Video & Transcript Research : 'electronic notifications'

Page 7 of 345
HI
Transcript Highlights:
  • . >> Um, your testimony, or the Judiciary's testimony, noted that there is a current notification program
  • Now, I'm curious if this pilot does occur, how many notices will be sent out electronically.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Commerce Committee Meeting - 2026-03-26

Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • There are consent forms they can sign and send electronically.
  • There are text messages electronically.
  • Some of those include electronically, an email, um, emailing back and forth a consent form or fax.
  • > um<01:09:08.400> emailing electronically, an email um emailing electronically, an email
  • Some of those include electronically, an email, emailing back and forth a consent form, or fax.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Higher Education Apr 8th, 2025

Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • provided guidelines on when university and colleges need to send timely warnings and emergency notifications
  • However, currently there is not much guidance on how quickly to issue these notifications.
  • Emergency notification, is that natural disaster, man-made things?
  • Chairman well, I just want to know would the loss in a final for qualify as an emergency type notification
  • program that y'all were briefed on earlier. on during our orientation committee hearings and an electronic
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Higher Education Apr 8th, 2025

Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • The House Committee on Administration established an electronic public comment process for all Texans
  • All public comments submitted through the portal will be posted on the electronic legislative information
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Commerce Finance and Policy Committee 3/3/26

Commerce Finance and Policy

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from February 26, after correcting the header date to Thursday, February 26. It then took up House File 36004, as amended by the author’s technical A1 amendment. Representative Van Binsbergen described the bill as a change to statute governing bulk delivery of nonoxygenated fuel, especially for boats and other watercraft, to allow direct delivery to vehicles rather than requiring transport of fuel in containers or removal of boats from the water. Members generally supported the concept, citing convenience for lake users, reduced travel and potential invasive species spread, and fewer spill risks, but the chair said the bill would be laid over pending additional clarification from the State Fire Marshal’s Office and other agencies. House File 2236 was then introduced as a vehicle bill for possible future omnibus use and laid over without testimony or opposition. The committee also heard House File 3709, which would allow Minnesota banks and credit unions to offer custodial accounts for digital assets such as cryptocurrency. The authors framed the bill as a consumer-protection and competitiveness measure that would let local institutions keep pace with customer demand and prevent Minnesotans from relying on out-of-state or offshore providers. Testimony from the Department of Commerce and credit union representatives supported the bill, saying it would level the playing field, keep digital assets under Minnesota oversight, and help local institutions remain relevant; one witness said significant liquidity had been leaving local communities for outside exchanges. Questions from members focused on whether the accounts would be NCUA-insured, how the bill related to unclaimed property, and whether the policy goal was consumer protection or simply preserving bank relevance. Several members expressed support but also cautioned about crypto volatility, scams, and the need to avoid turning credit unions into exchanges. The discussion ended without a final vote in the excerpt, with the bill still under committee consideration.
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

02/04/2026 - House Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections

Federalism, Military Affairs & Elections

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2663, which updates military leave protections for state and non-state employees by aligning statutory language with how service members’ orders are described. Representative Pena said the change was intended to remove confusion without affecting benefits, and members noted it would help protect employees called to training, deployment, or state active duty. The bill passed unanimously with a due pass recommendation. The committee then heard HB 2976, a bill addressing administrative control of justice courts and due process for elected justices of the peace when state or county entities take action affecting their statutory authority. Supporters, including two Pima County justices of the peace, described administrative orders that transferred control of their courts without notice, findings, or a meaningful chance to respond, and argued the bill would require notice, a hearing, written findings, and review before such changes. The Arizona Supreme Court’s government affairs director opposed the bill as unconstitutional, arguing the state constitution gives the Chief Justice administrative supervision over all courts and that the legislature cannot impose those procedures by statute. After a lengthy and at times contentious exchange over constitutional authority and the role of elected JPs, the committee voted 6-1 to give HB 2976 a due pass recommendation. After a recess, the committee considered HB 2406, which requires the Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services to study how aware veterans are of available state, local, and federal benefits and to report recommendations for improving awareness. Testimony in support emphasized that many veterans do not know the full range of benefits available to them and suggested surveys, outreach, and other low-cost methods to gather information. Some members questioned whether a study was necessary or how it would be conducted, but several said they would support it for now; the bill received a due pass recommendation by a 5-1-1 vote. Finally, the committee heard HB 2226, which requires courts at initial appearance hearings to ask whether a defendant is a veteran and, if so, to consider referral to veterans’ treatment or diversion programs. Supporters said the bill would help identify eligible veterans early in the process and connect them to services, while one member raised Fifth Amendment concerns about asking the question before counsel is present. The sponsor and testifier agreed to work on an amendment clarifying that the answer could not be used against the defendant in later proceedings. The committee moved the bill forward with a due pass recommendation, with members indicating support pending that amendment.