Transcript Highlights:

• 00:23:03.360> Deanna testimony and support from Deanna testimony and support from Deanna Espenas
• Thank you for your<00:25:28.640> testimony. your testimony. your testimony.
• <00:32:32.799> House written testimony and support. House written testimony and support.
• We have testimony<00:41:25.098> [clears throat] testimony [clears throat] testimony [clears throat
• Wonderful to have testimony and support. >> Okay, testimony standing in support.

Bills: HB2264, HB2336, HB2298, HB1518

Keywords: protective orders, military, law enforcement, judicial coordination, victim safety, community safety, federal military installations, disaster response, emergency services, state funding, transportation department, public safety, Hawaii, education, high school diploma, veterans, wartime practices, armed services, HB1518, Hawaii SNAP

Summary: The committee opened by announcing that it would hear testimony but would not take decisions on the day’s bills, with action deferred to a later decision-making agenda. The first measure, HB 2264, would require notification to military security forces when a protective order is issued involving a military-affiliated person. Support came from the U.S. Defense State Liaison Office, the Hawaii National Guard, and DBEDT’s Military Affairs office, all emphasizing better coordination and faster notice to help protect victims and support command oversight. Family Court Judge Jesse Hall supported the intent but asked for deferral, explaining that a prior fax-and-email notification system had broken down and that the military had not re-engaged with the court. The Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence supported the bill but recommended narrowing it so it applies only when the respondent is actually marked as military-connected and delaying the effective date to January 1, 2027 to allow implementation. In questions, members discussed the current breakdown in communication, the number of military-marked TROs statewide, and whether the bill would be necessary if the old system were restored; the military witness said she would try to reestablish contact with the court. The committee then took up HB 2336, which would authorize the Department of Transportation to enter into agreements with the U.S. Department of Defense for services at federal military installations and charge an administrative fee. DOT and the Military Affairs office supported the measure, describing it as a way to speed projects, combine state and federal resources, and strengthen infrastructure that also supports disaster response and the economy. Members questioned why the bill was needed if similar arrangements had existed before, and whether Title 23 federal highway funds could be used; DOT responded that the bill would help expedite projects and supplement, not supplant, federal funding, while each project would still require review of the appropriate funding source. The committee also heard HB 2298, which would allow the Department of Education to award high school diplomas to qualified people whose schooling was interrupted by military service or wartime practices during World War II, the Korean War, or the Vietnam War. The U.S. Defense State Liaison Office, the Hawaii Office of Veterans Affairs, and DOE supported the bill, and DOE said implementation would have only a minimal printing cost. Finally, the committee heard HB 1518, which would require DHS, upon obtaining a federal waiver, to create a pre-release SNAP application process for inmates nearing release by January 1, 2028. DHS said it was already working on a pilot and stood on its testimony; the County of Hawaii, the Correctional System Oversight Commission, the ACLU of Hawaii, and the Hawaii Public Health Institute supported the measure, arguing it would improve reentry outcomes and would not cost the state additional money. No votes or final committee actions were taken on any of the bills during this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Chair: For invited testimony, the Chair calls... Invited testimony is now open.
• I see no one registered for invited testimony, so testimony is now closed.
• No more people are registered for invited testimony. Invited testimony is now closed.
• I see no one is registered for invited testimony. My testimony is now closed.
• The Chair now opens for public testimony. No one registered for public testimony.

Bills: SB614, SB872, SB1199, SB1212, SB1278, SB1573, SB1588, SB1602, SB1660, SB1704, SB1723, SB1833, SB1858, SB1946, SB2009, SB2146, SB2177, SB2373, SB2460, SB2785

Keywords: forensic science, capital writs, criminal justice, case review, Texas Forensic Science Commission, SB 872, burglary of a vehicle, vehicle burglary, theft of a firearm, stolen gun, firearm theft, Penal Code Section 30.04, third-degree felony, Class A misdemeanor, criminal penalty enhancement, gun theft, vehicle break-in, property crime, sentencing enhancement, Texas criminal law

Transcript Highlights:

• testimony?
• Give us your testimony.
• Thanks for your testimony.
• Give us your testimony.
• It is not a cap on testimony. It's not a limitation on testimony.

Bills: SB30, SB517, SB1313, SB1314, SB1316, SB1541, SB1698, SB1845, SB1860, SB2420, SB2429, SB 30

Keywords: gambling, criminal offenses, penalties, defense, electronic devices, tobacco advertising, youth protection, public health, criminal offense, retailer regulation, e-cigarettes, nicotine products, health, public safety, regulation, advertising restrictions, health and safety, elections, election audit, county elections

Transcript Highlights:

• testimony next we have testimony uh<00:08:25.039> written<00:08:25.360> testimony<00:08
• I refer you to the written testimony. Testimony in opposition from Margaret St.
• I refer you to the written testimony. Testimony in opposition from Margaret St.
• In total, we have 37 testimonies in support, 103 testimonies in opposition, and three testimonies with
• We appreciate your testimony. Final testimony in writing from Mr.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard opening remarks and ground rules from Chair David Tarnas, including a request for two-minute testimony limits, clear speaking, Zoom etiquette, and respectful conduct. The first measure taken up was HB 2062, relating to gun violence prevention, which would appropriate funds for enforcement of gun violence protective orders and for public awareness campaigns. Judiciary submitted written testimony recommending technical changes to clarify that it does not enforce laws and instead should be funded for personnel to process temporary restraining orders and gun violence protective orders; the Department of Law Enforcement supported the bill and said it is well positioned to conduct public education. Support also came from county and advocacy witnesses, including Moms Demand Action, Giffords Gun Owners for Safety, HGEA, and a retired police officer, while opposition testimony argued the measure raises due process and Fifth Amendment concerns and that education, not enforcement, should be the focus. The chair noted 37 testimonies in support, 103 in opposition, and three comments; no vote was taken in the portion provided. Testimony on HB 2062 emphasized both public safety and constitutional concerns. Supporters described the bill as a way to increase awareness of an existing legal tool, prevent suicides and shootings, and help law enforcement and the public understand gun violence protective orders. Opponents, including gun owners and firearms groups, argued that red flag laws can be abused, lack due process, and should not be expanded through state funding. A county neighborhood safety witness suggested an amendment to allow public, private, and nonprofit consultants to assist with training and implementation. Members asked a few questions, but the agencies with written testimony were not present, so the chair referred members to their submissions. The committee then moved to HB 2061, relating to firearms, which appropriates money for the state gun buyback program and requires at least two buyback events in each county. Written support was noted from the Department of Law Enforcement, Hawaii County Council, the County of Kauai Prosecuting Attorney, and the Hawaii State Association of Counties, with the latter emphasizing that buybacks are voluntary prevention tools that can reduce risk before crises escalate. Opposition came from the Mid-Pacific Pistol League, SDM Training Group/Bows and Bullets, and others; one witness argued buybacks are ineffective, costly, and can be vulnerable to misuse or black-market diversion, and suggested a year-round surrender option instead. The committee heard additional support from a retired police officer and from a gun violence survivor with Students Demand Action, but no final action or vote was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you'd like to stand on your testimony, your written testimony that you previously submitted, that
• If you'd like to stand on your testimony, your written testimony that you previously submitted, that
• you'd like to stand on your testimony you'd like to stand on your testimony that<00:08:22.000>
• please know that your written testimony please know that your written testimony will<00:08:39.919
• regarding that issue and our testimony regarding that issue and our testimony I'm<00:13:10.160><

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Testimony will be limited to invited testimony and public testimony.
• Public testimony will be limited to invited testimony and public testimony.
• So, having no more invited testimony, public testimony is closed.
• So the chair... hearing no more invited testimony, invited testimony is now closed.
• So, hearing no more invited testimony, invited testimony is now closed.

Bills: SB693, SB781, SB836, SB860, SB906, SB993, SB1101, SB1321, SB1370, SB1537, SB1563, SB1610, SB1637

Keywords: notary public, notaries, acknowledgment, jurat, personal appearance, remote notarization, online notarization, e-notary, electronic notarization, fraud prevention, identity verification, real estate fraud, property transfer, state jail felony, Class A misdemeanor, secretary of state, continuing education, record retention, notarial act, Texas Government Code

Summary: The committee heard a series of criminal justice bills focused on victim protections, law enforcement tools, notary/deed fraud, sexually violent predators, veterans in jail, tribal policing authority, and peace officer records. Several bills were laid out, heard, and left pending because the committee lacked a quorum for final action on those items. Testimony was generally supportive on bills addressing interpreter appointments, fuel theft investigations, deed fraud, survivor privacy, veteran jailer training, tribal peace officer authority, and officer-record confidentiality, though some bills drew concerns about due process, scope, or drafting. Senate Bill 1537 would clean up criminal procedure language on appointing interpreters and align it with Government Code standards requiring licensed or certified interpreters; it received no public opposition and was left pending. Senate Bill 993 would let Comptroller Criminal Investigative Division officers directly seek warrants for mobile tracking devices in fuel-theft and tax-fraud investigations; it also drew support and was left pending. Senate Bill 693, as substituted, would create a criminal offense for notarizing documents without the signer personally appearing, with a higher penalty when real property is involved, and would add notary continuing education; a Dallas County prosecutor testified that notary fraud is a major driver of deed theft, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 1610, as substituted, would address safety, registration, and criminal penalties at the Texas Civil Commitment Office for sexually violent predators, including assaults on staff and sex-offender registration issues; agency witnesses described increased assaults and operational problems, while a public witness urged waiting for Sunset review and raised due-process concerns. Senate Bill 836 would add privacy protections for sexual assault survivors by limiting livestreaming of trials, expanding pseudonym use, and protecting forensic exam and invasive-recording evidence; survivors and advocates strongly supported it, and defense lawyers said they had no opposition to the substitute. Senate Bill 1563 would require county jailer training on interacting with veterans, with testimony from the Texas Veterans Commission and veterans’ advocates emphasizing suicide risk, PTSD, and the need for better identification and support in jails; the bill was left pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 906, which would authorize the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo tribal police to be commissioned as Texas peace officers like two other federally recognized tribes in Texas; tribal leaders said the change would improve response times and coordination, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 781, as substituted, would standardize confidentiality rules for peace officer personnel and departmental files statewide, mirroring Chapter 143 civil-service practices; law enforcement witnesses supported it as a way to protect personal information and create uniform records practices, but several senators raised concerns that the bill could blur existing disclosure rules or bury misconduct complaints, and public testimony included an opposition witness describing a police shooting involving her brother.

Transcript Highlights:

• Education uh we have written testimony Education uh we have written testimony with<00:05:37.680>
• Services stand on our written testimony Services stand on our written testimony providing<00:18:
• We stand on our testimony providing comments on this testimony. Thank you so much.
• providing testimony.
• He stands on the written testimony providing testimony. Thank you so much.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee opened its first hearing of 2025 and announced that all measures heard that day would be deferred to the next committee hearing for decision-making on Thursday, January 30. The agenda centered largely on procurement and government-operations bills, with testimony generally split between state agencies and local governments. On procurement measures, SB 254 and SB 383 would raise small-purchase thresholds; the State Procurement Office opposed both, while county officials, the City and County of Honolulu, the state librarian, and others supported them. SB 382, which would bar disclosure of a competing offeror’s proposal or evaluation score, and SB 462, which would require performance incentive contracts to specify pricing bases, goals, and formulas, drew mostly written comments and some support from agencies such as the Department of Transportation and Department of Education. SB 615, which would treat certain large change orders as new contracts, received opposition from the Comptroller and engineering interests. The committee also heard several bills on vacancies, appointments, and legislative oversight. SB 5 on state legislative vacancies had one supporting testifier, while SB 300 on deadlines for filling certain Senate vacancies drew opposition from several individuals and support from one late testifier. SB 1081, which would create a legislative budget office to provide fiscal analysis and reports on bills, received broad support from advocacy groups, civic organizations, and individuals. SB 711, requiring Senate advice and consent for certain executive-branch appointments, drew written opposition from the Governor’s Office and support from one individual. SB 375, establishing a select commission on government restructuring, had one written supporter. SB 418, which would require the Attorney General’s office to review a portion of administrative rules each year, prompted extended discussion about outdated rules, the difficulty of repealing or amending rules, and whether the bill should be refined; the AG’s office indicated the process is burdensome and could be streamlined. The committee then took up transparency and access measures. SB 55, requiring agency rules to be posted online in a digitally accessible format, received support from several advocacy and civic groups and written comment from the Lieutenant Governor’s Office. SB 870 would direct the comptroller to identify state office buildings that could provide equitable telecom access for remote participation in hearings, especially for residents with disabilities; the Comptroller supported the concept, and members discussed using libraries, DAGS facilities, county facilities, and other public buildings, with concerns raised about staffing, bandwidth, and competing public use. SB 270, a sunshine-law measure allowing board members to attend informational meetings and presentations, drew opposition from the Public First Law Center, which argued it would create a broad loophole and should be narrowed to existing county-council provisions. SB 45, concerning neighborhood board meetings and third-party presentations, prompted discussion about whether it actually addressed neighborhood boards’ Sunshine Law concerns; the committee was told it was not the right vehicle for that issue. SB 406, which would cap copying fees for government records at 5 cents per page with exceptions, drew support from media and transparency groups but opposition from DAGS, which said its actual per-page cost is much higher; members discussed possible electronic-copy alternatives and asked for more cost information before the next hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• You have a written testimony in support, and this testimony is the same testimony for the next two bills
• is the same testimony for this testimony is the same testimony for the<00:29:51.960> next<00:
• <00:52:38.359> in testimony we had other testimony in testimony we had other testimony in
• testimony thank you for your testimony testimony thank you for your testimony next<02:32:13.960>
• > and<02:33:31.200> Echo testimony our written testimony and Echo testimony our written testimony

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• No person may read the testimony of another individual, but the committee will accept written testimony
• Gallo, for that powerful testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Questions from the committee? Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Al-Shabazz. Any questions? Thank you for your testimony, Mr.
• Willis, for your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on a wide range of criminal justice, victim services, and records-sealing bills. Early testimony focused on H.1811, the Clean Slate automated record-sealing bill, with supporters arguing that automatic sealing after existing waiting periods would remove barriers to jobs, housing, and education without changing eligibility rules. Advocates from legal aid, business, and housing organizations said the current petition-based system is underused, burdensome, and costly, while opponents of expanding surveillance-related laws urged the committee to preserve privacy protections. The committee also heard testimony on H.1693, which would immediately seal records in cases ending without conviction and clarify the presumption of innocence, with speakers describing how dismissed cases still create lasting collateral consequences and prevent people from moving forward. No votes were taken during the hearing. Several bills centered on victim safety and domestic violence. Senator Michael Moore testified for S.1201, which would keep child-protective orders in effect even if the parent or guardian who filed them dies, and for S.1204, which would update the wiretap statute. Multiple survivors and advocates supported S.1215 and S.1222, arguing for a narrow wiretap defense for recordings made to document threats or abuse and for making GPS tampering a separate felony offense. Testifiers described situations in which GPS devices were cut off or disabled and said current law leaves victims at risk and gives abusers too much leeway. The committee also heard emotional testimony on H.1685/S.1238, a bill prompted by the suicide of Stavri Yanka in custody, with the sponsor, his mother, and the sheriff describing the need for better information-sharing so suicide-risk information follows a person into custody. Law enforcement and prosecutors supported several due-process and dangerousness-related bills. MassCOP, the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association, and the State Police Association backed H.1828/S.1039/S.1235, which would require de novo Superior Court review for POST Commission suspensions over two weeks or decertifications, arguing officers need a meaningful appeal beyond administrative review. The committee also heard support for H.1691, expanding the dangerousness statute to additional offenses; Bristol County District Attorney Quinn said the changes would let prosecutors seek detention in serious cases such as child rape and manslaughter when facts warrant it. In contrast, the Committee for Public Counsel Services opposed expanding dangerousness detention, warning that pretrial detention causes serious harms and disproportionately affects Black and Hispanic defendants. The hearing also included testimony on H.1654/S.1063 to enhance victims’ rights and H.1525, which would rename and expand community corrections into community justice programs, with supporters emphasizing reentry, reduced stigma, and broader service access.

Transcript Highlights:

• "Thank you for your testimony. Panel, thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your testimony. Brandon Tiorina.
• I'd like to say I respect all the testimonies, the testimonies, the The testimonies that said the cannabis
• Appreciate your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you so much for listening to my testimony. Ms.

Bills: SB 3, HB28, SB3

Keywords: flash flood, flood warning, outdoor warning siren, emergency alert, disaster preparedness, flood mitigation, Hill Country floods, Texas Water Development Board, municipalities, counties, local government mandate, public safety, grant program, backup power, weather siren, emergency management, flood-prone area, warning system, hemp regulation, consumable products

Transcript Highlights:

• Testimony on House Bill 2105.
• Further testimony regarding these bills. Further testimony regarding these bills.
• Seeing none, thank you for your testimony. Further testimony.
• Seeing none, thank you for your testimony. Further testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If you have written testimony and also wish to speak, please bring your written testimony forward when
• If not, the chair now opens up for invited testimony. Is there any invited testimony?
• If not, invited testimony is closed. The chair now opens public testimony.
• The chair opened public testimony.
• We'll move to public testimony. I only have one individual registered for public testimony.

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:

• Thanks for your testimony.
• Thanks for your testimony. Welcome. Introduce yourself and give us your testimony.
• Thanks for your testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Please state your name and give us your testimony.
• Thanks for your testimony.

Bills: HB186, HB201, HB229, HB796, HB1506, HB2702, HB2885, HB3225, HB3909, HB4285, HB5138

Keywords: social media, children, account verification, data privacy, parental control, financial crime, card fraud, motor fuel theft, law enforcement, criminal activity, skimmers, prevention, training, biological sex, government information, definitions, sex-based distinctions, public health, federal directives, state authority

Transcript Highlights:

• disconnected while presenting testimony disconnected while presenting testimony you<00:08:49.120
• <00:14:11.079> in you chair the ho Farm was testimony in you chair the ho Farm was testimony
• Did you submit written testimony?
• And we have three, two individual testimonies in support and one individual testimony in opposition.
• your testimony and answers.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We stand on our testimony and support.
• DEH was named in your testimony.
• DEH was named in your testimony.
• sure so highlighted in your uh testimony sure so highlighted in your uh testimony you<00:09:44.040
• support okay we do have late testimony support okay we do have late testimony from<00:15:02.600>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Labor and Technology heard testimony on several measures. Senate Bill 327, relating to internships, drew broad support from the Department of Education, Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, University of Hawaiʻi, DBEDT, P20, HFIA, Hawaiʻi Electric, the Hawaii Primary Care Association, and the Chamber of Commerce, with suggested amendments to clarify the internship purpose, limit some responsibilities to the state executive branch, and address staffing and reporting details. The committee later recommended passing SB 327 with amendments, including changes to the internship language, private-sector references, work-hour limits, reporting requirements, and a deferred effective date for further discussion. Senate Bill 716, relating to the Hawaii Employment Security Law, received support from the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations as a step toward modernizing unemployment insurance, and the committee recommended passage with housekeeping and technical amendments. Senate Bill 717, relating to collective bargaining, would allow certain exempt employees to grieve suspensions or discharges. The City and County of Honolulu and the Department of Human Resources Development said the issue should remain a collective bargaining matter, while HGEA and United Public Workers supported the bill. DHRD opposed changing the statute and pointed to existing internal complaint procedures. The committee nevertheless recommended passing SB 717 with amendments and deferred the date for further discussion. Senate Bill 742, relating to data sharing, would create a data sharing and governance working group within the Office of Enterprise Technology Services and include appropriations. OETS, the Executive Office on Early Learning, the University of Hawaiʻi, DOE, Hawaiʻi Kids Can, Hawaiʻi P-20, and others supported the measure, with OETS estimating a total cost of about $2.64 million, including software, consulting, and six FTE. The committee recommended passage with amendments and a deferred effective date, and noted the budget request in the committee report. The final measure, Senate Bill 855, relating to the Hawaii Retirement Savings Act, would shift the program from opt-in to opt-out and appropriate startup funds; former Senator Brian Taniguchi and AARP supported it, while Retail Merchants of Hawaiʻi and the Tax Foundation of Hawaiʻi opposed it over costs and burdens on small businesses and concerns about adding mandates before the program is implemented. The committee recessed briefly on a proposed AARP amendment, then returned and indicated support for the opt-out language before taking the bill up for decision-making.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those with testimony on multiple pieces of legislation should provide testimony for all bills at once
• So now we'll start the testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony.
• We appreciate your testimony. So now we'll move on to the testimony from the public.
• And thank you for your testimony.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Agriculture and Fisheries held a public hearing on 19 legislative proposals, with testimony limited to three minutes per speaker and seven minutes per panel. The hearing opened with testimony on bills promoting urban agriculture and vacant-lot conversion, including H.121/S.61, which Green Roots staff and community members supported as a way to turn vacant lots in environmental justice communities into urban farms and gardens that improve food access, health, community cohesion, and climate resilience. Rep. James Arena-DeRosa also spoke in support of H.109/S.56, the PFAS bill, describing it as a measure to protect soil and farms from contamination and to create relief for affected farmers. A major portion of the hearing focused on H.109/S.56, which would ban land application of sewage sludge/biosolids, provide liability protection and relief funds for farmers, and address PFAS contamination in soil, water, crops, and animals. Testimony came from environmental groups, farm organizations, and individual farmers, including the Mass Food System Collaborative, Conservation Law Foundation, Clean Water Action, CEMAP, NOFA, Sierra Club, and several farmers who described contamination in Maine and Massachusetts and urged the committee to act. Witnesses emphasized that PFAS poses serious health risks, that farmers should not bear responsibility for legacy contamination, and that the bill should be paired with funding for testing, remediation, and assistance. Committee members asked questions about farm liability, the scope of the bill, contamination in different ownership situations, and the costs and timelines of remediation, with Senator Comerford and others clarifying that the bill is intended to protect farms and farmers rather than non-agricultural landholders. The committee also heard strong support for H.416, a farm-to-institution pilot program, from Rep. Lee Davis, Berkshire Agricultural Ventures, and Berkshire Bounty. They said the pilot would connect Massachusetts farms to schools, hospitals, correctional facilities, and other institutions, creating new markets, strengthening local supply chains, and supporting food-is-medicine efforts. Members discussed whether the model could be statewide and referenced existing programs such as Island Grown Initiative and local hospital and insurance partnerships. Another agricultural bill, H.1058, was supported by Rep. Mark Sylvia and the Cape Cod Cranberry Growers’ Association as a way to allow unused cranberry water rights to be transferred within the same watershed for municipal mitigation while helping growers retire or consolidate bogs. The hearing also included testimony on the broader farm omnibus bill H.112/S.55 and related measures, with the Massachusetts Farm Bureau and others praising the committee’s work on agricultural resilience, food security, agritourism, workforce development, and farmland access, while suggesting additional transportation-related fixes for farmers. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• a two-minute time limit for testimony.
• And if you're standing on your testimony, please just, you know, stand your testimony.
• I didn't submit written testimony.
• We stand on our written testimony.
• um testimony and the Judiciary testimony um testimony and the Judiciary testimony um<02:42:38.479

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Housing held a public hearing on January 31 and heard testimony on a series of housing and building-code bills. The first major item, HB 1 relating to building codes, drew sharply divided testimony. Supporters, including BIA Hawaii, Grassroot Institute, Dr. Horton, and several builders and trade groups, argued the current code-adoption process is slow, fragmented, and costly, and that reform would help housing production. Opponents, including Sierra Club Hawaii, AIA Hawaii, ICC, and labor representative Kiko Bosi, said the bill would weaken public safety, reduce statewide consistency, and could leave tenants and first responders at greater risk. No vote was taken during the hearing, and members asked questions about the effect of a governor’s emergency proclamation suspending the Building Code Council and about county authority over code amendments. The committee then heard HB 745 and HB 1321, both also relating to building codes. Grassroot Institute supported both measures, saying the system is broken and needs streamlining, while BIA Hawaii and others emphasized the cost burden of repeated code updates. Opponents, especially Bosi and ICC, argued that the bills would undermine the State Building Code Council’s role, create confusion, and prioritize cost over safety; Bosi also said labor should be included in any code discussions. Members questioned whether counties can remove state code provisions and whether the state code already supersedes county codes, and one member noted the need for clarity and consistent enforcement rather than a wholesale overhaul. Later, the committee heard HB 284 on housing, HB 761 on county permitting and inspection, and HB 738 on historic preservation. HB 284 drew support from several housing and real estate groups, while DLNR opposed it. On HB 761, HHFDC supported the bill, DLNR warned that the proposed changes could jeopardize Hawaii’s participation in the National Flood Insurance Program, DAGS said it would likely need to duplicate county permitting staff, and the Department of Planning and Permitting opposed it; Grassroot Institute and NAIOP supported it. For HB 738, HHFDC, DLNR, Grassroot Institute, Hawaii YIMBY, NAIOP, and others supported the measure, with Grassroot and NAIOP suggesting clarifications so expedited review would also cover mixed-use projects and better define the scope of work. The transcript does not show any final votes or committee action on these bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your testimony.
• Thank you very much for your testimony. Thanks panel for your testimony.
• Thank you for that testimony. I'm sorry? I said thank you for your testimony.
• Ma'am, we cannot take testimony from somebody else. It has to be your own. testimony.
• Thank you for your testimony. Thank you so much for listening to my testimony.

Bills: HB 28, SB 3

Keywords: hemp regulation, consumable products, cannabinoids, state health, youth protection, licensing fees, criminal offenses, HB28, public testimony, committee decorum, bill substitute, legislative process

Summary: The meeting featured significant discussions regarding HB28, where the chair outlined the plans to bring forward a substitute for the bill. The chair emphasized the importance of maintaining order and decorum during the proceedings. Members engaged in deliberations, and a number of public witnesses were invited to testify, thereby enriching the discussion around the bill. This interaction provided valuable insights into public sentiment regarding the issues at hand.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, UPW submitted testimony for us. Okay. Testimony support, thank you. Yasmin Chaney.
• testimony is different from your written testimony.
• from those offering testimony. from those offering testimony.
• for your testimony. for your testimony.
• after Hawaii in their testimony. after Hawaii in their testimony.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2455, HD2, relating to employment practices. Testimony was limited, with support from the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women and UPW; the committee noted nine support, zero opposition, and zero comments. No vote was taken on this bill during the portion provided. The committee then took up House Bill 2165, HD2, relating to the Hawaii Employment Security Law. DLIR supported the measure but requested an amendment moving language in Section 2 from subsection A to subsection C to preserve the legal structure. Members questioned DLIR about a January 8 U.S. Department of Labor letter and whether the bill would keep Hawaii in conformity with federal unemployment insurance requirements. DLIR said the federal guidance requires the state to remove the carve-out for labor-dispute claimants, though unions with hiring halls and members in good standing could still be exempt from work-search requirements under an authorized list. UNITE HERE Local 5 opposed the bill and said the current law already gives the department discretion to exempt striking workers. The committee recessed the bill before any final action was taken in the portion shown. In the joint hearing with Commerce and Consumer Protection, the committees heard House Bill 1509, HD2, relating to workers’ compensation. DLIR supported the bill, DHER offered comments and requested an amendment, UPW supported it, and one Zoom testifier described personal experience with delayed care and urged faster decisions. After testimony, the committees voted to pass the bill with amendments. The adopted amendments restored the 7-day treatment-plan deadline from 10 days, changed the effective date to January 1, 2077, and struck the proposed $500 fine for employers who fail to respond within 10 days. Back in the Labor and Technology agenda, the committee heard House Bill 1515, HD2, also relating to workers’ compensation, with testimony noting seven in support, one in opposition, and one comment, but no action was taken in the excerpt. The committee also heard House Bill 1514, HD2, relating to workers’ compensation vocational rehabilitation plans. A Zoom testifier opposed the bill, arguing the 120-day timeline was unrealistic for complex cases. DLIR said the bill would give the director discretion to extend the vocational rehabilitation plan timeline beyond 120 days with no cap on extensions, and the committee noted five support, four opposition, and zero comments. Finally, the committee began House Bill 2458, HD3, relating to surveillance pricing. OCP said it stood on written testimony, while supporters argued the bill would prevent corporations from using personal data to set prices, especially for groceries. Retail and grocery interests opposed the measure, saying it was too broad and could restrict loyalty programs, promotions, and discounts; one witness asked that a loyalty-program exemption be restored.

Transcript Highlights:

• Testimony will be limited to invited testimony and public testimony.
• So, having no more invited testimony, testimony is closed.
• Invited testimony is closed. So we now proceed to public testimony.
• So the chair... hearing no more invited testimony. Invited testimony is now closed.
• So hearing no more invited testimony, invited testimony is now closed.

Bills: SB693, SB781, SB836, SB860, SB906, SB993, SB1101, SB1321, SB1370, SB1537, SB1563, SB1610, SB1637

Keywords: notary public, notaries, acknowledgment, jurat, personal appearance, remote notarization, online notarization, e-notary, electronic notarization, fraud prevention, identity verification, real estate fraud, property transfer, state jail felony, Class A misdemeanor, secretary of state, continuing education, record retention, notarial act, Texas Government Code

Summary: The Senate Committee on Criminal Justice heard a series of bills focused on criminal procedure, public safety, victim protections, and law enforcement administration. SB 1537 would require criminal-proceeding interpreters to meet the same appointment standards used in the Government Code, and SB 993 would let the Comptroller’s Criminal Investigative Division seek mobile-tracking warrants directly in motor fuel theft and related tax-fraud investigations. SB 693, as substituted, would create a criminal offense for notaries who notarize documents without the signer personally appearing, with a higher penalty when real property is involved, and would add continuing education for notaries. SB 1610 would tighten rules for civilly committed sexually violent predators at the Texas Civil Commitment Office, including penalties for new crimes and assaults on staff, sex-offender registration requirements, and removal of certain provisions from the filed version; the substitute reduced some of the harsher penalties and preserved parole/community-supervision eligibility. SB 836 would expand privacy protections for sexual assault survivors by limiting livestreaming of certain trials, allowing pseudonyms earlier in the process, and protecting forensic exam evidence and invasive recordings under protective orders. SB 1563 would require county jailers to receive training on interacting with veterans, with testimony emphasizing suicide risk, PTSD, and the need for better identification and support in jails. SB 906 would give the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo authority similar to other Texas tribes to commission peace officers under state law to enforce Texas laws on tribal land. SB 781 would standardize confidentiality rules for peace officers’ personal information and create a confidential departmental file system modeled on Chapter 143 civil-service practices, though members raised concerns about whether the bill could affect disciplinary records and existing disclosure rules. Testimony was largely supportive for the bills, especially from prosecutors, law enforcement representatives, victim advocates, and agency officials. Supporters of SB 693 described widespread deed fraud tied to improper notarizations; supporters of SB 836 stressed survivor privacy and the harms of livestreamed sexual-assault proceedings; supporters of SB 1563 said jailer training could help prevent veteran suicides and improve treatment; and supporters of SB 906 said state commissioning would improve public safety and coordination on tribal lands. SB 781 drew support from police and TCOLE witnesses who said the bill would extend confidentiality protections already used in civil-service departments, while some members questioned whether the bill duplicated existing law or could be read to shield misconduct information. Public testimony included opposition to SB 1610 from a civil-rights advocate who urged waiting for Sunset review, and opposition to SB 781 from a family member of a person killed by police, who objected to expanding confidentiality for officers. Several bills were left pending after testimony because the committee lacked a quorum or chose to hold them for later action.