Transcript Highlights:

• Customers pay for utility services, not for executive compensation packages.
• I heard this morning from executive pay.
• full flexibility for utilities to pay their top executives whatever they see fit.
• At-risk pay includes bonuses, incentives, and the like.
• whose salaries you and I pay. whose salaries you and I pay.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House File 76, as amended by the adopted A1 amendment, and the chair moved the bill to be re-referred to the general register. The bill would limit the amount investor-owned utilities can charge ratepayers for executive compensation, capping recoverable pay for the top 10 executives at the governor’s salary. Representative Greenman argued the measure would protect customers from paying for lavish executive pay and said it would not affect what executives are paid, only what can be recovered from ratepayers. She cited recent Public Utilities Commission action and ongoing rate cases as evidence the issue is real and recurring. Supportive testimony came from a Minneapolis resident describing financial hardship and rising utility bills, a local worker who said customers have no choice of utility provider and should not fund monopoly executive pay, and advocates from the Energy and Policy Institute and Utility Reform Now, who said ratepayers should not subsidize excessive compensation and that the bill is a targeted reform. Xcel Energy and CenterPoint Energy opposed the bill’s premise by defending the current regulatory process. Their representatives said the PUC already reviews executive compensation in rate cases, generally allows only limited recovery, and has used that process for decades. Xcel also emphasized its affordability programs and said executives help secure savings and investments for customers. Members discussed whether the legislature should set a bright-line rule or leave the issue to the PUC. Representative Greenman said the bill is needed because the PUC process can take years and the legislature should establish a clear standard for all investor-owned utilities. Some members supported the bill as a response to an affordability crisis and the lack of consumer choice, while others said the legislature should focus on broader energy-cost issues and existing regulatory tools. The committee did not take a final vote on the bill in the portion of the meeting provided, but the amendment was adopted and the bill was moved for re-referral to the general register.

Transcript Highlights:

• Borrow and be paying back. We would borrow and pay back, borrow and pay back.
• , we're paying for supplies like salt, cinders, we're paying for our maintenance contracts from there
• , we're paying the overtime for snow removal.
• Pay for maintenance operations every single year.
• Well, we're paying it anyway.

Transcript Highlights:

• We pay bonuses every year.
• He's going to pay it on... everything that comes in. He can't negotiate.
• ways they're trying to pay for that is by cutting health care.
• They're going to be paying significantly higher taxes. taxes.
• We create the jobs that pay the taxes.

Keywords: joint hearing, small business, Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, economic recovery, tax relief, job creation

Summary: In this joint hearing of the House Committee on Small Business and the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, the primary focus was on the importance of making the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA) permanent. The chair emphasized that small businesses are crucial for the nation's economic recovery, especially in the wake of current federal policies perceived as detrimental. Witnesses shared their experiences and highlighted how the tax cuts facilitated job creation and business expansion, stressing the need for continued support through ongoing tax relief measures. The meeting included discussions about the economic implications of the TCJA's potential expiration, with members voicing their concerns regarding how this could impact small businesses and the broader economy.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2019, we were afforded pay parity with the traditional troopers, which brought our pay up quite significantly
• :05:37.600> with<00:05:37.919> the were afforded pay parody with the were afforded pay
• <00:24:41.440> the their own, but they have to pay the their own, but they have to pay the
• <00:28:57.200> the participating employers to pay the participating employers to pay the minimum
• The bill also limits standard pay scale.

Keywords: Consideration of HB 220 00:02:49 Consideration of HB 467 00:09:50 Consideration of HB 516 00:19:50 Consideration of HB 589 00:27:16, 958, all

Summary: The House State Government Committee met with a quorum and considered four bills. House Bill 220, sponsored by Rep. John Blandon, addressed pension spiking for Kentucky Public Pension Authority systems by extending the effective date back to July 1, 2022. Blandon explained it was intended to correct a gap left by last year’s legislation affecting retirees who received across-the-board raises during the court period. A retired Kentucky State Police captain testified in favor but asked that the retroactive date be moved back to 2021. Members asked about fiscal impact, and Blandon said the bill would have only a very small percentage impact on CERS. The committee approved HB 220 unanimously, 17-0, with favorable expression. House Bill 467, sponsored by Rep. DJ Johnson, dealt with the disposal of surplus or underutilized state-owned real property. A committee substitute was adopted first. Johnson said the bill would let local governments and private citizens identify abandoned or dormant state property earlier in the process, while preserving existing fair-market-value disposal procedures. Committee members clarified that the bill concerns real property, not personal property, and asked about pricing and the current disposition process. Johnson and others explained that the bill would not change fair-market-value requirements but would move local involvement to the front end. The committee approved HB 467 as amended by the substitute, 17-0. House Bill 516, sponsored by Rep. Chris Lewis, would allow probationary police officers and firefighters in certain retirement systems to purchase service credit for up to 12 months of probationary employment and would extend line-of-duty death and disability coverage to probationary employees. Lewis said the bill was developed with the FOP, Professional Firefighters, and input from the Kentucky League of Cities, and that any retirement cost would be offset because both employee and employer contributions would be paid. Committee members confirmed the bill had been heard in PPOB and discussed the cost structure and the six-month window for purchasing service credit. The committee passed HB 516 favorably, 18-0. House Bill 589, sponsored by Rep. Stephanie Deetsz, created a framework for cities and chapter 75 fire districts to rehire retired firefighters under strict conditions, similar to existing rules for retired police officers. A committee substitute was adopted that required minimum employer retirement contributions, required a CPAT retest after a one-year separation, and expanded eligibility to chapter 75 fire districts. Deetsz said the bill was aimed at staffing shortages and preserving experienced personnel while protecting the retirement system. A city official and a Kentucky League of Cities representative testified in support, describing labor shortages and the value of bringing back experienced firefighters to mentor younger staff. The committee approved HB 589 as amended by the substitute, 18-0, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The pay-as-you-go line on Ms.
• The pay-as-you-go line on Ms.
• The pay-as-you-go line on Ms.
• The pay-as-you-go line on Ms.
• The pay-as-you-go line on Ms.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So, Representative, this is money we pay that leaves our...
• So that was part of the pay plan that went into effect last summer that now we pay them.
• Now we can say we're paying these people adequately, and we are paying them based on the rate study,
• When the new pay plan was implemented, one of the goals behind it was to, because the pay was increasing
• Everybody is paying. But, um... ...rid of all these differentials. Everybody is paying.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The Joint State Agencies committee met to approve the October 8, 2025 minutes and then held an extended oversight discussion with the Department of Human Services about the death of Zachary Moore at the Southeast Arkansas Human Development Center (later clarified in testimony as the Warren facility). DHS officials described Moore’s background, said he died after being restrained in a prone position for about 13 minutes, and reported that a nurse later administered a chemical restraint before CPR was attempted. They said the agency settled with the family for $725,000, terminated 13 staff members, changed facility leadership, and brought in consultants under a directed plan of correction from the Office of Long-Term Care to review policies, retrain staff, and conduct a root-cause analysis. Later testimony clarified that the death certificate listed the manner of death as homicide and the cause as physiologic stress associated with struggle and prone restraint; committee members also noted that six people had been charged with manslaughter and neglect of a vulnerable person. Members focused on restraint policy, staff training, chain of command during emergencies, family communication, and whether warning signs had been missed. DHS said it has written restraint protocols, annual restraint training, and a mortality review process, but acknowledged that the Warren facility had multiple failures, including use of a prone restraint, improper chemical restraint, poor supervision, inadequate communication, and problems with equipment and behavior plans. Officials said they were revising policies, creating clearer crisis-team roles, and retraining staff, and that the consultant work would be shared across the other human development centers. Several members pressed DHS on why the family had not been kept informed, why the agency was not prepared with basic facts, and whether a more formal independent audit of facilities should exist. The committee also discussed broader staffing and funding issues across the human development centers. DHS said CNAs start at about $39,000 a year, that the centers rely heavily on float and contract staff, and that there are about 2,000 people on a waiting list for services. Members argued that low pay, turnover, and rural staffing shortages contribute to risk and asked for recruitment and retention plans, possible regional pay differentials, and more legislative support. DHS said it is drafting a systemwide retention and recruitment plan and expects to bring it to ALC, while also implementing a separate rate study for certain PASS program services in January 2027. The meeting ended after comments from Zachary Moore’s mother, Angela Stevens, who said money cannot replace her son and urged the state to ensure no other family experiences the same loss; the committee asked DHS to keep members and Ms. Stevens updated on consultant reports and recruitment efforts before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• or I have this on-campus job that's definitely going to pay me.
• I have this on-campus job that's definitely going to pay me.
• When work and education conflict, it's the students who pay the price.
• Like the jobs just need to pay more. The high cost of living, right?
• , and that most of them are low-wage, low-paying jobs.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Economic Development, Growth, and Household Impact held an informational hearing in Paramount as part of its “Pocketbook Tour,” focused on affordability, cost pressures, and household impacts in Los Angeles County. The first panel centered on workers and learners, with testimony from the UCLA Labor Center and the Southeast Los Angeles County Workforce Development Board. Speakers described how rising living costs, tuition, and low wages force many students to work long hours, often in unrelated, low-wage jobs, while struggling with food, rent, bills, anxiety, and limited financial aid. Recommendations included expanding state-funded work study, creating a statewide internship tax credit for small businesses, improving financial aid formulas to reflect regional cost of living, increasing flexibility for students, and strengthening worker-rights education and career pathways. The second panel focused on microbusinesses and small business affordability. Testimony from microenterprise advocates, the Los Angeles Regional Small Business Development Center Network, and local business owners described rising commercial rents, labor costs, tariffs, supply chain disruptions, insurance, utilities, and disaster-related pressures as major threats to small businesses. Witnesses emphasized that small businesses are central to local economies and asked the state to expand technical assistance, low-interest financing, disaster support, supply-chain development, and community-based outreach. They also urged more intentional support for microbusinesses and home-based entrepreneurs, including networks that connect them to resources and help them build collective buying power. Committee members asked about possible state actions, including tax credits for hiring local workers or interns, support for trades and apprenticeships, and ways to partner more closely with SBDCs and chambers of commerce. Public comment echoed the hearing themes, with speakers highlighting student hardship, nonprofit mental health funding, renewable energy jobs and internships, and the need for state support for clean-energy incentives. No formal votes were taken; the hearing concluded with closing remarks and adjournment at 11:05 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• Through this mechanism, the state pays a monthly capitation payment to the MCOs, and then the MCOs pay
• It would provide they are paying.
• incur, but also to pay for value.
• for. absence factor pays for.
• medical records without paying a fee. medical records without paying a fee.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• You know that we got pay raises for the attorneys and pay raises for the investigators because we're
• I do $1,500, $2,000 pay raise.
• because you pay them a lot more money. because you pay them a lot more money.
• and what we're actually able to pay. and what we're actually able to pay.
• >> Say diligence doesn't pay off. >> Say diligence doesn't pay off.

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 13 January, 2026; 1:45 PM, 925, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard first from the Office of State Public Defender, which said its core budget request was essentially level funding, with attorney and investigator pay raises already included because of the DA pay raise linkage. The main discussion focused on two initiatives: a rural public defense pilot in four counties and a Hinds County/Jackson public defense expansion. The pilot, funded last year with capital expense money, has formed a nonprofit, hired a director and staff, opened an office in Kosciusko, and began taking cases on October 1; most of its 44 cases involved day-one jail visits. The office said the project is intended to improve early representation, reduce jail time, and generate data, while not displacing local public defenders. For Hinds County, the office said new data show about 31% of cases originate from state-agency arrests, and it is seeking roughly $525,000 more to fully fund positions, bringing the total request to about $952,972 for five lawyers, an investigator, a legal secretary, and office expenses. Senators asked about funding sources and workload standards; the office said the pilot request had been submitted as general funds rather than capital expense, and that it is using weighted workload measures rather than strict national caseload standards. The committee then heard from the Attorney General’s office, represented by Deputy Attorney General Doug Miracle, who presented the FY 2027 budget request. The office requested $45.48 million total, including $35.31 million in general funds, which is a reduction from the prior year’s appropriation, but also requested a $1.58 million increase in salary funding. Miracle said the office is losing attorneys to other state agencies and district attorney offices because of salary caps and pay disparities, noting the Attorney General’s statutory salary cap of $150,000 and that more than 18 attorneys left last year. He said HB 1509 created higher pay levels for district attorneys and assistant district attorneys, making retention harder for the Attorney General’s office, and asked for either the salary increase or authority to move funds between budget lines. Miracle also highlighted the office’s work on child welfare and human trafficking, noting that federal HHS officials were visiting Jackson to discuss foster children and that the office administers the state’s human trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation fund. He said the office is working to reduce time children spend in state custody and support services for trafficking victims and foster youth. The committee discussed statewide youth court reform as well, with Miracle explaining that the office supports expert recommendations and a plan that could create 25 youth court positions in 20 chancery districts at an estimated $10 million, based on DHS and AOC data and a model using state-employed and contract lawyers. No votes were taken during the excerpted meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Who pays for that?"
• I was going to ask about the pay.
• I was going to ask about the pay.
• We need to pay them and compensate them properly.
• Let's remember that Social Security is an earned benefit that you pay for, that our employers pay for

Summary: The committee heard several labor and employment measures. AB 465 would require local public employers, at a union’s request, to negotiate minimum disciplinary and grievance procedures in MOUs, including progressive discipline, just-cause protections, grievance appeal rights, and paid release time for representatives. Supporters, including AFSCME and SEIU, said it would create fairer and more consistent due process protections for local government workers; opponents from county and city groups argued it would impose binding arbitration and rigid discipline rules that could undermine local flexibility and accountability. The bill passed on a 5-0 vote and was re-referred to Appropriations. AB 792 would allow court interpreter bargaining to be consolidated when multiple regions are negotiating at the same time. The author and the California Federation of Interpreters said the change would reduce repeated bargaining, improve efficiency, and help address interpreter recruitment and retention. There was no opposition, but some members questioned whether the proposal would really solve wage and staffing problems; the bill passed 5-0 and was placed on hold. AB 1309, which would improve Cal Fire firefighter compensation by tying salaries more closely to comparable local fire departments, drew strong support from firefighters and no opposition. Members praised Cal Fire’s work and the bill passed 7-0 and was held for add-ons. The committee also approved AJR 8, a resolution urging protection of Social Security and opposing federal cuts or office closures. Supporters said Social Security is essential to seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, and children, and warned that reductions would increase poverty and homelessness. One member objected to naming political figures in the resolution, but the measure still passed 7-0 and was held. AB 1247, which would require contracted-out school classified workers to meet the same training and qualification standards as direct hires and address related retirement contributions, passed 5-2 despite opposition from county superintendents and school administrators who said it would add costs and limit contracting flexibility. Finally, AB 288, which would authorize PERB to act when the NLRB fails to remedy labor claims by a deadline, passed 6-0 with strong union support and no opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is the amount that would be necessary to pay for all reinsurance claims and Minnesota Comprehensive
• Basically, it's the amount that's needed to pay for five years of reinsurance as currently estimated.
• Basically, it's the amount that's needed to pay for five years of reinsurance as currently estimated.
• How are we going to pay for MinnesotaCare and M.A.? So can one of you answer that? Mr.
• <00:14:54.639> for to pay for to pay for these<00:14:56.079> appropriations<00:14:56.959

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee reviewed a side-by-side comparison and fiscal analysis of Senate File 3472, a reinsurance-related bill affecting the premium security plan account, MinnesotaCare, and related health care funding. Staff explained the Senate and House versions of the bill, including how the Senate proposal extends reinsurance for five years and uses a projected $1.087 billion general fund transfer to fully fund claims and administrative costs through fiscal year 2028, while the House version conditions continuation of the program on federal approval of the state innovation waiver. The fiscal presentation also covered appropriations for MNsure, a mental health parity and substance abuse office, and House provisions for delivery reform and a public option study, along with a House transfer of $110.674 million to the health care access fund. Members debated the budget horizon and whether costs should be forecast beyond fiscal year 2025. Representative Schultz argued that the spreadsheet understated the broader fiscal impact of reinsurance and warned about future funding cliffs for MinnesotaCare and other health programs, while other members and staff noted that the state’s standard forecast ends in fiscal year 2025 and that the fiscal note only estimated reinsurance costs through the five-year extension. Supporters said reinsurance was the best available option to reduce premium increases, especially in rural areas, and some pointed to a public option as a longer-term alternative. Opponents argued reinsurance does not address underlying health care costs or deductibles and urged consideration of other reforms. House Research then walked through the policy differences. House-only provisions would change Minnesota Comprehensive Health Association board membership, require platinum plans in certain markets, expand postnatal coverage, require a prescription drug benefit in some plans, set a minimum actuarial value for MinnesotaCare, create an Office of Mental Health Parity and Substance Abuse Accountability, and direct reports on delivery reform and a public option. The shared provisions would extend the premium security program to 2027 and delay the transfer of remaining premium security plan funds to the health care access fund until 2029, with the House language again contingent on federal waiver approval. No formal vote was taken in the excerpt; the chair closed discussion after hearing no further questions and indicated members would be contacted about next steps.

Transcript Highlights:

• If I go to the coin shop right around the corner and pay $500 in one cent, I don't have to pay.
• The state would still pay in dollars. It would pay it onto the platform.
• However, we don't pay for things generally with cash.
• We are not allowing people to pay us in gold or to deposit, make deposits in gold, or pay taxes with
• But the state wouldn't be paying gold. The state would be paying dollars to the platform.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 794, as amended by a late-filed strike-all, which would require a human being to make insurance claim denial decisions and prohibit artificial intelligence from being the sole basis for a denial. The sponsor said the bill was intended to preserve human oversight while allowing innovation in claims processing. Public testimony included support from the Florida Insurance Consumer Advocate and the Florida Medical Association, along with one speaker urging additional protections for homeowners. The committee adopted the strike-all and reported SB 794 favorably with committee substitutes. Members then heard SB 134, which removes the $500 threshold on the sales tax exemption for bullion, making sales of gold, silver, and platinum bullion fully exempt and eliminating certain dealer documentation requirements. Supporters argued the change would reduce a regressive tax and help consumers preserve savings; the sponsor estimated a revenue impact of about $300,000. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also adopted a strike-all on SB 888, which directs the Office of Insurance Regulation to create a more consumer-friendly homeowners insurance website with premium comparison information, market data, rate filing access, and educational resources. The sponsor and Leader Boyd said the goal was to improve transparency and help consumers navigate a stabilizing market. SB 888 was reported favorably with committee substitutes. The final bill heard was SB 1578, covering mammograms and supplemental breast cancer screenings. The sponsor said it would expand coverage requirements in ACA plans and private insurance policies, including annual mammograms for women ages 40 to 50 and supplemental screening coverage, while noting Medicaid already provides these services. The Florida Insurance Consumer Advocate waived in support, and the bill was reported favorably. After the bills, the committee held a lengthy panel discussion on gold and silver as legal tender and transactional money, with testimony from officials from Utah and Florida, industry representatives, and advocacy groups. Panelists discussed constitutional authority, consumer protections, depository oversight, taxation issues, and possible transactional platforms for precious metals. No further action was taken after the discussion, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• They weren't allowed to pay.
• We're paying 80 percent of state employees.
• Well, I think they Were paying 100 percent.
• Who's paying for the judge's insurance? The judges pay for their own.
• It's also how we pay for the interns that we have.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And people often say renters don't pay property taxes. It's not true.
• They think what they pay.
• I think about this: if I don’t pay my property taxes for 25 years and I pay...
• If that’s the case, there’s no recourse; nobody’s going to pay the tax at all.
• is just awful because nobody would pay.

Summary: The Select Committee on Property Taxes held its first meeting with opening remarks from the co-chairs and ranking member framing the committee’s task as developing property tax legislation for next session. Staff then gave a high-level overview of Florida property taxes, explaining how ad valorem taxes work, the roles of property appraisers, tax collectors, taxing authorities, value adjustment boards, and the Department of Revenue, and reviewing key concepts such as just value, assessed value, exemptions, taxable value, millage rates, homestead exemptions, Save Our Homes, and portability. The presentation also emphasized that property tax law is largely rooted in the Florida Constitution and that local governments choose millage rates, which affects collections. No public comment was taken. The committee then discussed five Speaker-proposed concepts. Proposal 1 would require cities, counties, and special districts to hold a referendum on eliminating property taxes on homestead properties; members raised concerns about local funding, public safety, special districts, renters, and the need for extensive voter education, with some suggesting countywide elections or town halls instead. Proposal 2 would create a new $500,000 homestead exemption for non-school taxes and a $1 million exemption for seniors 65+ or long-term homesteaders; members split between seeing it as meaningful relief for seniors and warning it could devastate local tax bases, especially in lower-value or rural counties, while also potentially trapping older homeowners in place. Proposal 3 would authorize the Legislature to raise homestead exemptions by general law; some liked the flexibility, but others worried about statewide one-size-fits-all impacts, political difficulty in reversing changes, and the need for local revenue replacement. Proposal 4 would change assessment caps for homestead and non-homestead property; several members said it would not provide enough relief and could shift burdens to rental properties and non-homestead owners. Proposal 5, eliminating foreclosure on homestead property for tax liens, drew the strongest opposition, with members saying it would undermine lien priority, mortgage and title systems, and incentives to pay taxes. Throughout the meeting, members repeatedly stressed the need to understand local fiscal impacts, including police, fire, infrastructure, and other services funded by property taxes, and to consider alternative revenue sources or offsets if taxes are reduced. The co-chairs said the committee is still in the information-gathering stage, that all ideas remain on the table, and that members should do “homework” by meeting with local taxing authorities and learning how property taxes are set and spent in their districts. The meeting ended with no votes on the proposals and adjournment after a motion to rise.

Transcript Highlights:

• Consumers won't be paying more.
• And I was always exempt from paying the state sales tax.
• So they said, we don't have to pay yet. We're exempt.
• And the little people are the ones paying. Believe me, it's the little people paying in our county.
• And if we pass a use tax, the little people are going to pay. The little people pay in our county.

Summary: The Missouri House Legislative Rules Committee held a rare public hearing on House Bill 2243, sponsored by Rep. Bryant-Wolfen, which would repeal a local sales tax exemption for certain industries that was enacted in a prior omnibus bill tied to the Wayfair-related tax changes. The sponsor argued the exemption shifted revenue away from counties and onto local residents, and said the bill would restore local tax collections that had been lost without a guaranteed replacement. Several members questioned whether the proposal amounted to a tax increase on manufacturers and whether it could deter investment or job growth; the sponsor responded that the tax burden had already been shifted to Missourians and that other pro-business reforms could address competitiveness. Supporters from Iron County, St. Genevieve County, and Adair County testified that the exemption had reduced local revenue for roads, law enforcement, ambulance, and 911 services. They described budget shortfalls, service cuts, and the impact on counties that had already approved local sales or use taxes by voter approval. One Iron County commissioner said the loss of revenue had forced higher property tax levies and reduced ambulance coverage, while St. Genevieve officials cited large drops in monthly sales tax receipts and rising costs. Adair County officials said the exemption affected revenue from large solar and wind projects and argued that the taxes were intended to support local infrastructure and schools. Opponents, including Associated Industries in Missouri, argued the exemption was originally adopted to keep Missouri’s tax system uniform and compliant with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Wayfair framework for out-of-state sellers. They warned that removing the exemption could create a $35 million annual burden on manufacturers and potentially jeopardize broader local use-tax collections if the state’s system were challenged again. Committee members also discussed the possibility of requiring local voter approval or a replacement revenue source before changing the exemption. No vote was taken during the hearing, and the chair said he planned to execute the bill later in the week.

Transcript Highlights:

• > and<00:23:30.400> getting application, paying fees, and getting application, paying fees
• have to pay the credit have do you have to pay the credit agency<01:02:40.079> or<01:02:40.240
• system punish uh renters who don't pay system punish uh renters who don't pay on<01:15:20.320>
• If I don't pay my bad behavior.
• folks that are renters that are paying folks that are renters that are paying their<01:17:34.480

Bills: HF4207, HF3639, HF3981, HF3064, HF2123

Keywords: housing aid, local housing trust, funding projects, income provisions, technical changes, landlord regulations, tenant rights, minor children, lease agreements, eviction, privacy protection, housing, lease termination, medical care, death, infirmity, landlord obligations, St. Paul, public housing, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency

Transcript Highlights:

• You pay for or how do you do that? yeah. You pay for or how do you do that?
• I mentioned earlier increase pay.
• Higher pay.
• pays off later. pays off later.
• the pay we'd like to honor the same pay the pay we'd like to honor the same pay as<01:09:44.080>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Instead of paying doctors and providers directly, the state pays an HMO middleman who then would pay
• Instead of paying middleman function.
• an M HMO middleman who then state pays an M HMO middleman who then would<00:01:34.159> pay<00
• <00:02:49.599> for and how much the state should pay for and how much the state should pay
• <00:04:12.159> the direct quote, "The cost of paying the direct quote, "The cost of paying

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We've been paying attention.
• For example, Cushing is still paying out of the LOM. They're paying a lot of ad valorem.
• They're already paying.
• A lot of folks pay sales taxes, and they also pay income taxes, so it to me, it seems to be the same
• We are saying you pay gross production. We do not have to pay out of a LOM.

Bills: SB1287, SB1983, SB1796, SB1806, SB1558, SB2135, SB483, SB1198, SB1265, SB2154, SB2139, SB1552, SB2118, SB1775, SB259, SB1344, SB1380, SB2007, SB1572, SB2074, SB1423, SB1425, SB1502, SB1503, SB1833, SB1561, SB1555, SB2044, SB1749, SB904, SB1565, SB1500, SB667, SB1484, SB1562, SB1644, HR1045, SB227, SB1627, SB1475, SB1966, SB2049, SB1531, SB80, SB1734, SB1630, SB1894, SB1975, SB1432, SB1437, SB1812, SB346, SB710, SB1489, SB1614, SB2045, SB1250, SB1304, SB1501, SB1946, SB592, SB65, SB1257, SB444, SB640, SB2178, SB1242, SB1642

Keywords: abstraction, licensing, Oklahoma Abstractors Board, criminal background, good moral character, SB1983, foster care, resource family partner, resource family partners, Department of Human Services, DHS, child welfare, foster homes, foster children, placement data, data sharing, de-identified data, aggregated data, sibling groups, placement disruptions

Transcript Highlights:

• , yeah, 1.6 million. whatever fund is paying for the salaries whatever fund is paying for the salaries
• <00:19:19.520> and<00:19:19.799> the must pay for The Fringe and the must pay for The
• <00:20:29.400> yeah6 helped cause it was Hazard pay yeah6 helped cause it was Hazard pay yeah6
• to pay the hotel, to pay for maybe a function reception.
• <02:11:16.800> the that allows the university to pay the that allows the university to pay

Keywords: 912, senate, all