2242 , HB2245 , HB2253 , HB2283 , HB2317 , HB2343 , HB2385 , HB2406 , HB2417 , HB2426 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB2606 , HB1170 , HB1544 , HB1834 , HB2111 , HB2156 , HB2188 , HB2199 , HB2206 , HB2296 , HB2360 , HB2436 , HB2471 , HB2478 , HB2510 , HB2525 , HB2532 , HB2543 , HB2605 , HB2624 , HJM4012 , HB1759

Keywords: design review, local government, land use, zoning, project permits, housing density, middle housing, affordable housing, parking minimums, single-family zoning, infill development, growth management, comprehensive plan, permit streamlining, objective development regulations, architectural review, administrative review, transit-oriented development, accessory dwelling units, ADU

Transcript Highlights:

• You will take the following bills in the following order: House Bill 2165, House Bill 2624, House Bill
• 2385, House Bill 1717, House Bill 1859, House Bill 2151, House Bill 2115, and House Bill 2111, hearing
• We will take the following bills in the following order: House Bill 2543, House Bill 2606, and House
• House Bill 2543, House Bill 2606, and House Bill 2417, hearing no objection, so ordered.
• It was the following bills in the following order: House Bill 2317, House Bill 2436, House Bill 2296,

Bills: HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1002 , HB1065 , HB1155 , HB1916 , HB2264 , HB1078 , HB1687 , HB1701 , HB1717 , HB1795 , HB1859 , HB2088 , HB2091 , HB2107 , HB2109 , HB2110 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2151 , HB2152 , HB2155 , HB2165 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2228 , HB2229 , HB2230 , HB2235 , HB2238 , HB2242 , HB2245 , HB2249 , HB2253 , HB2254 , HB2269 , HB2272 , HB2283 , HB2304 , HB2317 , HB2340 , HB2343 , HB2385 , HB2406 , HB2417 , HB2426 , HB2445 , HB2452 , HB2472 , HB2492 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB2606 , HB2664 , HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1065 , HB1717 , HB1795 , HB1859 , HB2107 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2151 , HB2155 , HB2165 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2242 , HB2245 , HB2253 , HB2283 , HB2317 , HB2343 , HB2385 , HB2406 , HB2417 , HB2426 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB2606 , HB1170 , HB1544 , HB1834 , HB2111 , HB2156 , HB2188 , HB2199 , HB2206 , HB2296 , HB2360 , HB2436 , HB2471 , HB2478 , HB2510 , HB2525 , HB2532 , HB2543 , HB2605 , HB2624 , HJM4012 , HB1759

Keywords: design review, local government, land use, zoning, project permits, housing density, middle housing, affordable housing, parking minimums, single-family zoning, infill development, growth management, comprehensive plan, permit streamlining, objective development regulations, architectural review, administrative review, transit-oriented development, accessory dwelling units, ADU

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm testifying today on House Bill 5539, recall elections in the town of Danvers.
• Josh Herding, a resident of Sudbury, in support of House Bill 5521.
• My name is Amber Hillman Herding, and I am here testifying in support of House Bill 5521.
• I urge you to favorably report out House Bill 5521. Thank you.
• I am here to submit testimony for House Bill 5521. Sorry, I'm a little nervous.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Election Laws

Summary: The committee held a hearing on several late-file local bills, with testimony focused mainly on municipal governance and election-related home rule petitions. Representative Silver supported H.5556 for a Fall River polling place change, saying the locations were reviewed by the Secretary of State’s office and supported locally to improve accessibility, especially for voters with disabilities. Testimony also supported H.5539 for Danvers recall elections and S.3118/H.5542 concerning the Groton-Dunstable Regional School District, where witnesses said a candidate was improperly left off the ballot due to an administrative error and should be allowed to fill the full three-year term. Most of the hearing centered on H.5521, Sudbury’s recall-election petition. Supporters argued the measure was lawfully adopted at a heavily attended special town meeting, reflected local self-government, and provided an accountability tool for elected officials. They emphasized that recall provisions are common in Massachusetts and said the bill’s safeguards, including signature thresholds and election procedures, were reasonable. Several Sudbury residents and former officials described the meeting as well-publicized and broadly participatory, and urged the committee to respect the town vote. Opponents, including the Sudbury League of Women Voters, former officials, and residents, argued the bill was rushed, lacked public review, and should go through a fuller charter process. They objected to the absence of stated grounds for recall, the low 10% signature threshold, the short three-month waiting period, and the simultaneous successor-election feature. One witness asked that the bill be sent for further study rather than approved as written. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair closed by inviting written testimony and then adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's rated 3, 4, or 5.
• Bill 3, that was passed two sessions ago, made some changes to. the minimum salary schedule, and who
• What was not addressed in House Bill 3 when charter schools were asked to pay. the eight and a quarter
• Quite frankly, I think, given how complicated House Bill 3 was.
• I was clear on the bottom line dealing with Senate Bill 2, House Bill 3, the impact on T.

Committee: House Pensions, Investments & Financial Services

Transcript Highlights:

• the governor's 3% reduction.
• Legislature will decide whether we do a 3% or whether we increase 3%.
• Tier 3 is just being eliminated.
• And as you said, it isn't in the bill because it doesn't have to be in the bill because it's already
• But we continue to clean up on the bill. We will. We continue to clean up on the bill.

Summary: The committee met to discuss higher education funding and capital building policy. Members first heard an update from NDUS Deputy Commissioner Lisa Johnson on low-producing academic programs. She described a proposed board policy using a five-year rolling window and thresholds of fewer than 10 undergraduate graduates or fewer than 5 graduate graduates, with programs flagged for three consecutive review periods going to the board. Possible outcomes would include continuation, continuation with modifications, inactivation, or termination. Members asked about how the review would account for program costs, service to other students, workforce demand, and the difference between inactivation and termination. Johnson said the board would consider broader factors and that campuses already do detailed program analysis. Several members also asked about cost savings and staffing impacts from program terminations, and Johnson said the board would try to provide more information later. The committee then received a report on the Capital Building Fund from Jamie Wilkie. He reviewed the program’s history, matching requirements, and recent uses, noting that about $334 million in state and matching dollars has been invested overall, with most going to deferred maintenance and extraordinary repairs. Members discussed whether the program is reducing deferred maintenance and requested updated systemwide data on deferred maintenance and campus space utilization. Wilkie said the board is considering a new study to update deferred maintenance figures, which are based on information more than 12 years old. He also reported that several institutions have used current biennium funds for projects such as residence hall renovations, health sciences housing, generators, and building repairs. Later, the committee began a detailed walkthrough of a draft bill that would replace the current higher education funding formula with an FTE-based model and also revise the capital building fund structure. The draft would use fall enrollment FTEs, add completion incentives for degrees in in-demand fields, and create a separate research funding component for UND and NDSU tied to doctoral completions and external research expenditures. Members raised concerns about the use of older data in the formula, the treatment of waivers, the weighting of professional and health sciences programs, and the use of CIP codes to define CTE and education incentives. The bill draft would also combine capital building fund tiers, broaden eligible uses for deferred maintenance and legislatively authorized projects, change matching requirements, repeal the old formula chapter and the capital pool, and transfer funds from the Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund into the capital building fund. No final votes were taken during the portion provided; the meeting was primarily discussion and review.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here today because I'm deeply concerned about Senate Bill 2722 and its companion bill, House Bill
• and House Bill 5177.
• bill.
• Last bill for hearing is Senate Bill 2439.
• Last bill for hearing is Senate Bill 2439.

Bills: SB39 , SB2129 , SB2141 , SB2246 , SB2323 , SB2439 , SB2722 , SB 39

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee reconvened on SB 2722, as substituted by Senator Bettencourt, which would redirect a portion of Harris County Toll Road Authority surplus revenues to the City of Houston and impose audit and tax-rate penalty provisions. Houston Police Chief Noe Diaz and Fire Chief Thomas Munoz testified in support, arguing that Houston bears a large share of toll-road public safety burdens, citing thousands of police and fire responses on toll-road property and the need for compensation for emergency services. Bill King, testifying neutrally, said the toll authority generates large excess revenues and urged stronger oversight and clearer controls on how the money is spent. Opponents, including Harris County officials, business and neighborhood representatives, and toll-road critics, argued the bill would divert transportation dollars, create a precedent for taking toll revenues for general municipal use, and could worsen project delivery and incentives; several also questioned the accuracy and interpretation of the revenue figures and the lack of comparable audit requirements for the city. The committee took extensive testimony but left SB 2722 pending without a vote. The committee then heard SB 2129, which would increase fines for motorists who disregard railroad crossing gates or flaggers, and SB 2323, which would redact railroad crew members’ personal information from public accident reports. Both bills were presented as safety measures, with railroad labor testimony in support, and both were left pending after brief public testimony. The committee also heard SB 2141, a Zaffirini bill concerning specialty license plates for judges, with the substitute aimed at reducing security risks by changing how judges are identified on plates; it too was left pending. Finally, the committee heard SB 2439, another Zaffirini bill, described as a TDLR cleanup measure related to ATV and off-highway vehicle safety certification. The bill would abolish the current training and certification program, which supporters said was burdensome and underused given the small number of approved instructors statewide. With no significant opposition on the record, the committee closed testimony and left SB 2439 pending as well.