Transcript Highlights:

• What it does is request a professional evaluation from the legislative auditor of how the process works
• the legislative auditor to review that entire process, whether it's dynamic scoring or how it's evaluated
• There is, through the process of attrition in years, there will be an opportunity to evaluate how best
• They conducted a study based upon actual workload, looked at evaluated case weights for both appellate
• “On actual workload, looked at evaluated case weights for both appellate and trial courts.

Bills: SCR59, SCR70, HR275, HR279, HR282, HR289, HR307, HCR112, SCR61, SCR62, SCR64, SB121, HR310, HR314, HR316, HR317, HR321, HCR117, SCR5, SCR29, SCR33, SCR37, SCR63, SCR30, SCR40, SCR65, HCR3, HCR49, HCR66, HCR67, HB54, HB137, HB321, HB368, HB386, HB414, HB431, HB552, HB555, HB578, HB590, HB593, HB618, HB638, HB670, HB692, HB707, HB708, HB715, HB718, HB732, HB741, HB748, HB776, HB796, HB807, HB822, HB848, HB856, HB887, HB888, HB917, HB921, HB1082, HB1243, HB1246, HB1, HB2, HB42, HB45, HB71, HB79, HB126, HB133, HB159, HB213, HB218, HB222, HB289, HB291, HB312, HB313, HB324, HB352, HB383, HB398, HB403, HB429, HB457, HB459, HB549, HB571, HB579, HB591, HB608, HB616, HB624, HB766, HB769, HB783, HB804, HB864, HB874, HB909, HB951, HB971, HB983, HB1005, HB1017, HB1051, HB1056, HB1126, HB1186, HB1193, HB1223, HB1224, HB1235, HB1249, SB259, SB295, SB312, SB348, SB444, SB485, SB441, SB149, HB359, SB29, SB43, SB78, HB463, HB998, SB197, SB268, SB123, SB276, SB326, SB80, HB901, HR20, HR74, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB646, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, SB97, SB479, HB74, HB119, HB134, HB210, HB258, HB468, HB784, HB870, HB953, HB956, HB1117, HB1236, SB42, SB208, SB217, SB274, SB300, SB341, SB379, SB382, SB387, SB401, SB449, SB487

Keywords: Major Richard Star Act, veterans, military retirement, disability compensation, VA benefits, combat-wounded, medically retired, military retirees, service members, veterans benefits, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense, concurrent receipt, retirement offset, combat-related disability, bipartisan support, memorial resolution, Congressional memorial, Louisiana delegation, Richard Star

Summary: The House convened with a quorum and opened with prayer by Archbishop Checchio, the pledge, and the national anthem. Members also used personal privilege to recognize visiting officials, university leaders, grocers, Governor’s Fellows, and several special guests and honorees, including Grambling State University for its 125th anniversary, Tiger Athletics, and the Tiger Marching Band, as well as CASA volunteers and advocates. The chamber adopted a number of ceremonial resolutions and made several conference committee appointments and committee discharge motions. The floor then took up a series of Senate and House resolutions, many of which were adopted without objection or after brief debate. These included resolutions creating or studying task forces on topics such as homeowner catastrophe claims and insurance-related litigation, the Louisiana-Ireland Trade Commission, informed consent laws, fiscal note procedures, K-12 student success pathways, and military funding alignment. Members also adopted resolutions on domestic violence protective-order access, flood risk mapping, seismic activity in North Louisiana, illegal dumping enforcement, toll signage and customer service, and other local or commemorative matters. Several Senate resolutions were temporarily returned to the calendar, while others were adopted by recorded vote, including SCR 29, SCR 33, SCR 37, SCR 63, SCR 30, SCR 65, and SCR 40. The House then considered Senate Bill 259, which authorizes an online application process for civil protection orders and restraining orders for domestic violence victims; it passed 93-0. Senate Bill 312, dealing with public-sector labor organizations and dues/withdrawal procedures, prompted extended debate focused on whether the bill unfairly singled out teachers’ unions and whether teachers already have the ability to opt out; the bill ultimately passed 60-38. Senate Bill 348, allowing the City of St. George to contract for administrative assistance in motor-vehicle crash response, passed 84-9 after questions about citations, reports, and the role of third parties. Senate Bill 485, concerning St. George’s municipal fiscal authority and insurance premium taxes, passed 91-0 after an amendment removed new public facility charge authority. The House also debated Senate Bill 197, which would reduce the number of judges on the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal from 12 to 10 based on a workload and population study by the National Center for State Courts. Supporters cited the circuit’s smaller population and lower per-judge workload, while questions focused on the study’s publication and whether it actually recommended a reduction. The transcript ends during that debate, before final disposition is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• discussion several months ago that we may be looking at putting some language in there to study and evaluate
• discussion several months ago that we may be looking at putting some language in there to study and evaluate
• discussion several months ago that we may be looking at putting some language in there to study and evaluate
• discussion several months ago that we may be looking at putting some language in there to study and evaluate
• discussion several months ago that we may be looking at putting some language in there to study and evaluate

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first discussed HB 771, the open enrollment bill, which had returned from the Senate with language clarifying that districts should list both tuition expenses and offsetting revenue estimates from sending districts. The chair and Representative McGuire supported concurring with the Senate changes, while Representative Luno raised broader concerns about the bill’s structure and equity, arguing that tuition based on 80% of the sending district’s average cost could be unfair and could create problems for receiving districts with different cost structures. After a show of hands, the committee voted to concur and send that recommendation to the House floor, with Luno indicating he would speak against it there. The committee then took up SB 9 in executive session. An amendment, 1920H, was offered to clarify that the tuition calculation should use the sending district’s average cost and to support access to CTE programs, including allowing students to take academic courses at the receiving school and, in some cases, attend the nearest CTE center. Supporters said the bill would help more students participate in career and technical education and noted bipartisan sponsorship in the Senate. Opponents argued the amendment would increase district costs, strain property taxpayers, and could reduce CTE participation or create logistical problems. The committee adopted the amendment 10-8, then voted 10-8 to recommend OTPA as amended; Representative Lad was assigned the majority report and Representative Luno the minority ITL report. After closing the SB 9 executive session, the chair reminded members that committee reports were due immediately and announced retained-bill subcommittees. One subcommittee will address adequacy and school funding issues arising from HB 651, HB 772, HB 491, and HB 434, chaired by Representative Spillsbury. Another will address school building aid issues from HB 295 and HB 366, including whether to keep the current formula or revise it, and how to handle renovations, new construction, and lease arrangements.

Transcript Highlights:

• that the court's findings were clearly erroneous, giving deference to the court's opportunity to evaluate
• that the court's findings were clearly erroneous, giving deference to the court's opportunity to evaluate
• that the court's findings were clearly erroneous, giving deference to the court's opportunity to evaluate
• that the court's findings were clearly erroneous, giving deference to the court's opportunity to evaluate
• that the court's findings were clearly erroneous, giving deference to the court's opportunity to evaluate

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• forward in the amendments were included for review this year and were not included, so they were evaluated
• forward in the amendments were included for review this year and were not included, so they were evaluated
• forward in the amendments were included for review this year and were not included, so they were evaluated
• forward in the amendments were included for review this year and were not included, so they were evaluated
• Proposals are reviewed and evaluated by our members, including through presentations from applicants.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• ability, listen to the experts and the stakeholders with a variety of perspectives, and carefully evaluate
• So the Department of Commerce was charged with publishing a report evaluating existing state AI laws
• Tool evaluation becomes even more critical.
• It's being evaluated by our teams. Does it fit with the enterprise strategy? Is it secure?
• It's being evaluated by our teams. Does it fit with the enterprise strategy? Is it secure?

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The USGS and the department, in supporting the USGS, went through a whole episode of re-evaluating the
• And that is where something like FEMA, when they changed their evaluation for calculations for something
• Basically, common sense is moving to where we are today and evaluating that project as the conditions
• So it still leaves more control, more thought process, more evaluation at the local end.
• But I think if you look at going back to what the STB has to evaluate under their regulations, is would

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The USGS and the department in supporting the USGS went through a whole episode of re-evaluating the
• And that is where something like FEMA, when they changed their evaluation for calculations for something
• Basically, the common sense is moving to where we are today and evaluating that project as the conditions
• So it still leaves more control, more thought process, more evaluation at the local end.
• And that is the effects of wetlands and on evaluations.

Summary: The committee opened its third interim meeting with roll call, approved the November 13, 2025 minutes, and the chair reviewed prior committee work, including a denied request for a fertilizer-capacity study and a planned later discussion of the Union Pacific/Norfolk Southern merger issue. Commissioner Doug Goring then presented Department of Agriculture updates on uncrewed aerial systems grants to detect noxious weeds, the state’s irrigation potential, the low-carbon fuels program for ethanol plants, the Environmental Impact Mitigation Fund, model zoning ordinances for animal feeding operations, and fertilizer production and supply in North Dakota. Members asked about funding sources, fertilizer storage and availability, natural gas and water needs for future fertilizer plants, and how the model zoning website would help counties and townships apply setback and odor tools. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the Department of Water Resources’ economic analysis tool for water conveyance and flood-related projects. Dr. Dwayne Poole explained that the department is proposing changes to better account for end-of-useful-life conditions and updated hydrologic data, while still limiting the model to direct, demonstrable costs and benefits. He said the goal is to make the analysis more realistic and consistent without changing statute, and he provided examples of how project benefits could change as drains age or as rainfall and flood data evolve. Committee members and water-user representatives generally supported continued work on the proposal, while raising concerns about downstream impacts, closed-basin projects, and whether the changes would meaningfully affect project approvals. The committee then heard from John Paskowski, state engineer, on Devil’s Lake, the West End and East End outlets, and the Tolna Coulee control structure. He reviewed lake history, outlet capacities, sulfate and downstream flow limits, and explained that the control structure is intended to prevent a catastrophic uncontrolled release by slowing erosion and head cutting. Members asked about water quality trends, the length of the downstream flow constraint, and whether the Tolna Coulee area had been studied for possible natural overflow or silt buildup. The discussion emphasized ongoing flooding concerns, mitigation for affected landowners, and the need to balance outlet operations with downstream water quality and infrastructure protection.

Transcript Highlights:

• H. 294 directs the Department of Corrections to produce a comprehensive report evaluating options for
• options for providing report evaluating options for providing no-cost<00:48:50.120> telecommunication
• This pause allows for a deliberate evaluation of outcomes, effectiveness, and long-term viability of
• Second, in section 4A, the amendment responds to the Human Services Committee's interest in evaluating
• Second, in section 4A, the amendment responds to the Human Services Committee's interest in evaluating

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House began with routine business, including referral of Senate Bill 211 on motor vehicle inspections to the Transportation Committee and Senate Bill 298 creating the Vermont Voting Rights Act to the Committee on Government Operations and Military Affairs. The chamber also referred House bills reported by Ways and Means to Appropriations, including H. 211 on data brokers and personal information and H. 931 on miscellaneous education law changes. JRH9, a joint resolution urging the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association to reconsider its opposition to rapid prompting method communication instruction for students with apraxia of speech or autism, was read and referred to Human Services. Several announcements followed, including a welcome to members of the Vermont chapter of the American Physical Therapy Association, a reminder about an education reform meeting, and a correction regarding a prior reference to S. 138 of 2023 and the working group on student protections from harassment and discrimination in schools. The House also recognized guests in the gallery, including Donnie Kanovsky, who was described as a proponent of JRH9. The Speaker announced that H. 606 on firearms procedures, H. 642 on youthful offender proceedings, and later H. 585 would be bumped to later in the calendar. The House then took up H. 537, the right to grow vegetable gardens. The committee explained the bill would protect vegetable gardening in common interest communities and rental housing, while allowing reasonable restrictions and landlord or association oversight; witnesses included a South Burlington resident, HOA and landlord representatives, and legislative counsel. The committee reported an 8-0-0 vote, the House adopted the committee amendment, and ordered third reading. The chamber then passed H. 171 on Attorney General investigations into a law enforcement officer’s use of a firearm and H. 519 allowing Randolph police officers to enroll in Group C of the state retirement system. The House also passed H. 536 on toxic heavy metals in baby food products after extended debate over whether infant formula should be included. Supporters said the bill would help parents make informed choices and noted the amendment was intended to align with federal action; opponents argued formula-specific federal work was still underway and urged waiting. The chamber then passed H. 550 on gender equity in correctional facilities, H. 733 on franchise agreements, H. 775 on housing production tools, H. 887 on crime victim status under the Fair Employment Practices Act, H. 917 on military affairs, and H. 921 on alcoholic beverages. Action on H. 930 addressing chronic absenteeism was postponed one legislative day, and H. 942 on miscellaneous agricultural subjects began second reading with the committee outlining sections on water quality training, non-sewage waste management, and unit pricing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And when I say we studied those, every one of those was evaluated in-house by engineering staff.
• Even before we do that, we do an in-house desktop evaluation study of the potential routes.
• Even before we do that, we do a in-house desktop evaluation study of the potential routes.
• A in-house desktop evaluation study of the potential routes.
• We don't do our own evaluations. We don't want it to be biased.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Energy Development and Transmission Committee met in interim session and approved the November 6 minutes. Chair Novak outlined the committee’s study agenda, including large energy users such as data centers, geothermal, landowner relations, wind and solar, and other energy topics across the state. The meeting was framed as informational only, with no bills or formal legislative action taken beyond the minutes approval. Testimony focused first on landowner relations. Oliver County Commissioner Dave Berger described the county’s energy history and local support for coal and related development. North Dakota Farmers Union President Matt Perdue emphasized proactive, face-to-face communication with landowners, respect for property rights, and the need for developers to be transparent about tradeoffs; he also discussed insurance and liability concerns tied to easements. Committee members asked about eminent domain, local versus state authority, and how communities can better understand the revenue and infrastructure implications of energy development. Department of Agriculture Deputy Commissioner Tom Bodine then described the department’s ombudsman programs for pipeline restoration and reclamation, wind restoration, and royalty oversight. He said the programs provide confidential, third-party assistance on reclamation and royalty disputes, but do not provide legal advice. Senators raised concerns about post-production deductions in royalty leases and whether the ombudsman can explain them; Bodine said the program can clarify statements and deductions but cannot resolve legal disputes. He also said the department has not received requests related to fiber lines. Representatives from Grid United and One Oak described their project development and landowner engagement practices. Grid United’s Brent Johnson discussed the North Plains Connector transmission project, its route selection process, voluntary acquisition approach, and efforts to avoid eminent domain by working closely with regulators, counties, townships, and landowners. One Oak’s Danette Welsh and Tom Giltner described the company’s midstream operations, extensive North Dakota footprint, and emphasis on direct landowner communication, consistent local regulation, careful construction practices, and post-construction reclamation. Members asked about setbacks, zoning consistency, invasive species prevention, outside advocacy groups, and eminent domain use; One Oak said it has not used eminent domain on its North Dakota projects, largely because most gathering lines are negotiated easements.

Transcript Highlights:

• evaluator under certain circumstances.
• It's a study to evaluate the fiscal impact. The question occurs on the final passage of HB 1868.
• Like can I call the hospital to request that they re-evaluate my bill or do they automatically do it?
• But you would agree with me that if a prosecutor had evaluated a case...
• How will we evaluate that cost for the cost of the wig? Right.

Bills: HB24, HB45, HB15, HB35, HB38, HB47, HB318, HB349, HB554, HB1359, HB1373, HB1647, HB2254, HB2259, HB2853, HB3073, HB3088, HB353, HB355, HB786, HB762, HB705, HB932, HB849, HB 1160, HB 1119, HB1612, HB3041, HB713, HB3104, HB3970, HB3962, HB5061, HB4042, HB4115, HB4490, HB1731, HB1705, HB2607, HB3556, HB138, HB3689, HB1788, HB1887, HB1914, HB2402, HB2306, HB1809, HB2350, HB3000, HB3237, HB3326, HB3211, HB 1056, HB2081, HB2187, HB3092, HB3308, HB3526, HB3750, HB3527, HB4219, HB4230, HB4290, HB5238, HB4804, HB4749, HCR6, HCR12, HCR34, HCR50, HCR55, HCR58, HCR70, HCR71, HCR72, HCR74, HCR75, HCR78, HCR80, HCR93, HCR100, HCR107, HCR116, HCR117, HCR90, SB1806, SB783, SB1271, SB326, SB1637, SB769, SB897, SB1035, SB1706, SB1185, SB1194, SB384, SB1426, SB1468, SB1215, SB1066, SB599, SB1930, SB2065, SB767, SB1619, SB1738, HB1500, HB718, HB23, HB34, HB 119, HB 128, HB 130, HB132, HB2756, HB166, HB406, HB186, HB331, HB380, HB1583, HB1584, HB621, HB303, HB552, HB366, HB463, HB 1211, HB1327, HB1461, HB923, HB1760, HB2467, HB5333, HB1592, HB1576, HB1552, HB2018, HB3511, HB1781, HB2013, HB2340, HB2508, HB2970, HB865, HB2851, HB3385, HB3336, HB3309, HB 1127, HB 1232, HB1397, HB4236, HB4041, HB1965, HB2730, HB3698, HB3699, HB163, HB201, HB272, HB405, HB519, HB654, HB694, HB791, HB 1136, HB 1240, HB 1266, HB 1275, HB1437, HB1532, HB1675, HB1842, HB1868, HB1894, HB1943, HB1990, HB2029, HB2061, HB2286, HB2523, HB2622, HB2652, HB2692, HB2842, HB2885, HB3016, HB3096, HB3248, HB3255, HB3479, HB3611, HB3623, HB3803, HB3804, HB3805, HB3806, HB3810, HB3816, HB4129, HB4163, HB4187, HB4238, HB4454, HB4588, HB4643, HB4738, HB4739, HB4945, HB5015, HB5616, HB1749, HB1775, HB 118, HB1762, HB2520, HB24, HB45, HB15, HB35, HB38, HB47, HB318, HB349, HB554, HB1359, HB1373, HB1647, HB2254, HB2259, HB2853, HB3073, HB3088, HB353, HB355, HB786, HB762, HB705, HB932, HB849, HB 1160, HB 1119, HB1612, HB3041, HB713, HB3104, HB3970, HB3962, HB5061, HB4042, HB4115, HB4490, HB1731, HB1705, HB2607, HB3556, HB138, HB3689, HB1788, HB1887, HB1914, HB2402, HB2306, HB1809, HB2350, HB3000, HB3237, HB3326, HB3211, HB 1056, HB2081, HB2187, HB3092, HB3308, HB3526, HB3750, HB3527, HB4219, HB4230, HB4290, HB5238, HB4804, HB4749, HCR6, HCR12, HCR34, HCR50, HCR55, HCR58, HCR70, HCR71, HCR72, HCR74, HCR75, HCR78, HCR80, HCR93, HCR100, HCR107, HCR116, HCR117, HCR90

Keywords: zoning, public notice, local government, residential development, protests, peer support, first responders, mental health, confidentiality, emergency services, information network, health services, client referral, data privacy, disaster preparedness, accreditation, community services, sexual assault, victim rights, forensic examination

Transcript Highlights:

• As stated by the chair of the UC Board, the UC uses K-12 content standards to evaluate high school courses
• AB 1217 requests the UC to use K-12 content standards, frameworks, and model curriculum when evaluating
• The report on evaluating the local control funding formula found that funding for unduplicated pupils
• We believe that we need to evaluate the performance of public schools, including charter schools, all
• There's currently enough performance data on the dashboard to evaluate charter schools.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard AB 84, a charter school accountability measure focused on non-classroom-based charter schools and fraud prevention. The author and supporters said the bill was intended to respond to the A3 charter fraud case and related scandals by strengthening audits, transparency, authorizer oversight, and funding determination rules, while ensuring public education dollars are used for public education. Supporters included FCMAT, CSEA, CTA, and CSBA, who argued the bill would improve oversight and protect taxpayers. Opponents, including the California Charter Schools Association, Green Dot, many charter parents, educators, and charter operators, said the bill was too broad, would impose major new costs and bureaucracy on all charter schools, and could reduce options for families, especially those using flexible, homeschool, or special-needs charter programs. After extensive testimony and committee discussion, the bill passed on a 5-1 vote and was sent to Appropriations, with the item left open for additional votes. The committee then approved a consent calendar of 11 education bills, including AB 542, AB 563, AB 731, AB 753, AB 784, AB 964, AB 988, AB 1034, AB 1233, AB 1255, and AB 1381, all moving to Appropriations. The consent calendar passed unanimously. Later, the committee heard AB 1454, a literacy and reading instruction bill authored by Assembly Members Rubio and Revis. The bill would require the state to create professional development resources for evidence-based literacy instruction, update English language arts and English language development instructional materials, and revise administrator preparation standards to include literacy training. The authors and a broad coalition of supporters, including CTA, EdVoice, Families in Schools, Decoding Dyslexia, school administrators, and parent advocates, described the measure as a compromise aimed at improving reading outcomes and addressing California’s literacy crisis. There was no opposition testimony at the hearing, and members voiced strong support for the bill and its collaborative approach.

Transcript Highlights:

• If concerns remain, a team may recommend a special education evaluation to formally assess the presence
• And so tough evaluations, led with support, lead to a culture, a high-performance culture, and that's
• And so tough evaluations, led with support, lead to a culture, a high-performance culture, and that's
• , your internal evaluations, et cetera.
• It upholds the intent of House Bill 1605 by giving legal effect to the SBOE's evaluations and ensuring

Summary: The committee continued hearing testimony on Senate Bill 2252, which would expand early literacy and numeracy screening, parent notification, intervention supports, and teacher training, including math academies and early childhood supports. Supporters from Texas 2036, Good Reason Houston, Texas Business Leadership Council, and several parents argued that early identification of skill gaps, clearer data for families, and stronger teacher preparation would improve student outcomes, workforce readiness, and long-term earnings. They cited low math proficiency statewide, the importance of early intervention, and examples of districts using screeners and data dashboards to guide instruction and resource allocation. One witness also highlighted home visiting as a family-support model, while another urged more funding for pre-K partnerships and stronger support for parents with reading materials and guidance. A district special education administrator testified neutrally, saying the bill reflects practices already used in her district but expressing concern that it could reduce local control and teacher discretion by standardizing screening and tying it to funding. A Texas Classroom Teachers Association representative supported the intent but warned that mandatory math academies and intervention academies could burden teachers if implemented like prior reading academies, and a substitute teacher/teacher-of-the-year witness asked for clearer protections around special education information and pay for alternative certification candidates. After public testimony closed, SB 2252 was left pending. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2253, as substituted, which would phase out routine hiring of uncertified teachers over time, require parent notification when a teacher is uncertified, and expand high-quality preparation pathways such as university programs, residencies, improved alternative certification, and grow-your-own programs. Senator Creighton said the bill responds to the rise in uncertified teachers and aims to strengthen the teacher pipeline with more structured preparation, mentorship, and oversight by SBEC. Invited testimony strongly supported the measure: a Texas Tech researcher said uncertified teachers and fast-track programs are associated with significant learning losses, while year-long residencies and mentored pathways produce stronger outcomes and higher earnings for students. Leaders from Dallas College and Sam Houston State University described successful residency and grow-your-own models, high completion and retention rates, and the need for paid residencies and stipends so candidates can afford to enter the profession. Committee members asked about the difference between mentorship and residency, the cost-effectiveness of paid residencies, retention incentives, and how to scale the model statewide. The committee also adopted the substitute for SB 2253 and later paused to vote out several other bills, including SB 1191, SB 1786, SB 226, SB 326, SB 570, SB 870, SB 991, SB 60, SB 365, SB 1401, and SB 1067, all of which were reported favorably, many with unanimous votes and some placed on the local and uncontested calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the first step is that there's an internal or administrative inquiry process to evaluate the concern
• or administrative inquiry<00:10:02.720> process<00:10:03.320> to<00:10:03.640> evaluate
• <00:10:04.399> the inquiry process to evaluate the inquiry process to evaluate the concern
• not found any activity that we were not already watching and taking action on, but we continue to evaluate
• that. ...continue to evaluate that, and because of this process and the ability to take action when

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• There are threats that we were not evaluating in 2008 when the amendment started that we were looking
• They're nominated in a process to the Department of Health for evaluation.
• They're nominated in a process to the Department of Health for evaluation.
• that in lots of and we evaluate that in lots of different<01:15:37.159> ways<01:15:37.639>
• We evaluate effectiveness, particularly on the outcomes.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• You do the evaluation. You decide whether those animals should be surrendered.
• Can you come help us evaluate?" Um, you then go and make a recommendation.
• Can you come help us<01:52:44.360> evaluate?"
• Um, you then go and make a us evaluate?"
• between the initial evaluation and a followup to see if some corrective actions are done.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So if the process is there to evaluate, uh, income verification upon entry into the program, the infrastructure
• 06:52.880> to program so if the process is there to program so if the process is there to evaluate
• > uh<00:06:54.800> income<00:06:55.800> verification<00:06:56.800> upon evaluate
• uh income verification upon evaluate uh income verification upon entry<00:06:57.919> into<00:
• <02:35:00.000> whether list if we're going to evaluate whether list if we're going to evaluate

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the into the study would be evaluating the economic<01:04:28.039> impacts<01:04:28.760> of
• <01:23:08.440> of<01:23:08.600> State policy in their evaluation of State policy in
• their evaluation of State purchasing purchasing purchasing decisions<01:23:10.960> the<01:23:
• <01:23:23.120> described<01:23:23.600> in assured that the evaluation described in
• assured that the evaluation described in the<01:23:23.800> bill<01:23:24.520> can<01:23

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on House Bill 233, which would impose transparency and reporting requirements on the New Hampshire Vaccine Association. The prime sponsor, Representative Comto, said the bill and a proposed amendment were intended to increase public access by requiring a physical meeting location, making meetings available online, and publishing a complete list of vaccines and pharmaceutical products purchased. She argued the association should be more transparent because it is involved in vaccine purchasing and public trust is important, especially given controversy around vaccines. Committee members questioned the sponsor about the association’s legal status, who sets vaccine requirements, whether other private entities would be covered, and whether the proposal should instead apply more broadly to all meetings or include recordings. The sponsor said the association was created by the legislature, that childhood vaccine requirements come from DHHS and CDC-related processes, and that she would be open to broader recording requirements. Some members raised concerns about misinformation and whether requiring answers to public questions could be problematic in a contentious policy area. Patrick Miller, executive director of the Vaccine Association, and attorney Mark McHugh testified in opposition. They described the association as a not-for-profit voluntary corporation created by statute in 2002 to serve as a funding mechanism for the state’s universal childhood vaccine purchase program, with no policymaking role and no public funding. They said the association already posts notices, agendas, minutes, and allows public webinar access and comments, while also providing annual audits and reports and other statutory reporting. They argued HB 233 would impose unnecessary administrative costs on a private entity, interfere with its limited charitable purpose, and ultimately increase costs borne by insurers, employers, and consumers. No vote or final action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:58:42.640> whether<00:58:43.119> increased evaluate whether increased evaluate whether
• Second, it is to integrate regional considerations into state funding decisions so counties can evaluate
• options before evaluate regional options before building<01:08:03.039> uh<01:08:03.280> new
• Counties must evaluate whether the care.
• Counties must evaluate whether the way<01:09:24.880> they<01:09:25.040> have<01:09:25.279

Bills: HF3700, HF3982, HF3927, HF3933, HF3949, HF4238, HF4275, HF4476, HF4504

Keywords: Duluth, Lake Superior Zoo, capital improvements, funding, bonds, appropriations, capital investment, port development, grant caps, state assistance, navigation facilities, Dakota County, state bonds, park improvements, infrastructure, transportation, safety, congestion, water infrastructure, bond issuance

Transcript Highlights:

• the program, distribution formulas for the revenue, uses of compensatory revenue, and methods to evaluate
• /c><00:45:02.960> duty So, the first duty area in statute was just target populations, to evaluate
• The legislative language did ask the task force to evaluate the best uses of compensatory revenue.
• c> and<01:13:26.720> recommend<01:13:27.200> a<01:13:27.240> permanent evaluation
• and recommend a permanent evaluation and recommend a permanent accurate<01:13:28.840> data<01

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These are just evaluation conversation. I do want to point out one thing on the insurance fund.
• I'm here this morning also to talk about the actuary's 2025 evaluation for Teachers Retirement System
• So to begin, I have a summary of the key findings of the 2025 actuarial evaluation.
• <00:26:56.280> for about the actuary's 2025 evaluation for about the actuary's 2025 evaluation
• Uh you see the the top one evaluation.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:00:12 Approval of Minutes: 00:01:34 Actuarial Valuation Update – KPPA: 00:02:10 Actuarial Valuation Update – TRS: 00:25:32, 958, all

Summary: The meeting began with roll call, confirmation of a quorum, and approval of the prior minutes. The main presentation was from KPPA officials Ryan Barrow and Erin Saratt on the annual actuarial valuations for the retirement and insurance systems. They said the systems’ funding status improved overall, with three of five insurance funds fully funded, CERS hazardous dropping from over 100% funded to 90.9% because of premium changes, and KRS receiving $650 million in supplemental funding over the biennium. They also reported strong investment returns above assumed rates, higher payroll and membership counts, and resulting actuarial losses tied to higher salaries and premiums, especially on the insurance side. Members asked several questions about what drove the actuarial losses and whether legislation affected them. KPPA said the CERS insurance loss was driven by premium increases and Senate Bill 10, while the pension-side losses were largely due to higher payroll and benefits for Tier 1 and Tier 2 members. They explained that new Tier 3 employees are designed to add no additional unfunded liability, and that the state administers the systems but does not directly control all hiring. Questions also focused on retiree health premiums, which KPPA said rose about 15% for non-Medicare retirees and 38% for Medicare retirees, with the increase attributed to utilization, prescription costs, and the Inflation Reduction Act. The committee then heard from TRS Deputy Executive Secretary and General Counsel Beau Barnes on the 2025 TRS actuarial valuation. He reported that the Retirement Annuity Trust and Health Insurance Trust both received full funding, the retirement trust’s funded ratio improved to 61%, TRS 4 remains well funded with no liability, and the health insurance trust improved to 89.1%. Barnes said TRS is on track to fully fund legacy liabilities within the amortization period, with 2044 as the point when the system reflects 100% funding and 2046 as the last year needing additional dollars for the legacy liability. He also explained that lower assumed investment returns and updated mortality assumptions increased liabilities, but that TRS uses direct rate smoothing for budgeting purposes. At the end of the meeting, the chair circulated a proposed set of “do’s and don’ts of pensions,” emphasizing that future legislation should not create unfunded liabilities. Barnes also noted he would later discuss several legislative proposals for the 2026 session, but the transcript provided ends before that discussion or any votes on those proposals.