Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, there is a subdivision in 97A. I just don't know it off the top of my head.
• then the other project is subdivision then the other project is subdivision 3B,<01:09:32.560>
• to is subdivision 4F under wetlands. to is subdivision 4F under wetlands.
• :29.280> Little<01:10:29.600> Cannon would be subdivision 5T, Little Cannon would be subdivision
• c> five, And then uh subdivision five, And then uh subdivision five, letter<01:10:41.440> Z,

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The Committee and Rules recommends the following bill for proper consideration.
• The Committee and Rules recommends the following bill for proper consideration.
• The Committee and Rules recommends the following bill for proper consideration.
• The Committee and Rules recommend the following bill for proper consideration.
• build wildcat subdivisions in areas that do not have assured water supply.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:38:51.760> of limit it to a particular subdivision of limit it to a particular subdivision
• If it's a subdivision of Chapter 4, then that's fine.
• to a certain area of the HRS, a certain subdivision, but okay, that's fine.
• Chair, a follow-up question. subdivision but okay that's fine so subdivision but okay that's fine so
• , present its proposed final rules to the Board of Land and Natural Resources.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees first heard SB 443, which would require agricultural-district lands with solar energy facilities to also be certified as being used for a farming operation. DLNR, the State Energy Office, and the Agri-Business Development Corporation all supported the bill but recommended changes, including shifting the certifying authority from DLNR/BLNR to the Department of Agriculture. The Attorney General also recommended replacing the certification requirement with a condition that the land be used for a farming operation, citing the lack of a clear statutory framework for certification. The Hawaiʻi Farmers Union supported the measure but suggested using existing county agricultural dedication processes and raised concerns about conversion of agricultural land. The committees adopted amendments reflecting the Department of Agriculture as the certifying body and the Attorney General’s proposed language, then passed SB 443 with amendments. The committees then took up SB 79, relating to historic preservation reviews for state affordable housing projects. DLNR State Historic Preservation and DHHL supported the bill with amendments, including striking a redundant section and conforming the language to existing law. The committees agreed to those changes, and after a brief recess and decision-making, Water and Land, Housing, and Hawaiian Affairs each voted to pass SB 79 with amendments. The record notes that some members were excused and that the committees adopted the chair’s recommendations. Later, the joint Housing and Water and Land hearing considered SB 26, SB 867, and SB 1170. SB 26 would create an affordable housing land inventory task force within HCDA; HHFDC supported it, while HCDA suggested an alternative approach involving county coordination. The committees amended the bill to incorporate OPSD’s proposed language, add legislative and county representatives to the task force, and include an appropriation for the Mayor Wright project, then passed it with amendments. SB 867, which creates a working group to inventory water resources and streamline well permit approvals for affordable housing, drew broad support and was amended to specify the Department of Health director rather than the Clean Water Branch chief; it also passed with amendments. SB 1170, which would exempt certain Maui affordable rental housing projects from chapter 205A, drew support from housing interests but concern from the Attorney General that it could be unconstitutional; the AG suggested narrowing the bill to disaster recovery and limiting its scope. Testifiers also discussed the Weinberg Court Apartments project and other redevelopment concerns, but the transcript ends before final action on SB 1170 is completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:52:43.599> their them and to improve the rules their them and to improve the rules their
• So, or along roads, usually, or in a subdivision.
• So, or along roads, usually, or in a subdivision.
• So, or along roads, usually, or in a subdivision.
• <01:19:41.639> if roads um usually or in a subdivision if roads um usually or in a subdivision

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several water, land, and conservation measures. HB 86, which would fund a permanent DLNR Makai Watch coordinator position, drew strong support from DLNR and community advocates. Testifiers said the coordinator is needed to connect community-based nearshore monitoring groups with government, support training and reporting, and provide stable civil-service funding instead of relying on grants and philanthropy. The committee discussed the position’s duties and cost, estimated at about $110,000 with fringe benefits, and noted broad support from organizations including Kuaʻulu, The Nature Conservancy, OHA, and others. HB 36, relating to state water code penalties, was also supported in principle by DLNR, but the agency proposed amendments to create two tiers of violations, distinguish first-time/non-harmful violations from repeat or harmful ones, and give the commission discretion on whether each day counts as a continuing violation. DLNR said the bill is intended to address egregious cases such as Red Hill while avoiding undue impact on small farmers and others without malicious intent. Testifiers from the Board of Water Supply, Lono Initiative, and others supported stronger penalties and transparency, while Earthjustice raised concerns about broader structural issues and the risk of penalties being applied unfairly. The committee then heard HB 316, which appropriates funds to continue the Green Jobs Youth Corps program. DLNR, the Hawaiʻi State Energy Office, Kōkua, The Nature Conservancy, and other groups testified in support, describing the program as a workforce pipeline that places young professionals in communities, builds trust, and helps recruit future state employees. Supporters said the program has expanded capacity in watershed and reef management and has drawn extensive public backing. Finally, HB 506, funding equipment for the Oʻahu branch of DOCARE, received support from DLNR and others. DOCARE said recent recruit classes are moving through training, that the new positions will expand patrol capacity, including nighttime enforcement, and that the Oʻahu-specific funding is tied to priorities such as the Māʻili Bay herbivore rules. The committee also began hearing HB 510 on water shortage and emergency declarations. DLNR proposed limiting shortage declarations to 90 days unless extended, capping groundwater reductions at 20% for lower-priority permits, removing climate-crisis language as a standalone criterion, and moving the process into rulemaking for more public input. The Board of Water Supply supported the bill and the proposed changes, while Earthjustice urged deferral absent broader Water Commission reforms. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided; the chair indicated the committee would be decision-making after the hearing on items on the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• As you came into the hearing room, you saw the rules. We strongly encourage you to behave.
• As you came into the hearing room, you saw the rules. We strongly encourage you to behave.
• this committee but are not eligible for the Assembly floor consent calendar, consistent with Assembly rules
• I'm here to present AB 1664, which would require a local agency, political subdivision, or elections
• A drive-through model addresses this gap in a controlled, compliant manner.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:21:46.360> 1 described by section 1365 subdivision 1 described by section 1365 subdivision
• <00:37:23.640> 1B General is saying is subdivision 1B General is saying is subdivision 1B
• There's also a set of rules that kind of govern, that's not in statute, but a set of rules that govern
• Where would a member of the public find that set of rules?
• Rules.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we need to dig deeper on the financial return on investment and do some modeling and projections
• Would that help if I amended the bill to disproportionately impact other political subdivisions?
• Would that help if I harass other political subdivisions? Let the guest answer. Mr. Chair, Mr.
• So I'm very eager to do that, and perhaps we can use the City of Phoenix's audit as a model for what
• I looked at a model that was working in another state, so I'd like to tell you about Washington state

Bills: HB2056, HB2202, HB2207, HB2224, HB2303, HB2344, HB2532, HB2759, HB2798

Keywords: brackish water, groundwater, desalination, water resources, feasibility study, environmental impact, dementia care, telementoring, healthcare education, rural communities, grant funding, braille, disability access, education funding, state corrections, inclusion, produce incentive, agriculture, economic support, funding

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 3385 threatens the viability of that kind of model in the future.
• We talk about the 75% rule and what we don't understand... And is it 75% of what?
• So, that free market model of having it under the G permit has provided quite a bit of flexibility. .
• 75% could be in the rules, and that's how the rulemaking process goes.
• However, the current reimbursement model creates a gap in funding.

Bills: HB223

Keywords: municipal budget, county budget, local government finance, spending cap, expenditure limit, inflation plus population growth, taxpayer impact statement, budget transparency, property tax, fees, Legislative Budget Board, voter approval, disaster spending, fiscal restraint, Texas Local Government Code, city budget, county expenditures, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Same rules, same regs. Our families live here.
• Let's model a hypothetical scenario.
• These are examples of AI model hallucinations based on having bad data points training the models.
• These are examples of AI model hallucinations based on having bad data points training the models.
• And I think we do that through administrative rules.

Summary: The committee met in Grand Forks, approved the February 26 minutes by voice vote, and recessed for a tour of Minnkota Power Cooperative before hearing presentations on large energy consumers and related infrastructure issues. The first presentation, from the North Dakota Transmission Authority, focused on the need for better local decision-making tools for counties, townships, and planning and zoning boards facing major projects such as transmission lines, pipelines, data centers, wind, solar, and large-scale agriculture. The speaker urged more objective, data-driven analysis, noted that local officials often have limited time and resources, and said the state should support training and tools through groups like the League of Cities and the Association of Counties. Members asked about proactive outreach, data center ordinances, and how to avoid subsidizing large loads or causing reliability problems. The Division of Air Quality then discussed environmental oversight of data centers, emphasizing that North Dakota’s air remains among the cleanest in the country and that the agency’s role is limited to air, water discharge, stormwater, and waste—not zoning or water use. The presentation explained that data centers generally have low direct emissions but may rely on diesel backup generators when the grid is unavailable, which creates air-quality concerns; the department said it is requiring air monitors at some projects to collect real-world data and guide future decisions. Members asked about generator emissions, misinformation, monitoring costs, and staffing succession, and the agency said permit applicants pay for the monitors while the state handles some QA work. The Department of Water Resources followed with an overview of North Dakota water law and data center water use. The director explained the state’s prior-appropriation system, the public-interest review for permits, and the large overall water supply available from groundwater and the Missouri River. He said most proposed data centers use closed-loop cooling systems and generally request relatively small amounts of water compared with other uses such as power plants, irrigation, and oilfield operations, and that even a worst-case data center scenario would use only a tiny fraction of Missouri River flow. Questions focused on downstream impacts and comparisons to fracking water use, and the director said the state’s use is too small to materially affect downstream users. Later, McLean County State’s Attorney Ladd-Erickson testified online about data center zoning and permitting. He asked the committee to have Legislative Council gather information on how other states handle data center permitting and to keep the topic on the interim agenda. He argued that local zoning should remain local, but said counties lack the technical and legal resources to manage complex reclamation or bonding requirements and that state-level enabling legislation may be more appropriate. He also recommended eliminating tax incentives for data centers. The committee chair said staff would prepare a document on other states’ zoning and permitting approaches. After a lunch recess, the committee reconvened at the EERC, where CEO Charles Gorecki gave an overview of the center’s 75 years of work and its role in oil and gas, carbon management, and other energy technologies, highlighting enhanced oil recovery and carbon dioxide utilization as major opportunities for future production and tax revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's going to be subdivision three, and then subdivision four is getting into the administrative
• houses inside our new Lots subdivision houses inside our new Lots subdivision three<00:03:56.519
• that's going to be sub uh subdivision that's going to be sub uh subdivision three<00:04:36.560><
• > four<00:04:38.120> is three uh and then subdivision four is three uh and then subdivision
• <00:53:17.480> that a state or federal law or rule that a state or federal law or rule that

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• The rules are suspended. Following resolution, the clerk will read the resolution.
• The chairs, none of the rules are suspended.
• Speaker, I move to suspend the rules to take up and consider HR 438.
• The chair hears none and the rules are suspended.
• The chair hears none and the rules are suspended.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have the same rules, same regs. Our families live here.
• I did ask our staff, too, let's model a hypothetical scenario.
• In that, training large language models takes millions of clean data points.
• These are examples of AI model hallucinations based on having bad data points training the models.
• , transmission modeling, looking at grid resiliency.

Summary: The committee met in Grand Forks, approved the February 26 minutes by voice vote, and recessed for a tour of the Mincota Power Cooperative headquarters before returning for presentations on large energy consumers, especially data centers. The first presentations focused on how North Dakota should respond to rapid growth in energy-intensive projects, with speakers emphasizing the need for reliable transmission, local decision-making tools, and factual information for county and township officials who are being asked to weigh major projects with limited staff and technical support. The North Dakota Transmission Authority director said local governments are being asked to make high-impact decisions on pipelines, transmission lines, large agriculture, wind, solar, carbon dioxide pipelines, direct-air capture, and data centers, and urged development of simple statewide decision tools and support from the League of Cities and Association of Counties. The Department of Environmental Quality’s air division director said North Dakota’s air remains among the cleanest in the nation, but large data centers can create air-quality concerns because of diesel backup generation; he said the department is requiring air monitors at some facilities and expects grid power and, potentially, cleaner natural gas backup to reduce emissions. Members asked about emissions standards, misinformation, monitoring costs, and staffing succession at DEQ. The Department of Water Resources director said North Dakota’s water law is based on common ownership and prior appropriation, and that data centers generally use relatively small amounts of water, often in closed-loop systems. He said the Missouri River and groundwater supplies are ample for projected needs, that the department’s permitting process protects senior water rights, and that even a worst-case data center scenario would use a very small share of Missouri River flow. Members asked about downstream impacts and compared data center water use with fracking. Later, McLean County State’s Attorney Ladd Erickson urged the committee to study how other states regulate data centers, warned against litigation-driven delays and overly broad local ordinances, argued reclamation bonding should be handled at the state level if at all, and said data centers can bring jobs and tax base but should remain subject to local zoning. The committee ended the morning session for lunch and later heard an EERC update from CEO Charles Gorecki on the center’s 75 years of work in energy and environmental technologies, especially oil and gas development and related research.

Transcript Highlights:

• in accordance with the revisions of subdivision 2B.
• established under this subdivision established under this subdivision in<00:21:13.760> accordance
• subdivision 2B. subdivision 2B.
• section and insert subdivision. section and insert subdivision.
• Subdivision 5.

Bills: HF4308, HF4153, HF4703, HF4711

Keywords: HF4308, Monticello nuclear plant, Prairie Island, renewable development account, RDA, nuclear waste, spent fuel, dry cask storage, utility tax, commercial-industrial property tax, state general levy, property tax exemption, residential heating fuels, natural gas tax exemption, electricity sales tax exemption, year-round sales tax exemption, distributed solar energy standard, solar mandate, community solar, grid modernization

Transcript Highlights:

• Because in 2022, the state switched back to a fee-for-service model for paying for pharmaceuticals instead
• Marcus Detweiler with the California Special District Association here to express our support for Subdivision
• This is a subdivision language that relates to the Department of Finance's authority to augment state

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It basically required the registration of AI models over a certain level of computation, a certain number
• required the registration of AI models required the registration of AI models over<00:07:14.879>
• can be trained and get smarter AI models can be trained and get smarter and<00:18:32.000> bigger<
• parameters for your large language model parameters for your large language model if<00:21:14.679
• with the government register your model with the government and<00:21:20.320> regularly<00:21

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard CACR 6, a proposed constitutional amendment by Representative Keith Ammon to recognize a fundamental right to use computation resources. Ammon argued that computing is now essential to daily life, speech, education, and economic opportunity, and said the amendment was intended to push back against government or corporate restrictions, citing a 2023 federal executive order on AI registration and reporting as an example of the kind of precedent he wanted to oppose. He said the proposal should be simple and clear because it would go to voters, and he compared the right to compute to other constitutional rights that do not require the government to provide the underlying tools. Committee members raised concerns about the breadth of the language, including whether it could affect encryption, authentication, network security, energy use, and other regulatory issues. Representative McFarland questioned whether the amendment could interfere with security measures, while others asked whether it would prevent ordinary network management such as throttling or require the state to provide internet access or hardware. Ammon responded that the right would not entitle someone to other people’s resources and said encryption and similar issues would sort themselves out. Several members also raised concerns about child safety, public safety, and whether existing laws could still regulate misuse of computing; Ammon said reasonable limits would still apply, similar to other constitutional rights. Sarah Scott of Americans for Prosperity testified in support, saying the amendment would protect innovation, individual autonomy, and economic competitiveness by preventing overregulation. After questions concluded, the chair closed the hearing on CACR 6. The committee then opened House Bill 615, sponsored by Representative Dan Maguire, which would substantially rewrite the state’s drug-forfeiture law. Maguire said the bill is intended to improve fairness and efficiency in cases where property such as cars or cash is seized in connection with drug offenses, noting that the criminal case and the civil forfeiture case are currently handled separately, with the property case prosecuted by the Attorney General’s office. He explained that the bill addresses courtroom procedure for these forfeiture actions and is meant to make the process more specific and orderly.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 10 goes into the flexible transportation fund with the state treasurer to the political subdivisions
• county, city, or township that adopts an ordinance or policy exceeds the state statute, administrative rules
• And then political subdivision grants would also include cities at $106 million.
• But the thing is, these local political subdivisions, they’ve been having their cake and been able to
• Because when you start looking at what the state’s doing for local political subdivisions now, between

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to consider Senate Bill 2012, the Department of Transportation budget, with Representative Brandenburg presenting a detailed House amendment package and Speaker Robin Weisz explaining the overall funding strategy. The discussion focused on restructuring transportation funding streams, including moving Prairie Dog money into a flexible transportation fund, adjusting gas tax distributions, increasing the legacy earnings transfer from 7% to 8%, and authorizing a $155 million bond for Highway 85. Members also discussed DOT operations, bridge funding, rest areas, electronic titling, and the use of funds for grants to counties, cities, and townships. A separate provision would let the DOT consider whether local ordinances or policies unreasonably restrict permitted agriculture or energy projects when scoring grant applications, which drew significant debate about local control and whether the language was punitive. Testimony from Brandenburg and Weisz emphasized that the plan was intended to provide more predictable funding, preserve the ability to match federal dollars, and direct money where needs are greatest through a grant process. Weisz said the package was designed to simplify multiple revenue buckets, ensure DOT can meet federal match requirements, and free up money for the general fund while still supporting transportation needs. Several members raised concerns about whether cities, counties, and townships would receive as much as under the prior Prairie Dog structure, whether the bridge allocation was correctly reflected in the bill, and whether the local-policy language would penalize subdivisions that oppose energy projects. Supporters argued the state needed to protect revenue tied to energy development and that local governments would still receive distributions plus additional grant opportunities. The committee adopted the House amendment to SB 2012 by a vote of 19-1-3, then rejected an amendment to remove the local-policy language on a 5-15-3 vote. The committee then passed SB 2012 as amended on a 20-0-3 vote, with Representative Brandenburg designated as the carrier. The chair announced that Senate Bill 2014 would not be taken up at that time and the committee recessed until called back.

Transcript Highlights:

• management rules.
• The first rule is the rules for control of ionizing radiation.
• These rules are the rules for mobile home and recreational parks.
• Subdivision 402H.
• the rules?

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, the House is governed by a set of rules. Right? Yes. And one of those rules has to do...
• Can you cite me the rule? Thank you. It is the explanatory note following Rule 1, Section 9.
• I don't have my rule book. Could you read the rule to us?
• Rule 1, Section 9? Rule 1, Section 9, explanatory note for planetary note, page 10 of your manual.
• those rules?

Bills: HB4, HB 4

Keywords: district composition, congressional election, Texas, legislature, voting districts, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• immigrant arrested on suspicion of a violent crime, as defined by Minnesota State Statute 624.172, subdivision
• When you look at kind of model legislation at the federal level, the Lake and Riley bill got broad bipartisan
• when you look at really good question when you look at kind<00:03:12.000> of<00:03:12.159> model
• legislation<00:03:13.200> at<00:03:13.319> the<00:03:13.440> federal kind of model
• legislation at the federal kind of model legislation at the federal level<00:03:14.040> the<00

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like to recognize the Rules Chair. Senator Pasadoma: Thank you, Mr. President.
• You know, we have the 80-20 rule.
• Rules Chair Pasadomo, for what purpose do you rise? Thank you, Mr. President, for announcement.
• Before I recognize the Rules Chair for another motion, are there any announcements? Thanks.
• Before I recognize the Rules Chair for another motion, are there any announcements?

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum, prayer, and the Pledge of Allegiance, then read an amended joint proclamation expanding the special session call to include financial penalties for government officials, criminal penalties for offenses committed by illegal aliens, and programs and appropriations to support law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. No committee reports, governor’s messages, or House messages were on the desk before the chamber moved to the special order calendar. The main item was Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2B, the immigration bill, along with a late-filed strike-all amendment by Senator Gruters. Gruters said the amendment aligned terminology with federal law, increased penalties for crimes by unauthorized aliens, added transnational crime organizations to gang definitions, required stronger participation in the federal 287(g) program, created financial penalties for noncompliance, offered a $1,000 bonus for officers assisting ICE in large operations, directed more information-sharing with federal agencies, and barred DHSMV from issuing licenses or IDs to unauthorized aliens. He framed the bill as supporting President Trump’s immigration agenda and focusing on criminal illegal aliens rather than street-level enforcement. A long question-and-answer period followed, with Senators Polsky, Pizzo, Smith, Jones, Roscoe, Berman, and others pressing the sponsor on scope, legality, costs, and implementation. Questions focused on whether the bill would require participation beyond jails and detention centers, whether schools or churches could be affected, liability and immunity for local agencies, the size and purpose of the proposed appropriations, and the impact on undocumented students receiving in-state tuition waivers. Gruters and Senator Fine said the 287(g) provisions were intended to apply to jails and detention facilities, that green-card holders and lawful residents would not be affected, and that the tuition waiver repeal would end discounted tuition for students in the country illegally while not affecting their ability to attend. Fine also defended the mandatory death penalty provision for certain capital offenses committed by illegal immigrants, acknowledging it would likely be challenged in court but arguing the bill was designed to test and advance the policy. No final vote or other action on the bill is reflected in the excerpt.