Bills: HB14, HB 106, HB146, HB267, HB274, HB 1127, HB1359, HB1393, HB1584, HB1640, HB1710, HB2152, HCR101, HJR8, HR51, HB106, HB146, HB267, HB274, HJR8, HR51

Keywords: nuclear energy, advanced reactors, energy security, grant programs, Texas Advanced Nuclear Energy Office, HB 106, oil and gas, Railroad Commission of Texas, overhead electrical lines, electrical distribution system, power line maintenance, administrative penalty, Natural Resources Code, oil and gas lease, well operator, energy safety, utility infrastructure, regulatory compliance, cleanup fund, oil and gas regulation and cleanup fund

Transcript Highlights:

• So, while the Office of Procurement Services manages the procurement of commodities and services for
• just for a one-time procurement just for a one-time procurement commodity.
• <01:03:39.920> documents, understand the procurement documents, understand the procurement
• integrity of the procurement process. integrity of the procurement process.
• . procurements. procurements.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The assessment is being procured through the Department of Health.
• The Health Department will follow all state laws on procurements.
• >> We have one procurement for the Department of Health.
• We're going to procure a service for the state.
• And again, what counties were represented at that meeting?

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 4 June, 2026; 2:30 PM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and contracting practices, including information technology procurements.
• As of December 31, 2024, our two procurement bureaus have competitively procured more than 733 active
• and contracting practices, including information technology procurements.
• As of December 31st, 2024, our two procurement bureaus have competitively procured more than 733 active
• And the power of this agreement is in addition to that initial procurement.

Summary: The Committee on Governmental Oversight and Accountability met with a quorum present and first took up SB 268, a public records exemption bill for public officers. Senator Brodeur explained the bill on behalf of Senator Jones, saying it would protect partial home addresses, phone numbers, and certain family information for the governor, cabinet members, and other elected officials because of threats and harassment against public servants. An amendment narrowing and clarifying the definition of public officer and the process for claiming the exemption was adopted without objection. Chair Fine and Senator Brodeur both spoke in support of the bill, citing personal experiences with threats and the need to protect officials and their families. CS for SB 268 was then reported favorably by roll call vote. The committee then heard a presentation from Brandon Spencer, Director of State Purchasing and Chief Procurement Officer at the Department of Management Services, on state agency procurement and contracting practices, including IT procurements. He described the state’s procurement structure, including state term contracts, alternate contract sources, and agency procurements, and said the division now manages more than 960 enterprise-wide agreements, with that number continuing to grow. He also highlighted that roughly 21% of purchase order spend is on IT services, discussed statutory requirements for IT procurements, and said the division is working with Florida Digital Service to improve oversight, training, vendor accountability, and procurement options. No committee action followed the presentation, and the meeting adjourned after no further business was raised.

Transcript Highlights:

• Four days, and, you know, I can go down to Montgomery County, 98% full. Freestone County, 98% full.
• to county.
• There are different counties from El Paso to Hidalgo to Cameron County.
• But I also understand Harris County projects two to three million, and El Paso... ...County at least
• Smaller counties, but also larger counties, are helped as well.

Bills: SB37, SJR84, SJR87, SJR27, SB8, SB10, SB227, SB261, SB15, SB12, SB25, SB57, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB512, SB241, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2035, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB310, SB1346, SB2753, SB2703, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SCR9, SB2405, SB2406, SB2407, SB2166, SB2148, SB535, SB777, SB827, SB1141, SB1330, SB1352, SB1664, SB1862, SB1936, SB1453, SB1448, SB1398, SB2137, SB2111, SB53, SB226, SB1677, SB1723, SB1839, SB36, SB38, SB815, SB1856, SB552, SB646, SB37, SJR84, SJR87, SJR27, SB8, SB10, SB227, SB261, SB15, SB12, SB25, SB57, SB127, SB293, SB441, SB3059, SB512, SB241, SB1718, SB140, SB2055, SB2075, SB2018, SB1534, SB1567, SB785, SB1233, SB1580, SB1663, SB413, SB447, SB519, SB467, SB1579, SB1191, SB1021, SB1838, SB2807, SB2835, SB546, SB2121, SB2167, SB2035, SB2024, SB1032, SB1049, SB1266, SB1400, SB1302, SB401, SB1596, SB1281, SB1242, SB1343, SB310, SB1346, SB2753, SB2703, SB2221, SB1719, SB2177, SB800, SB790, SB748, SB571, SB1957, SB1923, SB1896, SB1760, SB1335, SB2368, SB2477, SB2587, SB2972, SB2986, SB2965, SB1563, SB1467, SB1164, SB1137, SB614, SB705, SB961, SB918, SB955, SB869, SB850, SB863, SB1610, SB1055, SB2206, SB457, SB2337, SB1362, SCR9, HB5560, HB762, HB 107, HB 114, HB300, HB138, HB4386, HB2495, HB581, HB3348, HB5323

Keywords: higher education, curriculum review, governing board, faculty council, ombudsman, tax exemption, property tax, homestead, fire damage, constitutional amendment, bail reform, criminal justice, felony offenses, public safety, judicial conduct, state commission, judicial misconduct, commission membership, immigration enforcement, ICE agreements

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, Texas law provides two distinct structures for county procurement.
• In counties operating under the board model, such as Dallas and Bear Counties, procurement processes
• House Bill 4259 addresses these challenges by providing counties the option to shift procurement responsibilities
• Before adopting this new procurement structure, counties would be required to hold a public hearing,
• counties.

Transcript Highlights:

• Item B are the procurement rule revisions that are proposed from the Office of State Procurement, and
• the Office of State Procurement Director, Ms.
• Number 22, with Jefferson County.
• County Juvenile Justice Center.
• Contract 120 is with Lone Oak County Task Force.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , Areas of century code related to procurement or specifically procurement of concessions, both OMB and
• , areas of century code related to procurement or specifically procurement of concessions, both OMB and
• I don't know that we would really focus on starting with the counties, you know, the counties...
• and not the actual counties.
• Next one is IT procurement. Next one is IT procurement.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the county clerk for the county of Maui, and our concern, as we will echo Mr.
• Clerk County Maui.
• I think we got County Clerk County Maui.
• state procurement office. state procurement office.
• So no county references to the county. So no county officials.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 1525, which would appropriate funds to counties to open more voter service centers for in-person voting, provide money to the Office of Elections to print and mail the voter information guide to all registered voters, and support a public outreach campaign to increase voter participation. The Office of Elections supported the bill and estimated costs of a little over $2 million to print and mail the guide and about $178,000 for outreach, noting it spent about $441,000 on election advertising in 2024. Testimony from advocacy groups including Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action, Common Cause Hawaii, and Indivisible Hawaii strongly supported the measure, emphasizing access for neighbor island voters, people with disabilities, new voters, and voters who need ballot assistance. County election officials from Honolulu, Maui, and Kauai provided comments or testimony that were more cautious. They said additional funding would be welcome, but staffing and logistics remain major constraints, especially for election-day service centers. Honolulu’s city clerk said funding alone would not necessarily solve long lines, while Maui’s county clerk explained that voter service centers require trained seasonal employees, extensive training, and the ability to handle many ballot styles. Maui also described its current pop-up sites, including Hana, as expensive but necessary for remote communities, and said the county is already running at bare minimum staffing. Members asked questions about who decides how many service centers are opened, how staffing is handled, and whether there is a middle-ground model between the old precinct polling places and the current voter service center system. Honolulu explained that county clerks make those decisions under current law and that the county has tried pop-up sites in addition to its main centers. The discussion also noted that in 2024 most voters used vote by mail, while a smaller number used early in-person voting or final-day service centers. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• how the procurement lifecycle works.
• As of April 3rd, our two procurement bureaus have competitively procured and awarded and executed over
• You know, for instance, a real common one is one of our counties or cities may have procured a contract
• Now, we are procurement experts.
• large IT procurement contracts.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a panel on Florida’s IT procurement process from the Florida Digital Service, the Department of Management Services, and the Department of Financial Services. Witnesses walked through the procurement lifecycle, including planning, market research, solicitation, evaluation, award, implementation, and closeout, and emphasized the role of budget timing, contract managers, and subject matter experts. DMS described the state’s enterprise contracting system, noting more than 1,100 active vendor agreements, over 800 involving IT services, and the statutory requirement to request 25 quotes for certain IT purchases. DFS demonstrated the Florida Accountability Contract Tracking System (FACS), explaining how agencies upload contract and payment data and how the public can search contracts and related documents online. Members focused on accountability, transparency, and whether the state is getting the best products and vendors. Questions addressed how contracts are vetted, how technical evaluations are performed, how financial consequences are used for missed deliverables, how public records and confidential information are handled, and how the state screens vendors for foreign-concern or bad-actor issues. Witnesses said agencies rely on technical experts for evaluations, that contract terms should include measurable deliverables and meaningful financial consequences, and that agencies—not procurement staff—generally manage performance, though Florida Digital Service oversees large IT projects of $10 million or more. The committee then shifted to broader policy discussion, including Senate Bill 7026 and proposals to reorganize state IT governance. Several members argued for stronger centralization under a state CIO or similar enterprise authority, while others cautioned against abrupt restructuring and stressed the need for a transition plan. Members also raised concerns about workforce retention, consulting services, recurring project overruns, and the need for better planning and periodic monitoring. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with the chair thanking members and staff and adjourning the subcommittee.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've had conversations about expanding those pilots to Marion County and to Jefferson County.
• We've had conversations about expanding those pilots to Marion County and to Jefferson County.
• We've had conversations about expanding those pilots to Marion County and to Jefferson County.
• We've had conversations about expanding those pilots to Marion County and to Jefferson County.
• She was a national health County.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The task force met with a quorum, approved the minutes from the August 20 meeting, and then heard testimony from Representative Steven Doan on House Bill 439, a school nutrition bill aimed at restricting certain ultra-processed foods in schools. Doan said the bill was inspired by his own health journey and his work in agriculture, and he described the measure as targeting specific chemical additives in foods served during the school day, not concession sales or after-hours activities. He said the bill would phase in later to give schools time to adjust and noted that the list of restricted additives was drawn from efforts in other states and advocacy groups. Members asked about the chemical abstract numbers, fiscal impact, summer meal programs, fundraisers, and whether the bill would affect parent-provided items; Doan said he had not done a fiscal note and explained that the bill was intended to apply only during instructional time on school property. Committee members generally reacted favorably, with some raising practical concerns about cost and implementation. One member asked about high fructose corn syrup, which Doan said was not included because it is too pervasive in the food system. Another member noted that schools already limit some homemade items and asked about the line between school-provided and parent-provided food. Doan also said the list was based in part on Turning Point USA materials and similar laws in other states, and he referenced federal efforts to define ultra-processed foods. The committee then heard from Kentucky Department of Education officials Matt Ross, Lauren Moore, and Katie Embry on school meals and nutrition programs. They outlined Kentucky’s school lunch, breakfast, summer meals, and other USDA child nutrition programs, including participation and reimbursement figures, and explained how community eligibility provision schools, meal patterns, offer-versus-serve, smart snacks, and local wellness policies work. They said USDA and FDA are currently seeking public input on a uniform definition of ultra-processed foods, that there are no current USDA requirements specifically on ultra-processed foods, and that schools already operate under federal and state rules governing competitive foods, including a state time restriction on smart snacks. They also discussed local purchasing, noting its benefits but also the procurement and staffing challenges schools face. No votes or final actions on the bill were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 161 related to County Senate Bill 161 related to County permitting<00:02:48.400>
• So why are you guys approaching the county councils to pass this at the county level and keep coming
• councils would react, and you know, we think the county councils and the city and county has reacted
• So why are you guys approaching the county councils to pass this at the county level and keep coming
• department County Commission or County department County Commission or County department also<00

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint hearing began with SB 133 on energy, which drew opposition testimony from James Abraham, who said the bill was unnecessary because the Public Utilities Commission had already opened a proceeding to investigate wheeling, including intergovernmental wheeling, and should be allowed to finish its collaborative process. The committees then moved to SB 161 on county permitting and inspection, where several agencies submitted written comments or opposition, while the Grassroots Institute and HCDA-related testimony supported the measure. Members raised concerns about accountability and whether state agencies would report back on projects approved under any permitting exemption, and witnesses suggested annual reporting or amendment language to address that issue. The hearing then turned to SB 232 and SB 588, both related to renewable energy permitting. Testimony on SB 232 was largely supportive, but Rocky Mold of the Hawaii Solar Energy Association said SB 232 was an older version of a bill and that SB 588 was the preferred, updated measure. Members discussed whether the bill should be limited to residential or behind-the-meter customer-sited systems rather than utility-scale projects, and Mold clarified that the proposal was intended for customer-sited systems, not utility-scale facilities. For SB 588, the Department of Land and Natural Resources warned that state or county laws inconsistent with the National Flood Insurance Program could jeopardize flood insurance eligibility and related federal assistance, while Mold argued the bill’s FEMA floodway exemption was needed to avoid blocking solar installations on existing structures. The chair expressed concern about risking federal funding and questioned whether the exemption could be narrowed without defeating the bill’s purpose. SB 412, also on renewable energy, received supportive testimony from the State Energy Office and others. Members questioned whether a single coordinating entity should compile agency assessments, and Mark Glick said the Energy Office could take on that role if given the duty and sufficient staff. The committee then discussed SB 635 on energy efficiency, which would require state agencies to use energy-efficient lighting. Mark Glick testified that much of the work was already underway through benchmarking and related contracts, and a DAGS representative said the state was already assessing 590 buildings over 10,000 square feet, with results expected around 2027. Members suggested amending the bill to require annual status reports so the committees could track progress and avoid duplication. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• today were when we say procurement, we mean it procurement, whether it's for services or commodities
• for it procurements.
• So the procurement agency they need to determine the procurement need, whether that's you know it or
• procurement levels are different.
• What we do is we I have a internal procurement, it procurement team that resides in my shop and we then

Transcript Highlights:

• Normally in procurement, it is, just as Levi said, what is the scope of the procurement.
• In state procurement, the way we operate our procurement is that there is a finite, you know, the solicitation
• The OMB State Procurement Office collaborated with procurement managers from the university system institutions
• OMB provided clarification that alternate procurements—let me explain an alternate procurement in the
• why they are not competitively procuring something.

Summary: The task force approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, striking language about contracting with a security vendor. Members then reviewed a draft bill on concessions procurement (LC 27.0161), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, update language for vending and merchandising machines, and clarify where concession proceeds are deposited. OMB explained the bill and said it was open to further changes, including language to address artificial fragmentation, clarify which government entities are covered, and possibly set contract-length limits. Members raised questions about whether the bill would apply to school districts, park districts, airports, and other political subdivisions, and about whether concession agreements could direct proceeds to nonprofits or other secondary recipients; OMB said the statute is intended to require proceeds to go to the government entity’s operating fund or general fund. OMB also reported on other survey suggestions. It said a proposed general authority for agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is best limited to high-volume agencies. On legal notices, OMB said it had made progress with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernizing online notices, improving ADA compliance, and discussing rate and definition changes. On click-through agreements, OMB and the Attorney General’s office concluded no statutory change was needed after revising internal guidance; the $20,000 threshold was described as a practical cutoff for adhesive, nonnegotiable software terms. OMB also said issues raised by the Center for Distance Education on alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures had been resolved through policy clarification. The University System gave a brief update on its collaboration with OMB and said it was continuing to review concessions, surplus property, and capital project statutes with all institutions involved. The task force then discussed a draft bill on requirements for new or expanded spending, intended to require agencies to identify program purpose, needs, alternatives, success measures, and budget details, and to report on outcomes over time. Members and staff debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how much should be real-time versus periodic, and whether the bill should include full implementation costs for pilot programs. Legislative Council staff said the new program evaluation division is still being built out, that staffing remains limited, and that the office plans to continue working with OMB and the executive branch to refine the proposal before the next meeting. No final action was taken on the draft bills beyond directing further work and follow-up for the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Normally in procurement, it is, just as Levi said, what is the scope of the procurement.
• In state procurement, the way we operate our procurement is that there is a finite, you know, the solicitation
• In state procurement, the way we operate our procurement is that there is a finite, you know, the solicitation
• In state procurement, the way we operate our procurement is that there is a finite, you know, the solicitation
• OMB provided clarification that alternate procurements—let me explain an alternate procurement in the

Summary: The task force first approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, including a correction removing language that suggested the auditor’s office would contract with a security vendor. Members then moved to a bill draft on concessions (LC 27.0161.00000), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, clarify that proceeds go to the entity’s operating fund or general fund, and make other technical updates. OMB explained the draft and answered questions about scope, fragmentation, vendor restrictions, school districts, and whether concession proceeds could be directed to nonprofits; OMB said the draft could be refined further, including clarifying covered entities and contract length. No vote was taken on the draft during the discussion. OMB also reported on other survey items. It said a proposal to broadly allow agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering/land surveying vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is working well for the agencies that already have it. On legal notices, OMB said it has been working with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernization, including an ADA-compliant online notice system and possible statutory updates to reflect changing technology and notice definitions. On click-through agreements for routine IT purchases, OMB and the Attorney General’s office said policy clarification—not statutory change—was enough, and the $20,000 threshold was intended to distinguish low-dollar adhesive contracts from purchases where terms can be negotiated. The committee also heard that OMB and the Center for Distance Education had resolved questions about alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures through existing policy, so no statutory changes were needed there. North Dakota University System representatives gave a brief update on ongoing collaboration with OMB on statutory efficiency ideas, including concessions and surplus property. Finally, the task force discussed a draft on requirements for new or expanded spending programs, which would require agencies to identify purpose, expected benefits, alternatives, success measures, and full implementation costs, and would require reporting on outcomes over time. Members debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how to use the new program evaluators, whether real-time dashboards should be used, and how to choose which programs to evaluate; staff from Legislative Council said they would work with OMB and the auditor’s office to revise the draft and process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Normally in procurement, it is, just as Levi said, what is the scope of the procurement.
• Normally in procurement, it is, just as Levi said, what is the scope of the procurement.
• In state procurement, the way we operate our procurement is that there is a finite— the solicitation
• The OMB State Procurement Office collaborated with procurement managers from the university system institutions
• OMB provided clarification that alternate procurements—let me explain an alternate procurement in the

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Ramsey County and allow the county to Ramsey County and allow the county to expand<00:52:00.480> the
• Up until that point, Ramsey County was the only metropolitan county to not levy from its housing and
• <00:54:10.400> can intersections where Ramsey County can intersections where Ramsey County
• hand that over to our deputy county hand that over to our deputy county manager,<00:55:30.480>
• service team at Ramsey County.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Item B are the Procurement Rule revisions that are proposed from the Office of State Procurement, and
• the Office of State Procurement Director, Ms.
• Jessica Patterson, Director of the Office of State Procurement.
• Number one is with the Division of County Operations.
• Number 22 is with Jefferson County.

Summary: The committee met to review a supplemental agenda, procurement rule revisions, methods of finance, discretionary grants, contracts, and a member disclosure. The Office of State Procurement presented rule changes tied to 2025 legislative changes, including Act 782, with updates to sole-source definitions, unrealistic bids, protest requirements, debarment procedures, and recodification references; the committee voted to accept the supplemental agenda and approve the rules. Members also approved eight methods of finance covering university repairs, equipment replacement, property purchase, and capital projects, along with a large slate of discretionary grants for courts, health, DHS, historic preservation, and tobacco prevention programs. The committee then reviewed RFQs and six ratifications. The ratifications included a Workforce Connections payment to ACT WorkKeys, Department of Health costs from an ice-storm-related water leak, a large Department of Public Safety ratification for Motorola’s Arkansas Wireless Information Network upgrade, Veterans Affairs HVAC and medical-service payments, and a UA Little Rock painting contract. The Department of Public Safety ratification drew extended questioning about why the expired Motorola contract had not been renewed sooner and why the issue took months to reach the committee; agency officials said the project was bond-funded, had not been tracked in ASIS, and involved ongoing negotiations and system updates. Despite concerns, the committee approved the ratifications. Members also reviewed a long list of construction, intergovernmental, out-of-state, and in-state contracts, including numerous university, DHS, health, corrections, and state agency agreements. Several contracts were discussed in more detail, including an SAU custodial contract question about sales tax and transparency reporting, and Department of Corrections aerial application contracts for Tucker and Cummins farms, which officials said served separate facilities in different parts of the state. The committee approved the contract lists, reviewed reports, and accepted a disclosure from Representative Andrew Collins regarding his investment interest in a company leasing property to Arkansas Rehabilitation Services before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• aims out of the state procurement office aims out of the state procurement office aims to<00:
• we're not doing any They want to see we're not doing any They want to see procurement procurement procurement
• addition to some of the procurements addition to some of the procurements types<00:27:08.400>
• It’s like—you know, procure.
• . procure. procure.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Government Operations held an informational briefing with the State Procurement Office on its small business procurement program. SPO staff described the program’s purpose as expanding access to state contracting for small businesses, including veteran-, Native Hawaiian-, and women-owned firms, and said they are seeking to make the current five-year initiative permanent before it ends in June 2027. They reported outreach efforts, a new website and newsletter, statewide surveys, draft administrative rules, and a 38% increase in small business registrations in the HANS database. They also explained that the program is intended to support outreach, education, certification, compliance, and a statewide database to connect agencies with qualified small businesses. Committee members focused heavily on whether the program is producing measurable contract awards, not just registrations. The chair and senators questioned the definition of “small business,” noting that SPO currently relies on SBA standards in HANS and is considering a Hawaii-specific definition based on employees, revenue, and Hawaii residency. Members raised concerns that the data showed only a small number of registered businesses receiving awards and that the database does not yet track awards well enough to evaluate performance. SPO responded that the database has had funding gaps, that the position was only filled in February 2025, and that the agency is still building the system and rules needed to track outcomes accurately. A major theme was how to make the program more effective for very small or “micro” businesses and how to reduce the complexity of state procurement. Members discussed the difference between set-asides and bid preferences, with SPO explaining that set-asides are generally tied to RFPs and preferences to IFBs. The committee suggested that future rules should make participation easier, provide more training and hand-holding, and possibly create pathways for micro businesses or groups of small businesses to bid together. No votes or formal actions were taken; the briefing ended with the committee asking SPO to provide more performance data and clearer information on outreach results and database contents.

Transcript Highlights:

• Peter Abello, Florida Association of Counties, waves in support. Thank you.
• If you're putting out a procurement, it should be posted on your website.
• You'll have a procurement that goes out.
• You got points on your procurement if you did community service.
• And I think having great procurement starts everything.

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 1183, by Rep. G. Lombardo, as amended by a strike-all. The bill would provide liability protection for local governments and private-sector entities that substantially comply with certain cybersecurity practices, including multi-factor authentication, disaster recovery plans, and related policies and procedures. Rep. Lombardo said the measure is intended to create incentives for better cybersecurity and to limit class-action exposure after incidents, while still allowing suits where negligence can be shown. Supporters included TechNet, the Florida Justice Reform Institute, the Florida League of Cities, Associated Industries of Florida, the Florida Association of Counties, and Dr. Edward Long of the James Madison Institute; Vice Chair Steele, Rep. Blanco, and Rep. McFarland also spoke in favor. Ranking Member Bracy Davis opposed the bill, saying she was not comfortable granting liability protections to entities that may have contributed to breaches and questioning whether substantial compliance would be self-attested. The amendment was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably by a 14-2 vote. After the vote, the committee shifted into an extended discussion about Florida’s state IT governance structure, procurement, and project management. Members criticized the current federated model as fragmented and lacking clear accountability, with repeated references to long-running problems such as cost overruns, weak vendor oversight, workforce shortages, and the troubled I-Connect system. Several members argued that the state needs a single accountable leader or stronger enterprise authority over agency technology decisions. Ranking Member Bracy Davis raised concerns about the impact of broken systems on vulnerable populations and asked about the role of advisory councils. Rep. G. Lombardo, Vice Chair Steele, Rep. Miller, and Rep. Groh all emphasized the need for centralized leadership, better alignment of authority and budget, and more disciplined procurement and integration practices. A public witness, Victoria Zep of Team 180, testified in support of a more enterprise-wide approach and said the private sector also wants more organization and transparency. She criticized short procurement timelines, limited competition, and poorly written scopes, and urged the state to post procurements more openly and seek broader vendor input. She also discussed the need to respect agency-specific federal requirements while still improving statewide coordination. The chair closed by asking members to bring forward ideas for immediate and long-term reforms, including review of Senate Bill 7026, and the meeting adjourned without further business.