Transcript Highlights:

• That injunction has been stayed by the Eighth Circuit.
• <00:10:53.040> That<00:10:53.200> injunction merits of their claims.
• That injunction merits of their claims.
• <00:10:58.160> prohibiting preliminary injunction prohibiting preliminary injunction prohibiting
• But these cases were all for injunctive But these cases were all for injunctive relief<00:31:40.480

Bills: HF3477, HF3414, HF103, HF3661, HF3146

Keywords: civil rights, law enforcement, federal collaboration, accountability, state law, constitutional rights, color of law, 42 U.S.C. 1983, section 1983, civil action, damages, injunctive relief, attorney fees, law enforcement task force, federal-state cooperation, intergovernmental agreement, federal agency partnership, Minnesota Constitution, U.S. Constitution, police accountability

Transcript Highlights:

• Federal Credit Union Act, which were chief among them. arguing the court to grant a preliminary injunction
• The judge issued the partial preliminary injunction for National Banks, and a motion of summary judgment
• Because the injunction in the lawsuit in Illinois would make it so the law only applies to credit unions
• dictated that in the state of Illinois, we pass a public policy, but with that said, there is an injunction
• At the preliminary injunction stage of the litigation, the court has said yes, we Think it's likely to

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , uh, the preliminary injunction was granted.
• injunction was also released<03:59:33.840> uh<03:59:34.160> or<03:59:34.319> issued
• uh the the the injunction was uh the preliminary<04:00:00.479> injunction<04:00:01.040> was
• <04:00:02.479> Uh preliminary injunction was granted.
• Uh preliminary injunction was granted.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, members, SB 1211, aggravated harassment lifetime injunctions, adds felony aggravated harassment
• involving domestic violence to the list of offenses for which a victim may request a lifetime injunction
• ..involving domestic violence to the list of offenses for which a victim may request a lifetime injunction

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus reviewed a long calendar of bills spanning health care, education, tax, public safety, firearms, elections, and family law. On health and education, HB 283 would expand diabetes-related coverage for certain supplies; SB 1126 would require schools to provide records and cooperate with Department of Child Safety caseworkers; SB 1210 would require out-of-state private postsecondary institutions to register in Arizona; and SCR 1006, which would create private causes of action over restroom and pronoun policies in schools, drew strong opposition and was requested to be pulled from consent. Members also discussed HB 2308, which would bar dental insurers from owning dental practices, and SB 1049, which would cap spousal maintenance at four years and change how the marital standard of living is considered; both prompted questions and SB 1049 was pulled from consent. Several tax measures were also reviewed. SB 1293 would limit GPLET abatements by protecting school district revenue, and members noted prior opposition. SB 1294 would clarify county assessors’ authority to prorate destroyed property for tax purposes, though members said they were still researching whether it was necessary. SB 1430, the Tax Corrections Act of 2026, would make technical tax changes and remove redundant language, but members said they wanted Department of Revenue-requested corrections restored. SB 1053 would reduce concealed weapons permit fees for Arizona residents and was pulled from consent after concerns about fee impacts and unresolved amendment language. On public safety and firearms, SB 1058 would prohibit government records distinguishing firearm retailers and firearm owners and was pulled from consent after criticism and reference to a prior veto. SB 1093 would expand riot-related offenses to include property damage and add riot to conspiracy and racketeering provisions. SB 1160 would restrict drones near ticketed entertainment events, with supporters framing it as a public safety measure and clarifying that event-authorized drone use could still be exempt. SB 1211 would allow lifetime injunctions for felony aggravated harassment involving domestic violence. The caucus also considered election-related bills. SB 1006 would raise the threshold for aggregated campaign contribution reporting from under $100 to under $200, and it was pulled from consent. SB 1029 would create a process for terminating a campaign committee after a candidate’s death. SB 1038 would make cast vote records public records, SB 1057 would add fraud countermeasures for paper ballots, and SB 1237 would require consultation with county recorders and legislative leaders before the Secretary of State updates the Elections Procedures Manual. Several of these election bills were noted as having been vetoed previously, and the meeting ended by moving into closed caucus.

Transcript Highlights:

• So unless that argument is explicitly addressed, there is no overcoming the district court injunction
• I really don't think any injunction.
• That was in the opinion and injunction.
• That was the bulk of the injunction.
• overcome the district court injunction. overcome the district court injunction. the<01:27:49.679

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 34, which would require parental consent for each new service provided to a student through the Medicaid to Schools program and require reports to legislative policy committees. Senator Ruth Ward said the bill was intended to increase transparency, protect parental involvement, and ensure continuity of care, especially for students with disabilities. She also noted a proposed amendment she received shortly before the hearing that would change the bill’s focus from a “new service” to a “new care plan.” Representatives from the New Hampshire Primary Care Association and Amoscake Health testified that they opposed the bill as written but would support it with the amendment. They explained that tying consent to individual diagnosis codes or services could be burdensome, could delay care, and could create compliance problems if a diagnosis changes during a visit. They said the amendment would better align consent with the overall care plan and avoid interrupting treatment mid-appointment. Committee members raised questions about how the bill would interact with IEPs, individualized health plans, homebound services, telehealth, billing, and whether the amendment would still require parental involvement after a care plan changes. The deputy Medicaid director from the Department of Health and Human Services testified that the amendment was more operationally feasible because Medicaid billing involves many ICD-10 codes that can change or overlap, and consent should be tied to the care plan rather than to each code. He said the current law already requires parental consent for participation in the Medicaid to Schools program and annual consent for billing, but the bill would make explicit consent for care-plan changes. No vote was taken during the portion of the hearing provided, and the committee appeared to continue discussion with DHHS after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:30.920> And action for injunctive relief. And action for injunctive relief.
• So, injunctive relief under this bill.
• I'm sorry, injunctive relief. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, injunctive relief.
• Injunctive<02:50:28.800> relief. Injunctive relief. Injunctive relief.
• Would<02:54:24.760> injunctive<02:54:25.400> relief Would injunctive relief Would

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Friday, April 10, 2026, 960, senate, all

Summary: The Senate opened with an invocation by Associate Pastor Justin Wills of Miracle Temple Church in Lothian, followed by remarks recognizing his family’s ministry and requesting that the prayer be journalized. The chamber then moved through several introductions, including Johnston Square Elementary students who were recognized for strong grades, education-related guests, and staff and family members of senators. After the roll confirmed a quorum, the Senate returned to business. On third reading, House Bill 563, concerning emergency response animals, was amended to align the House and Senate versions. The amendment added self-defense as an affirmative defense, included horses used in search and rescue within the definition of emergency response animal, added a definition of law enforcement unit, and adjusted penalties. The bill then passed with 44 affirmative votes. The Senate also took up Senate Bill 159 on EMS vehicle supplies and neonatal care; the chamber refused to concur in House amendments and sent a message asking the House to recede or appoint a conference committee. The Senate introduced House Bill 420 and referred it to Rules. In Judicial Proceedings, Senate Bill 791 on immigration enforcement prohibitions in correctional facilities was reported favorably with three amendments, including technical changes, limits tied to certain convictions, notice requirements for state facilities, and authorization for judges or commissioners to consider immigration detainers in bail decisions. The minority leader and others requested that the bill be special ordered for more time to review and prepare amendments, arguing the issue was controversial and had been fast-tracked; supporters of the committee report said the bill had already been heard and discussed. The debate over the special-order motion was ongoing at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• recommendation here is to pass with amendments since you can already get damages, punitive damages, and injunctive
• punitive damages, already get damages, punitive damages, and<00:03:27.200> an<00:03:27.519> injunctive
• <00:03:27.959> relief,<00:03:28.720> let's<00:03:29.000> remove and an injunctive
• relief, let's remove and an injunctive relief, let's remove I'm<00:03:30.040> going<00:03:30.160

Bills: SB2057

Keywords: immigration enforcement, sanctuary policy, detainer, ICE, federal immigration authorities, 8 U.S.C. 1357(g), 8 U.S.C. 1373, 8 U.S.C. 1644, deportation, undocumented immigrants, noncitizen, migrant rights, local police cooperation, law enforcement cooperation, hold request, judicial warrant, probable cause, civil immigration enforcement, county police, state police

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met on Thursday, March 5, for a series of decision-making agendas and considered a long list of Senate bills. Early measures included SB 2151, which clarifies state and local authority during emergencies and revises the definition of “emergency”; the committee agreed to restore the broader, long-used definition and add a sunset date, then passed the bill with amendments. SB 3055, concerning false impersonation of an employee organization representative, was amended to remove liquidated damages and passed. Several technical or conforming bills also advanced, including SB 3067, SB 3077, SB 3131, SB 3134, SB 3144, SB 3152, SB 3154, and SB 3249, with most passed with technical amendments or unamended; some members noted reservations on SB 3249. The committee also took up bills affecting public safety, health, and education. SB 3083 was amended to narrow notice requirements for protective orders involving military-affiliated individuals to a designated military security force, and SB 3118 on the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children passed as is. SB 3134 modernized emergency medical services statutes, while another SB 3134 item addressed dangerous intoxication and civil protective custody. SB 3262, requiring the Hawaii State Teachers Board to submit nominees to the Board of Education, was amended to include a defective effective date. SB 3315, allowing a one-time medical cannabis purchase while registration is pending, was also amended to a delayed effective date and passed. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on law enforcement and immigration-related proposals. SB 3322, which restricts facial coverings by law enforcement, requires visible identification, and sets agency policies on cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, was amended to remove an affirmative defense, make the penalty a misdemeanor, and incorporate exceptions for undercover work and related preparation; it passed with one no vote. SB 3251, barring certain former ICE and Border Patrol personnel from employment in specified state agencies, was narrowed to apply to those with more than 90 cumulative days of such work during a defined period and passed with reservations. SB 2057, a reconsideration measure limiting use of state personnel and funds to assist federal immigration agents beyond their authority, was further amended to clarify definitions, protect First Amendment activity, and preserve cooperation required by federal law; it then passed without objection. The committee adjourned after adopting each measure considered.

Transcript Highlights:

• that court to issue an injunction that court to issue an injunction preventing<01:24:19.679>
• And you feel that that would result in a successful injunction?
• a new injunction.
• > the So that injunction regarding the So that injunction regarding the implementation<01:51:46.159
• 55:42.239> one<01:55:42.400> that's injunction that is the one that's injunction that is

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then recognized a staff member’s birthday and a guest shadowing Senator Adams. It then moved into informational review of Education and Labor Cabinet, Department of Education regulation 702 KAR 3:30, which sets insurance coverage requirements for school district buildings and structures. Department of Education officials explained that districts are expected to carry coverage at replacement cost and said they understand some districts participate in self-insurance pools with backup policies, but they deferred detailed insurance questions to the Department of Insurance. Senators raised concerns that pooled coverage could leave districts exposed if claims exceed pool limits, and the chair asked KDE to follow up with DOI to confirm districts are adequately covered, especially for bondholders. No vote was taken on the informational review. The committee then reviewed emergency ABC regulations 804 KAR 130:01 through 130:04 implementing Senate Bill 100’s new licensing requirements for tobacco, nicotine, and vapor product businesses. ABC and Public Protection Cabinet representatives outlined the emergency rules governing enforcement, license applications, denial criteria, and transitional licenses. Retail industry witnesses Shannon Stiglet and Brian Clark said they support licensure in principle but argued the rules add duplicative requirements borrowed from alcohol licensing, create confusion about transitional licenses, and may be too burdensome for the roughly 7,000 affected businesses to meet by the January 1 deadline. They also said guidance has been inconsistent and requested the agency revise the regulations, remove requirements not grounded in law, and provide clearer, separate processes for new and existing businesses. Committee members asked whether the industry had worked directly with ABC and noted the public comment period was still open. Witnesses said they had communicated with ABC and the Public Protection Cabinet, but responses had been uneven and they wanted written guidance. Members expressed concern about the short timeline and the need to avoid disruption so businesses can operate legally on January 1. Representative Marzian asked for clarification that the discussion concerned emergency regulations already in effect while ordinary regulations remain in process. No formal action was taken beyond receiving the informational testimony and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those courts have the ability to do injunctions and specific performance now.
• Those courts have the ability to do injunctions and specific performance now.
• Those courts have the ability to do injunctions and specific performance now.
• Those courts have the ability to do injunctions and specific performance now.
• <00:35:04.600> and have the ability to do injunctions and have the ability to do injunctions

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But we averted such a catastrophic event because we won an injunction. that directed the federal government
• We obtained a preliminary injunction, making the funds available to us.
• Shortly after filing the lawsuit and submitting our briefs requesting a preliminary injunction that would
• We sought a preliminary injunction, which remains in effect today.

Transcript Highlights:

• We can have litigation where we obtain civil injunctive relief against the person said there in joined
• Also, if the person violates that in injunction, then we have indirect criminal contempt as a possible
• remedy so they can being present for up to 5 months if they violate that civil injunction.
• every year have ceased and desist affidavits that people agree to or we litigate and we obtained an injunction

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Current law on injunctions or current practice on injunctions?
• At you to render injunctive relief? Not necessarily.
• But let's say the judge decides that injunctive relief is warranted and issues an injunction.
• who that injunctive relief would apply to?
• And again, so we're not telling a judge how to apply an injunction.

Bills: HJR73, HB31, HB279, HB370, HB4768, HB513, HB875, HB982, HB 1085, HB2677, HB2874, HB5478, HB4880, HB4798, HB4514, HB4958, HB4508, HB3758, HB3830, HB3744, HB3622, HB741, HB2204, HB2860, HB4659, HB4578, HB813, HB712, HB1551, HB2790, HB2698, HB3365, HB3504, HB3118, HB2959, HB1862, HB 1026, HB4401, HB4164, HB3920, HB4737, HB4966, HB4967, HB1958, HB4979, HB5459, HB3862, HB1823, HB4415, HB4893, HB2343, HB 1228, HB4337, HCR141, SB250, SB1883, SB617, SB2411, SB2306, SB2929, SB552, SCR27, HJR218, HB168, HB2545, HB5436, HB4926, HB5165, HB4811, HB4755, HB3179, HB4310, HB4611, HB3637, HB3153, HB2786, HB2966, HB2159, HB5081, HB638, HB640, HB876, HB4809, HB5308, HB4687, HB5623, HB4412, HB3284, HB3420, HB3449, HB4098, HB4281, HB4120, HB4504, HB4370, HB4421, HB 1106, HB4070, HB2370, HB2407, HB2253, HB2273, HB2040, HB1586, HB3788, HB3993, HB4690, HB4696, HB2308, HB 1142, HB1533, HB1621, HB2242, HB2012, HB2193, HB2464, HB2348, HB2313, HB2289, HB1942, HB2011, HB1629, HB2993, HB3592, HB4076, HB4623, HB4535, HB4327, HB4520, HB3824, HB4921, HB2494, HB3066, HJR112, HB2695, HB3138, HB2442, HB3863, HJR73, HB4773, HB 1091, HB5115, HB5515, HB3372, HB5659, HB 127, HB386, HB 115, HB2868, HB 1249, HB4766, HB3720, HB4656, HB4879, HB 105, HB5383, HB4621, HB5431, HB5678, HB5534, HB4174, HB4212, HB3954, HB3966, HB3636, HB3918, HB1422, HB4765, HB4732, HB4742, HB5122, HB4518, HB5084, HB3986, HB4045, HB4144, HB3911, HB3976, HB4473, HB3425, HB3641, HB3642, HB3475, HB3509, HB3424, HB3383, HB4744, HB4531, HB4539, HB3159, HB5228, HB5370, HB4359, HB4398, HB4443, HB4466, HB3861, HB3849, HB4240, HB4706, HB4685, HB5354, HB5141, HB5686, HB3629, HB3554, HB3567, HB2015, HB3575, HB5381, HB1431, HB3514, HB4614, HB4546, HB4683, HB5681, HB5673, HB5663, HB4271, HB4350, HB4035, HB3807, HB3812, HB3552, HB3540, HB3715, HB3710, HB3664, HB4196, HB4233, HB4173, HB1998, HB3333, HB3510, HB4222, HB2070, HB2854, HB2347, HB 113, HB983, HB4847, HB1449, HB3833, HB5151, HB265, HB1845, HB782, HB 108, HB1960, HB158, HB1954, HB1955, HB2512, HB605, HB2581, HB2803, HB627, HB2667, HB1738, HB636, HB3679, HB2638, HB2655, HB871, HB2438, HB 1107, HB1765, HB1822, HB2153, HB4099, HB3732, HB3171, HB3178, HB3182, HB3749, HB2814, HB3977, HB4204, HB4207, HB4449, HB1820, HB1876, HB1939, HB1347, HB2593, HB2136, HB2132, HB2658, HB2413, HB2757, HB2080, HB3154, HB3063, HB3009, HB3448, HB3006, HB2844, HB3241, HB3680, HB3169, HB2078, HB2507, HB4559, HB3946, HB3460, HB3405, HB475, HB3463, HB3441, HB3520, HB2060, HB4731, HB4991, HB1991, HB5596, HB2014, HB2142, HB2673, HB2731, HB2417, HB2399, HB2301, HB3335, HB3234, HB3320, HB5573, HB4848, HB4748, HB4769, HB4795, HB2086, HB2234, HB2203, HB4916, HB5624, HB4505, HB139, HB5093, HB5302, HB5402, HB5606, HB2333, HB4630, HB4701, HB2583, HB2983, HB4924, HB3339, HB3793, HB3631, HB4882, HB5509, HB5499, HB5430, HB5561, HB5611, HB5043, HB5064, HB3733, HB3781, HB3219, HB32, HB4515, HB5348, HB3902, HB4420, HB3269, HB469, HB336, HB316, HB5396, HB993, HB1342, HB5216, HB2046, HB2188, HB2450, HB2813, HB2857, HB4075, HB2911, HB4682, HB3117, HB3253, HB3442, HB4820, HB4336, HB5356, HB3669, HB3428, HB5465, HB3662, HB2590, HB2288, HB1886, HB3458, HB5603, HB5620, HB1489, HB4101, HB4990, HB5685, HB4950, HB4980, HB5684, HB3507, HB3566, HB4487, HB4462, HB4876, HB4915, HB4663, HB5570, HB2929, HB5261, HB2920, HB4642, HB4746, HB1609, HB5403, HB5453, HB3844, HB2336, HB1572, HB 1226, HB2806, HB2617, HB2827, HB3948, HB3945, HB4266, HB4542, HB3319, HB1772, HB2496, HB1970, HB3434, HB5545, HB5577, HB31, HB279, HB370, HB4768, HB513, HB875, HB982, HB 1085, HB2677, HB2874, HB5478, HB4880, HB4798, HB4514, HB4958, HB4508, HB3758, HB3830, HB3744, HB3622, HB741, HB2204, HB2860, HB4659, HB4578, HB813, HB712, HB1551, HB2790, HB2698, HB3365, HB3504, HB3118, HB2959, HB1862, HB 1026, HB4401, HB4164, HB3920, HB4737, HB4966, HB4967, HB1958, HB4979, HB5459, HB3862, HB1823, HB4415, HB4893, HB2343, HB 1228, HB4337, HCR76, HCR127, HCR9, HCR40, HCR118, HR559, HCR59, HCR135, HCR141

Keywords: ad valorem tax, property tax, tax limitation, elderly, disabled, low-income, homestead exemption, constitutional amendment, juvenile justice, community supervision, felony offenses, treatment of children, juvenile facilities, chemical dispensing device, solitary confinement, rehabilitation, criminal proceedings, HB 279, uranium mining, uranium permit

Transcript Highlights:

• Anyway, there is an injunction in place?
• ,<00:23:11.919> the think once there's an injunction, the think once there's an injunction
• , would be if there was an injunction, would be if there was an injunction, obviously<00:24:58.400
• Um, it might take months before an injunction is granted.
• before an injunction is is uh granted. before an injunction is is uh granted.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council met on May 27, 2026, approved the January 7 minutes and the day’s agenda, and reported no conflicts of interest. The executive director gave staff updates, including introductions of new staff member Cara Castanza and DNR liaison Jason Co., both of whom were welcomed by the council. Members were also informed about three minor easement/conveyance matters in the packet, including a small Bowser easement impact with about $1,600 returned to the Outdoor Heritage Fund, a Minnesota Land Trust easement request involving a DNR trout stream easement, and an access easement revision in Itasca County. The council also noted several upcoming dedication events and a June field tour in southeast Minnesota beginning in Winona on June 16, with visits to Whitewater WMA, bluff prairie and stream sites, and a river segment if a boat is secured. A major agenda item was a legislative session recap on the Outdoor Heritage Fund portion of Senate File 2077, the omnibus Outdoor Heritage Fund, Legacy, and Lands bill. Staff reported that all council recommendations were incorporated into the bill, which passed both chambers on May 17 and was expected to be signed by the governor. The fiscal year 2027 Outdoor Heritage Fund recommendations covered 53 programs totaling about $188.9 million, with the February forecast increasing the appropriation slightly so the final total was about $191.16 million; eligible programs were proportionately increased. Staff also highlighted a few changes made during the legislative process, including adjustments to the Roso Lake rehabilitation phase three project, the conservation partners legacy grant language, and statutory provisions affecting the council. The recap also covered policy changes in the bill: a public member term limit of eight years, with a short vacancy exception and transition rules for current members; a revised executive director hiring process allowing the Legislative Coordinating Commission to provide support while preserving the council’s final hiring authority and permitting closed meetings for candidate discussions; and an extension of the Upper Mississippi River invasive carp deterrent design deadline to June 30, 2027. Members discussed the Roso Lake amendment at length, with Senator Lang and Representative Burkel explaining that the added delay and injunction-related language were intended to address local concerns and preserve the council’s process while litigation proceeds. The meeting ended without any additional formal action beyond receiving the updates and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• They add, and Ben talked about a lot of this, $108 million for the health care injunction, $100 million
• They add, and Ben talked about a lot of this, $108 million for the health care injunction, $100 million
• You noted on the second line $108 million in ongoing ADC health care injunction costs, additional 615
• The executive is classifying year one of the health care injunction cost as one-time and then continuing
• The executive is classifying year one of the health care injunction classifying year one of the health

Bills: HB2053, HB2116, HB2148

Keywords: stormwater, recharge mapping, water resources, groundwater, appropriation, Arizona, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation, state budget, interstate water compact, Colorado River Compact, water litigation, A.R.S. 45-119, natural resources, water policy, river management

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 2116, which would appropriate $1 million in fiscal year 2027 from the State General Fund to the Colorado River Litigation Fund. The sponsor said it was a repeat of last year’s request and was intended as a backup if the seven Colorado River basin states cannot reach a new agreement. Arizona Department of Water Resources staff testified in support, explaining the state’s role in ongoing Colorado River negotiations and distinguishing the litigation fund from the executive’s separate Colorado River Protection Fund. The bill received a due pass recommendation on a 17-1 vote. The committee then took up House Bill 2053, which appropriates $100,000 to ADWR for updated stormwater recharge mapping and expands the mapping effort beyond state trust lands to private lands. The committee adopted Chairman Livingston’s amendment, which extended the coordination timeline to one year, broadened the agencies involved, and revised language on site eligibility and the definition of stormwater. The sponsor said the bill would help identify more places to capture stormwater for recharge, while ADWR testified neutral, supporting the mapping work but raising a concern about language tied to appropriable surface water because that is a legal determination for the courts. The amended bill passed 11-7. House Bill 2148 was then heard, proposing to give the legislature authority to appropriate non-custodial federal monies, with requirements for specifying purposes and allowing agencies to spend such funds if the legislature does not act. An amendment excluded university and Board of Regents research grants from the bill’s scope, which the chair said was intended to avoid implementation problems. The sponsor framed the bill as a transparency measure, and members discussed the large amount of federal pass-through funding Arizona receives. The amended bill passed 11-7. After the bills, the committee received a lengthy JLBC presentation comparing the executive budget with the JLBC baseline. Discussion focused on revenue forecasts, the impact of federal tax conformity, state employee health insurance costs, SNAP administrative and error-rate costs under H.R. 1, developmental disabilities and AHCCCS growth, and K-12/ESA funding trends. Members repeatedly criticized the executive budget for funding some ongoing costs on a one-year basis and expressed concern about rising caseloads and supplemental needs. No formal action was taken on the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are two very important notes here: TPWD only has standing to seek an injunction for such harm during
• coordinate with a project developer where we ...which is hence the importance in this bill of the injunctive
• We do object to the injunctive, the ability of Parks and Wildlife, one agency, to actually stop construction
• It allows Parks and Wildlife to seek an injunction if a developer does not comply.
• It allows Parks and Wildlife to seek an injunction if a developer does not comply.

Bills: SB3074, HB49, HB2440, HB3556, HB3619, HB3866, HB4042, HB4112, HB4271, HB4413, HB4426, HB5033

Keywords: SB 3074, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Water Code, permit applications, environmental permitting, administrative record, ex parte communications, legislative communications, governor, lieutenant governor, state legislators, district projects, public records, recusal, conflict of interest, substantial interest, agency transparency, environmental regulation, permit renewal

Summary: The committee heard and laid out several natural resources and environmental bills, with testimony focused on balancing development, public health, wildlife protection, and regulatory authority. SB 3074 would allow the governor, lieutenant governor, and legislators to communicate in writing with TCEQ about matters before the commission, with safeguards requiring the communication to be part of the record and allowing other parties to respond; a committee substitute narrowed it to written communications about permits only, limited legislator communications to facilities in their districts, and adjusted conflict-of-interest rules. HB 3556, as substituted, would require notice to Texas Parks and Wildlife for certain very tall structures in specified coastal counties and give TPWD a limited right to seek injunctive relief if mitigation is insufficient to prevent material harm to migratory birds; supporters said it would address ignored wildlife recommendations and protect key flyways, while opponents argued the bill was too broad, singled out wind energy, and gave one agency unusually strong enforcement power. HB 49 would expand liability protections for produced-water recycling and beneficial use; supporters said it would encourage reuse of a large wastewater stream and reduce disposal pressures, while opponents warned it could shield operators from responsibility before the science and standards are mature. HB 4413 would authorize mass-balance accounting for renewable biomass feedstocks, and HB 3866 would regulate intermediate bulk container recycling facilities near homes, with a committee substitute adding a grandfather clause and making implementation contingent on funding. The committee also heard bills affecting air and energy regulation. HB 5033 would create a trigger to end vehicle emissions inspections if federal law changes to allow it; the substitute removed a Supreme Court-related trigger, and the lone public witness opposed the bill, warning it would worsen air quality and harm nonattainment areas. HB 4112 would clarify that on-site storage of high-level radioactive waste is allowed at current and future nuclear reactors and university research reactors only for waste generated at that site; the substitute clarified the language and removed an inoperative permit condition, and witnesses from environmental and nuclear groups said the clarification was needed to prevent unintended restrictions while avoiding off-site storage. HB 2440 would prohibit state agencies from using air-quality rules to ban or restrict vehicles based on energy source, including internal combustion vehicles, and no public testimony was offered. HB 4271 would require TCEQ to hold public meetings on request for composting facility authorizations; the substitute limited the requirement to future applications and was presented as a transparency measure after a denied local request and extensive public comments. Additional bills addressed landowner protections and Railroad Commission oversight. HB 3619 would require the Railroad Commission to restore surface land after plugging or replugging operations and indemnify landowners from damages tied to authorized entry; a witness supported the bill but urged fixing a separate statutory loophole that he said allowed operators to enter unrelated tracts without notice. HB 4042 would extend Railroad Commission pipeline safety and fee provisions to propane distribution systems by removing the word “natural” from the relevant definitions. HB 4426 would set a 10-year permit term for commercial surface disposal facilities, allow renewal based on compliance history, and require renewal applications 120 days before expiration. The committee took no votes because a quorum was not initially present, and each bill was left pending after testimony and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I filed the TRO for myself, which resulted in an injunction against harassment issued by Judge Richard
• This letter was sent on September 20, 2021, nine months after the court issued an injunction against
• against harassment issued by injunction against harassment issued by judge<00:43:56.079> Richard<
• <00:44:44.079> against<00:44:44.359> harassment<00:44:45.119> because injunction
• against harassment because injunction against harassment because they<00:44:45.559> clearly<00

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Education met on January 30 and heard testimony on several bills, beginning with an announcement asking testifiers and members to keep remarks brief because of weather. The vice chair also explained that HB 440, relating to immigration issues in schools and state hospitals, was removed from the agenda because the proposal would not create meaningful legal protections and immigration policy is governed by federal law. The committee then moved through a series of education-related measures, with testimony largely from the Department of Education, the School Facilities Authority, the Attorney General’s office, unions, advocacy groups, and individual testifiers. On HB 330, concerning school impact fees, the School Facilities Authority supported the bill as aligning policy with implementation, while the Tax Foundation of Hawaii said the fee accounts have accumulated large balances, including more than $20 million in impact fee funds and nearly $9 million from predecessor fair-share contributions, and urged that collected money be used rather than left idle. DOE said it would follow up on the balance and why it was not being used. On HB 1188, dealing with workforce housing, DOE and the Charter School Commission offered comments or support, the Attorney General suggested clarifying the phrase “within commuting distance” by using a mileage standard and adding repayment language, and HSTA, HGEA, and others supported the bill, with HSTA saying teachers need housing to be able to live and work in Hawaii. On HB 624 and HB 625, both related to school psychologists, DOE said it would participate in a work group on the pathway bill and supported the incentive program bill; school psychologists and related groups supported the measures, while one testifier said DOE should not lead the work group alone because school psychologists may work in many education settings beyond DOE schools. The committee also heard HB 1314 on youth mental health in schools. DOE described its student support process, universal screening tools, and behavioral health services, saying schools already identify and respond to concerns and that staff are trained to report issues, while the Attorney General warned the bill could expose schools to liability and recommended a broad liability waiver. Testimony was mixed, with several supporters and one opponent. On HB 616, concerning school safety and harassment protections for educational workers, the Attorney General sought clarifying amendments on harassment definitions, temporary restraining order costs, and paid leave, while HSTA, HGEA, and individual teachers strongly supported the bill, describing harassment incidents and arguing for a standardized statewide response. DOE said it already has reporting pathways, visitor codes of conduct, trespass notices, and an ethics hotline, but acknowledged implementation varies by school and that staff can escalate concerns if needed. The committee also began hearing HB 88 on a three-year pilot program for athletic travel, but the transcript cuts off before that bill’s testimony is completed or any votes are taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• This measure authorizes public employers to petition for temporary restraining orders and injunctions
• This measure authorizes public employers to petition for temporary restraining orders and injunctions
• This measure authorizes public employers to petition for temporary restraining orders and injunctions
• This measure authorizes public employers to petition for temporary restraining orders and injunctions
• Thank you. injunctions against employment related injunctions against employment related harassment,<

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures. HB 1957, relating to safe entryways, would create enforcement procedures in large cities to prevent personal property from blocking private doorways or entrances. The Department of the Attorney General supported the concept but recommended moving the offense to the criminal code, adding clearer definitions to avoid vagueness, and including notice, inventory, storage, and property-disposition procedures to address constitutional concerns. No other testimony was offered and no questions were raised. HB 25003/HB 253, relating to fireworks, would expand civil asset forfeiture for certain fireworks offenses, revise the definition of aerial device, and clarify air-delivery offenses. The Attorney General supported the bill but suggested removing the 25-pound weight threshold to avoid unequal treatment of similar offenses. The Department of Law Enforcement also supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity for evolving fireworks investigations and prosecutions. The committee took no action during testimony. HB 2137, relating to artificial intelligence, would prohibit certain harmful uses of realistic AI-generated digital imitations, require disclosures, and create civil remedies and fines. The Commission on the Status of Women supported the bill, while the Hawaiian Islands Republican Women opposed it on First Amendment grounds. The Motion Picture Association, Recording Industry Association of America, and SAG-AFTRA also opposed the bill but said they preferred a different framework, the federal “No Fakes” model, and were willing to work with the committee on amendments. The Attorney General had suggested constitutional amendments, which the chair said would be considered later. The committee also heard HB 2198 on prediction markets, with the Honolulu prosecutor strongly supporting inclusion of prediction markets in the gambling definition because of concerns about speculative betting on events and national security-related outcomes. HB 1511 on consumer protection drew support from the Office of Consumer Protection and the Insurance Division, with OCP proposing clearer disclosure for license and registration renewal solicitations. HB 1897 on condominium alternative dispute resolution received supportive comments from the Real Estate Commission and CI. HB 1642 on crypto kiosks drew strong support from OCP and AARP Hawaii for a ban on kiosks accepting U.S. currency, but opposition from Hill Ventures, which argued for regulation and guardrails instead of a ban. HB 1753 on social media account deletion received supportive comments from DCCA on clarifying deletion of unique identifiers and inferences. HB 1654 on anonymous complaints against public employees drew strong opposition from the Attorney General over implementation and due process concerns, while the Government Employees Association supported it as a way to screen baseless complaints; the committee then moved on to HB 1659 on collective bargaining, with testimony beginning as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• like to start out by reminding the committee that there is an active, unprecedented geothermal injunction
• reference<00:21:17.400> made<00:21:17.640> to<00:21:17.840> an<00:21:18.240> injunction
• <00:21:19.240> do<00:21:19.400> you reference made to an injunction do you reference
• made to an injunction do you know<00:21:20.039> about<00:21:21.039> what<00:21:21.720>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on April 1 at the State Capitol and heard four measures. HCR 45/HR 38 urged the Public Utilities Commission to support transferring regulatory authority over motor carriers, water carriers, and other transportation means to the Department of Transportation; both the PUC and DOT testified in support, and members discussed that the resolution was largely symbolic because statutory changes would still be needed. HCR 58/HR 54 requested a geothermal energy working group; the Consumer Advocate, PUC, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, and Life of the Land supported it, while Students for Justice in Palestine at UH opposed it, citing an active injunction, environmental risks, and the need to prioritize Native and local community voices. Members asked about the injunction and community representation, and the PUC said it would support including Hawaiian community members in the working group. HCR 91/HR 87 sought insurance coverage for prosthetic and orthotic devices; a 14-year-old amputee testified in support, describing the need for sports prosthetics and arguing that coverage should allow people with limb loss to participate fully in school and athletics. HCR 102/HR 98 urged the Real Estate Commission to allow the salesperson exam to be administered in Japanese for timeshare sales; the Real Estate Commission opposed, while ARDA supported it, arguing there is a shortage of bilingual real estate professionals and that Japanese-language testing would help the timeshare industry and Japanese visitors. Members questioned the limited-license concept and public protection concerns, and the committee later amended the measure to a limited real estate salesperson’s license for timeshare sales, changing the target from Japanese-speaking visitors to Japanese nationals, before passing all four measures out of committee, with HCR 102 passing with amendments and the others passing as is.

Transcript Highlights:

• the plaintiff is a candidate for office, that plaintiff would be entitled to make a motion for injunctive
• relief to prohibit... ...for office, that plaintiff would be entitled to make a motion for injunctive
• It also specifies that when the court makes the determination on whether to grant that injunctive relief

Keywords: House Committee Room C, General Assembly Building, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It confirms that property owners have a right to bring declaratory, injunctive, or mandamus actions against
• It's like a positive injunction, right?
• The new Mercedes dealership that's less than 100 feet from my property is zoned— injunction, right?

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 2215, which would clarify that property owners may challenge municipal zoning ordinances that are adopted without following Chapter 211 procedures, and would expressly waive municipal sovereign immunity for declaratory, injunctive, and mandamus actions in those cases. The bill sponsor and witnesses argued it would simply enforce existing notice, hearing, and due process requirements and give landowners a practical remedy when cities fail to comply. Testimony in support came from attorneys and a landowner describing alleged zoning actions in Selma that they said occurred without proper notice or hearings and caused significant financial harm. After questions, the committee substitute was withdrawn and the bill was left pending. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2639, which would add disclosure and compensation requirements for local historic designations, including compensation based on the greater of repair/restoration costs or the difference in appraised value with and without the designation. The bill author said it was intended to address situations where historic designation delays or blocks redevelopment and to ensure property owners are fairly compensated. A property owner testified in support, describing an Austin case in which a demolition permit led to historic designation and what he said was a costly forced rehabilitation. Opponents, including a preservation advocate and an East Austin resident, argued the current process is already rigorous, rare, and balanced, and that the bill would undermine cities’ ability to preserve historic places and community heritage. During closing on SB 2639, the chair raised a concern that Section 3B appeared to apply retroactively to pending cases, which he said could be unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution’s prohibition on retroactive laws. The committee did not resolve that issue during the hearing, and the bill was left pending. The committee then adjourned.