Transcript Highlights:

• to ensuring there's a clear path of compliance for this act, and we look forward to continuing conversations
• We appreciate the conversation and ability to do so. So, thank you. Mr.
• I want to acknowledge that we've had really good conversations with the author's office and the sponsors
• We'd like to really come to some resolution on section C, and we look forward to continuing conversations
• This is a major compromise that is a product of months of conversation and mutual agreement.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But do urge the committee and certainly the proponents, and we've had conversations in about this as
• conversations about a fee structure that helps Fund the good work that DTSC does we actually need them
• That was just committed but I do think that is why we need to have further conversation.
• We also very much appreciate the conversations with all their staff and the committee staff.
• It may make sense to go in that direction but I think there's more conversations that need to be have

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Another good conversation that we had today.
• Those are top-level conversations.
• But really that's what we had in conversation today.
• Let's get this done. had in conversation today. Nothing had in conversation today.
• :41.120> together conversations, four leaders together conversations, four leaders together along

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And as I said, we've we have had many conversations with different participants in the whole issue.
• However, in listening to lots of participants in the conversation, I do have an amendment to address
• And I'm open to further conversation along that line. This is a first stop.
• But I'm open to further conversations.
• Just trying to follow you in the conversation. >> You mentioned about the numbers of students.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• in<00:03:53.680> the<00:03:54.120> legislature<00:03:55.120> now our conversations
• in the legislature now our conversations in the legislature now is<00:03:55.519> there<00:03:
• <00:05:01.600> a<00:05:01.759> much<00:05:01.919> larger<00:05:02.280> conversation
• <00:05:02.720> and that's a much larger conversation and that's a much larger conversation
• on anything that impacts conversation on anything that impacts the<00:07:45.199> cost<00:07:45.520

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: Senator Eric Lucero testified about Minnesota’s housing affordability challenges, arguing that rising interest rates, insurance costs, property taxes, and construction expenses are being passed on to renters and homeowners. He said the core problem is supply and demand: demand has risen while supply has not kept pace, in part because fewer homeowners are selling or downsizing. Lucero said the legislature should look for ways to reduce costs without creating major new state expenses, especially in a budget year with a projected deficit. Lucero highlighted several policy ideas and bills. He said he has introduced a bill to exempt sales tax on building materials, which he argued would lower the final cost of new homes. He also said he is interested in reducing permit costs and examining other factors that affect construction costs, including materials and labor. On insurance and property taxes, he suggested lawmakers should consider reforms or relief measures, while noting that interest rates are largely beyond state control. The discussion also focused on homeowners associations and common interest communities. Lucero said he has been part of a bipartisan work group for about six months that reviewed public testimony and expert input, and that the group has now issued recommendations. He said he and other legislators plan to turn those recommendations into one or more bipartisan bills aimed at improving transparency, accountability, and reducing costs for homeowners. He closed by saying housing affordability affects everyone and that he believes there is momentum this year for reforms that support homeownership and generational wealth.

Transcript Highlights:

• they've<00:55:04.240> been actually long conversations they've been actually long conversations
• And I know that we are having this conversation nationally, and I know that we are having this conversation
• we are having this conversation locally we are having this conversation locally and<01:03:46.480
• As much as you wanted to dilute this<01:53:46.000> conversation this conversation this conversation
• This does not conversation. It's not.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House File 4240, an elections administration bill, was introduced as a package of updates to absentee voting, statewide voter registration system use, early voting procedures, recordkeeping, removal of outdated statutory language, and reimbursement for municipalities and counties that administer certain special elections. The author, Rep. Freiberg, described the bill as a modernization and efficiency measure that would clarify procedures while maintaining election security. Several amendments were adopted. The A4 amendment, offered by Rep. Freiberg, was described as aligning language with the Senate and passed without objection. The A6 amendment, offered by Rep. Cosnik, would give school districts more direction on polling locations for special elections in multi-county districts; Rep. Lee raised concerns that it could affect many districts statewide and questioned whether it applied to early voting, while Rep. Cosnik said it was narrowly tailored and intended to prevent disenfranchisement. Rep. Freiberg and Rep. Lee both said they would support it as a voter-access measure despite possible costs, and it was adopted. The A5 amendment, offered by Rep. Schultz, would require the Secretary of State to provide voter information to the U.S. Department of Justice upon request for civil-rights and federal voting-law enforcement; it was debated at length, with supporters framing it as election integrity and opponents arguing it would jeopardize voter privacy and could be used by the Trump administration to pressure Minnesota. The amendment was adopted after a roll call request. The debate on A5 was especially contentious, with Republicans arguing the state should cooperate with federal efforts to clean voter rolls and Democrats arguing the DOJ had overreached, mishandled civil-rights investigations, and sought voter data without a lawful need. Members on both sides cited voter fraud, privacy, and federal-state election authority, and several speakers referenced recent DOJ actions and court disputes. The transcript ends during further discussion of the federal role in elections, with no final disposition on the underlying bill shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:13:33.640> with I did have some conversations with I did have some conversations with
• probably have to have a conversation probably have to have a conversation about<01:20:26.200>
• <01:26:42.600> we um, is similar to the conversation we um, is similar to the conversation
• Um, you know, there's conversations.
• I mean I understand the conversation.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, please take your conversations Members, please take your conversations to<00:57:33.599>
• Speaker, and this has been a lively conversation. It was a lively conversation in committee.
• It was a lively conversation.
• conversation in, uh, in in committee. conversation in, uh, in in committee.
• :39.040> the<01:10:39.280> conversation<01:10:39.760> and ...the conversation and

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And of course, further conversation would be especially where there's small rural schools or...
• It's more of a holistic conversation. And additionally, you know, it's not—thank you.
• We also appreciate the committee's conversation around data and reporting.
• We look forward to further conversation. Thank you. Hello, my name is Ambrosia Kramer.
• We appreciate the conversation around community schools.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals for universal school meals, the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), and community schools. On universal meals, the Department of Education supported continued funding for the Universal School Meals Program and a fourth round of Kitchen Infrastructure and Training Grants, citing meal-count growth, improved meal service, and the need to offset federal uncertainty, inflation, and reduced direct certification tied to immigration-related policy changes. The LAO recommended rejecting another kitchen grant round, arguing prior rounds are still being spent and the state has not clearly defined unmet need. Members also raised concerns about the state’s ability to backfill federal meal funding and about how federal requirements affect programs like Summer EBT/SUN Bucks. Public commenters largely supported school meals and kitchen investments, with some urging support for plant-based milk options and continued infrastructure funding. For ELOP, the Department of Finance proposed $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding, including $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended going further and fully fixing the Tier 2 rate, saying rate uncertainty complicates district planning. CDE supported the proposal and said the program has improved attendance and academic outcomes, while noting new CalPADS reporting will provide more data soon. Senators discussed whether ELOP should remain a standalone program or be folded into LCFF, and whether the state should require stronger outcome reporting. Public testimony generally backed stabilizing Tier 2 funding, but some speakers urged more support for older youth and more timely, user-friendly reporting. On community schools, the administration proposed $1 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding to expand the model to thousands more schools and to support existing grantees, along with stronger technical assistance, statewide alignment, and an accreditation/self-certification framework. The LAO recommended continuing the current one-time grant approach instead of creating a new ongoing categorical program, warning about reduced flexibility, administrative burden, and the state’s capacity to support a much larger cohort. CDE supported the ongoing investment but asked for additional county office and technical assistance funding. Senators and public commenters were broadly supportive of community schools, emphasizing improved attendance, graduation, and student engagement, while also debating accountability, accreditation, and whether non-classroom-based charter schools should be eligible. Public testimony strongly favored ongoing funding and highlighted community schools’ role in mental health, family engagement, and wraparound supports.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I can't speak to motive, but that's been the conversation. Okay, thank you.
• But let's have that conversation with what that number should be.
• Madam Chair, I thank the bill sponsor for the conversation.
• I mean, we can have this further conversation. But I agree with your point.
• I mean, we can have this further conversation. But I agree with your point.

Bills: HB2040, HB2142, HB2255, HB2379, HB2482, HB2575, HB2600, HB2764, HB4033, HCR2015

Keywords: public education, adoption, sex education, parental rights, student health information, school safety, resource officers, mental health, training, infrastructure improvements, Arizona Teachers Academy, teacher preparation, education funding, public schools, scholarships, teacher certification, community colleges, school district, governing board, training requirements

Summary: The committee on Education heard a series of bills and took action on each. HCR 2015, a resolution supporting at least 60 minutes of daily physical activity for K-12 students and posting dietary guidelines in schools, drew testimony from advocates for recess and student wellness; it was approved 6-0. HB 2040, which would require schools to provide adoption information when contraception or STI topics are discussed and add adoption-related content to sex education, drew opposition from Reproductive Freedom for All and the Arizona Education Association, but passed 4-2. HB 2255, extending Arizona Teachers Academy eligibility for community college students from two to four years, passed unanimously 6-0. HB 2764, creating a voluntary state seal of computer science proficiency for high school graduates, also passed 6-0. The committee then considered HB 2600, requiring written parental permission for students in grades 6-8 to join school clubs or organizations. The ACLU of Arizona opposed the bill, arguing it would suppress participation in clubs involving sensitive identities or topics; the bill passed 4-2. HB 2379, which requires school district governing board members to complete recurring training on school finance and related duties, was amended to narrow the re-election consequences and then passed 4-2. HB 2142, establishing a school safety center and council within the Arizona Department of Education to provide training, technical assistance, and risk assessments, received mixed testimony over its funding source and council makeup but passed 4-2. Later, HB 4033, which would require more detailed bond election pamphlets and separate ballot propositions for certain school bond projects such as stadiums, administrative buildings, and teacher housing, drew opposition from the Arizona Education Association over added barriers to school funding, but passed 4-2. HB 2482, capping job order contracting for building renewal grant projects at $1 million and requiring verification against artificial project splitting, drew concerns from builders and school board groups about slowing repairs and limiting procurement flexibility; it passed 4-2. Finally, HB 2575, the Anti-Semitism and Education Act, which would bar public schools and higher education institutions from teaching or promoting antisemitism and create reporting and discipline procedures, drew strong support from Jewish community representatives describing school and campus incidents, and opposition from the ACLU and AEA over free-speech and liability concerns; the transcript cuts off before the committee vote on this bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• conversation about how we protect children, is what we're doing in the home.
• conversation about how we protect children is what we're doing in the home.
• And I think that we're going to have that conversation.
• I think that we're going to have that conversation.
• And as chair of B&P, I'm sure I'll be a part of those conversations.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee heard an audit on the Department of Cannabis Control’s oversight of cannabis packaging and labeling, focused on whether products attractive to children are being kept out of the legal market. The auditor said the department’s rules are often vague or subjective, leading to inconsistent enforcement, and that the state relies heavily on licensees to self-police because there is no upfront review before products reach the market. The audit cited examples involving cartoon-like images, bright colors, flavor references, candy-like imagery, strain names, and beverage packaging, and recommended clearer statutory standards, possible pre-approval of packaging, better enforcement tools, and stronger tracking of repeat violators. Assemblymembers and senators largely agreed that child safety is the priority, but differed on the best policy response. Some members argued for clearer legislative limits and even plain packaging, saying products like root beer, cherry pie, and cereal-like designs are plainly appealing to children. Department officials said they had already begun reforms, including a centralized label-review team, a rubric, improved databases, and more attention to repeat violations, while also emphasizing that the illicit and intoxicating hemp markets are major sources of youth exposure and that resource constraints limit inspections. They said they are open to working with the Legislature on more specific standards and additional funding. Public witnesses split between public health and industry perspectives. A pediatrician and public health advocate urged stronger restrictions, including plain packaging, limits on flavors and potency, and a pre-market review system, arguing that vague rules have failed children. Industry representatives said they support youth protections but want bright-line, objective standards so compliant businesses can know what is allowed; they argued that most youth-targeted packaging is in the illicit market and that the legal market needs clearer rules rather than broader bans. No formal vote or committee action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, just going back to the previous topic of conversation, just to clarify, I think to Representative
• And overall, when we're looking at the budget, we're not having that conversation.
• And overall, when we're looking at the budget, we're not having that conversation, right?
• So with that, I'm going to be a no today. ...in this conversation, so with that I'm going to be a no
• Again, it's part of a budget package; that's a different conversation.

Bills: HB2207, HB2225, HB2602, HB2641

Keywords: braille, disability access, education funding, state corrections, inclusion, HB 2225, Yavapai County, northern Arizona regional training academy, training academy, public safety training, law enforcement training, police academy, first responder training, capital appropriation, state general fund, state treasurer, lapsing appropriation, section 35-190, capital costs, regional training facility

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2641, which would ban firefighting foam containing intentionally added PFAS chemicals. The sponsor said the bill was intended to protect firefighters and the public from carcinogenic and persistent chemicals that can contaminate groundwater, and noted Arizona had already banned the foam for training. A University of Arizona public health researcher testified that firefighters have higher PFAS levels than the general public and that AFFF use is associated with elevated exposure, while a firefighters’ association representative said alternatives exist and that the bill would remove uncertainty for departments. The committee passed HB 2641 unanimously, 15-0. The committee then heard HB 2602, a $24,000 appropriation for a 10% pay increase for Department of Public Safety employees in fiscal year 2027. The sponsor and supporters from the Arizona Troopers Association argued the raise was needed for recruitment and retention, citing vacancies, departures, and the cost of training new troopers. Several members supported the idea but raised concerns about the budget impact and the broader issue of pay disparities across agencies and state employees. The bill received a do pass recommendation on a 10-0-3 vote, with two members voting no and three voting present. Finally, the committee considered HB 2225, which would appropriate $10 million for capital costs at the Northern Arizona Regional Training Academy in Yavapai County and keep the funds from lapsing until 2029. The sponsor and Yavapai County law enforcement witnesses said the academy is overcrowded, serves multiple agencies across northern Arizona, reduces travel and lodging costs, and provides both basic and in-service training. Some members questioned whether the state should fund a county-based facility and raised concerns about the size and structure of the appropriation, while others supported the training mission but wanted the issue handled in the budget process. The committee voted to give HB 2225 a do pass recommendation, with several members voting no or present.

Transcript Highlights:

• And he will be helping us in guiding today's conversation.
• I look forward to a thoughtful and productive conversation.
• So those conversations never really stop.
• I know conversations will not end today, and we will continue having conversations.
• continue having conversations and I know assembly member Haney will continue having conversations so

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing production, affordability, and timelines. Chair Pacheco and Assemblymember Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage and the need to reduce costs while maintaining environmental, safety, and community protections. The first panel featured housing experts and industry representatives who argued that state regulations, code complexity, utility constraints, and agency review processes add substantial cost and delay to development. Bill Fulton described overlapping state and local land-use authorities and the tension among housing, coastal protection, climate, and wildfire goals. CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and California Apartment Association representative Bob Raymer said building codes, energy mandates, and agency processes have materially increased per-home costs, and they urged more centralized affordability analysis and greater scrutiny of regulatory impacts. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger timelines and accountability for state agency reviews. The second panel brought in state agencies to explain their roles. HCD said its housing element enforcement, streamlining laws, and technical assistance have helped increase production, shorten entitlement timelines, and improve compliance by local governments. CARB said SB 375 is a planning law that does not directly regulate land use, and argued that regional housing assumptions in sustainable communities strategies are not being fully implemented on the ground. The Coastal Commission said it works with local governments to balance coastal protection, sea-level-rise risk, and housing, and noted recent guidance and pilot efforts to streamline housing approvals in the coastal zone. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are designed to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design and documentation complexity. Fish and Wildlife and DTSC both emphasized early engagement and collaboration to reduce delays while protecting natural resources and public health; DTSC said it is refining vapor intrusion guidance and using brownfield grants to support redevelopment. The State Water Resources Control Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to provide predictable permitting while balancing water quality, water rights, and housing needs, and noted billions in grants and loans for water infrastructure and site remediation that can support housing affordability. In response to questions from Assemblymember Haney, several agencies described ongoing coordination across departments, including regular meetings among HCD, CARB, the Coastal Commission, and transportation agencies, as well as broader interagency efforts to reduce redundancies and identify pinch points in project delivery. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the main outcome was informational testimony and discussion of possible future reforms to improve coordination, predictability, and affordability in state regulatory processes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Each conversation left an impact. Each trip was eye-opening.
• I appreciated our conversation we had earlier in the week.
• And I had a great conversation with your staff. I appreciate their time.
• Moving on, there was an earlier conversation, Mr.
• We engaged in a number of conversations with state bank commissioners.

Keywords: legislation, housing affordability, financial regulation, public testimony, accountability, oversight

Summary: The meeting involved significant discussions around key legislative proposals, primarily focusing on various bills such as HB2 and SB5. The committee examined the implications of these bills on issues like housing affordability and financial regulation. Notable members engaged in debates, providing differing perspectives on the potential economic impacts of the proposed bills. The meeting witnessed public testimony, which included a call for accountability in government actions and oversight of current financial policies. Members echoed concerns about following through on commitments to address critical issues affecting everyday Americans.

Transcript Highlights:

• Based on my conversations with the nominee, and based on his actions in uniform, I'm confident... that
• Knowing what you do about the substance of that conversation, how would you feel?
• I know from our conversations and my own due diligence, VMI is very proud of you.
• We had a great conversation about Nevada and for your willingness to to serve.
• And we've had conversations with the Air Force about this as well.

Keywords: national security, military readiness, Kane nomination, defense budget, China threats, Russia, collaboration, modernization

Summary: The meeting centered on the nomination of retired Lieutenant General Dan Kane for Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, delving into various security concerns and the strategic environment facing the U.S. today. Testimonies highlighted the growing threats from adversaries such as China and Russia, with discussions around the necessity of maintaining and modernizing military capabilities to address these challenges. The need for agility in military operations and enhancing collaboration among various defense agencies was underscored. Further, concerns were raised regarding the defense budget and the importance of a strong national defense strategy were prevalent throughout the discussions. The committee members collectively emphasized the need for superior readiness and modernization to keep pace with global threats.

Transcript Highlights:

• But that's definitely a topic of conversation and how do we move that needle?
• Is that a reasonable conversation to have?
• Is that a reasonable conversation to have? Chairman Davidson, yes, that is reasonable.
• So, okay, we'll have a conversation about how the next.
• And it seems like we're just walking on eggshells when we have these conversations.

Summary: The committee first heard an update on North Dakota’s Interagency Council on Homelessness and Continuum of Care funding. Jennifer Henderson of the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency reported that homelessness remains driven by tight housing markets, low incomes, rising rents, and barriers to rental assistance, public benefits, and disability determinations. She said the state’s one-time North Dakota Homeless Grant is serving all regions but reaches far fewer households than the former Rent Help program, and that aging homelessness, shelter staffing shortages, and limited affordable units are growing concerns. Members discussed the need for more housing supply, better coordination with Health and Human Services, landlord engagement, reentry housing, and possible continued one-time funding for the $10 million Homeless Grant and $25 million Housing Incentive Fund. Henderson also warned that federal Continuum of Care funding is uncertain, with HUD expected to issue a new notice June 1 and possible shifts away from permanent supportive housing toward transitional housing and other models. The committee then took testimony on accessibility of government services for people who are blind, visually impaired, deaf, or hard of hearing. Paul Olson of North Dakota Vision Services School for the Blind described the school’s services for infants, children, and adults, including screenings, mobility training, assistive technology, and outreach across the state. He said the agency works closely with Vocational Rehabilitation and is also involved in improving website and document accessibility, especially for PDF materials. Public testimony highlighted barriers such as inaccessible CAPTCHA systems, online forms, driver’s license requirements on job applications, and limited transportation in rural areas. A deaf resident urged broader use of video remote interpreting and video relay services, along with training so people know how to use them effectively. Finally, Kay Larson presented the final report on the child care provider licensing study. The report recommended streamlining North Dakota’s child care licensing structure into three provider types plus a preschool designation, while preserving health and safety standards and maintaining eligibility for child care assistance. The committee discussed simplifying training and qualification rules, revising ratio and group-size requirements, and adjusting age bands for infants and toddlers. The report also noted that some changes would require statutory amendments and later administrative rule changes, with a transition period likely extending through 2029. No formal votes were taken in the transcript, but the committee accepted the updates and scheduled follow-up presentations for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• are conversations we need to have.
• > about<00:11:12.959> guns, of conversation today about guns, of conversation today about
• those are conversations we need to have. those are conversations we need to have.
• And then I want to talk about<00:22:49.919> a<00:22:50.240> conversation<00:22:50.640><
• I had with two 18 about a conversation I had with two 18 to<00:22:51.760> 20<00:22:51.919>

Keywords: The live stream for the House Chambers was interrupted and this version was recovered from backups and should contain the complete Legislative Session. Convene 00:00:00 Senate Message 00:04:40 Calendar/2nd Readings 00:05:38 Orders of the Day 00:06:14 HB 312 00:06:42 Motions, Petitions, and Communications 01:11:07 Introduction of New Bills and Resolutions 01:13:24 Recess for ConC and Rules Meeting 01:14:30 ConC/Rules Report 01:19:42 Adjournment 01:21:18, 958, all

Summary: The House convened, received the invocation and Pledge of Allegiance, established a quorum with 89 members present, excused absent members, and suspended rules to allow co-sponsorships and vote modifications. The chamber approved the prior day’s journal and received notice that the Senate had passed SB 13, 22, 46, 51, and 90 and requested concurrence. On second reading, HB 134 (sexual assault nurse examiners), HB 168 with HCS 1 (voting under the influence), and HR 7 (recognizing guiding principles of elections in Kentucky) were reported. The House also recommitted HB 258 to the Transportation Committee and took up HB 312 for third reading and passage. HB 312, relating to concealed firearms and deadly weapons, drew the bulk of the debate. The sponsor argued the bill would allow law-abiding 18- to 20-year-olds to obtain a provisional concealed carry license, saying they are adults in other respects, the Second Amendment protects their right to bear arms, and Kentucky should align with other states. Supporters framed the measure as a constitutional rights issue and cited defensive gun use statistics, while one member argued the root problem is family upbringing rather than guns. Opponents said the bill would increase risks in schools and public spaces, pointed to concerns from school district police and SROs, and cited research linking younger age groups and loosened carry laws to higher firearm violence; they also argued the bill would make communities less safe and that no one’s rights would be taken away by voting no. The sponsor said no stakeholder had expressed opposition and clarified the bill would not change where firearms are permitted. The transcript provided does not include the final vote on HB 312.

Transcript Highlights:

• members for the spirited conversation. members for the spirited conversation.
• and I had conversations and I had conversations uh<01:14:13.600> in<01:14:13.840> the<
• and because I think these conversations and because I think these conversations are<01:42:00.320
• <02:14:59.280> that and a a lot of the conversations that and a a lot of the conversations
• <02:36:55.439> is the co-chair and the conversations is the co-chair and the conversations

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm picking up some conversation across the room. >> The conversation somewhere else, please.
• And as we have this conversation today, let's remember.
• We should be putting that conversation before this one.
• And I know that we are having this conversation nationally and I know that we are having this conversation
• And I know that we are having this conversation nationally and I know that we are having this conversation

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate File 3432, a public safety bill requiring identifying equipment and insignia to be removed from emergency vehicles sold to the public. The chamber first adopted a House language amendment, then debated a broader security package that would fund judicial and courthouse security, Capitol security measures, short-term protection for legislators facing credible threats, State Patrol deficiency funding, and additional BCA analysts and investigators to assess threats statewide. Supporters framed the bill as necessary to protect public safety, democracy, and First Amendment activity at the Capitol and courthouses; they also said the package was pared down from larger requests and based on security reviews. The House adopted an A-1 amendment clarifying that BCA staff could investigate threats statewide, and later rejected a Schultz A-3 amendment that would have eliminated all appropriations in the bill. The A-3 was defeated on a 37-94 vote after the House upheld the Speaker’s ruling that a proposed school-safety secondary amendment was not germane, with that appeal decided 69-62. A major theme of debate was whether the Legislature should prioritize security for members and the Capitol before passing school safety funding. Several members argued they could not support spending tens of millions on Capitol and legislative security without first funding school safety for all students, including public, charter, private, and tribal schools. Others defended the bill as necessary because of recent threats and violence, including the June 14 tragedy, and said the Capitol security changes were based on professional recommendations. Some members also criticized the new security setup as overly restrictive or “security theater,” while supporters said the measures were needed to keep the public, staff, and lawmakers safe. After the A-3 was defeated, the bill was read for third time and members continued floor debate. The discussion remained split between those emphasizing immediate Capitol and legislative security needs and those insisting school safety should come first. Representative Agbaje then moved to table the bill, and the clerk began a roll call on that motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• today uh but through the conversation today uh but this<00:21:28.799> is<00:21:28.960> an<
• as well I have a follow conversations as well I have a follow Senator<01:01:11.640> John<01:01
• the conversation with it so<01:24:20.280> thank<01:24:20.600> you<01:24:21.600> well
• system so we'll have more conversation system so we'll have more conversation thanks<01:26:09.920
• So those are some of the arguments for LRT, but we can have more conversation about that.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all