Transcript Highlights:

• This is a brief timeline of the litigation that we're in.
• We are involved in litigation against the federal government.
• And, as was noted in one of those earlier slides, we currently filed litigation, refiled new litigation
• pending litigation.
• And I have a question as it pertains to the litigation.

Summary: The committee received a briefing from AHCA Deputy Secretary Brian Meyer and Florida Healthy Kids CMO Ashley Carr on implementation of HB 121, which was enacted in 2023 to expand Florida’s KidCare/CHIP eligibility from 200% to 300% of the federal poverty level and replace the sharp premium “benefits cliff” with a tiered premium glide path. Sponsor Rep. Bartleman described the bill as a bipartisan effort to help working families keep children insured while moving toward economic self-sufficiency. The presenters explained that the program remains a joint federal-state structure, with Medicaid unchanged and the bill affecting only the CHIP-related portions of KidCare. AHCA said implementation has been delayed by federal CMS actions. The agency reported that CMS first rejected a state plan amendment approach, then required revisions to the premium tiers under a new maintenance-of-effort interpretation, and later issued a new interpretation of continuous 12-month eligibility that would prevent disenrollment for nonpayment of premiums. AHCA said it submitted an 1115 waiver, but negotiations over special terms and conditions reached an impasse, and the state has filed litigation challenging CMS’s interpretation. Members asked about the cost of litigation, the effect on future bills, the review process for CMS documents, disenrollment and reenrollment rules, and whether any additional legislative action is needed; AHCA said no further state action is needed at this time and that the key issue is the pending federal litigation. Several members and the sponsor emphasized the need for immediate implementation and asked about possible interim relief. AHCA said current coverage remains in place under the preexisting program, that there is a 30-day grace period for premium payment, and that reenrollment does not require a penalty or back payment, though coverage is not active during lapsed periods. The committee also heard public comment from Nicholas Hessing of the Children’s Services Council of Broward County and the Florida Alliance of Children’s Councils and Trusts, who supported HB 121 and said the expansion could make about 17,600 additional children eligible in Broward County alone. The meeting ended with Rep. Bartleman thanking staff and expressing hope that the new federal administration would allow the program to move forward, and the chair adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• What documents should be given to the litigants to help them as pro se litigants?
• What documents should be given to the litigants to help them as pro se litigants?
• What documents should be given to the litigants to help them as pro se litigants?
• What documents should be given to the litigants to help them as pro se litigants?
• Uh I I litigants.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Family Court Subcommittee of the Children and Family Law Committee convened under Chairman Mark Pearson to continue work begun by the prior special committee on the family division of circuit court. Pearson emphasized a collaborative, consensus-based approach with the judiciary and said the subcommittee would build on earlier “low-hanging fruit” reforms while tracking how prior changes are actually working. He also explained that the subcommittee would likely form smaller working groups, with informal meetings allowed so long as they stayed within open-meeting limits. The main policy focus was House Bill 652, which was retained by the committee, along with broader questions about what additional changes family court should make. Members divided the work into two broad areas: pre-trial and trial issues. Pre-trial topics included alternative dispute resolution, mediation training and supervision, counseling/therapy for litigants with issues such as PTSD, and improving materials for pro se litigants, including New Hampshire Bar forms and instructions. The committee also discussed whether to use input from prior testimony, former litigants, other states, and legislative researchers, and whether some of the work should be assigned to two-person subgroups to allow flexible research and outreach. For trial-related issues, members identified additional training for family court judges, whether judges should be dedicated solely to family court, and how to handle the overlap between civil and criminal matters, especially domestic violence and divorce cases. Representative Raymond raised concerns about courtroom recordings and whether judges’ behavior and record preservation were adequate; Aaron Kan of the court system responded that circuit court recording practices and staffing had not changed, that circuit court lacks the court monitors used in superior court, and that resource limits prevent similar staffing. Raymond also raised the cost of obtaining trial transcripts for pro se litigants; Kan explained that transcripts are produced by private vendors because the court system no longer employs court reporters, and that the fees reflect that outsourced service rather than a court-imposed markup. No votes were taken, and the meeting ended with plans to continue gathering information and assigning subtopics for further study.

Transcript Highlights:

• You had the social inflation or litigation challenges.
• We're seeing an uptick in litigation trends taking place around the entire system around that.
• Litigation is down.
• You've got to litigate these claims litigations where you're at.
• I'm going to litigation. Why don't you guys just pay the claims with small businesses?

Transcript Highlights:

• New Mexico and related litigation.
• New Mexico litigation, we think, is a...
• Our initial position in the litigation was an aggressive one.
• The court cases are dismissed; we're not pouring more money into litigation.
• This is litigation that has been going on for more than a decade.

Transcript Highlights:

• But what is the predatory litigation lending that we're talking about?
• That's exactly what these third-party litigation funders... S680.
• But what is the predatory litigation lending that we're talking about?
• That's exactly what these third-party litigation findings.
• Understanding, this is under litigation, but the Iowa...

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several financial services bills, with the main focus on cryptocurrency kiosk regulation, financial literacy, and earned wage access. Legislators and witnesses described widespread crypto-related scams targeting older adults, often involving impersonation, urgency, spoofed phone numbers, and rapid transfers through kiosks that are difficult to trace or recover. Supporters of the kiosk bills said Massachusetts needs licensing, registration, transaction limits, warning notices, receipts, refund protections, and other safeguards; some also urged a “pause” or hold on transactions to give victims time to reconsider and allow law enforcement to intervene. The Attorney General’s office, AARP, local law enforcement, and several prosecutors and sheriffs backed the consumer-protection approach, while Bitcoin Depot supported a narrower regulatory framework but opposed low fee caps and strict daily limits, arguing they would function like a ban and reduce legitimate use. Witnesses from Waltham police, Middlesex and Essex County law enforcement, and the AG’s office said crypto scams are growing quickly, losses are often unrecoverable once funds move, and current tools are limited. They described cases involving elderly victims losing thousands of dollars, and said warnings alone are not enough because scammers keep victims on the phone and guide them through the process. Some witnesses said a temporary hold or refund mechanism has worked in at least one case, while others emphasized that transaction limits and visible disclosures could reduce harm even if they do not stop fraud entirely. The AG’s office also said it would submit written opposition to separate earned wage advance legislation, while DailyPay testified in support of that bill, saying earned wage access helps workers bridge short-term gaps without debt or credit reporting. The committee also heard support for mandatory financial literacy education from Representative Jim Hawkins, who said high school students need instruction on credit, debt, and inflation before they enter adulthood. In addition, the committee took testimony on litigation financing bills from insurance industry representatives, who argued for disclosure and regulation of predatory litigation lending and warned about foreign interference and reduced plaintiff recoveries. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; members asked questions throughout, and the chair noted the need to move testimony along because of time constraints.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is still in litigation two years later, and it is not done. Would you?
• Do you anticipate more litigation if this were to pass? Absolutely.
• is filed, and it lasts for as long as the litigation is pending.
• They're not going to automatically get pulled into litigation after the fact.
• is pending, and that's at all levels of the litigation process.

Bills: HB5691, SB427, SB2623, SB2858

Keywords: municipal management district, bonds, assessments, property taxes, economic development, eminent domain, special district, SB 427, local government, political subdivision, state loan, state grant, financial reporting, annual financial statement, annual report, county report, municipal finance, water district, municipality, county auditor

Transcript Highlights:

• have on that existing litigation.
• or any existing litigation before the bill passes.
• I guess they would have it if the litigation was already pending.
• I'm trying to understand how that connects to my question about the pending litigation.
• But in litigation, presumably, it would be the buyer who hadn't completed it.

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met with a quorum present and took up a single bill, HB 167, dealing with former phosphate-mined land. Chair McClure explained that the bill revises a strict liability provision if the current property owner records the prior phosphate-mining use with the county or municipality and the Department of Health completes a survey. Members asked about whether the lands would be treated as hazardous or Brownfield properties, how the bill would affect disclosure and recorded notice, and whether it would apply to pending litigation. McClure said the bill is intended to create more public assessment data and that the language requires the conditions to be met at the time of litigation, though he was open to further clarifying language if needed. During debate, Ranking Member Gottlieb said he would support the bill because Florida is a buyer-beware state and the recording requirement plus the Department of Health study should provide purchasers with needed information. Representative Joseph also supported the bill, citing the transparency and recording provisions, while noting he still wanted clarification on pending litigation. In closing, McClure said the bill reflects a middle ground after prior discussions and noted that environmental assessments are typically part of transactions involving these properties. The committee then voted unanimously to report HB 167 favorably, with 21 ayes and no nays. The meeting adjourned after the bill passed and no further business remained.

Transcript Highlights:

• Isn't there litigation right now going on between these parties?
• Yes, there is litigation currently underway.
• Yes, we are currently in litigation. It is not very far along.
• Who's all involved in litigation?
• I do not litigate or practice as an attorney. If you...

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I've done my very best to treat litigants and their lawyers alike with respect and an open mind.
• Louis, with a focus on intellectual property litigation.
• That also goes to appearing in court. capitalized and represented litigants can.
• Nobody wants to be in litigation.
• Many litigants in family court appear without the benefit of an attorney.

Summary: The Senate Executive Committee met in hybrid format and first considered two gubernatorial judicial appointments. Morgan T. Zurn, nominated to the Delaware Supreme Court, described her background in public service, the Court of Chancery, DOJ, and federal clerkship, and answered extensive questions about judicial philosophy, precedent, statutory interpretation, access to justice, AI and deepfakes, corporate law stability, civility, social media, and public confidence in the courts. Christy N. Vitola, nominated to be Commissioner of Family Court, discussed her Delaware upbringing, legal career in family law and child support, and experience with pro se litigants and high-volume dockets; she was questioned about handling family court cases efficiently, the best interests of the child, and correcting calculation errors. No votes on the nominations were taken during the portion shown. The committee then moved to legislation. House Bill 443, concerning background checks for volunteers and mentors in the Department of Education’s mentoring program, was presented as a technical update to allow DOE to continue receiving wrap-back reports and to ensure mentors undergo state and federal criminal background checks. There was no public comment or committee debate on the bill. House Bill 431 with House Amendment 1, sponsored by Representative Bush and Senator Hoffner, would allow composting of yard waste, food residue, and other organic materials to divert waste from landfills, extend landfill life, reduce disposal costs, support farmers by returning nutrients to the soil, and reduce methane emissions; it also preserves county/local control over siting and inspection. Senator Townsend asked whether composting was currently allowed, and Senator Hoffner explained that the bill would authorize it under the stated controls. No public comment was offered on either bill. At the close of the meeting, the chair noted that the bills and nominee backers had been circulated for signatures. Senator Hocker moved to adjourn, Senator Townsend seconded, and the committee adjourned without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• So any ambiguity in the terms, we will then be litigating.
• So any ambiguity in the terms, we will then be litigating.
• say, it takes decades and decades of litigation to ensure the rights that we have today.
• One, we're dealing with some negative consequences from vexatious litigants.
• Litigants have all the rights that they do today.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several bills. AB 416 would allow emergency room physicians to initiate 5150 mental health holds, with supporters saying it would reduce emergency room bottlenecks and speed care for patients in crisis. County and behavioral health representatives opposed the bill, and some members raised broader concerns about the 5150 system and juvenile placements. The bill was ultimately approved on a do-pass as amended vote. AB 446, the Surveillance Pricing Act, drew extensive testimony. The author and supporters argued it would prohibit businesses from using personal data to charge different prices for the same product or service, describing the practice as discriminatory and exploitative. Business and industry groups opposed the bill, warning that its language was too broad, could affect discounts and loyalty programs, and would create litigation risk through a private right of action. After discussion about enforcement and possible amendments, the bill passed on a do-pass motion. AB 632 would give local governments a faster way to collect penalties for serious code violations, including unsafe housing, fire hazards, and illegal cannabis activity, by allowing certain fines to become money judgments and clarifying lien authority. It had support from county and city groups and no opposition was voiced in the hearing; the bill passed as amended. ACA 7, a constitutional amendment intended to clarify and limit misuse of Section 31A, also moved forward after brief support testimony. The committee then took up AB 649, which would extend protections for businesses that proactively obtain certified access specialist inspections and fix accessibility violations; the author, a small business owner, and others testified in support, while disability rights groups moved to neutral after amendments. Members discussed the balance between access enforcement and reducing predatory litigation, and the bill was still under consideration as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's already in the law, but what had to happen was we had to add the litigation including appeals
• We had litigation this summer when it was learned that the witnesses did not have the same party, but
• including appeals so we want litigation including appeals so we want to<00:08:06.400> ensure<
• litigation litigation Etc<00:10:28.800> section<00:10:29.320> 14<00:10:29.800> requires
• <00:10:44.440> this time of signings we had litigation this time of signings we had litigation

Keywords: Consideration of HB 684 02:30 Consideration of HB 699 19:10, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Elections, Constitutional Amendments and Intergovernmental Affairs met with a quorum and considered two election-related bills. The committee first took up House Bill 684, sponsored by Representative Jennifer Decker, and adopted a committee substitute. Decker described the bill as a “continuous improvement” measure developed with election officials, clerks, legislators, and citizens. She walked through provisions addressing precinct officer staffing in vote centers, notice to school districts when schools are used as voting centers, absentee ballot replacement when a ballot is not received, retention and disposal timelines for election-related video surveillance, permanent voting assistance certifications, write-in candidate deadlines and posting restrictions, candidate filing details, witness requirements, public posting of candidate information, felony voting language, and school district closure rules for voting locations. Members discussed the school-related provision, the handling of mail-in ballots, and a committee-substitute change removing credit cards and debit cards as acceptable voter ID. Supportive comments emphasized election integrity and the collaborative drafting process. The committee then voted to report HB 684 favorably. The committee next considered House Bill 699, sponsored by Representative DJ Johnson, which would add a pre-certification verification process for candidate filings. Johnson said the bill was intended to prevent ineligible candidates from appearing on the ballot by requiring election officials to verify that a candidate’s residence is in the correct jurisdiction and, in partisan races, that the candidate is registered with the party sought, with appeals going to circuit court. He argued the current system relies on costly legal challenges after filing errors occur. During discussion, Representative Hancock voted no, saying the bill would create an unnecessary administrative burden and that filing paperwork should remain a basic responsibility of candidates, while other members voted yes. The committee ultimately reported HB 699 favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• litigation after a map has passed.
• The map we passed in 2022, we had litigation on that.
• Prior maps, there was litigation, and there'll be litigation on this one. Thank you.
• The map we passed in 2022, we had litigation on that.
• Prior maps, there was litigation, and there'll be litigation on this one. Thank you.

Bills: SCR12, HB221, HB509, HCR58, HB75, HB1222, SB121, SB312, SB348, SB485, SCR9, SCR58, SB65, SB215, SB249, SB269, SB282, SB296, SB323, SB363, SB369, SB474, SB490, SB492, SB500, SB514, HCR54, HCR79, HCR87, HCR94, HCR104, HCR32, HB944, HB17, HB41, HB73, HB223, HB244, HB410, HB750, HB759, HB906, HB966, HB1006, HB1009, HB1086, HB1107, HB1112, HB1215, HB1242, SB208, SB217, SB283, SB387, SB389, SB401, SB408, SB469, HB74, HB119, HB368, HB414, HB552, HB732, HB776, HB848, HB870, HB953, HB956, HB1236, SB29, SB42, SB43, SB78, SB149, SB274, SB300, SB341, SB382, SB441, SB449, HB134, HB210, HB258, HB359, HB468, HB784, HB1117

Keywords: logging, recognition, John Keith, environment, safety, Mississippi River bridge, Trump Expressway, transportation, federal funding, Louisiana highways, injection wells, public hearing, geologic sequestration, environmental impact, public comment, Ascension Parish, state capitol, economic development, community partnership, celebration day

Transcript Highlights:

• ensuring transparency and litigation ensuring transparency and litigation while<00:25:23.600>
• at the expense of other litigation at the expense of other taxpayers.<00:32:32.880> Let<00:32
• It increases the cost of property tax litigation and it makes it harder for the government to defend
• It increases the cost of property tax litigation and it makes it harder for the government to defend
• And so I I I don't litigation purposes.

Bills: HF3676, HF2959, HF3233

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Transcript Highlights:

• But I can tell you that litigation experience, the decrease in litigation, we're still—there's still
• a substantial ...litigation experience, the decrease in litigation, there's still a substantial amount
• And how do you do it without having to go to litigation, or at least saving litigation?
• And how do you do it without having to go to litigation, or at least saving litigation and the lawsuit
• It's an expensive, time-consuming process to go to litigation.

Summary: The subcommittee held its first meeting on homeowners property insurance, with members from both parties introducing themselves and repeatedly noting that insurance affordability, roof condition, claims handling, and storm recovery are top concerns for their districts. Chair Yeager said the meeting was intended as an educational discussion rather than a legislative debate, and introduced a panel that included Insurance Commissioner Mike Yaworski, consumer Chad Carr, agent Mary Catherine Lawler, insurer executive Melissa Burt DeVries, and policyholder attorney Chip Merlin. The panel and members discussed major cost drivers in Florida homeowners insurance, including inflation, home age, roof age, mitigation features, claims history, litigation costs, reinsurance, and the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund. Commissioner Yaworski said underwriting has become more sophisticated and that litigation costs, reinsurance, and replacement-cost inflation all affect premiums; he also said litigation is down about 30% and average requested rate increases have fallen from about 22.1% in 2022 to 0.8% today. DeVries said age of home, replacement cost, roof age, and coverage choices can materially change premiums, and explained that reinsurance is a major expense passed through to consumers. Merlin emphasized transparency concerns, argued that insurers are increasingly individualizing risk, and said consumers often struggle with coverage limits, deductibles, and claim denials. Members asked about flood coverage, hurricane deductibles, managed repair programs, mitigation credits, new insurer capitalization, and whether savings from reforms are reaching consumers. Yaworski explained that flood is generally excluded from homeowners policies and covered separately, that hurricane deductibles are mandatory in Florida and usually around 5%, and that the office tracks savings from reforms through rate filings and insurer discussions. He said the state is updating mitigation discounts and monitoring new entrants closely for solvency and market conduct. Several members and panelists said recent reforms have helped reduce some abuses and litigation, but many consumers are still seeing higher premiums because replacement costs and reinsurance remain elevated. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• We talked with um shakedown litigation.
• That case is litigated, if they can afford to litigate that case to a verdict, and a district court judge
• That case is litigated, if they can afford to litigate that case to a verdict, and a district court judge
• That case is litigated, if they can afford to litigate that case to a verdict, and a district court judge
• It doesn't opened me up for litigation.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took Senate File 3210 off the table and then adopted an amendment from Representative Nadeau that added the word “reasonable” and a statutory reference clarifying who qualifies as a person with a disability. The bill, as amended, was then given third reading. The measure is described as relating to human rights and disability accommodations as protection from discrimination. Representative Hicks, the bill’s author, said the proposal is intended to send a clear message that discrimination against people with disabilities is unlawful and that entities must engage in a good-faith process to identify reasonable accommodations. Supporters, including Representatives Finke, Feist, and Luetkemeyer, argued the bill reinforces existing law, reflects the interactive process already used in practice, and helps protect access in employment, public accommodations, schools, and other settings. Hicks also responded to questions from Representative Joy by describing the process as a simple conversation to meet a person’s needs. Representative Niska opposed the bill, arguing that it is unclear whether it changes the meaning of other provisions in the Minnesota Human Rights Act beyond employment and that it could create ambiguity and more litigation for businesses, schools, and public entities. He said the legislature should be explicit if it intends to change those provisions and warned the bill could invite lawsuits rather than provide clarity. Representative Loegering-Nicolai responded that the bill would change the practice of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights and that referencing the interactive process in public policy would provide a lens for assessing whether accommodations were handled in good faith. No final vote on passage was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• In Medicaid it's about $300, and so there has been a host of litigation.
• And so to knock out one tiny piece of the litigation is not going to change the... ...piece of the litigation
• Circle back to your question, it's not going to reopen the litigation.
• Sarn exit agreement, which may put the state at risk for reopening litigation.
• Let me add on to that: we are going to place ourselves in more litigation if we do this bill.

Bills: HB2408, HB2434, HB2725, HB2728, HB2729, HB2730, HB2731, HB2732, HB2733, SB1192, SB1398, SB1399, SB1494, SB1557, SB1813, SB1821

Keywords: nursing board, regulatory actions, disciplinary actions, expungement, healthcare professionalism, controlled substances, prescription monitoring, opioid crisis, healthcare regulations, patient safety, prescription drugs, opioids, healthcare, pain management, utilization controls, AHCCCS, Department of Economic Security, social services, welfare programs, vocational rehabilitation

Summary: The committee took up several health and human services bills. SB 1192 would exempt good-faith basic first aid given without compensation from Arizona Medical Board licensure requirements, with added consent and law-enforcement notification rules for injured persons under 15; a Shamp amendment clarified that the bill does not limit existing liability protections, and the bill passed as amended. SB 1398 would require AHCCCS to redetermine eligibility for members over 21 every six months starting in 2027 and report eligibility data annually; Access testified neutral but raised concerns about costs and the lack of exemptions, while supporters framed it as a transparency and budgeting measure. The committee adopted a technical amendment and passed the bill as amended. SB 1399 would require prepaid capitated AHCCCS contractors to report annual spending on direct patient care versus administrative costs; it passed without amendment after testimony that the report would improve oversight of taxpayer dollars. The committee also considered SB 1494, a strike-everything amendment aimed at stopping patient brokering and steering, including prohibiting health care providers, institutions, and drug manufacturers from paying premiums or inducing plan changes tied to health-status factors. Blue Cross Blue Shield supported the concept, describing small-scale but harmful brokering and fraud concerns, while ARMA opposed the language as too broad and vague, warning it could chill ordinary provider-patient conversations and sweep in social workers and navigators. The committee adopted the striker and passed the bill as amended, though several members said they wanted to refine the language before floor action. SB 1813 would remove the Maricopa County cap on Arizona State Hospital civil beds tied to the Arnold v. Sarn settlement and require admission based on clinical need; the sponsor and supporters argued the cap is outdated and leaves beds unused while patients remain in crisis, while the Department of Health Services and others warned of rural access concerns, litigation risk, and the need for more resources. The committee adopted both amendments, including removal of a citizenship requirement, and passed the bill as amended after a lengthy debate about legality and possible court challenges. SB 1821, which would allow JLBC audit review of DCS case-management systems, authorize unannounced inspections of licensed group foster homes, prioritize kinship placements, and require one year of supervised training for new child safety workers, passed without amendment. SB 1557 would require signed informed consent before most medical interventions; supporters said it codifies standard practice, while the ACLU argued it was vague and could create burdens for ongoing care and politically sensitive treatments. The bill passed as introduced.

Transcript Highlights:

• Louis, with a focus on intellectual property litigation.
• I suspect that there will be litigation over proper authentication, under...
• Nobody wants to be in litigation.
• Many litigants in Family Court appear without... Right.
• Many litigants in Family Court appear without the benefit of an attorney.

Keywords: 1064, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, whether through with litigation.
• , attorneys presenting litigation, attorneys presenting litigation, yes,<01:37:27.920> they
• because there's counsel to litigate because there's counsel to litigate intellectual<01:38:57.360
• it again because he already litigate it again because he already litigated<01:39:24.080> it<01
• But we've given the litigation too.

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:

• Operators represented by experienced agents proceed to litigation.
• I litigate probably more of these cases than most of my peers.
• My clients do not have litigation budgets.
• An individual litigant. against the government is not a level playing field.
• and make the litigation expensive.

Bills: HB1952, HB3258, HB3524, HB3851, HB4478, HB4613, HB4703, HB4742, HB4744, HB4809, HB4864

Keywords: county appraisal district, board of directors, governance, taxing units, public representation, penalty, property report, taxation, timely filing, chief appraiser, appraisal district, ad valorem tax, property appraisal, tax protests, unequal appraisal, property rights, property tax, public employees, protest leave, appraisal review board

Transcript Highlights:

• Yet they are routinely pulled into litigation for conditions they didn't create and couldn't change.
• Yet they are routinely pulled into litigation for conditions they didn't create and they couldn't change
• People will say we're exposing MoDOT to more litigation. I totally, totally disagree.
• I just want to make you aware of this as a new potential for dragging in more litigation.
• I just want to make you aware of this as a new potential for dragging in more litigation.

Keywords: 959, house, all