Transcript Highlights:

• You know, the process really does matter.
• It was very well done about procurement processes.
• That's dictating process.
• process that includes one public notice and the opportunity and a public participation process that
• environment would be helpful to that process.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But I would contend that there still should be a process in place; there should be due process in our
• But I would contend that there still should be a process in place; there should be due process in our
• But I would contend that there still should be a process in place; there should be due process in our
• But I would contend that there still should be a process in place; there should be due process in our
• <01:29:21.320> and or maybe it just says due process and or maybe it just says due process

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So thank you for the process. I think it was needed a long time ago, and not just today.
• When funding sources require separate processes, When funding sources require separate processes with
• What if we saved a year on that process?
• And that is the closing process that people referred to over and over again.
• But, um, you know, I now know the processes. I go to these things and I also learn a process.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Governor’s 2025 reorganization plan to split the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into two new agencies: a Business and Consumer Services Agency and a California Housing and Homelessness Agency. Administration officials said the change would give each side more focused leadership, improve consumer protection and regulatory oversight, and better align housing and homelessness policy with the state’s broader housing goals. Leaders from the Department of Consumer Affairs, Cannabis Control, Alcoholic Beverage Control, and Financial Protection and Innovation all voiced support for the business-side reorganization, while housing officials emphasized that the new housing agency would help streamline funding, compliance, and coordination across programs. Members raised concerns about timing, budget impacts, office space, and whether the split would actually reduce bureaucracy. The administration said the plan would be included in the May Revision, was intended to be cost-neutral, and would not require fee increases for licensees or additional office space. On the housing side, officials said the new Housing Development and Finance Committee would work toward a single application and more coordinated award process for affordable housing funding, while preserving CalHFA’s statutory and financial independence. They also said the reorganization would improve compliance monitoring, data collection, and coordination with local governments, including Los Angeles homelessness programs. Public testimony was largely supportive. Industry groups representing beverage distributors, craft brewers, wine, mortgage lenders, and housing organizations backed the business-side split, and housing advocates such as Housing California, the California Housing Partnership, and the California Housing Consortium supported the housing agency concept and the proposed one-stop-shop approach. Several witnesses urged that tax credits, bonds, and other funding sources be better coordinated, and some said the plan should be paired with additional state investment and implementation resources. No formal vote was taken; the hearing was informational.

Transcript Highlights:

• It outlines the process, some of the procedures.
• So it's a really lopsided process.
• And the process is... But the process is... But the process is... It's three lines.
• Any time after this process, once that offer-counteroffer process starts, and if we end up in the condemnation
• It's not a rulemaking process.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 5695, which would create the Sayers Ranch Municipal Utility District in Bastrop County between Elgin and Bastrop. Representative Gurdis said Bastrop County commissioners unanimously supported the district. There was no public testimony, the bill was left pending, and later reported favorably to the full House on an 8-0 vote. The main debate centered on Senate Bill 291, which would require condemning entities to pay landowner attorney’s fees if they fail to provide 10 years of appraisal reports with an initial offer in an eminent domain case. Supporters, including Rita Beving and Charles Maley, argued the bill would add an enforcement mechanism and better protect landowners in a process they described as intimidating and lopsided. Opponents, including Tom Zabel and Lisa Kaufman, said current law already provides a remedy through abatement and attorney’s fees under Section 21.047 of the Property Code, and warned the bill could create inconsistency, delay public infrastructure projects, and increase costs. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard House Bill 5699, a simple MUD boundary change in Harris County Municipal Utility District No. 405 that would allow a tract to leave one district and join another. Representative Schofield said the landowner and district agreed to the change and to pay the tract’s share of debt. The committee substitute was adopted and the bill was reported favorably on an 8-0 vote. Later, the committee considered House Bill 5489, which would impose a four-year moratorium on impact fees. Representative Dyson framed it as an “active study” to test whether impact fees raise housing costs. College Station officials and other opponents argued impact fees help fund infrastructure for growth and that local governments should retain control; supporters said the fees are regressive and add to housing prices. The bill was left pending. The committee then heard Senate Bill 292, which would update the Landowner Bill of Rights to add information on surveys, require separate offers for property not sought in condemnation, and require the rights document to be delivered with the initial offer. Supporters said it would improve transparency and fill gaps in the current document, while opponents said it was unnecessary because the law already exists and warned against revisiting a 2021 compromise. The transcript ends during that discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the vetting process to apply to get grants for a city?
• , milk process value-added milk processing facility incentive program, and this is similar to what we've
• , milk process value-added milk processing facility incentive program, and this is similar to what we've
• And along with dairy processing plants, they also had to have a milk processing plant.
• In the state of North Dakota, along with dairy processing plants, they also had to have a milk processing

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to work on three remaining policy bills. On HB 2225, members discussed an amendment reducing the Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund housing grant program from $50 million to $30 million, lowering the maximum grant amount, and clarifying that existing lots can qualify after a certificate of occupancy is issued so the program can help communities like Watford City and Williston use prepared lots. Members also discussed the matching requirements, tribal eligibility, and how Commerce would score applications to ensure the money lowers lot costs rather than being absorbed by political subdivisions. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Murphy was assigned to carry the bill. The committee then took up SB 2200, which funds the 988 crisis hotline. After discussion, members agreed to strip out the proposed phone-line charge approach and instead provide a $500,000 appropriation from the Community Health Care Trust Fund, consistent with the Senate version, to supplement existing funding for increased staffing and texting-related demand. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Nelson will carry the bill. Finally, the committee considered SB 2342, which creates a value-added milk processing facility incentive program. The amendment reduced the proposed line of credit from $10 million to $5 million, with the program intended to support dairy-related processing infrastructure such as utilities, roads, water, wastewater, and rail access. Members noted the program would be administered through the Agriculture Diversification and Development Committee, could potentially support one or multiple facilities, and sunsets June 30, 2027. The amendment and the bill as amended both passed 22-0, and Representative Brandenburg will carry the bill. The committee then adjourned, planning to reconvene the next morning to take up additional bills and budget adjustments.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:38.879> was improvements to our election process was improvements to our election process
• It provides that process.
• that process. It authorizes the board of that process.
• <00:04:57.360> as process for individuals identified as process for individuals identified
• We know that lawmaking is a process, and we respect that process and continue to be a partner in it.

Keywords: HB 534 (only one on the agenda) – 00:02:08, 958, all

Summary: The House Elections, Constitutional Amendments, and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee met to consider House Bill 534, sponsored by Rep. DJ Johnson, with a committee substitute. Johnson said the bill was the product of interim work with the Secretary of State’s office, the State Board of Elections, county clerks, KREF, and other stakeholders, and that the committee substitute folded in several election-administration changes. He highlighted provisions clarifying the timeline for felony voter-roll removals, allowing the Board of Elections to work with federal agencies to identify non-citizens on the voter rolls, creating a process for those individuals to prove citizenship and vote provisionally, and changing some KREF board appointments. He also described technical campaign-finance changes and said some provisions might still be adjusted through floor amendments. Members raised concerns about fiscal impact, timing, and voter privacy. Rep. Bivens questioned the cost and whether the bill could affect voter records; Johnson responded that the bill itself did not require new equipment or broad new spending, though a special election in a local government failure scenario could create costs. Rep. Hancock and Rep. Marzian argued the bill could create unnecessary burdens on county clerks and questioned whether there was a demonstrated problem to justify the changes. The county clerks’ association, through Rockcastle County Clerk Danetta Ford Allen, opposed the bill as introduced, warning that citizenship checks could wrongly remove eligible voters, that online ballot images or cast vote records could threaten voter privacy and facilitate vote buying, and that the emergency clause would force major changes too close to the May primary. Johnson defended the bill as a targeted response to a real local election failure and said the citizenship data sharing would be limited to name, date of birth, and Social Security number. He also explained that the ballot-image language was permissive and intended to let counties explore emerging technology, but he was open to removing that section or changing the effective date in a floor amendment. He further said he would consider preserving gubernatorial appointments to KREF with Senate oversight instead of shifting appointments to legislative leaders. After discussion, the committee voted 9-2 with one pass to report the bill out, with several members explaining yes votes as support for moving the bill forward while expecting further cleanup, and no votes citing cost, timing, and voter-access concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• WE ARE GENERALLY TRYING TO FIND A BETTER PROCESS.
• >> WE THINK THAT PROCESS SHOULD BE THROUGH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT. THE ACTUAL PROCESS ITSELF. >> Sen.
• SB 1080 STREAMS AND THE PROCESS ORDERS BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.
• SHEET SAYING THIS DIFFICULTY ALREADY WITH THE FUNDING PROCESS.
• BUT WE DID WITH THE MATCHING PROCESS.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're still in the planning process and the permitting process.
• It's just our process is kind of out of order.
• I was not in junior high when this process started.
• So my concern is that we try to rush this through the budget process when we already have another process
• no public involvement or no public process.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you lose water in that process?
• The permitting process will be much simpler.
• Um, but the process seems to be, uh, you're a little bit ahead of the process, and, and that's what worries
• Uh, like the process with RUS with all the co-ops, we're using the same process, uh, for this hydrogen
• So this was, this was a competitive process.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a working process.
• And that process, I believe, represented...
• Process.
• The exact same process is contemplated here.
• There's a long process before they get issued.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• was left over after the claims process was left over after the claims process was<00:15:14.720><
• $117,000 annually we're in the process $117,000 annually we're in the process right<00:18:54.080
• <00:30:58.840> to make that a standard ardized process to make that a standard ardized process
• through that but there there's a process through that but there there's a process to<00:41:32.119
• team has learned how to process team has learned how to process applications<01:31:42.880> quickly

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we have a very thorough process.
• That goes through our process, and then we have a very thorough process that those complaints go through
• It's a very involved process.
• So we have, like our grand jury process, we've got our hearing process.
• So we have, like our grand jury process, we've got our hearing process, if they appeal that, there will

Bills: SB2101, SB2334, SB2633, SB2637, SB2713, SB2781, SB2782, SB3059, HB 1130

Keywords: minors, sexually explicit materials, public libraries, age verification, civil penalties, library collection review, alcohol storage, airline permits, beverage regulations, airport, commercial flights, alcoholic beverages, local option election, zoning regulations, municipality control, land use, state law, social media, bot accounts, misinformation

Summary: The committee first reopened public testimony on Senate Bill 2713, which concerned protections for freedom of conscience in the context of Realtor association discipline. Texas Realtors representatives testified that their organization is a separate Texas legal entity but affiliated with the National Association of Realtors through a charter and code of ethics. They said Texas Realtors is neutral on SB 2713, that their ethics process is focused on fair housing and equal professional service, and that they have not suspended or terminated anyone in Texas for religious or political speech. Senators pressed them on whether national standards could override Texas law and on examples from other states; the witnesses said state and federal law control and that they would comply with Texas law if the bill passed. Public testimony then closed and SB 2713 was left pending. The committee then took up Senate Bill 1698 on e-cigarettes. Senator Parker explained a committee substitute that tightened enforcement, required distributor registration, expanded regulation to nicotine from any source, added restrictions on child-appealing packaging, authorized inspections and audits, and set compliance deadlines later in 2025 and 2026. After questions, the substitute was adopted and SB 1698, as substituted, was reported favorably to the full Senate on a 6-0 vote, with a recommendation for the local and uncontested calendar. Next, the committee considered Senate Bill 2487 on crisis and mental health facilities. Senator Parker described a substitute that renamed the program a crisis service model, allowed multiple county facilities, added local siting limits, expanded staffing options, shortened clinical timelines, required discharge referrals, directed law enforcement and EMS to transport people there first, and created local boards and expanded reporting. The substitute was adopted and the bill was reported favorably on a 6-0 vote, also recommended for the local and uncontested calendar. Senate Bill 2819, dealing with political activities of county elections administrators, was then reported favorably on a 6-0 vote and likewise sent to the local and uncontested calendar. Senate Bill 2043 was withdrawn. The committee spent substantial time on Senate Bill 2101, which would require municipal public libraries to move sexually explicit materials out of minors’ sections and impose age-verification and review requirements. Supporters argued the bill would protect children from explicit material in public libraries and that libraries should not be left to self-regulate. Opponents, including librarians, parents, authors, and ACLU representatives, argued the definitions were vague, the bill would be costly and burdensome for small libraries, could function as a book ban, and would restrict teens’ access to classics, research materials, and other books. Several witnesses said parents should make those decisions, not the state. The bill’s author said the committee substitute was still being worked on and asked witnesses to review it; public testimony remained open in the portion provided, with no final action on SB 2101 shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• So my question is: Where does this approval process stand?
• Yeah, so the process already was approved.
• I do not want to lose it over process.
• Where are we at in that process to have such a thing?
• Where are we at in that process to have such a thing?

Summary: The committee first heard AB 597, a bill to strengthen consumer protections for disaster survivors who use public adjusters. The author and the Department of Insurance said the measure would cap public adjuster fees at 15% for claims tied to declared disasters, require clearer contracts, prohibit solicitation during emergency conditions, and allow consumers to rescind contracts that were solicited during prohibited periods. Insurance industry groups supported the bill, while public adjuster representatives opposed it as written but said they were willing to work on revisions. The committee approved the bill and re-referred it to Appropriations; the roll call was ultimately recorded as 16-0. The committee then held its fourth oversight hearing on the Department of Insurance’s Sustainable Insurance Strategy, with Commissioner Ricardo Lara giving an extensive update on wildfire-related market reforms and consumer protections. He said the recent Southern California wildfires had not derailed the strategy and described actions including advance claim payments, a one-year moratorium on residential non-renewals in affected areas, a new fraud strike team, smoke-damage claim guidance, additional living expense protections, and a consumer claims tracker. He reported more than $12.1 billion in claims paid, over 37,000 claims filed, and more than 7,000 survivors assisted directly. He also discussed related bills and reforms, including AB 597, SB 495, SB 547, SB 429, SB 616, AB 888, and AB 2026. Members questioned the commissioner about the Fair Plan’s growing exposure, the $1 billion assessment, rate increases, non-renewals, underinsurance, and whether the reforms would actually stabilize the market. Lara said the assessment was already approved, that policyholders would not be hit with one large bill because insurers have two years to recover costs, and that the department was pushing insurers to use catastrophe modeling and reinsurance tools in exchange for commitments to write more policies in wildfire-distressed areas. He said the department expects to see market stabilization by 2026, though he emphasized the timeline depends on insurer participation, implementation of the new regulations, and future disaster activity. Members generally expressed support for the goals of the strategy while pressing for clearer expectations for consumers and faster action on mitigation and market reform.

Transcript Highlights:

• necessarily helpful. ...process of how to get to that point.
• Everyone fine with adding to include process.
• the family law courts, and process in the state of North Dakota.
• It's an expensive process. Actually, you've got to publish them.
• It's an expensive process. Actually, you've got to publish them.

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met to approve prior minutes and then worked through draft legislation related to a possible family court study committee. The group discussed the proposed 15-member committee’s makeup in detail, including whether to add parent representation, judges, family law section members, child support, clerks of court, domestic violence advocates, and other stakeholders. The task force ultimately agreed to keep the committee at 15 members, reduce the legislative membership from eight to six, add two judges from different districts, add two family law section members with rural and urban representation, include one parent subject to a custody order, and replace the mental health professional with a clerk of court representative appointed through the trial court administrator’s office. The draft was also revised to keep domestic violence advocacy representation and to clarify that the study could consider juvenile court issues as part of the family court umbrella. The committee voted to approve the revised draft and recommend it to Legislative Management, with one recorded “no” vote from Judge Hovey after the meeting resumed. The task force then turned to a second draft dealing with requiring participation in a family transition program, which was renamed in discussion to a parenting education course. Members debated whether the bill should simply refer to an existing program like Parents Forever or instead specify broader education about the court process, parental rights, co-parenting, and related issues. Some members supported the requirement as a way to reduce conflict and improve understanding of the system, while others raised concerns about vague language, cost to parents, lack of exemptions, and whether the bill was too open-ended or potentially duplicative of other legislation. The discussion became lengthy and unresolved, with the drafter noting that more specific direction would be needed to revise the bill. The transcript cuts off before a final vote or action on this second draft is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• When we think about this citizen initiative process, and now what I see, this citizen initiative process
• I just feel that this process that we've taken to get us to this point, it's not a democratic process
• And we should all want integrity in our electoral process.
• . 76% want to keep the petition process just as it is.
• They have a verification process already in place.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of member introductions recognizing interns, pages, volunteers, and the retirement of Pastor Gary Austin from the sergeant’s office. Leadership also announced that budget talks with the House were continuing and that senators would not need to plan on being in next week, suggesting progress toward a budget framework. After routine floor business, the chamber took up a major third-reading measure on citizen initiatives and several education bills, followed later by returning messages from the House on health and school-safety measures. The most extensive debate centered on the citizen initiative bill, which sponsors said was intended to protect the constitutional amendment process from fraud and abuse based on election-crime investigations and a large state report on petition fraud. Supporters argued the bill would add reasonable guardrails, prevent misuse of public funds, and preserve integrity while still allowing grassroots participation. Opponents from both parties argued it would make citizen-led amendments much harder by adding costs, deadlines, criminal penalties, and administrative burdens that would chill participation and favor wealthy or corporate interests. After lengthy debate, the Senate voted 28-10 to pass the bill. The chamber then passed several education measures with little or no opposition, including bills tied to Bright Futures, dual enrollment, Florida ABLE, teacher preparation, and other education policy updates, all by 38-0. Later, the Senate concurred in House amendments on a stem cell therapy bill, an EKG requirement for student athletes, and a cardiac emergency bill, each passing 37-0. The House also sent back a school safety bill with amendments affecting child care facility partnerships with law enforcement, temporary door locks during active assailant incidents, supervision windows, and funding for panic alarm systems; the transcript ends as that bill is being explained.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's an important process, if I remember correctly, that EPI process. Correct, correct.
• You have things in process.
• We do appreciate that review process.
• But we try to do the best we can through the waiver process and through the enforcement process, but
• But we try to do the best we can through the waiver process and through the enforcement process, but

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The committee began with Article I budget items for the Secretary of State. LBB staff outlined recommendations that would reduce the agency’s appropriation by about $40.3 million, including changes to HAVA funding, removal of one-time business system replacement money, and a rider directing the agency to use Fund 5095 first. Secretary Jane Nelson and staff then defended several exceptional items, especially additional staffing for elections and business filings, a new website, digitization of records, cybersecurity tools, and renovation of the James Earl Rudder Building. Members focused heavily on election administration, cross-checking voter rolls, Harris County complaints, call-center response times, and whether online voter registration should be expanded. No votes were taken; the discussion was informational and budget-focused. The committee then heard the Office of the Governor and trustee programs. LBB presented a recommended $2.4 million decrease for the governor’s office proper and a much larger decrease in trustee programs driven by one-time funding and unexpended balances, while still preserving major border security funding and victim assistance funding. Governor’s staff emphasized Texas’ economic growth, the importance of border security, and efforts to seek federal reimbursement for the roughly $11 billion Texas has spent on border operations. Members discussed whether shifting National Guard deployment to federal control could reduce state costs, and they also reviewed the music incubator program, the Governor’s University Research Initiative, and the semiconductor innovation consortium. Staff highlighted a $5 million late-added request for grants to protect nonprofits from violence and terrorism. Again, the exchange was largely explanatory, with no formal action. Finally, the committee took up the Texas Facilities Commission and lease payments for revenue bonds. LBB recommended major reductions overall, including removal of border wall construction funding and capital complex bond funding, but added money for higher utility costs, renovation of the Rudder Building, and additional facilities staff. George Purcell also noted stable maintenance-and-renewal funding and new riders related to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission building, tenant communications, and space utilization. For lease payments, LBB recommended a smaller appropriation tied to revenue-bond costs allocated across agencies. The discussion was informational, with members asking about the Rudder Building renovation, border wall progress, and capital complex construction timelines; no votes were recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• procuring processes. procuring processes.
• requirements and processes. requirements and processes.
• management processes. management processes.
• the performance management process. the performance management process.
• processes related to surety bonds. processes related to surety bonds.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So you have to have a fair process, and it kind of threw some people off.
• So we were not involved in that decision process.
• I think this process has caused a lot of confusion. Thank you.
• So we started this process, but this process is not working like it should.
• So there's— We started this process, but this process is not working like it should.

Summary: The Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee met on May 12, 2026, and focused primarily on Senate Bill 407, a congressional redistricting proposal, with Senate Bill 121 also scheduled for later. The chair explained the committee would first take up SB 407, consider amendments, then hear public testimony, and would not take up SB 116 or SB 130. Two amendment sets were adopted on SB 407: one technical set adjusting dates to align with the upcoming election cycle, and another updating the map in the bill. Committee members and the bill sponsor described the proposal as a 4-2 congressional map intended to comply with the Supreme Court’s CalA ruling, preserve traditional redistricting criteria, and avoid using race as the basis for district lines. Supporters of SB 407 argued the map was compact, contiguous, kept parishes and cities together, and created two opportunity districts without racial predominance. Several senators said the map better reflected Louisiana’s political and demographic realities and could withstand legal challenge under the Equal Protection Clause and First Amendment. Testimony in support also emphasized fairness, representation, and the idea that the state should not move to a 5-1 map. Some speakers, including former legislators and community advocates, said the state should maintain or preserve two districts where Black voters and Democratic voters could elect candidates of choice. Opponents of the broader redistricting effort criticized the process as rushed and confusing, especially because early voting had already begun and the Secretary of State was not present to answer questions. Some speakers said the legislature had not been properly involved in the election suspension process and raised concerns about whether votes already cast would count if maps changed. Others argued the proposed changes were an attempt to dilute political power and disenfranchise voters, particularly Black, poor, and queer communities. The committee heard extensive public testimony on both sides, but no final vote on the bill was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, we have streamlined a lot of the process.
• We have engaged partners, and I was hoping to have our first house... ...process.
• It did lead to a couple little slowdowns in the process because that's a very bureaucratic process.
• I think, on the wait list actually, but anyway, the process, whatever process it was, it was very smooth
• But anyway, he was very impressed with the process and just how smooth it actually...

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs met with a quorum and heard two bills, a confirmation, and two agency presentations. SB 48 by Senator Gates would require local governments to allow voluntary accessory dwelling units, preserve homestead exemption for the owner-occupied portion, limit parking restrictions, require 30-day minimum leases, extend density bonuses for military-family housing, and allow reusable tenant screening reports. The bill drew strong support from the Florida Association of Mortgage Professionals and several others, and it was reported favorably on a unanimous roll call. SB 34 by Senator Sharief would expand the Historic Cemetery Program, particularly to help historic African-American cemeteries preserve and maintain themselves by allowing sale of excess vacant land only if proceeds are used for long-term upkeep; it also passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee also recommended confirmation of Fox Henderson to the Florida Housing Finance Corporation Board of Directors by unanimous vote. In addition, the Department of Commerce presented on the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program and Rebuild Florida, describing more than $4.3 billion in HUD disaster recovery funds since 2017, housing repair and replacement efforts that have completed more than 5,200 homes, and infrastructure and mitigation projects across the state. Members asked about average project costs, contractor oversight, corrective actions for deficient work, and clawbacks from a prior vendor; Commerce said it had ended the earlier vendor relationship, imposed about $3.6 million in financial consequences, and now uses stronger oversight and competitive procurement for contractors. The Division of Emergency Management then presented on Elevate Florida, a federal mitigation program that allows homeowners to apply directly for elevation, reconstruction, acquisition, or wind-mitigation projects, with a 75/25 federal-homeowner cost share and no state funds used. Director Kevin Guthrie said the program is intended to reduce repetitive flood losses, keep homeowners in their communities, and serve as a national model; he reported more than 12,000 applications, about 1,500 prioritized for review, 500 on a wait list, and 305 submitted to FEMA for final approval. Members asked about assistance for seniors who cannot meet the 25% match, the wait-list process, contractor selection, and the mix of project types, and Guthrie said contractors were selected through competitive procurement and that most projects are elevations, though some may become reconstructions or acquisitions depending on inspection results. The committee adjourned after the presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• It starts to raise questions of due process.
• They can controvert the claim under the 1002 process.
• It’s simply that you don’t have to go through this long process, sometimes a long process like you have
• With the 1010 process, the minimum delay is five days.
• The second thing is that this is not an onerous process.

Summary: The committee first voluntarily deferred House Bills 460 and 561, then took up House Bill 1101 on workers’ compensation. The sponsor said the bill would define maximum medical improvement, adjust fraud provisions, shorten temporary total disability and supplemental earnings benefit periods, and revise vocational rehabilitation rules; an amendment removed proposed age-based termination language for benefits. Business groups including LABI supported the bill as a way to reduce Louisiana’s comparatively high indemnity costs and align the state with regional norms, while injured-worker advocates and attorneys strongly opposed it, arguing it would cut benefits, shift medical and disability decisions away from treating physicians and judges, broaden fraud too far, and potentially push costs onto public programs. After debate, the committee voted to report HB 1101 with amendments. House Bill 282 was voluntarily deferred. House Bill 293, which would add sexual orientation and gender identity to Louisiana employment discrimination protections, drew generally supportive testimony from the sponsor and supporters, with some members raising questions about religious exemptions and federal law. The committee ultimately voted against reporting HB 293 favorably. House Bill 390, providing unpaid leave protections for domestic abuse survivors at larger employers, was presented as a tool for survivors, but the committee split 6-6 on a motion to report it favorably; the tie resulted in the bill being voluntarily deferred. The committee then heard House Bill 456, which would expand workers’ compensation petition requirements and allow employers or payers broader access to file disputed claims and seek discovery. Supporters argued employers currently lack a practical way to obtain records and challenge claims without first cutting off benefits, while opponents said the bill would revive a rejected 2012 approach, increase litigation, and undermine the no-fault workers’ compensation bargain. The discussion centered on whether the bill would preserve benefits while allowing discovery or instead encourage more disputes and penalties. The transcript ends with testimony still underway on HB 456, with no final vote shown.