Video & Transcript Research : 'arbitrary assessment'

Page 76 of 425
NH

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

House Science, Technology and Energy (03/10/2025)

Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:
  • 00:09:02.079> about Our work session and talk about HB 450 relative to commercial property assessed
  • I don't think this bill cuts the mustard for this year, and that's my assessment.
  • mustard for this year and<01:39:10.199> that's<01:39:10.440> my<01:39:10.760> assessment
  • c><01:39:11.760> and<01:39:11.920> I'm<01:39:12.199> anxious and that's my assessment
  • and I'm anxious and that's my assessment and I'm anxious to<01:39:12.639> hear<01:39:12.800><
Keywords: 1189, house, all
NH

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

House State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs (01/17/2025)

State-federal Relations and Veterans Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • <00:46:33.640> challenge<00:46:34.640> you<00:46:34.880> our recruiting assession
  • challenge you our recruiting assession challenge you our recruiters<00:46:35.440> are<00:46:35.559
  • No, we have to stop and pause and assess the process and see have we really set up our employees for
  • /c><02:07:29.000> and<02:07:29.159> pause<02:07:29.480> and<02:07:29.679> assess
  • <02:07:30.079> the<02:07:30.400> process to stop and pause and assess the process to
Keywords: 1189, house, all
OK
Transcript Highlights:
  • The requirement of OA is for a bill to first assess whether or not a proposal has a liability added to
  • And we're going to ask that agencies perform post-contract assessment and publicly post those results
  • central purchasing, we are asking that contracts include a metric to measure the success in post-assessment
  • contracts and the status of contracts and we're asking central purchasing to post in Perpetuity post-assessment
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Senate SessionReading and Referral of Bills Mar 17th, 2025

Texas Senate Floor Meeting

Bills: SJR 4, SCR 36, SCR 37, SCR 38, SCR 39, SCR 40, SCR 41, SCR 42, SB 7, SB 30, SB 31, SB 32, SB 33, SB 34, SB 36, SB 37, SB 38, SB 39, SB 1851, SB 1852, SB 1853, SB 1854, SB 1855, SB 1856, SB 1857, SB 1858, SB 1860, SB 1861, SB 1862, SB 1863, SB 1864, SB 1865, SB 1866, SB 1867, SB 1868, SB 1869, SB 1870, SB 1871, SB 1872, SB 1873, SB 1874, SB 1875, SB 1876, SB 1877, SB 1878, SB 1879, SB 1880, SB 1881, SB 1882, SB 1883, SB 1884, SB 1885, SB 1886, SB 1887, SB 1888, SB 1889, SB 1890, SB 1891, SB 1892, SB 1893, SB 1894, SB 1895, SB 1896, SB 1897, SB 1898, SB 1899, SB 1900, SB 1901, SB 1903, SB 1904, SB 1905, SB 1906, SB 1907, SB 1908, SB 1909, SB 1910, SB 1911, SB 1912, SB 1913, SB 1914, SB 1915, SB 1916, SB 1917, SB 1918, SB 1919, SB 1920, SB 1921, SB 1922, SB 1923, SB 1924, SB 1925, SB 1926, SB 1927, SB 1928, SB 1929, SB 1930, SB 1931, SB 1932, SB 1933, SB 1934, SB 1935, SB 1936, SB 1937, SB 1938, SB 1939, SB 1940, SB 1941, SB 1942, SB 1943, SB 1944, SB 1945, SB 1946, SB 1947, SB 1948, SB 1949, SB 1950, SB 1951, SB 1952, SB 1953, SB 1954, SB 1955, SB 1956, SB 1957, SB 1958, SB 1959, SB 1960, SB 1961, SB 1962, SB 1963, SB 1964, SB 1965, SB 1966, SB 1967, SB 1968, SB 1969, SB 1970, SB 1971, SB 1972, SB 1973, SB 1974, SB 1975, SB 1976, SB 1977, SB 1978, SB 1979, SB 1980, SB 1981, SB 1982, SB 1983, SB 1984, SB 1985, SB 1986, SB 1987, SB 1988, SB 1989, SB 1990, SB 1991, SB 1992, SB 1993, SB 1994, SB 1995, SB 1996, SB 1997, SB 1998, SB 1999, SB 2000, SB 2001, SB 2002, SB 2003, SB 2004, SB 2005, SB 2006, SB 2007, SB 2008, SB 2009, SB 2010, SB 2011, SB 2012, SB 2013, SB 2014, SB 2015, SB 2016, SB 2017, SB 2018, SB 2019, SB 2020, SB 2021, SB 2022, SB 2023, SB 2024, SB 2025, SB 2026, SB 2027, SB 2028, SB 2029, SB 2030, SB 2031, SB 2032, SB 2033, SB 2034, SB 2035, SB 2036, SB 2037, SB 2038, SB 2039, SB 2040, SB 2041, SB 2042, SB 2043, SB 2044, SB 2045, SB 2046, SB 2047, SB 2048, SB 2049, SB 2050, SB 2051, SB 2052, SB 2053, SB 2054, SB 2055, SB 2056, SB 2057, SB 2058, SB 2059, SB 2060
US

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

US House Floor Proceedings (Monday, April 27, 2026)

US Federal House Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • and that is by being taxed on their compensation simply because their suffering doesn't meet some arbitrary
  • 04:27:13.040> doesn't<04:27:13.439> meet<04:27:13.760> some<04:27:14.560> arbitrary
  • suffering doesn't meet some arbitrary suffering doesn't meet some arbitrary standard.<04:27:16.159
NH

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

Senate Session (06/26/2025)

New Hampshire Senate Floor Meeting

Transcript Highlights:
  • And with no clear standard, enforcement becomes arbitrary at best and unconstitutional at worst.
  • And with no no clear standard, enforcement<05:32:38.638> becomes<05:32:39.040> arbitrary
  • ><05:32:39.680> at<05:32:39.920> best enforcement becomes arbitrary at best enforcement
  • becomes arbitrary at best and<05:32:40.718> unconstitutional<05:32:42.080> unconstitutional
Keywords: 1191, senate, all
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Committee on Environment, Climate and Legacy - 04/10/25

Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:
  • And I also accept that as a friendly amendment, because the number was arbitrary, so, you know, we randomly
  • ><02:20:20.720> the<02:20:21.040> number<02:20:21.280> was<02:20:21.520> arbitrary
  • <02:20:22.399> so amendment to the number was arbitrary so amendment to the number was arbitrary
Keywords: 1187, senate, all
NH

New Hampshire 2026 Regular Session

House Environment and Agriculture (01/27/2026)

Environment and Agriculture

Transcript Highlights:
  • Uh, secondly, to do that, the first part of the bill was to assess where available space actually still
  • the concerns that were raised at the first public hearing was that it would be very expensive to assess
  • So there's six existing sites, and the proposal is that uh the first thing we do, we assess the land
  • , um, see how much land there's available, and then um rather than hire a third-party engineer to assess
  • where available space actually to assess where available space actually still<00:22:24.799> exists
Keywords: 1189, house, all
NH

New Hampshire 2025 Regular Session

House Judiciary (03/19/2025)

Transcript Highlights:
  • In observation number six on page 25, we discussed the need for a formal risk assessment.
  • The commission did not complete a formal risk assessment during the audit period.
  • The commission did not assessment.
  • <00:11:59.440> during complete a formal risk assessment during complete a formal risk assessment
  • include some credibility assessment? include some credibility assessment?
Keywords: 928, house, all
Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to hear the Legislative Budget Assistant Office’s performance audit of the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights. Auditors said the commission was inefficient and ineffective in investigating discrimination complaints and closing cases in a timely manner during fiscal years 2020 through 2023. The report contained 25 observations; the commission fully concurred with 24 and concurred in part with one. Auditors highlighted major problems with case processing delays, inaccurate case data, lack of a case management system, weak strategic planning and risk assessment, outdated and disorganized policies, confidentiality issues, expired administrative rules, fee-setting practices, incomplete financial-interest filings, and failure to complete required reports and reconciliations. Two recommendations, involving complaint screening and conciliation, may require legislative action. Several observations focused on the commission’s intake and investigation practices. Auditors said complaints may have been screened out before docketing, potentially preventing commissioner review required by statute, and that the investigation process lacked clear rules and guidance. They also found investigators were assigned non-investigative tasks, training was inadequate, interview requirements were unclear, supervisory duties were burdensome, and confidential information was not always protected by encrypted email. The audit recommended clearer administrative rules, better internal controls, more focused staffing, a supervisory investigator position, and improved training and documentation. Commission representatives said they had already made progress on several items since the audit began, including posting overdue biennial reports and moving toward a case management system expected to go live in June. They said they were working with EEOC counterparts and legal counsel, but emphasized staffing shortages and high turnover, noting the commission currently had nine people working out of 15 authorized positions, with three investigator vacancies and a vacant paralegal position. Committee members thanked the auditors and commission staff, discussed the history of the audit request, and raised concerns about how long the recommended corrective actions might take. The committee took no vote or formal action during the hearing.
MA

Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session

Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm

Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:
  • We support completing the statewide needs assessment first, then allowing stakeholder input before any
  • Furthermore, the $1 million threshold, while appreciated, seems arbitrary and rather low.
Keywords: 995, all
Summary: The Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources held a heavily attended hybrid hearing focused primarily on plastics reduction bills, along with a few local and related waste-management measures. Chair Rauch and Chair Barber outlined strict testimony rules because of the large number of speakers. Before the plastics docket, the committee heard support for a local Sharon sewer-extension bill for a Sunrise Senior Living project, and the bill’s proponents said the project would help address senior housing needs and would still require MWRA and local approvals. The chairs also noted a separate local matter involving Sharon and the MWRA. A major portion of the hearing centered on the Plastics Reduction Act and related bills addressing single-use plastics, including plastic bags, polystyrene, black plastic, plastic beverage bottles, non-flushable wipes, skip-the-stuff provisions, and truth-in-labeling. Sponsors and supporters said the bills would reduce litter, microplastics, greenhouse gas emissions, and municipal waste costs, while creating statewide consistency and supporting environmental justice communities. Several speakers cited local bans already adopted by many Massachusetts cities and towns, and many urged the committee to advance comprehensive statewide action. The committee also heard testimony on a boat wrap recycling bill, a mattress recycling bill, and a bill to prohibit hotels from providing small plastic toiletries. Municipal officials and waste professionals supported extended producer responsibility for paint and labeling for non-flushable wipes, saying these measures would shift costs away from cities and towns and reduce strain on wastewater systems. The Massachusetts Municipal Association, Mayor Ruth Ann Fuller of Newton, and a Franklin County waste official all backed paint EPR and wipes labeling. Fire Chief Brian Nardelli testified for the Fire Chiefs Association in support of lithium-ion battery legislation, citing fire safety and disposal concerns. Other speakers, including environmental groups, local activists, and business representatives, supported bag and polystyrene bans, though the Retailers Association of Massachusetts urged any bag policy to be truly statewide and said any bag fee should be retained by retailers. No votes were taken during the hearing.
MN
Transcript Highlights:
  • This allows cities the ability to assess needs around parking, water, sewer, and storm sewer, as well
  • that can kind of get there to ensure that we're opening up access to everyone, that we're not using arbitrary
Keywords: 919, house, all
Summary: The committee heard House File 1987, the Minnesota Starter Home Act, and first adopted the A1 author’s amendment, which made minor cleanup changes, removed sections two and three, adjusted ADU language, and tweaked density language. The bill authors described the measure as a bipartisan effort to address Minnesota’s housing shortage by allowing more starter homes, duplexes, townhomes, and accessory dwelling units, while also limiting some local zoning barriers and preserving city protections in certain sensitive areas. They emphasized that the state has a large housing gap, rising home prices, and that the bill is intended as one part of a broader housing package. Supportive testimony came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, Housing First Minnesota, Habitat for Humanity, AARP Minnesota, and Americans for Prosperity. These witnesses argued that workforce and starter-home shortages are hurting families, employers, and economic growth; that restrictive zoning and lengthy approval processes raise costs; and that more middle housing and ADUs would expand options for older adults, caregivers, working families, and people seeking homeownership. Several supporters said the bill would reduce regulatory barriers, lower development costs, and help communities add needed housing supply. Opposition or cautionary testimony came from city and municipal representatives, including officials from Cambridge, Eagan, and Mankato, as well as the League of Minnesota Cities and related groups. They argued that local governments already are approving substantial housing growth and need flexibility to manage zoning, parking, infrastructure, stormwater, and community input. They warned the bill could weaken local control, remove practical standards, and create unintended impacts such as more rental conversion in some neighborhoods or development without adequate infrastructure. No final vote on the bill itself was shown in the transcript beyond adoption of the A1 amendment.