Transcript Highlights:

• This law was originally passed to streamline sales and use tax agreement in 2007, and I'm just going
• Senator Dibble, I understand that, and I think this bill is written to address that circumstance and
• I think this bill is written to capture those circumstances where clearly the taxpayer was acting in
• to address that circumstance is written to address that circumstance and<00:30:38.440><c> that</c><00
• uh to capture those written uh to capture those circumstances<00:30:43.720><c> where</c><00:30:44.720

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:23:14.640><c> We</c><00:23:14.960><c> cannot</c> the bill is currently written.
• We cannot the bill is currently written.
• This excludes them as it is written. >> Okay. Does that help? Uh, Mr.
• This exclude them as it is written. written. written.
• </c> I can do then when I provide the written I can do then when I provide the written report<01:12:02.320

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The working group convened with all members present, approved the minutes from its October 16, 2025 meeting and its October 28, 2025 Halawa Correctional Facility site visit by unanimous consent, and received no public testimony on the agenda or minutes. The chair then reviewed the statutory timeline under Act 292/SB 104, noting the group continues until January 8, 2027, and discussed required reporting dates and the need to develop a work plan for the remaining meetings. The chair also said the October 16 DCR presentation would be treated as satisfying the group’s interim-report purpose, though the legal reporting obligations to the Legislature and oversight commission still needed to be sorted out. The main discussion focused on DCR’s proposed amendments to Act 292 and the department’s interim report. Director Johnson said the department’s October 16 presentation included recommended statutory amendments because the law, as written, could not be fully complied with; the proposals were described as section-by-section changes intended to address implementation problems. Members discussed several specific issues, including transfer language for higher levels of care, the 2010 MOA with the Department of Health, and replacing “physician” with “clinician” to reflect staffing realities. DCR explained that the change would allow licensed clinicians, including APRNs and doctors of osteopathy, to make decisions when physicians are not on duty, and that the MOA is being updated so transfers can occur from any DCR facility to the state hospital. An OHA staff member gave a detailed critique of the proposed amendments, saying they would weaken Act 292’s intent by reducing procedural protections, expanding exceptions, and relying on aspirational language such as “strive” and “if practicable.” OHA also raised concerns about the lack of baseline data on restrictive housing use and said the department’s report showed serious operational problems, including overcrowded and outdated facilities, limited space for private medical or mental health exams, and the use of suicide/safety cells for people who may not need mental health treatment. DCR responded that it had requested 35 new medical positions in the budget, supported by the governor, and said those positions are needed to meet basic care obligations for people in custody. The group did not take a vote on the proposed amendments. Instead, members agreed to continue the discussion, with the chair saying the reports, settlement tracker, 2010 MOA, and comparison guidelines would be distributed and used as the basis for future work. In the final discussion on work-plan priorities, members identified staffing shortages, physical plant limitations, and the need to examine humane alternatives and implementation challenges as key topics for upcoming meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• we are still working with a couple of stakeholders throughout the state and are working toward an agreement
• And then you have a situation where a homeowner makes an agreement on what the ultimate payout is for
• One will be the actual agreement itself.
• One will be the actual agreement itself.
• Without the express written consent of the owner of the vehicle.

Committee: House Insurance

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to be performed by a prime contractor and its subcontractors, and to include community workforce agreements
• or project labor agreements, prevailing wage, and apprenticeship utilization requirements.
• today to testify on behalf of those members and speak strongly in support of Senate Bill 6171 as written
• today to testify on behalf of those members and speak strongly in support of Senate Bill 6171 as written
• The main argument for needing NDAs is to protect trade secrets, but they're often written so broadly

Summary: The committee first met in executive session on Senate Bill 5941, which would exempt certain school districts from a Washington State Energy Code requirement for onsite renewable energy systems on large new commercial buildings or additions. The committee adopted Senator Short’s amendment narrowing the eligible school district definition from 1,000 or fewer students to 500 or fewer students, then approved the bill as amended and sent it to the Rules Committee with a do pass recommendation. The committee then held a public hearing on Senate Bill 6171, a proposed substitute addressing emerging large energy use facilities, primarily data centers. Staff explained that the bill would require utilities serving such facilities to adopt tariffs or policies to protect other ratepayers, require long-term contracts and full cost recovery, allow curtailment during emergencies, add reporting and sustainability requirements, create a fee to fund energy assistance, weatherization, and higher education programs, and impose new clean energy and labor-related requirements. The prime sponsor said the bill is intended to protect affordability, reliability, transparency, and the public interest as data center demand grows. Testimony was mixed. Supporters, including community action groups, environmental organizations, some utilities, Ecology, and student representatives, argued the bill would prevent cost shifting, improve transparency, support low-income energy assistance, and help manage grid and climate impacts. Opponents, including data center representatives, public utility district and business groups, and some local government and port officials, said the bill was too prescriptive, could raise costs, threaten competitiveness, duplicate existing utility practices, and interfere with existing CCA/CETA provisions and local flexibility. No vote was taken on SB 6171 during the hearing, and the meeting adjourned after public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• NOT IN AGREEMENT BUT IN COLLABORATION WITH THE BOARD OF MEDICINE.
• THESE AGREEMENTS ARE NOT NEW.
• PHYSICIANS AND PHARMACISTS HAVE BEEN ENTERING INTO COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE AGREEMENTS OR CHRONIC HEALTH
• THESE AGREEMENTS INCREASE THE EFFICIENCIES OF TEAM-BASED CARE WITH THE PHYSICIANS ULTIMATE DISCRETION
• PATIENT NUMBER ONE, LET ME CLARIFY I AM NOT PART OF A COLLABORATIVE PHARMACY AGREEMENT.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But just to clarify, we also very much welcome written testimony.
• And please do submit what you have left in written testimony. Thank you, someone.
• I'll submit additional details via written testimony. Thank you.
• No, but we certainly welcome written testimony.
• Now you're just... ...written testimony would be interested to read that.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities held a hybrid hearing on a series of child welfare bills focused on DCF, foster care, mandated reporting, educational records, and family support. Chair Kennedy and Chair Livingstone opened with accessibility and testimony rules, then heard testimony on bills including S.127 on expanding mandated reporters, S.107/H.235 on a Foster Children’s Bill of Rights, S.106/H.228 on transferring foster care review from DCF to the Office of the Child Advocate, H.258/S.125 on an electronic backpack for foster children’s educational records, H.205 on kinship foster care background checks, H.246/H.266 on minimizing trauma in care and protection cases, and S.159 on support for families after sudden unexpected infant death. Supporters of the mandated reporter bill, led by Sen. Feeney and Foxborough advocates, described a local model that trains all adults who work with children and argued the state should scale that approach statewide to improve recognition and reporting of abuse. Testimony on the foster care bills emphasized the need for clearer rights, better notice to children and attorneys, stronger remedies, and independent oversight. Advocates, youth with lived experience, and legal organizations described placement instability, delayed notifications, abuse in care, poor educational continuity, and the need for rights around safety, family contact, culture, language, and access to records. Several witnesses urged that the Foster Children’s Bill of Rights include enforceable court remedies, not just reporting requirements. On the oversight bill, supporters argued DCF should not review its own foster care system and pointed to poor outcomes, high placement instability, and recent investigative reporting as evidence for moving review responsibilities to the Office of the Child Advocate. On the electronic backpack bill, testimony focused on the need for real-time data sharing and a centralized system so schools can receive foster students’ records quickly and support continuity. On the trauma-minimization bill, Rep. Miskin framed the proposal as a set of practical changes to reduce harm during removals and court involvement. On the SUID bill, Sen. Lovely said families should be given information about available grief and support resources after an infant death. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The way the bill is currently written, as I read it, would require two agreements and favor the less
• That agreement is with the person who is required to stop the use.
• And then Subsection F2 relates to the agreement for the notice required under Subsection E.
• So I read F2 to be a different agreement because F2 states that the agreement is with the city, the lessee
• House Bill 2701 is written so that NFPA would be the maximum standard.

Bills: HB24 , HB2015 , HB2149 , HB2559 , HB2701 , HB2797 , HB3172 , HB24

Committee: House Land & Resource Management

Keywords: zoning, public notice, local government, residential development, protests, water conservation, municipal utility districts, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, environmental regulation, groundwater management, nonconforming uses, zoning regulations, land use, property rights, municipal authority, municipal moratorium, development moratorium, property development, subdivision, site plan

Transcript Highlights:

• Unless a development agreement provides for a different time period, the right to have a project permit
• Another thing I want to highlight is there are a couple exceptions in the vesting written into this.
• For the record, I'd like to say we are also in agreement with FutureWise.
• So rarely does a public hearing provide so much clarity and so much agreement.
• The public hearing provides so much clarity and so much agreement, so I'm grateful.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on several housing, building code, and permitting bills. HB 2228 would direct the State Building Code Council to convene a technical advisory group to recommend code amendments allowing scissor stairs in buildings with more than two dwelling units. Supporters, including architects, builders, and housing advocates, said scissor stairs could improve safety, reduce corridor and stair footprint, lower costs, and allow more efficient and denser housing layouts. The bill was then closed to public hearing. HB 2381 would create a performance-based code pathway for low-rise residential buildings and allow recognition of third-party certifications. The chair described it as a move from prescriptive to performance-based standards, with flexibility for builders and potential alignment with clean building goals. The Building Industry Association of Washington opposed the bill as written, saying the main need is a performance pathway in the energy code rather than the IBC, while FutureWise supported the concept but urged caution about the complexity and timeline of converting code to performance-based standards. The public hearing on HB 2381 was closed after testimony. HB 2418 would change permit review processes, including vesting rules for residential project permits in urban growth areas, pausing review clocks in certain circumstances, extending timelines to other fee-charging reviewing entities, and requiring a single permit responsible official and point of contact by 2027. Builders, developers, and housing advocates generally supported the bill’s coordination and timeline provisions, saying they would reduce delays and costs, though several groups raised concerns about the vesting section and completeness definitions. FutureWise and county representatives warned the vesting changes could create litigation or records issues, while the sponsor said the vesting portion might be reconsidered. The committee also heard HB 2273, which would require embodied carbon reduction standards for larger building projects through reuse, product-based reductions, or whole-building life-cycle assessment. Support came from architects, Commerce, and environmental justice advocates, who said the bill would reduce climate impacts and encourage innovation; opponents from the concrete and aggregate industry and a taxpayer group raised concerns about costs, supply-chain issues, conflicts with other legislation, and exemptions such as for schools. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after closing the public hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 5177 is written.
• My understanding is they just recently have reached an agreement.
• I don't buy your county agreement creation part.
• And we can come up with an ILA, an interlocal agreement.
• Commissioners are in agreement against this legislation.

Bills: HB2065 , HB2462 , HB2621 , HB3187 , HB3539 , HB3563 , HB3726 , HB4164 , HB4207 , HB4368 , HB4706 , HB4916 , HB4950 , HB4967 , HB5177 , HB4429 , HB5597

Committee: House Transportation

Keywords: commercial vehicles, parking regulations, residential areas, local governance, land use, traffic safety, high occupancy vehicle lane, pregnant operators, transportation, parental rights, motor vehicle regulations, live video feed, state agency, transparency, public safety, regional transportation, mobility program, sales tax, public infrastructure, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• That concludes my coverage of the written statement. friend, um.
• Now those specifications will exclude some, and they're written to meet the needs of the, of the state
• Those agreements need to be maintained and updated, uh, throughout the years.
• Those agreements are in place. How does that work with aircraft that are owned by a state?
• Agreement was in their, uh, was in their possession.

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Now those specifications will exclude some and they're written to me the needs of the of the state and
• If the need exists, then those agreements can be in place ahead of time and then that conversation can
• Uh, some of those cons, as we identified in the last group, is those agreements need to be if they're
• Compacts and or agreements to share aircraft back and forth those agreements need to be maintained and
• Written for large air tankers, scoopers don't qualify because of the specifications.

Committee: House State Affairs

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The third area really focuses written responses and we had many more written responses and we had many
• I don't recall that we've written in what we have written in the plan.
• </c> I don't recall that we've written in. I don't recall that we've written in.
• </c><00:29:40.960><c> memorandum</c> states, we have an agreement memorandum states, we have an agreement
• <00:29:52.320><c> universities,</c> some agreements with the universities, some agreements with the universities

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:01 Department for Public Health Budget Request 00:01:46 Department for Community Based Services Budget Request 00:31:58 Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics (CCBHC) 00:57:13, 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes, then heard a lengthy presentation from the Department for Public Health on Kentucky’s rural health transformation plan and related budget questions. Commissioner John Langfeld said the state received a $212.9 million federal award, one of the larger awards nationally, and outlined five focus areas: maternal and infant health, integrated EMS/trauma response, behavioral health and substance use disorder, oral health, and chronic disease prevention with an emphasis on obesity and diabetes. He stressed that the effort is intended to be integrated, data-driven, and sustainable, and that the federal funds cannot be used for new construction, clinician salaries, research and development, EHR replacement, or to pay for currently billable services. He also said the program carries accountability requirements and that funds can be clawed back if milestones are not met. Members pressed for clarification on duplication with other budget requests, sustainability after the five-year funding period, and how success would be measured. Langfeld said he was not aware of any duplicate funding with the department’s additional budget requests and said the rural health funds were separate from those requests. He also said the program will be tracked through specific metrics and timelines, using both execution measures and outcome measures such as readmissions, with more rapid-cycle feedback to allow course correction. Representative Fleming raised concerns about possible overlap with navigator funding and asked for more detail on the budget breakdown; Langfeld said a detailed line-item budget had been prepared but was still awaiting final CMS approval before release, and that he would explore sharing more information once restrictions were lifted. The committee then heard from the Kentucky State Public Health Laboratory about a request for a new central lab expansion. The presenter described the current 35-year-old facility as outdated and constrained by aging infrastructure, obsolete equipment, deferred maintenance, and inadequate space, and said the lab performs critical work with no in-state alternative for many services, including newborn screening, select-agent and biosafety level 3 testing, animal necropsy for rabies, genetic sequencing, environmental and food safety testing, and response to emerging infectious diseases. The project is already in design phase C, expected to finish in mid-April, with construction funding sought at roughly $276 million on top of about $35 million already approved for design. Members asked about long-term operating costs, backup arrangements, and whether the current facility would remain in use; the presenter said the current lab would continue to be used by the department while other divisions move into vacated space, and that the lab has mutual-aid agreements with the Southeast Consortium and universities for contingency support. Finally, the Department for Community Based Services began its budget presentation on SNAP and relative caregiver issues. Commissioner Lisa Dennis and budget director Misty Sammons identified the governor’s recommended budget items tied to new federal requirements under HR1, including changes affecting payment error rates. The discussion was just beginning when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• So are all the parties in agreement on this? So the Board of Chiropractors are in agreement.
• One association is in agreement.
• But when you look at the statute that was written many years ago, the word serum is tied to that. but
• when you look at the statute, it was written many years ago, the word serum is tied to that, which we
• So I'm hoping over the next two weeks, if we don't come to an agreement, that I can convince him striking

Bills: HB4336 , HB1818 , HB3194 , HB3538 , HB3682 , HB3762 , HB3793 , HB3930 , HB3931 , HB3934 , HB4124 , HB4200 , HB4410 , HB4457 , HB4473 , HB3884 , HB1912

Committee: House Public Health

Keywords: interventional pain management, pain management clinic, chronic pain, acute pain, spinal injections, epidural steroid injection, peripheral nerve block, nerve ablation, spinal cord stimulator, intrathecal infusion pump, endoscopic diskectomy, fluoroscopy, physician supervision, allopathic physician, osteopathic physician, CRNA, certified registered nurse anesthetist, nurse anesthetist, freestanding pain management facility, medical licensure

Transcript Highlights:

• We look forward to reading the written testimony as well. Thank you.
• We look forward to reading the written testimony as well. Thank you.
• Any— you did mention they were going to submit written testimony.
• We look forward to your written testimony.
• We'll make sure this is in the written testimony.

Committee: House House Committee on Federal Funding, Policy and Accountability

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on the impact of recent federal policy and budget actions on Massachusetts libraries, humanities organizations, arts institutions, and tourism. Testimony from library leaders described the loss or jeopardy of Institute of Museum and Library Services funding, including statewide databases, local grants, staff positions, E-rate/hotspot support, and digital equity programs. Witnesses said the cuts have already forced reductions in services, canceled grants and workshops, and in some cases left schools, students, job seekers, and low-income patrons without access to key resources. Members of the committee asked for lists of affected communities and databases, and several witnesses said they would provide additional written detail. Arts and humanities witnesses said federal terminations from the NEA, NEH, and IMLS have hit organizations across the Commonwealth, including Mass Cultural Council, Mass Humanities, Mass MoCA, and local museums and historical societies. They described canceled or rescinded grants, layoffs, reduced programming, and a chilling effect on future applications and on artistic and scholarly work, especially where federal awards had already been matched with local or private funds. Several speakers also raised concerns about executive-branch DEI conditions attached to funding and about book challenges and book banning, saying these trends threaten intellectual freedom and public access to culture and history. Committee members emphasized the economic importance of the sector and the need to publicize the impacts. Tourism officials from Meet Boston and the Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism testified that federal cuts and broader geopolitical and tariff issues are hurting international visitation, especially from Canada and Western Europe, and could affect major upcoming events such as the 2026 World Cup and Sail Boston. They said reduced funding for Brand USA and Discover New England will weaken long-term marketing efforts and international partnerships, with downstream effects on hotel tax revenue, jobs, and workforce recruitment. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with members mainly asking questions and requesting follow-up written testimony and data.

Transcript Highlights:

• If further requested, the department should provide a written report, along with any recommendations
• And then we allowed for contractual agreements between the parish and the Project to exempt them out
• Chairman, so can you explain, does this override the agreements that's on the public lands already with
• Those exceptions include storage facilities on state land that have agreements with the State Mineral
• , what is already covered by the agreements on state lands and some of those projects, I do believe that

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 480, which would allow anchoring in certain waterways, specifically Oyster Bayou, with restrictions to protect oyster leases and require a person to remain on board. After brief explanation from the sponsor, Representative DeWitt moved favorable and the bill was reported favorable without objection. House Bill 510, which would have prohibited importation of captured carbon dioxide into Louisiana for sequestration, was discussed briefly. The sponsor said the proposal appeared to conflict with federal law and interstate commerce concerns, and he asked to voluntarily defer the bill. The committee agreed, and HB 510 was deferred. The committee also heard House Resolution 279, urging the state to study geothermal energy policy; after questions about geothermal technology and possible overlap with CCS infrastructure, the resolution was adopted on a 10-3 roll call vote and reported favorable. The bulk of the meeting focused on House Bill 1152, as amended, dealing with the Carbon Dioxide Geologic Storage Trust Fund and a proposed injection fee for carbon sequestration projects. The amendment would set the fee at 19 cents per ton, with 12 cents going to the state trust fund and 7 cents going directly to affected parishes, while retaining existing fund caps and adding evacuation routes as an eligible local expenditure. Industry groups and local government representatives both testified: industry warned the proposal was rushed, could create uncertainty, and might hurt Louisiana’s competitiveness; parish officials argued locals need a meaningful revenue share, transparency, and bargaining power because they will bear emergency-response burdens. Members raised questions about the fee structure, exemptions for state lands and parish agreements, and whether the local share would continue for the life of a project. The bill remained under discussion at the end of the transcript, with talk of creating an off-session task force or working group to continue negotiations for next year.

Transcript Highlights:

• or project labor agreements, prevailing wage, and apprenticeships.
• So it is not just prospective; it goes back to agreements because of the date you have in the bill.
• The way that the CCA is written, utilities are receiving no-cost allowances, but they're based upon a
• The way that the CCA is written, utilities are receiving no-cost allowances, but they're based upon a
• This relates to an agreement that was made long before I was in this body, and I think before almost

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2343, which would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to obtain CAFO or individual discharge permit coverage for its game farms, and to treat game farms with at least 5,000 birds as large CAFOs. The prime sponsor and local officials from Centralia said the WDFW pheasant farm has contributed to nitrate contamination in a critical aquifer, affecting drinking water and public health, and argued the state should be held to the same standards as private operators. WDFW testified that it has already voluntarily secured the permit the bill would require and is working with Ecology and local partners. Testimony from county health and residents largely supported the bill, citing elevated nitrate levels and health risks, especially for infants and pregnant people. The committee then heard House Bill 2301, which expands Washington’s paint stewardship program to cover additional paint-related products, aerosol paints, and certain non-industrial coatings. The sponsor and industry supporters said the existing paint recycling program is working well and should be broadened to keep more materials out of landfills and reduce local hazardous waste costs. Local government witnesses supported the expansion but asked for changes on convenience standards, packaging coverage, and reimbursement for local collection costs. Ecology supported the overall concept but raised implementation concerns, including the need for uniform standards, full reporting, and more time for rulemaking. A wood preservatives industry representative opposed including wood preservatives, saying they are not paint and have different handling requirements. The committee also took testimony on House Bill 2515, a proposed substitute addressing emerging large energy use facilities, defined mainly as large data centers and virtual currency mining facilities. The bill would require utilities to adopt tariffs or policies to protect other ratepayers, require long-term contracts, demand response or curtailment provisions, reporting on energy and water use, and new clean energy targets for these facilities, while also changing how no-cost allowances under the Climate Commitment Act are allocated and creating an annual fee for the facilities. Supporters, including environmental groups, community action agencies, some utilities, and labor and tribal representatives, said the bill would protect ratepayers, improve transparency, and keep Washington on track for climate goals. Opponents, including data center and business groups, some ports, and several labor organizations, argued the bill is too prescriptive, could raise costs or discourage investment, may affect existing contracts and other large industrial loads, and could reduce construction jobs. No votes or final actions were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then on page eight, starting on line 18, 340B covered entities, it says they've got to have a written
• agreement in place to prevent duplicate discounts.
• yeah, I mean, it's just stipulating what is already in regulations as far as what Medicaid can do. written
• agreement in place to prevent written agreement in place to prevent duplica<00:10:27.600><c> duplicate
• we don't want we don't want agreement we don't want we don't want the<00:16:38.199><c> EUR</c><00:16

Keywords: 00:25 Call to Order/Roll Call 01:36 Discussion of 25RS SB 153 23:11 Roll Call Vote on 25RS SB 153 30:56 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Health Services met on March 14, 2025, and took up a committee substitute for Senate Bill 153. The substitute deleted the original bill language and replaced it with provisions from Senate Bill 14, aimed at prohibiting pharmaceutical manufacturers from discriminating against 340B covered entities and adding reporting requirements for those entities. The sponsor explained that the protections would sunset after one year, allowing lawmakers to review data by July 1, 2026, and that Kentucky would continue to follow any future federal changes to the 340B program. Members asked several questions about the scope of the reporting, including what “total operating cost” means, how duplicate discounts are prevented, whether the reporting applies only to hospitals and not federally qualified health centers, and who would receive the data. The sponsor said the reporting is intended to help the Cabinet for Health and Family Services and the Office of Health Data Analytics at LRC assess how the program is working, including charity care and community benefits, while preserving protections for rural hospitals and allowing them to continue using contract pharmacies. A representative from LRC confirmed the data would come to the General Assembly through the Office of Health Data Analytics. The committee expressed mixed views about the balance between transparency and potential burdens on hospitals, especially rural facilities. Several members said they were supportive but had reservations about the reporting requirements and the sunset structure, while others noted concerns about unintended consequences and the possibility of changes on the House floor. The committee ultimately adopted the committee substitute, approved a title amendment, and reported Senate Bill 153 with House Committee Substitute 2 favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,</c> you know the rules would be written, you know the rules would be written, things<00:48:43.760><
• But the way I see it written here, eight and nine, is there will be a plan.
• Um this bill as written<01:38:19.520><c> though</c> written though written though um<01:38:21.760><c>
• </c><01:38:32.239><c> like</c> curriculum that is I think written like curriculum that is I think written
• </c><01:38:46.960><c> to</c> it it's not it's not written to it it's not it's not written to accurately

Committee: Senate Education

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> have that written. Thank you. have that written. Thank you.
• a note that we Also written Also on a note that we received<00:19:30.400><c> written</c> received written
• > with</c> written our written testimony with written our written testimony with comments.<00:54:43.120
• ><c> testimony</c><00:59:09.960><c> and</c> written submitted written testimony and written submitted
• </c> with the bill as written. with the bill as written.

Bills: HB1626 , HB1643 , HB1668 , HB1550 , HB1974 , HB1858 , HB1871 , HB1966 , HB1972 , HB1973

Committee: House Health

Keywords: youth penalties, juvenile justice, community service, fees and fines, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, reform, court costs, cultural connection, pharmacy, pharmacist, pharmacy audit, audit reform, pharmacy benefit manager, PBM, recoupment, extrapolation, claims audit, pharmacy reimbursement, dispensing fee

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 847, which would create a Kauai pilot program allowing qualified psychologists limited authority to prescribe psychotropic medications. The Board of Psychology supported the bill’s intent but asked for amendments to delay the effective date or extend the pilot so rules could be written first, and to clarify the education/training language. Supporters, including the Hawaii Psychological Association, Hawaii Mental Health Coalition, and several psychologists, argued that prescribing psychologists have long safety records in other jurisdictions and that the pilot could improve access to care on Kauai, especially amid ongoing mental health needs and storm-related stress. They cited studies and examples from New Mexico, Louisiana, the Department of Defense, and other places. Opponents, including the Hawaii Medical Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, Queen’s Medical Center, and a Department of Health representative, said the bill needed substantial work, raised concerns about training, liability, and workforce impacts, and urged a team-based model with psychiatrist oversight rather than independent prescribing. Some testimony also referenced a GAO report, with witnesses disagreeing over its meaning and cost-effectiveness. No vote was taken during the discussion, and members asked questions about how the bill would address the workforce shortage and whether a psychiatrist on Kauai could already meet the need. The committee then moved to SB 2271 on hospital licensing and SB 2272 on home health care licensing. The Department of Health, the Healthcare Association of Hawaii, and the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities supported both measures, which were described as streamlining and clarifying licensing oversight by relying on accreditation or certification reports. A member asked whether the bill language on hospital accreditation reports was duplicative, and the response was that the second provision was intended to strengthen enforcement by requiring hospitals to provide the actual report to DOH. The committee did not take final action in the portion of the hearing provided, and the chair noted that all bills on the agenda would later be considered for decision-making.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> will stand on our written comments. will stand on our written comments.
• </c><01:55:47.280><c> I'm</c> within the written testimony. I'm within the written testimony.
• </c> of judiciary stand on our written of judiciary stand on our written testimony<02:25:39.840><c> with
• </c> behalf of council standing on a written behalf of council standing on a written testimony<02:37:
• </c> on a written comment. on a written comment. &gt;&gt; Thank<02:38:44.800><c> you.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2021, a transportation measure creating a framework for electric bicycle and micromobility regulation. The bill would define electric bicycle and electric micromobility device, set age and helmet rules, restrict class 3 e-bikes from sidewalks, allow limited sidewalk use for class 1 and 2 bikes, prohibit high-speed electric devices and certain nonconforming devices in specified locations, update county tax definitions, and change related terminology. Testimony was largely supportive from DOT, police, Honolulu officials, Hawaii Bicycling League, AAA Hawaii, the Hawaii State Teachers Association, and several individuals, while DCCA’s Insurance Division asked for clarity on whether insurance would be required. Committee discussion focused on safety, enforcement, and the fact that no insurance market currently exists for these e-bike classes; members also discussed the need to target bad actors rather than ordinary riders. The chair then proposed and the committee adopted amendments to HB 2021, including clarifying that road-legal, permitted, classified electric bicycles are not subject to insurance requirements at this time; allowing properly classified electric bicycles on sidewalks at 10 mph or less subject to county restrictions; barring high-speed electric devices and other nonconforming devices from public roadways; authorizing impoundment of non-road-legal or improperly registered devices; and requiring direct parental supervision for riders under 16 on class 2 or 3 e-bikes. The committee also made technical and effective-date changes. The recommendation to pass HB 2021 with amendments was adopted unanimously by the members present. The committee next took up HB 1641, a related transportation bill addressing high-speed electric devices. The chair explained that the measure would prohibit the sale, lease, rental, distribution, possession, or operation of high-speed electric devices and establish penalties, but the committee’s version would narrow the focus to devices covered by HB 2021. The amended bill would prohibit offering high-speed electric devices for lease or rent, require sellers to comply with the new regulatory framework, ban operation on bicycle lanes, highways, roadways, and streets, and set a civil penalty of $250 to $1,000 per violation. After no further questions, the committee voted to pass HB 1641 with amendments, and the recommendation was adopted. The meeting then moved to HB 1709, which would transfer regulation of the Hawaii Water Carrier Act from the Public Utilities Commission to the Department of Transportation and make conforming changes with an appropriation. DOT testified in support, while the PUC and DCCA’s Consumer Advocacy Division raised concerns about preserving consumer protections and the complexity of moving the regulatory framework. Young Brothers supported the bill and said the current system is outdated, but the discussion remained ongoing; the transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 1709 is shown.