Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:13.880> off serving native Hawaiian well first off serving native Hawaiian well first
• should be First Hawaiian should be first should be First Hawaiian should be first and<00:36:14.079
• from our written testimony um the first from our written testimony um the first is<00:52:17.400>
• <01:03:36.480> Island insurance division kahol La Island insurance division kahol La Island
• on page two it says the county at first on page two it says the county at first it<01:19:52.679>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 410, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ biennium operating budget. OHA asked for a modest increase over its base budget, including $1.2 million to fund 13 new full-time positions for a strategy and implementation team tied to its long-term plan, with emphasis on housing, education, health, and economic resilience. OHA also described a broader effort to work directly with executive branch departments to improve outcomes for Native Hawaiians. Testimony was largely supportive, with several individuals speaking in favor and one testifier expressing strong frustration about Native Hawaiian rights and access to resources. The chair noted there were 38 additional written/supporting testimonies and three in opposition. Members asked about OHA’s funding sources and public land trust revenues; OHA said it is not receiving the full 20 percent share, described a public land trust working group and system issues, and said a related bill would seek funding to begin an inventory. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then considered House Bill 304, which would make the Hawaiian version of a law binding when the law was originally drafted in Hawaiian and later translated into English. The Judiciary supported the bill, saying it reinforces Hawaiian as an official language and looks to the original language for legislative intent. The Attorney General supported the intent but recommended narrowing the bill with a proviso to avoid ambiguities, limiting it to laws originally drafted in Hawaiian that were not later amended, codified, recodified, or reenacted in English. Public testimony was generally supportive, though one speaker raised broader sovereignty concerns. Members questioned how many laws would be affected and whether the proposed amendment would undercut the bill; the Attorney General said the amendment was meant to address uncertainty in interpretation. No final action was reported. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 603, which would direct OHA to administer a Native Hawaiian business marketing program to promote Native Hawaiian-owned businesses through marketing and technical assistance. OHA supported the concept, saying a label or branding program could help consumers identify and support Native Hawaiian-owned businesses, but requested that funding be redirected to a working group to study program design, implementation, enforcement, and long-term viability. The chair noted four supportive testimonies had been received, and a member asked OHA to confirm that its programs serve all Hawaiians, not only those eligible for homelands; OHA said it serves all Hawaiians in the state. The transcript ends before any vote or further action on HB 603.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, therefore let's get to the first bill on the agenda.
• And it is H517, an act relative to safer schools, and our first witness is Julian Washington from the
• with an SRO, one that goes poorly, An interaction with an SRO, one that goes poorly, can result in a first-time
• That first-time arrest doubles the odds that a student drops out.
• can protect the 99 other percent of students who are terrified of trying to be recruited into MS-13, La

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a public hearing on two bills: H.5171, an act relative to safer schools, and H.3895, an act expanding career and technical education opportunities for Lynn students. The hearing focused primarily on H.5171, which would limit school resource officers’ role to serious criminal or delinquent conduct, encourage de-escalation and anti-bias training, and create grants for alternative school safety approaches such as restorative justice. Witnesses from the Mental Health Legal Advisors Committee and the Committee for Public Counsel Services supported the bill, arguing that police involvement in routine school discipline can escalate situations, especially for students with disabilities, and contribute to the school-to-prison pipeline. They described examples of student encounters with SROs that led to fear, arrest, or other harmful outcomes. Committee members raised concerns about school safety, including gang activity and weapons in schools, and asked whether the bill would remove SROs entirely. Testimony clarified that the bill would not eliminate SROs or their role in responding to actual criminal activity, but would narrow their involvement in discipline and encourage better training. One witness, Joey Ford of Parent Data Force, was neutral on H.5171, saying problems often stem from broader district discipline practices, restraint and seclusion, and inconsistent DESE standards rather than SROs alone. For H.3895, Ford testified in strong support, saying career and technical education had been valuable in his own schooling and helped him develop useful skills and stay engaged in school. After testimony concluded and no additional witnesses remained, the committee closed testimony on both bills and adjourned without taking a vote on the legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the Vice Chair of the committee, very capably, I'm Bill Soltz, State Senator from the Las Cruces
• Then on page four is our first bill that was actually enacted: House Bill 63.
• Director, John Sena, provided a pretty—presented this PowerPoint to that subcommittee yesterday, but the first
• But if you turn To slide four, we wanted to talk first about the proposals that we're hearing from D.C
• Because starting on July 1st, for the first time in our state's history, we will have a separate factor

Transcript Highlights:

• Assembly Members La Rue Hatch, Marzola, Miller, Monroe-Moreno, Moore, Mosca, Nadeem, Nguyen, O'Neill,
• Reading so far had considered first reading.
• We will now go to Order of Business No. 9, introduction, first reading, and reference of bills.
• I move that all rules be suspended, reading so far considered first reading, rules further suspended,
• Let me first say that in vitro fertilization, IVF, has brought immeasurable joy to countless families

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• First up, we have the Attorney General's Office with comments. Good morning.
• When I first started, it was very, very difficult to break into the commercial industry.
• When I first started, it was very, very difficult to break into the commercial industry.
• When I first started, it was very, very difficult to break into the commercial industry.
• The first measure is SB 281, SD1, relating to telehealth.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection and Economic Development and Tourism committees heard S.B. 890, which would have prohibited the sale, display, or marketing of products labeled as poi unless wholly derived from Hawaii-grown taro. The Attorney General’s Office raised Commerce Clause and free speech concerns, and the Department of Agriculture offered support with comments. Testimony was mixed: several individuals and organizations supported the bill as a way to protect the cultural integrity and purity of poi and support local taro farmers, while an industry representative opposed the bill as written, arguing that poi is a process, that the language was too restrictive, and that the industry already faces taro shortages and supply variability. Committee members also discussed the limited supply of local kalo, the use of imported taro for tabletop products, and the need to expand production. After testimony, the committees recommended passing S.B. 890 with amendments. The amendment package would convert the measure from a prohibition to a labeling requirement so poi made with ingredients from outside Hawaii must be labeled with the origins of those ingredients, remove references specifically to taro to accommodate other ingredients, add a severability clause, and set a defective date of July 1, 2050. The measure was adopted, with one senator voting with reservations and the rest voting aye. The committees then took up previously heard measures. S.B. 281, relating to telehealth, was recommended for passage with amendments to reinstate an opt-out from video conferencing in the definition of interactive telecommunications software; it was adopted. S.B. 1449, relating to prior authorization of health care services, was recommended for passage unamended and was also adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• At the time of the initial vote, one commissioner was quoted in the LA Times as saying, 'For me, it becomes
• First, I want to start by one. Good morning, Madam Chair and committee members.
• First, I want to start by wishing Senator Arreguín a very happy birthday. Happy birthday, sir.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe when it was first<00:33:19.919> first<00:33:20.320> enacted<00:33:20.720>
• it was a general first first enacted it was a general fund<00:33:22.159> realization.
• And water is available on a first-come, first-served basis.
• And water is available on a first-come, first-served basis.
• And one come, first- serve basis.

Bills: SB2190, SB2338, SB2424, SB2356, SB2981, SB3028, SB3187, SB2378, SB2398, SB2192, SB2155, SB3219, SB3218

Keywords: affordable housing, employment contracts, salary caps, housing finance, public housing authority, executive compensation, parking minimums, off-street parking, transit-oriented development, TOD, housing supply, smart growth, redevelopment, adaptive reuse, micro units, rail transit, public transit stations, county zoning, land use, urban planning

Summary: The House Housing Committee heard testimony on a series of housing-related Senate bills. SB 2190 SD2 on inclusionary zoning drew support from HHFDC, Hawaii YIMBY, Grassroot Institute, Housing Hawaii’s Future, and Hako Seed Center, with opposition from OHA and Aloha Independent Living Hawaii. SB 2338 SD1, dealing with housing agency personnel authority, received comments from the Attorney General cautioning that the bill should be clarified to avoid conflicts with civil service and collective bargaining laws and recommending removal of a provision limiting employment contracts; HHFDC said its comments addressed those concerns and supported the measure. SB 2424 SD1, concerning HHFDC, received broad support from housing, business, and community groups, with one opposition. Testimony focused on changing the definition of “qualified resident” so people who already own an HHFDC-assisted unit could later purchase another if their housing needs change; HHFDC said the current rule forces people to sell before buying again and that the bill would help people move up the housing ladder and encourage more housing development. SB 2356 on parking also drew broad support from state agencies, housing advocates, business groups, and local officials, with Unite Here Local 5 in opposition. SB 2981 on land use had strong support from many organizations and 67 individuals, with Unite Here Local 5 opposing. SB 3028 SD2 on property conveyance generated the most detailed policy debate. Supporters, including Catholic Charities Hawaii, Hawaii Children’s Action Network, Indivisible Hawaii, and others, backed restructuring the conveyance tax into a marginal rate system and urged changes to revenue allocations, including dedicated funding for homeless services, DHHL, and the rental housing revolving fund. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii supported the marginal-rate concept but opposed dedicated special-fund allocations and criticized the bill’s blank sections. Committee members questioned the historical purpose of the conveyance tax, and the Tax Foundation explained it was originally a modest tax tied to property-value tracking when the state still ran the property tax system. The committee also heard SB 3187 SD2 on off-site construction, SB 2378 SD2 on housing permitting, and SB 2398 SD2 on residential housing utilities. OPSD supported SB 3187 but said it preferred the House version and wanted clarification that off-site certification should apply to factories in Hawaii, not out of state, to avoid outsourcing labor; it also suggested starting with a small scope. SB 2378 SD2 drew support from engineering, housing, and labor groups, with testimony that the House version included needed fixes to make the program insurable. On SB 2398 SD2, the Board of Water Supply opposed the bill, saying it could require disclosure of sensitive infrastructure information beyond ordinary water-availability assessments and raise critical-infrastructure and cybersecurity concerns; developers and housing groups supported the measure. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So uh that said, the first respectful.
• And you on this front LA just last year.
• Um I'm sure the first committee.
• rules where shifty within the first rules where shifty within the first initial<01:37:48.960>
• They don't have to be a first-time buyer anymore.

Bills: HB2611, HB2102, HB1710, HB1868, HB1920, HB1812, HB1733, HB1715, HB1723, HB1724, HB1727, HB1711

Keywords: HB2611, Hawaii antitrust, rental housing, rent price-fixing, algorithmic pricing, algorithmic rent-setting, property management software, pricing algorithms, rent coordination, price-fixing, collusion, cartel, multifamily housing, landlord software, occupancy levels, lease terms, Attorney General, public education program, consumer protection, housing affordability

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• First of all, you're not the only one.
• First of all, you're not the only one.
• First of all, you're not the only one.
• We will first start up with House Bill 1064.
• Let me go address the vegetation first. Let me go address the vegetation first.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee held its first hearing of the 2025 session and began with housekeeping on testimony deadlines, hybrid participation rules, time management, and expectations for civility. The chair said testimony posted at least 24 hours in advance would be available to members and the public at the same time, late testimony would still be processed, and decision-making would generally be deferred to later in the day so morning hearings could adjourn before the noon floor session. The first bill heard was HB 673 on emergency management. Hawaii Emergency Management Agency administrator James Barros testified in opposition, saying the bill could undermine the executive’s unity of command during emergencies and objecting to provisions allowing the legislature to terminate a state of emergency by a two-thirds vote. Members asked about the difference between an emergency order and a state of emergency, whether other states use legislative checks and balances, and whether long-running emergencies such as COVID-19 or homelessness should have clearer end conditions. Barros said the agency, along with the Attorney General’s office and the governor’s office, would review the language and that the issue is setting conditions for when an emergency ends. The committee then heard HB 596, also on emergency management, which would clarify types of events that count as dangers and emergencies. Barros opposed the bill, saying the current list covers known hazards but should remain open-ended for future threats; he cited COVID-19 as an example of an unforeseen event and said the bill could limit flexibility. Members asked whether the list could be expanded, and Barros said the agency would look at that possibility. Testimony included support from the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii and concerns from the Tax Foundation of Hawaii about the bill’s special fund provisions; the committee also corrected testimony that had been submitted for the wrong bill. The final measure discussed was HB 1060 on emergency preparedness and the Community Readiness Center Program. Barros explained the proposal as part of HEMA’s effort to build local readiness centers and community hubs, with an initial target of 10 communities through a federal grant and a longer-term concept of roughly 100 statewide. The Climate Advisory Team supported the bill’s intent but urged that centers be developed with strong community and nonprofit involvement through the HARRP program. The Department of Taxation offered comments on the special fund, and members raised questions about cost, size, use of existing school facilities, public messaging, and equity across communities. Barros said the centers would provide backup communications, power, water, and food for a community group, would not function as general shelters, and would be designed to help communities hunker down and recover after a disaster.

Transcript Highlights:

• the $199 million in one-time teacher stipends in the Minimum Foundation Program and $43.5 million for LA
• Finally, the Louisiana Giving All True Opportunity to Rise, or LA Gator, is funded at $87 million.
• First, one of the biggest complaints I get in my district is road and bridge repairs.
• When I came in my first term, we were $15 billion, so we're heading in the wrong direction in the long
• When I came in my first term, we were $15 billion, so we're headed the wrong direction in the long term

Bills: HR159, HR160, HR161, HR162, HR163, HR164, HCR60, HCR61, HCR62, HCR63, HCR64, HR153, HR154, HR155, HR156, HR157, HR158, HCR57, HCR58, HCR59, SB124, SB399, SB441, SB447, SB460, HCR4, HCR47, HB59, HB74, HB159, HB175, HB330, HB364, HB414, HB458, HB525, HB568, HB628, HB786, HB909, HB1008, HB1033, HB1034, HB1041, HB1052, HB1062, HB1070, HB1079, HB1112, HB1118, HB1139, HB1151, HB1154, HB1176, HB1182, HB1196, HB1214, HB1231, HB1241, SB244, HB1, HB2, HB3, HB312, HB313, HB383, HB314, HCR3, HB983, HB1126, HR1, HR17, HCR5, HB27, HB71, HB214, HB225, HB241, HB244, HB306, HB345, HB366, HB446, HB511, HB514, HB655, HB730, HB743, HB1027, HB1037, HB1043, HB1082, HB1091, HB1096, HB1103, HB1167, HB1174, HB1175, HB1230, HB1237, HB1238, HB55, HB385, HB394, HB396, HB406, HB608, HB622, HB676, HB772, HB897, HB1030, HB1035, HB1038, HB1045, HB1049, HB1056, HB1058, HB1059, HB1092, HB1100, HB1117, HB1160, HB1161, HB1162, HB1177, HB1180, HB1189, HB1216, HB1239, HB1240, SB162, SB349, SB350, SB382, SB383, SB127, HB51, HB58, HB140, HB750, HB911, HB982, HB1010, HB151, HB180, HB192, HB193, HB310, HB635, HB690, HB961, HB1003, HB1146, HB864, HB977, HB181, HB31, HB664, HB615, HB901, HR20, HR74, HB9, HB284, HB393, HB459, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB773, HB996, HB1113, HB1234, HB1236

Keywords: occupational therapy, healthcare, medical professionals, recognition, professional day, property transfer, public records doctrine, bad faith, Louisiana State Law Institute, real estate law, Black Maternal Health Week, maternal health, racial disparities, healthcare access, culturally competent care, Louisiana, community health, motorcycle safety, awareness month, motorcyclists education

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and received Senate messages, including several Senate bills and resolutions that were referred or laid over. The chamber also adopted a series of House resolutions honoring local organizations, commemorations, and community events, and referred one resolution on climate action to Natural Resources. Several Senate bills were read and referred to the appropriate committees, including measures on peer review confidentiality, higher education research security, pre-K program standards, police civil service, and a memorial highway designation. The main floor business was the budget. The House considered House Bill 1, the general appropriations bill, in Committee of the Whole and reviewed major funding levels and committee changes across state government. The bill included significant funding for early childhood education, higher education, TOPS, health care, corrections, public safety, transportation, and other agencies, along with adjustments tied to LASERS debt payoff, Medicaid, MFP, and various one-time or recurring items. Members heard brief questions on higher education funding and DOTD road needs, but no amendments were offered on the floor during the schedule-by-schedule review. HB 1 was reported from Committee of the Whole with amendments and then finally passed by a vote of 104 yeas. The House then took up House Bills 2 and 3, the capital outlay bill and the omnibus bond authorization act, both of which were explained as the financing measures for the capital program. HB 2 emphasized limited member project funding, reallocation of dormant projects, and bundling of projects to move them forward more efficiently; HB 3 authorized the bond sales needed to fund HB 2. Both bills passed unanimously or near-unanimously. The chamber also passed supplemental and fiscal bills including HB 312, HB 313, HB 383, HB 314, HCR 3, HB 983, and HB 1126, covering supplemental appropriations, treasury fund transfers, ancillary funds, hospital assessments, judiciary funding, and legislative expenses. The meeting ended with personal privileges, staff recognition, announcements, and adjournment to Monday at 1:00 p.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• These first specialized training.
• > people<02:23:22.160> committing should be first, the people committing should be first
• First order, protect us and criminals. First order, protect us from<02:23:55.040> criminals.
• 02:14.800> solemn that Congress's first solemn that Congress's first solemn responsibility,<03
• I met first and families broken.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, July 15, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• May the work of this chamber be true work of repair, la tikkun olam, by ma'aseh, perfecting the world
• Please read the bills the first time by number.
• proclamation mr. president secretary will now read the bills filed within the call please read the bills the first
• Please read the bills the first time by number, introduce her, and then title, and then announce the
• The first one would be that there's no special session, ever, again.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm here to present AB 946, which is my first bill of 2026.
• I’ll have an answer first and foremost thank you to the author for this bill and as someone who started
• Hill's conservancy right in the heart of South Central Los Angeles and South LA.
• So I'll buy that first one. Green hoodies. Sorry, green hoodies. Sorry. With that, thank you.
• First of all, I want to thank you for bringing the bill.

Summary: The committee met to hear AB 946 by Assembly Member Isaac Bryan, which would encourage California’s 30 by 30 conservation efforts to include investments in historically underserved urban communities. The author said the bill is intended to reduce “nature poverty” in places like South Los Angeles by treating urban greening and conservation as a co-equal goal alongside rural and coastal land protection. Supporters, including the California Park and Recreation Society, the Trust for Public Land, and Los Angeles County, argued that urban conservation can provide both environmental and human benefits, especially where land can be reused or restored for parks and green space. Committee members discussed the bill’s focus on urban areas versus rural districts. One member said they would not support it because it seemed to prioritize heavily urban communities over rural ones in their district, while others said the bill helps ensure conservation resources are distributed more equitably and can have important psychological, health, and climate benefits for dense communities. The author responded that the bill does not neglect rural areas, but instead seeks to correct an imbalance by ensuring urban communities are also considered in 30 by 30 planning. The bill was moved on a due pass motion to the Appropriations Committee. The vote was overwhelmingly in favor, with several members voting aye and one member not voting at the time of the roll call. After the vote, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Juro fidelidad a la bandera de los Estados Unidos de América.
• Members of the Senate elected or appointed to serve in the first session of the 57th Legislature, except
• Elected at the first session of the 57th Legislature, be designated the officers of the second special
• I want to yield first to Senator Padilla for excusals, a little roadmap, and some opening remarks, and
• I yield first to Senator Padilla. Thank you, Madam President.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for your support of this measure. um first up we have uh HB um first up we have uh HB 10004
• <02:05:44.920> amendment Constitution our first amendment Constitution our first amendment
• <02:16:23.440> state States um and this is the first state States um and this is the first
• It begins with our First Amendment.
• <03:17:35.760> Amendment First Amendment First Amendment correct<03:17:38.359> um<03:17

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint hearing opened with House Bill 1462 on crisis services. Testimony from the Department of Law Enforcement, the Community Alliance on Prisons, and the Department of Health supported expanding behavioral health crisis services as an alternative to arrest or incarceration. Witnesses said additional crisis sites would help divert people in mental health crisis to appropriate care, and the Department of Health described its current crisis center in Ewa, including the need for renovations such as a padded room and the time required to get the facility operational. In response to questions, the department estimated the Ewa center’s budgeted cost at about $4.3 million, not including rent or startup repairs, and said a second site’s cost would depend on whether it was freestanding or attached to an existing facility. The committee then heard House Bill 700 on cognitive assessments. The Executive Office on Aging supported the bill’s intent but asked that it be amended to make assessments optional rather than mandated, to pilot the program first, and to allow flexibility in handling HIPAA-protected data. SHPDA also supported the measure but said it should not be mandatory and suggested that payers reimburse for assessments when requested by patients, families, or physicians. The Alzheimer’s Association and caregivers strongly supported standardizing cognitive assessments to improve early detection and access to newer treatments, while noting the existing opt-out provision. The Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities supported the bill but asked that the age 65 threshold be removed because cognitive decline can begin much earlier for people with Down syndrome, autism, traumatic brain injury, stroke, and related conditions. In response to a question, the Office on Aging said a pilot project could likely be done for about $150,000, with data security being the main added cost. The final bill discussed was House Bill 237 on peer support programs. Testimony from Family Hui Hawaii, Early Childhood Action Strategy, peer support workers, and families described peer-to-peer programs as a cost-effective way to reduce isolation, strengthen families, and provide long-term community support. Speakers said these programs help parents and caregivers navigate crises, child welfare involvement, addiction recovery, and other challenges, and can have lasting benefits for children’s development and family stability. Several witnesses tied the bill to broader state goals, including infant and early childhood mental health, trauma-informed care, and child welfare reform. Written testimony from about a dozen organizations and individuals was also noted in support.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Tribal Council is aware of this and has had ongoing conversations since 2015 when this first became
• I come from Hopi and I'm from the village of First Mesa, but I go to school.
• The next couple of meetings are on Monday, LHHS in Las Vegas.

Transcript Highlights:

• President John Hansen the first President John Hansen the first president<01:19:18.400> of
• I remember when I first became a House member and first learned about this trust.
• The first one the leadership the bill.
• Uh first I'm going to tell more detail.
• The first thing we do, Mr.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The first being the request from the tribe to the governor to begin negotiations and that referral over
• It is outlined in the appendix that first, these electronic table games must show certification by an
• —that was first negotiated with the Kalispel tribe in 2018.
• Lummi does not have extension of credit now, and that is because this is the first based.
• And that is because this is the first. The amendment then authorizes the extension of credit.

Summary: The State Government and Tribal Relations Committee held a public hearing on July 10 at 8:30 a.m. on a proposed amendment to the Lummi Nation’s tribal-state gaming compact. Washington State Gambling Commission Director Tina Griffin and Tribal Relations Advisor Johnny Bray outlined the compact process under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and explained that the amendment had reached tentative agreement after negotiations with the Lummi Nation. Lummi Vice Chair Terence Adams and Councilperson Vindeen Washington described the amendment as the tribe’s sixth compact amendment and said it would expand gaming opportunities while supporting tribal governmental services, infrastructure, and jobs. The main changes discussed were authorization for electronic table games, extension of credit to customers, higher wagering limits, and the possibility of a second gaming facility. Committee members asked several questions about how credit limits would be set, how electronic table games work, whether online gaming was included, and how the systems would be tested and monitored. Witnesses said online gaming is not authorized by this amendment, that electronic table games must be certified by an independent lab and tested under state-tribal procedures, and that higher-limit tables could go up to $5,000 with no more than 25% of tables at those limits. Lummi representatives said credit policies would be developed responsibly after approval and that the tribe already uses strong internal controls. The Gambling Commission said seven tribes currently operate electronic table games and 13 tribes have adopted the limitations appendix related to credit and wager limits. The hearing was informational and part of the required public review before the commission’s later vote that morning on whether to forward the amendment to the governor or send it back for further negotiations. No vote was taken by the committee during this hearing, and the chair closed the meeting after thanking the presenters.

Transcript Highlights:

• that, we have some authors. ready to present let's start with the Assemblymember Rogers you are up first
• LA to get my daughter, then we drove to Orange County.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• you come up to testify, please speak clearly into the microphone, tell us your name, and spell your first
• Victor Rountree, District 3, West Bellevue, East Papillion, and La Vista.
• Would you mind spelling your first and last name for the record? Antonio, A-N-T-O-N-I-O.

Keywords: 956, all