Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Garcia's bill Senate Bill 48 related to judicial sales and procedures.
• fairness and transparency in our judicial sales process.
• It ensures judicial oversight, protect surplus funds and mandates independent professionals to handle
• The bar receives no state funding.
• Our clients security fund that fund provides can money to consumers who have been wrong by a lawyer.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• grants or federal funding.
• Last thing is, I don't recall seeing it on here, state judicial fund collections.
• fund.
• OK, so is or do they receive funding through this, or are they independently funded?
• State-funded hospital, state-funded district attorney's office, state-funded DHS, and the judges, and

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In fact, I served on the Judicial Council for four years.
• And we're creating a judicial removal through, we're creating judicial removal from a third branch, when
• It only calls into question judicial discretion.
• then they are subject to our purview because of the state funds that are going, state or federal funds
• , then they are subject to our purview because of the state funds that are going, state or federal funds

Summary: The House and Governmental Affairs Committee met on Senate Bill 123, a proposed constitutional amendment to create a legislative process for removing judges for cause. Senator Morris said the bill was needed because of uncertainty in the current Constitution about whether impeachment applies to judges, given the Judiciary Commission’s role in judicial discipline. He argued the measure would provide a clearer, higher-threshold accountability mechanism, and the committee adopted a technical amendment renumbering provisions and later clarified that the bill uses a majority vote in the House and two-thirds in the Senate, consistent with impeachment-style thresholds. Much of the hearing centered on testimony from Anna Carter and her family, who supported the bill after the murder of Jacob Carter in New Orleans. They described his death and other cases they said showed judges releasing dangerous offenders despite repeated violations, missed electronic-monitoring check-ins, and other warning signs. They argued the bill would create a last-resort accountability tool when judicial decisions or supervision failures lead to preventable harm. Several committee members expressed sympathy and said the testimony highlighted serious problems in the justice system, though some also suggested the bill should address district attorneys, electronic-monitoring oversight, or broader systemic issues. Opposition came from members who warned the proposal was overly broad, could become a political tool, and might conflict with existing constitutional provisions governing impeachment and judicial discipline. They argued the Judiciary Commission and Supreme Court already provide a disciplinary framework and that the bill could chill judicial independence or create due-process concerns. The ACLU’s Sarah Whittington also opposed the bill, noting technical inconsistencies in the draft, questioning why impeachment had not been tried first, and arguing the measure singled out judicial discretion while leaving other elected officials’ discretion untouched. The committee took no final vote on the bill during the hearing, but did adopt the technical amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• fund.
• , private funds.
• Chair and members: we are a well-funded fund and we are not a state fund.
• Chair and members: we are a well-funded fund and we are not a state fund.
• And so our judicial system is on the struggle bus right now with funding.

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with eight members present and deferred HB 127. It then considered a series of bills, most of which were reported favorably without opposition. HB 22 revised COLA rules for the clerks of court retirement system, allowing more frequent COLAs when the system is better funded; HB 324 made judicial stipends permanent and added future COLAs subject to available funding; HB 233 increased jury mileage reimbursement; HB 47 reorganized assessor retirement COLA statutes; HB 533 allowed St. Tammany Parish to transfer unused witness-fee account balances to the 22nd Judicial District Court; HB 980 adjusted eligibility for the Firemen’s Supplemental Pay Board; HCR 45 urged Congress to clarify ARPA deadlines for water projects; HB 559 increased court costs in the 4th Judicial District; HB 290 recreated the Department of Treasury and related entities in statute; and HB 382 addressed Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget review authority over Group Benefits plans. The committee also reported HB 1157 favorably, creating a financing bank mechanism for infrastructure projects, and HB 575 favorably, giving youth aging out of foster care preferred access to surplus state vehicles through the Louisiana Property Assistance Agency. Several measures drew more discussion. HB 1236, dealing with pharmacy benefit managers and professional dispensing fees, prompted extensive testimony from the sponsor, the Legislative Fiscal Office, the Department of Insurance, independent pharmacies, and PBM representatives. Supporters said it clarifies and strengthens enforcement of existing PBM law and protects independent pharmacies; opponents argued the bill’s requirement that PBMs bear dispensing-fee costs would be difficult to implement and could raise premiums. The sponsor said he would work on amendments, including clarifying language and a delayed effective date, and the bill was nevertheless moved favorably. SB 25, on registrar of voters compensation, was amended to a revised pay structure and then reported favorably. HB 47 and HB 533 were also presented as funding and administrative cleanups for retirement and court-related accounts, with local support noted. The committee also heard HB 233 on jury duty mileage reimbursement, which the sponsor said updates a 1961 rate and would be funded locally at an estimated average increase of about $4,000 per judicial district. HB 324 on judicial salaries was described as self-funded by the judiciary and subject to available funding, with no budget impact. HB 575 on foster youth transportation was presented as a non-appropriation measure aimed at helping youth aging out of foster care by giving them preferred access to surplus vehicles. HB 382, which concerns the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget’s role in approving Group Benefits plans, was reported favorably with little discussion. The meeting ended after a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund and align with the National Defense Authorization Act. Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• But it would have some sort of judicial review before it's definitely granted? Oh, absolutely.
• What I understand from the Judicial Administrator is that it was assessed that the Judicial Administrator's
• It's my understanding that there was technology funding provided to the Supreme Court for this.
• And it's funded through the technology fund. And I would...

Summary: The committee first took up SCR 30 by Senator Connick, which memorializes Congress to compel the Department of Justice to release unclassified Epstein-related records. Senator Connick gave personal remarks about child sexual abuse and the need to hold powerful people accountable. Representative Newell supported the resolution, and the committee reported it favorably without opposition. Next, the committee considered SCR 40 by Senator Selders, urging Congress to timely pass defense appropriations that fully fund and align with the National Defense Authorization Act. The measure was briefly explained as a statement of support for military readiness and proper appropriations, and it was moved favorably with no opposition. The main substantive discussion centered on SB 259 by Senator Barrow, which would authorize an online portal for civil protective order applications. A Supreme Court protective order registry representative explained that the portal would let domestic and dating violence survivors complete petitions online, with the same judicial review, service, and hearing process that exists now; the bill would not eliminate manual filing. Members asked about fees, guidance for applicants, verification, judicial review, public access, and the risk of false filings. The witness and several members emphasized that the process remains temporary and ex parte at the outset, that final orders are issued by judges, and that the registry is not public. A domestic violence coalition representative also testified in support. Representative Newell moved favorable, Representative Edmondson objected, and the committee reported the bill favorably by a 10-1 vote. Finally, Representative Baham presented HR 245 condemning political violence in the United States. He cited recent and historical examples of political attacks and argued that violence against public figures and activists is harmful regardless of party. Members voiced support, no one objected, and the resolution was adopted before the committee adjourned, with the chair noting it was the last meeting of the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Immigration enforcement from entering unless they have a valid judicial warrant or a court order.
• by providers in help. judicial precedent and practice that's already being implemented by providers
• since 2000 through the National Cancer Institute's SEER program, Federally funded since 2000 through
• Without action, we risk losing over $15 million in annual federal funding, a significant cost to the
• So thankful that we have the ability to secure, or not put at risk, $15 million in federal funding by

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard several Senate bills focused on health care access, privacy, and public health data. SB 81 (Arreguín) would require health care facilities to create nonpublic areas and bar immigration enforcement from entering without a judicial warrant or court order, while also protecting disclosure of immigration-related information in medical records. The bill drew strong support from labor, immigrant-rights, health care, and patient advocacy groups, with committee members emphasizing patient safety and privacy; one member raised implementation concerns about how the restrictions would work in practice. The committee voted the bill out on a due pass motion to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee, with one no vote recorded. SB 250 (Ochoa Bogh) would add skilled nursing facilities to DHCS’s managed care provider directory so Medi-Cal beneficiaries can more easily identify covered facilities. Supporters said the change would help seniors and people with disabilities avoid confusion and rushed placement decisions, especially during hospital discharge, and would make existing information easier to use. The committee passed the bill to Appropriations on a unanimous vote. SB 717 (Richardson) would formally recognize California’s three regional cancer registries in state law to help preserve federal funding and support cancer surveillance data collection. The author and supporters said the measure would protect more than $15 million in annual federal support and strengthen cancer research and tracking; the committee approved it unanimously to Appropriations. SB 504 (Laird) would allow health care providers to disclose personally identifying information about previously reported HIV infections to state or local health officials when needed for disease control or care coordination. The author described the bill as a modernization of reporting and coordination practices, and supporters from the California Medical Association and Planned Parenthood backed it. The committee sent the bill out as amended to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee on a unanimous vote. The meeting also included routine consent-calendar action and multiple add-on votes, with the committee repeatedly holding the roll open to record additional members’ votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• provided to the in general funds provided to the judicial<01:11:17.520> branch<01:11:18.000>
• The House funded with general funds; the Senate funds it with education trust funds.
• The House funded with general funds; the Senate funds it with education trust funds.
• Judicial branch amended RSA 135-C relative to the indigent defense fund and covering the cost of court-appointed
• Judicial branch amended RSA 135-C relative to the indigent defense fund and covering the cost of court-appointed

Keywords: LBA Briefing on Budget, 928, house, all

Summary: The presentation was an LBA overview of Senate changes to the House-passed state budget, with Michael Kane explaining how Senate Finance updated revenue and spending estimates after April revenue figures and agency discussions. He said the Senate’s revenue outlook was higher than the House’s in some areas, but lower in others, especially video lottery terminal revenue, and that the biggest differences also came from changes to revenue splits between the general fund and education trust fund, lapse estimates, and several policy changes in House Bill 1 and House Bill 2. Kane highlighted several major revenue and policy differences: the Senate changed the business tax, tobacco tax, and real estate transfer tax splits; adjusted liquor revenue dedication; removed the House’s meals-and-rooms distribution cap; delayed the Lakes Region facility proceeds plan; altered the PECARD fund treatment; added a granite patron of the arts tax credit; and changed the treatment of unique funds and video lottery terminal revenue. On spending, he noted Senate changes to judicial, corrections, HHS, human rights commission, and other budgets, including additional settlement costs, higher lapse assumptions, and a different approach to Medicaid premium revenue and retirement savings. He also described Senate additions such as a nursing home bed fee, Hampstead Hospital transition funding, and changes to the YDC claims settlement fund. The presentation focused on comparing House and Senate surplus statements across fiscal years 2025 through 2027, including projected ending balances and rainy day fund transfers. Kane repeatedly emphasized that the numbers were still dependent on final revenues and lapse amounts, and that some balances would be carried forward and trued up later in the biennium. No committee vote or final action was described in the excerpt; it was an informational budget briefing and comparison of the two chambers’ proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• before funds from the Strategic Closing Fund may be expended.
• to eligible fund managers, authorizing fund managers to use grant funds for marketing costs, and requiring
• before funds from the Strategic Closing Fund may be expended.
• to eligible fund managers, authorizing fund managers to use grant funds for marketing costs, and requiring
• to eligible fund managers, authorizing fund managers to use grant funds for marketing costs, and requiring

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Friday, March 20, 2026, 960, senate, all

Summary: The Senate reconvened with a quorum and quickly moved through committee reports and second-reader bills, adopting committee amendments and sending several measures to third reading without objection. Bills advanced included SB 10 on State Highway Administration approval timelines for speed monitoring systems; SB 487 on speed monitoring systems in safety corridors; SB 689 creating a task force on post-release services and re-entry; SB 811 requiring reporting of new home sale prices in multiple listing services; SB 877 authorizing a Baltimore City stop sign monitoring pilot in the 41st district; SB 937, the Maryland Fair Chance Housing Act, limiting use of criminal history in tenant screening; SB 984 barring private immigration detention facilities; SB 465 on out-of-court statements and second-degree assault; SB 187 on pre-release services for incarcerated women; SB 388, the Decade Act, revising multiple economic development and tax credit programs; and SB 844, the annual corrective bill. Most of the floor discussion focused on explaining amendments and the policy effects of the bills. Supporters described the housing bill as expanding second-chance opportunities while adding safeguards, and a senator asked detailed questions about how landlords could screen for serious offenses and sex offender registry status. SB 984 was described as an emergency measure preventing state and local approval of private detention facilities and authorizing enforcement by the Attorney General. SB 465 was presented as closing a gap in Maryland law on witness intimidation and aligning the state with broader practice. SB 187 would rename and expand the women’s pre-release facility into a re-entry facility and require progress reports. The most extended debate came on SB 165, the on-site wastewater systems bill. One amendment to exempt redevelopment properties from inspection was offered and failed by roll call with 27 votes in the negative. A second amendment to require consultation with Maryland Realtors in developing regulations was then offered; supporters argued it would help avoid delays in property settlements and bring real estate professionals into the regulatory process, while opponents said the bill concerned broader wastewater regulations, not just property transfers. The transcript cuts off during that amendment’s discussion, before the final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm not too worried about the funding aspect of it.
• I'm not too worried about the funding aspect of it.
• In fact, I've got one education funding.
• <02:01:07.920> mandates and the rejection of judicial mandates and the rejection of judicial
• legislative, executive and judicial legislative, executive and judicial ought<02:06:17.440> to

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first recessed for a subcommittee meeting on HB 313, which concerned an open-meetings-related issue. In the subcommittee, members discussed concerns that the bill might be unnecessary because current law already allows a person to request an open meeting in advance; the subcommittee then voted ITL on HB 313 by voice vote and closed its work session. The full Judiciary Committee then reconvened and took up CACR 6, the proposed constitutional amendment on a “right to compute,” with members debating whether the language was too broad and could create unintended consequences. Supporters framed it as a forward-looking protection for computation resources and strong encryption, while opponents said it was too open-ended and better addressed by future legislation. The committee voted ITL on CACR 6 by a 17-0 roll call. The committee next turned to HB 232, as amended, concerning the rights of conscience for medical professionals. The amendment narrowed the bill to abortion-related objections, removed sterilization and artificial contraception, aligned the abortion definition with existing state law, and reduced damages from treble damages to actual damages. Supporters said the bill would protect conscience rights, give physicians and patients more choice, and could help attract providers to New Hampshire. Opponents argued it was overly broad, unclear in key definitions, and could interfere with employers’ ability to assign staff, especially in rural health settings. Members also raised concerns about the bill’s scope and enforcement, including the broad definition of “participate,” the lack of clarity around exceptions for providers whose services include abortion as a “major part,” emergency determinations, and the inclusion of nursing homes in the definition of health care institution. Some members argued the bill singled out abortion while other controversial medical procedures were not treated similarly, and others criticized the minimum-damages provision as potentially punitive and designed to deter participation. The discussion continued without a final vote shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• The total is $75.1 billion in all funds, an increase of $13.6 billion.
• funding contingent upon passage of House Bill 2 and Senate Bill 569.
• capital needs at our non-public university fund institutions.
• In higher education, there is no funding for gender-affirming care.
• And we got the money into the water fund.

Summary: The House met in a late-session floor session that began with prayer, pledges, quorum, and a series of excused absences and Senate messages reporting action on numerous bills, conference committee appointments, and conference reports. Members also adopted a memorial resolution honoring Mark James Hanna, a Capitol lobbyist and advocate for nurses, and a congratulatory resolution for Rishi Tarumalasetti, an eighth-grade civics bee winner from Katy. The chamber also received and recorded a parliamentary colloquy about an unusual Senate request on SB 293, with the Chair stating the House could not recede from only part of its amendments and could not suspend the rules because the bill had not been returned from the Senate. The bulk of the session was devoted to taking up conference committee reports and related procedural resolutions, especially the state budget. The House adopted a resolution allowing the SB 1 conferees to go outside the normal bounds, then adopted the SB 1 conference report on a 107-21 vote. Debate on the budget centered on public education funding, tax relief, health care, corrections pay, and judicial compensation, with supporters calling it a responsible compromise and opponents arguing it was overly expansive and insufficient on property tax relief. The House also adopted a technical correction resolution tying judicial pay increases in SB 1 to the House version of SB 293, and members discussed at length the relationship between judicial salaries and legislative pensions. The chamber then adopted a long series of conference reports on measures covering topics such as school library review and book challenges (SB 13), SNAP restrictions on sweetened drinks and candy (SB 379), hospital price transparency (SB 331), nursing home accountability (SB 457), school district personnel compensation conflicts (HB 3372), property notice rules (HB 2011), research and development tax credits (SB 2018), and several other bills affecting elections, permits, education, and criminal justice. Most reports passed by wide margins, though some drew significant opposition, especially SB 13 and SB 379. The House also granted several Senate requests for conference committees and introduced additional resolutions to suspend conferee limits on various bills as the session moved toward adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:28:14.360> So<00:28:15.360> where funding that the judicial race.
• So where funding that the judicial race.
• regards to transportation funding regards to transportation funding policy.<00:33:25.440> And
• <00:46:30.480> elections more people in the judicial elections more people in the judicial
• actually have some ideas about judicial actually have some ideas about judicial um<00:46:47.119>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• compensation as well as judicial transparency, accountability, judicial compensation as well as judicial
• First off, you all have judicial conduct that you can't fight back.
• As an organization, 100% fully behind increase in judicial pay.
• On the bill, just so I can be consistent as a judicial officer.
• I can be consistent as a judicial officer.

Bills: HB40

Keywords: law enforcement, sheriffs, constables, contracts, county authority

Summary: The Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence met to hear House Bill 1761, a broad judicial package focused on increasing judicial compensation and adding accountability and efficiency measures. The chair explained that HB 1707 and HB 2100 were withdrawn from the agenda, and that HB 1761 would be taken up first because many judges and stakeholders were present. The committee substitute for HB 1761 proposed a 30% increase in base judicial pay to $182,000, changes to judicial retirement linkage, stronger judicial conduct provisions, and efficiency measures such as targeted reporting for judges not meeting benchmarks, appellate in-person meeting encouragement, and time limits on certain motions. The chair and several supporters said judicial pay had reached “emergency status,” citing Texas’s low national ranking and difficulty recruiting and retaining qualified judges. Witnesses in support included presiding and district judges, the State Bar’s judicial section, business and trial lawyer groups, and prosecutors. They emphasized that many judges work long hours off the bench, handle warrants at night and on weekends, manage heavy dockets, and face recruitment problems in both urban and rural counties. Supporters also said higher pay would help attract experienced lawyers, retain judges, and improve court efficiency. Several witnesses and members discussed judicial accountability, including public reporting of court performance and the role of the Texas Supreme Court and presiding judges in setting benchmarks. Some members raised concerns that raw statistics can be misleading because judges also do substantial off-the-bench work and often help cover other courts’ dockets. There was also testimony and discussion about the bill’s conduct and discipline provisions. A representative of the Texas Civil Rights Project opposed parts of the bill that would tie pay raises to changes affecting judicial independence, warning about subjective bail-related discipline standards and possible chilling effects. The executive director of the State Commission on Judicial Conduct cautioned against civil penalties for complainants, saying it could discourage good-faith complaints and create litigation risks. Other witnesses supported accountability reforms but urged caution about unintended consequences, especially for family and emergency cases and for judges handling warrants and other time-sensitive matters. After testimony, the committee withdrew the committee substitute and left HB 1761 pending, then recessed the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Swanson, that we maybe should pay more attention to in our examination of funding of elections?
• systems that are in place in terms of amounts of funds and lack of disclosure and sources.
• systems that are in place in terms of amounts of funds and lack of disclosure and sources.
• systems that are in place in terms of amounts of funds and lack of disclosure and sources.
• The nature of the funding systems that are in place in terms of amounts of funds and lack of disclosure

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Elections Committee met on February 6, 2025, and first considered the reappointment of Steven Swanson to the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board. Swanson described his background in legal aid, lobbying, judging, and international rule-of-law work, and said he wanted to continue serving the public. Committee members praised his experience and discussed the importance of campaign finance oversight, including preventing corporate participation in Minnesota elections. Senator Wosinski moved to recommend Swanson’s confirmation, and the motion was adopted. The committee then heard Senate File 529, a proposed constitutional amendment to state that elections shall be free, fair, and equal, and that no civil or military power may interfere with the free exercise of the right to vote. Senator Dibble presented the bill as a way to strengthen voting rights and provide a constitutional basis to challenge voter suppression, gerrymandering, and unfair campaign practices. Testimony in support came from David Fischer of Clean Elections Minnesota and Jean Massie of Fair Vote Minnesota, both of whom argued the amendment would protect access to voting, increase confidence in elections, and align Minnesota with other states that have similar language. Members discussed whether the amendment’s broad language could invite judicial interpretation or affect future election laws. Senator Koran questioned how the proposal would improve Minnesota’s already high turnout, while Senator Grant raised concerns that the terms “free, fair, and equal” were undefined and could shift power to the courts. Senator Lucero proposed an oral amendment to add “ensuring one eligible citizen, one vote” after the word “equal,” saying it would address concerns about future voter ID laws. The amendment was restated by counsel and discussed, with Senator Dibble saying it did not significantly harm the bill but suggesting it might imply a requirement he did not intend. The transcript ends during discussion of that oral amendment, and no final vote on the bill itself is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• So judicial council has to fund private attorneys who take cases when the public defender can't due to
• So judicial council has to fund<00:20:06.000> private<00:20:06.480> attorneys<00:20:07.360
• judicial council. judicial council.
• million out of the fund. million out of the fund.
• It moves the funding from general fund funding to 911 and puts back the general fund spending.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , relating to providing a one-time settlement payment applicable to certain benefits paid by the Judicial
• charges by certain counties authorizing administrative penalties for the submission of transportation funding
• , relating to providing a one-time settlement payment applicable to certain benefits paid by the Judicial
• , relating to providing a one-time settlement payment applicable to certain benefits paid by the Judicial
• is referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation Funding.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the chief defender in the 15th and 16th Judicial Districts.
• to the way the prosecutors are funded.
• I think it's a fundamental mistake to have a state agency budget state funds and other public funds and
• I think it's a fundamental mistake to have a state agency budget state funds and other public funds and
• It will sit aside on a different fund, especially for that work.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The Louisiana Public Defender Oversight Board met on June 18, 2026, with a quorum present and adopted the agenda. Public comment was dominated by district defenders and other public defense leaders praising State Public Defender Remy Starns for improving communication, collaboration, and overall system performance. Speakers from multiple districts said the system is more unified, better supported, and more stable than in prior years, and several credited Starns with helping resolve long-standing tensions and improve coordination across capital, district, and appellate work. One speaker also paid tribute to the late Mike Ginnard, describing him as instrumental to earlier public defense reforms. In his report, Starns said the system has improved over the last seven years but still needs a sustainable funding source. He discussed legislative changes affecting public defense, including a cleanup bill, elimination of filing fees for writs and appeals, and a new procedure related to expert-fee requests in light of recent court rulings. He also described ongoing efforts to integrate capital and appellate work into district offices, expand the laws/writs program, and continue post-conviction work under new statutory rules. Starns emphasized recruitment and retention, including the need for affordable health insurance and retirement benefits, and again honored Mike Ginnard for his leadership and service. The board then adopted proposed bylaws, after some discussion about special committees and public meeting requirements. Members agreed to create a committee to review and refine the bylaws later, and they also elected a vice chairman and designated the Office of the Public Defender, with staff support, as secretary for recordkeeping. Finally, the board heard a presentation on the strategic plan, which was described as largely an update to the prior version with terminology changes, new accessibility-related goals, and added performance measures for training, compliance, and communications. The strategic plan was adopted by resolution, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• which is the judicial branch budget. which is the judicial branch budget.
• general fund. general fund.
• purposes of SEEK funding. purposes of SEEK funding.
• fund.
• in bond funds. in bond funds.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:23 HB 503 Discussion 00:01:00 HB 503 Vote 00:02:17 HB 504 Discussion 00:02:53 HB 504 Vote 00:04:48 HB 500 Discussion 00:05:19 HB 500 Vote 00:29:18 HB 900 Discussion 00:32:02 HB 900 Vote 00:33:00, 958, all

Summary: The Kentucky Senate Appropriations and Revenue Committee met with a quorum and first took up House Bill 503, the legislative branch budget, adopting a committee substitute and reporting it favorably. The chair said the Senate version fully funds defined calculations, provides 2% raises in each fiscal year for legislative employees, removes a paragraph on operating expense reductions, and includes $1 million in the first year for a judicial branch salary study. House Bill 504, the judicial branch budget, was then amended and reported favorably; changes included 2% annual raises for judicial employees, revised operating expense language, $1 million each year for county current services, retention of Boyle County fit-up language, reporting requirements for smaller capital projects, full funding for nine judges added in 2022, and removal of furlough prohibitions and certain budget implementation language. Both bills passed the committee unanimously with favorable expressions to the floor. The committee then considered House Bill 500, the executive branch budget, adopting a committee substitute before hearing a lengthy summary of major spending and policy changes. The chair described statewide 2% annual employee raises, agency base reductions with many exemptions, increased school safety and 911 funding, veterans and military funding, local government and severance-related changes, attorney general and auditor funding, pension and retirement system support, education funding changes including SEEK, postsecondary and scholarship provisions, public safety and corrections funding, and multiple capital projects. The chair also highlighted Medicaid-related provisions, including added waiver slots, increased state-directed payments, a 2.5% reduction in managed care vendor payments for plan years 2027 and 2028 with savings redirected to fee-for-service rates, and additional funding for behavioral health and public health programs. The bill was reported favorably after members explained their votes, with several noting they had only recently received the full 228-page bill and wanted more time for detailed review. Finally, the committee adopted a committee substitute for House Bill 900, an appropriation measure for government agencies, and reported it favorably. The chair said the bill remains a work in progress and that one-time funding requests from across the Commonwealth and across party lines would continue to be addressed as the process moves forward. All measures considered during the meeting passed the committee with unanimous or near-unanimous favorable votes, and the meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• c> with >> This bill does have funding along with >> This bill does have funding along
• the funds, correct?
• evidence carefully and acts judiciously evidence carefully and acts judiciously on<00:53:46.560>
• judicial review. judicial review. Senator<00:54:42.200> Cronk.
• <00:56:59.600> The headnote judicial review. The headnote judicial review.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is relating to the major disaster fund.
• This is relating to the major disaster fund.
• arrest comes with a Judicial arrest comes with a Judicial determination<00:24:20.200> of<
• No, the judicial determination of probable cause still has to be filled out.
• No, the judicial determination of probable cause still has to be filled out.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Public Safety and Military Affairs heard testimony on several public safety and criminal justice measures. HB 433 HD1 would appropriate funds for Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation re-entry services; DCR Director Tommy Johnson said the department supports the bill’s intent but noted the same $4 million request is in the governor’s executive budget, and the Correctional System Oversight Commission, Public Defender, ACLU, OHA, Chamber of Commerce, and other groups testified in support. Members asked whether the funding was already in the governor’s budget, and Johnson confirmed it was requested there for the next two fiscal years. HB 1045 would make emergency appropriations for law enforcement personnel costs, and the Department of Law Enforcement, DAGS, Budget and Finance, and the Judiciary testified in support, with DLE saying the amounts match what Budget and Finance will present. HB 1296 would require timely notice and reporting to the Legislature when the governor transfers money to the major disaster fund; Budget and Finance and the Governor’s office offered comments, and no opposition was noted. HB 1002 would extend the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission coordinator’s term and clarify inspection authority; DCR and the commission supported it, with the commission saying a longer term would help the coordinator do the job effectively and allow inspections without notice. HB 596 would clarify what events qualify as disasters and emergencies for emergency management purposes. Hawaii Emergency Management Agency opposed the bill, while maritime and Grassroot Institute representatives supported it. Members asked whether the bill’s 21-day limit should be extended to 30 days, and HEMA said it opposed any change that would limit the governor’s flexibility in the response phase. The committee also heard HB 1128 HD1, which would set factors for warrantless arrests for petty misdemeanors and violations and require officers to record the justification. The Office of the Public Defender, ACLU, and some reform advocates supported it as a check on police discretion and a way to encourage citations, while the Attorney General, Honolulu Police Department, prosecutors, DLE, county police chiefs, SHOPO, and others opposed it as too restrictive and likely to create litigation and court delays. No votes or final committee actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• was from capital expense funds.
• funding was from capital expense funds. funding was from capital expense funds.
• next year's funding cycle.
• that's the current amount in the fund. that's the current amount in the fund.
• that funded what we could fund out of that funded what we could fund out of that million<00:52

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 13 January, 2026; 1:45 PM, 925, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard first from the Office of State Public Defender, which said its core budget request was essentially level funding, with attorney and investigator pay raises already included because of the DA pay raise linkage. The main discussion focused on two initiatives: a rural public defense pilot in four counties and a Hinds County/Jackson public defense expansion. The pilot, funded last year with capital expense money, has formed a nonprofit, hired a director and staff, opened an office in Kosciusko, and began taking cases on October 1; most of its 44 cases involved day-one jail visits. The office said the project is intended to improve early representation, reduce jail time, and generate data, while not displacing local public defenders. For Hinds County, the office said new data show about 31% of cases originate from state-agency arrests, and it is seeking roughly $525,000 more to fully fund positions, bringing the total request to about $952,972 for five lawyers, an investigator, a legal secretary, and office expenses. Senators asked about funding sources and workload standards; the office said the pilot request had been submitted as general funds rather than capital expense, and that it is using weighted workload measures rather than strict national caseload standards. The committee then heard from the Attorney General’s office, represented by Deputy Attorney General Doug Miracle, who presented the FY 2027 budget request. The office requested $45.48 million total, including $35.31 million in general funds, which is a reduction from the prior year’s appropriation, but also requested a $1.58 million increase in salary funding. Miracle said the office is losing attorneys to other state agencies and district attorney offices because of salary caps and pay disparities, noting the Attorney General’s statutory salary cap of $150,000 and that more than 18 attorneys left last year. He said HB 1509 created higher pay levels for district attorneys and assistant district attorneys, making retention harder for the Attorney General’s office, and asked for either the salary increase or authority to move funds between budget lines. Miracle also highlighted the office’s work on child welfare and human trafficking, noting that federal HHS officials were visiting Jackson to discuss foster children and that the office administers the state’s human trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation fund. He said the office is working to reduce time children spend in state custody and support services for trafficking victims and foster youth. The committee discussed statewide youth court reform as well, with Miracle explaining that the office supports expert recommendations and a plan that could create 25 youth court positions in 20 chancery districts at an estimated $10 million, based on DHS and AOC data and a model using state-employed and contract lawyers. No votes were taken during the excerpted meeting.