Transcript Highlights:

• It depends on who is Presenting that surtax.
• In some cases, folks have dual diagnosis.
• It's all about what we do with the data; it depends on the quality of the data.
• What you're going to have happen is all these cases will not plead guilty.
• State attorneys are going out to look over the cases and not to prosecute these cases.

Bills: SB 5, SJR 3, HB 11, HJR 72, HB 48, HB 27, HB 144, HB 37, HB 1481, HB 581, HB 1696, HB 2216, HB 1035, HB 1633, HB 742, HB 754, HB 1689, HB 1690, HB 2669, HB 391, HB 517, HB 1775, HB 1024, HB 1607, HB 252, HB 1716, HB 1562, HB 4116, HB 1866, HB 1741, HB 2103, HB 2637, HB 2884, HB 3707, HB 503, HB 1089, HB 1757, HB 2986, HB 972, SB 365, SB 1786, SB 5, SJR 3, HB 14, HB 43, HB 36, HB 26, HB 149, HB 121, HB 206, HB 136, HB 3114, HB 2733, HB 1732, HB 3700, HB 467, HB 1130, HB 1846, HB 1442, HB 1147, HB 2176, HB 2701, HB 805, HB 2890, HB 1154, HB 1644, HB 2118, HB 1718, HB 2488, HB 2596, HB 2468, HB 484, HB 2578, HB 3204, HB 1041, HB 307, HB 685, HB 538, HB 2525, HB 3125, HB 2027, HB 2894, HB 3077, HB 106, HB 18, HB 11, HJR 72, HB 48, HB 27, HB 144, HB 37, HB 1481, HB 581, HB 1696, HB 2216, HB 1035, HB 1633, HB 742, HB 754, HB 1689, HB 1690, HB 2669, HB 391, HB 517, HB 1775, HB 1024, HB 1607, HB 252, HB 1716, HB 1562, HB 4116, HB 1866, HB 1741, HB 2103, HB 2637, HB 2884, HB 3707, HB 503, HB 1089, HB 1757, HB 2986, HB 972

Keywords: dementia, research institute, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, funding, grants, state health initiatives, research funding, state budget, prevention, healthcare, medical research, Dementia Prevention and Research Institute, licensing, reciprocity, regulation, Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, interstate agreements, tax exemption, intellectual disability

Transcript Highlights:

• Thurgood Marshall took that case to the Supreme Court.
• This is a classic case of government picking winners and losers.
• and certain other criminal cases.
• I nurse the list of prohibited use cases. Speaker, I move adoption. Mr.
• The act known as ICWA has long been touted as the legal gold standard for child welfare cases.

Bills: SB5, SJR3, HB 11, HJR72, HB48, HB27, HB144, HB37, HB1481, HB581, HB1696, HB2216, HB 1035, HB1633, HB742, HB754, HB1689, HB1690, HB2669, HB391, HB517, HB1775, HB 1024, HB1607, HB252, HB1716, HB1562, HB4116, HB1866, HB1741, HB2103, HB2637, HB2884, HB3707, HB503, HB 1089, HB1757, HB2986, HB972, SB365, SB1786, SB5, SJR3, HB14, HB43, HB36, HB26, HB149, HB 121, HB206, HB136, HB3114, HB2733, HB1732, HB3700, HB467, HB 1130, HB1846, HB1442, HB 1147, HB2176, HB2701, HB805, HB2890, HB 1154, HB1644, HB2118, HB1718, HB2488, HB2596, HB2468, HB484, HB2578, HB3204, HB 1041, HB307, HB685, HB538, HB2525, HB3125, HB2027, HB2894, HB3077, HB 106, HB18, HB 11, HJR72, HB48, HB27, HB144, HB37, HB1481, HB581, HB1696, HB2216, HB 1035, HB1633, HB742, HB754, HB1689, HB1690, HB2669, HB391, HB517, HB1775, HB 1024, HB1607, HB252, HB1716, HB1562, HB4116, HB1866, HB1741, HB2103, HB2637, HB2884, HB3707, HB503, HB 1089, HB1757, HB2986, HB972

Keywords: dementia, research institute, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, funding, grants, state health initiatives, research funding, state budget, prevention, healthcare, medical research, Dementia Prevention and Research Institute, licensing, reciprocity, regulation, Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, interstate agreements, tax exemption, intellectual disability

Transcript Highlights:

• And a lot of them are cases, you know, we had one case involving a woman out in the west side walking
• , we had one case cases, you know, we had one case involving<00:20:56.159> a<00:20:56.559>
• It depends. It depends on what their—you can make it. If it's legal now, it's still legal.
• It depends. It depends on what their—you can make it. If it's legal now, it's still legal.
• It depends. It depends on to remove it. It depends.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard HB 698, which would increase criminal penalties for animal cruelty offenses. The chair explained that a proposed SD1 narrowed the bill to “pet animals” only, and testimony focused heavily on whether the bill should be limited to pets, whether service animals should also be included, and whether the measure could unintentionally affect livestock or cultural practices such as chicken fighting. Supporters, including the Hawaiian Humane Society, rescue organizations, and several individuals, argued that stronger penalties are needed because animal cruelty is under-prosecuted, that abuse of animals is linked to violence against people, and that harsher penalties could deter abuse. Opponents, including the public defender’s office and some farmers and livestock interests, argued the existing law is already on the books, enforcement is the real problem, and the bill is vague and could create unintended consequences. Several witnesses described graphic examples of animal abuse and urged the committee to act, while one testifier from the Disability Communication Access Board asked that service animals be explicitly included because they are not considered pets and are important to the independence and safety of people who rely on them. Committee members questioned the scope of the SD1, including whether it covered chickens, domesticated pigs, and service or emotional support animals. The deputy attorney general was asked to provide follow-up clarification on those points, and the Hawaiian Humane Society said it would welcome adding service animals back into the bill. At the end of testimony, the chair announced the final testimony count as 112 in support, 128 in opposition, and one comment, noting that some testimony appeared to address the broader House version rather than the narrower SD1. Because several questions remained unresolved, the committee deferred HB 698 until Monday, March 31, at 10:00 a.m. in room 016, with a vote to be taken then. After that, the committee moved on to its 10:02 decision-making agenda and deferred HB 108 as well, citing concerns about alcohol shipment, drunk driving, and underage access; it then began discussion of HB 226 on windshield tinting.

Transcript Highlights:

• and deciding cases.
• The mediators take cases off our appellate cases off our list.
• Depends.
• Exactly the case, right?
• That is not the case, right?

Transcript Highlights:

• Cases that involve drug abuse and misuse.
• are not caretakers of their dependent are not caretakers of their dependent children<00:30:05.880
• If there's juvenile cases, family court cases, they're allowed to view that information and make their
• you take into consideration these cases you take into consideration these cases and<00:53:50.480
• Clearly, there's a problem there. case worker to help case worker to help facilitate<01:00:52.640>

Keywords: 00:00:00 Call to Order/Roll Call 00:01:20 Discussion of 25RS HB 479 00:03:22 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 479 00:04:51 Discussion of 25RS HB 574 00:21:49 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 475 00:23:41 Discussion of 25RS HB 291 01:04:38 Roll Call Vote on 25RS HB 291 01:05:42 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Families and Children met and first took up House Bill 479, which would require one hour of dementia training for DCBS workers. Representative Derrick Lewis and the Alzheimer’s Association said the bill was a straightforward, bipartisan effort to address dementia awareness and improve worker training, with no fiscal impact. Members spoke in support, including remarks about personal family experiences with dementia and the importance of recognizing symptoms early. The committee voted 11-0 to pass the bill with favorable expression. The committee then heard House Bill 574, the “Baby Maya” child protection bill, sponsored by Representatives Dossett and Lewis. The bill would require reporting when a child is born to a parent who previously had children removed for neglect or abuse, create a rebuttable presumption allowing the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to make an initial safety determination, authorize emergency custody procedures, and name the measure the Baby Maya Law. Sponsors said it was intended to add guardrails after the Baby Maya case and stressed that it would not automatically remove children or add new mandatory-reporter penalties. Members asked about hospital involvement, HIPAA, and information-sharing; the Cabinet commissioner said the agency would be open to better data-sharing with hospitals, but currently has no such system. The bill passed 12-1 with favorable expression. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 291, the Family Preservation and Accountability Act, with a committee substitute. The bill would expand sentencing alternatives for primary caregivers convicted of nonviolent offenses, allowing judges to consider family status and use options such as counseling, parenting classes, and related services. Supporters argued it would keep families together, reduce harm from parental incarceration, and save money; one witness cited a report estimating $4 million in direct incarceration savings and broader economic benefits. Another witness, Amanda Hall, gave emotional testimony about the long-term harm of parental incarceration and said access to help would have been better for her family than prison. The committee adopted the committee substitute and passed the bill 12-1 with favorable expression.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a quote from the Florida Supreme Court case. Someone's got to pay for them.
• That's a quote from the Florida Supreme Court case that I could cite you to.
• And I submit to you that as a matter of equity, only dependents, my wife in my case, because they don't
• , are where that money should be awarded and not for non-dependents.
• That's not the case.

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to consider HB 6003, a bill to repeal Florida’s “free kill” law that limits certain survivors’ ability to recover non-economic damages in medical negligence wrongful death cases. The sponsor, Rep. Trabulsy, said the bill would restore access to the courts for a small class of families and noted the measure passed both chambers last year before being vetoed by the governor. She and supporters framed the bill as a fairness and constitutional issue, while opponents argued repeal would increase malpractice exposure, insurance costs, and pressure on physician access, especially in high-risk specialties and rural areas. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters included family members who described deaths they said were caused by medical negligence and who argued the current law denies accountability and equal treatment based on marital status or whether a decedent had minor children. Opponents included the Florida Hospital Association, Florida Medical Association, Florida Chamber, U.S. Chamber, Florida Insurance Council, and other health care and business groups, who warned that repeal could worsen already high malpractice premiums, contribute to physician shortages, and destabilize access to care. Several speakers on both sides discussed possible caps on non-economic damages as a compromise, though the bill itself was presented as a clean repealer with no amendments. During debate, several members spoke in support, emphasizing equal access to the courts and rejecting the idea that the law should treat some families differently from others. Opponents of the bill argued that the current system helps preserve market stability and that liability concerns, not the free kill law, are driving provider departures. After closing remarks from the sponsor, the committee voted 15 yeas and 1 nay to report HB 6003 favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• But what we depending on what period.
• It's so in the case of every number?
• >> Commissioner, was there a court case >> Commissioner, was there a court case that
• So depending on economic circumstances?
• property interest from that prior case? property interest from that prior case?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, in most cases it’s I think usually a few hours of um instruction in other similar cases.
• Uh, in most cases it’s I think usually a few hours of um instruction in other similar cases.
• Uh, in most cases it’s I think usually a few hours of um instruction in other similar cases.
• Uh in most cases it's I training is.
• Uh instruction in other similar cases.

Bills: SB2596, SB3002, SB3067

Keywords: government leases, state entities, real property, affordable leasing, budget impact, green infrastructure, urban development, sustainability, environment, climate change, public health, Hawaii State Planning Act, land records, registration, surveys, subdivision, Hawaii Revised Statutes, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees on Water and Culture and the Arts and on Hawaiian Affairs heard SB 3173, which would create a cultural training pilot program in the Department of Land and Natural Resources, administered by DOBOR, for commercial permit holders operating in Lahaina Harbor. Testimony was largely supportive from Lahaina Strong, which said the bill responds to community concerns and would help commercial operators return with greater cultural understanding and respect. Supporters framed the measure as a way to rebuild Lahaina intentionally and strengthen relationships between industry and community. Opposition came from Trilogy Excursions and the Activities and Attractions Association of Hawaii. They said they already provide or encourage cultural education, but argued the bill as written is too broad, potentially mandatory, and could create hiring and operational problems for businesses trying to restart after the fire. They asked that any program be voluntary, collaborative, and practical, with clearer details on who must take the training, how often it would be offered, and how it would be coordinated. In response to questions, a witness said most operators would likely participate if the training were accessible and well-marketed, but that the harbor’s limited current operations and staggered rebuilding make timing important. After testimony and questions, the chairs said they appreciated the comments but wanted to move the bill forward without amendments because of a filing deadline, noting that timing and other issues could be worked out in later committees with DLNR, OHA, and stakeholders. Both committees then voted to pass SB 3173 unamended, with one member excused in each committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cases. So, I want to just give a shout out to them. Really amazing work!
• So, depending on the... Policy provision, the timing is different.
• It's going to depend on the timing.
• So it really kind of depends.
• Representative, it really depends on the enrollment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Depends on how many I get to apply for the position.
• You only had one county with a few cases from Fargo or West Fargo, one of the two. ...with a few cases
• And so what you're kind of saying is you're... so it went from a few cases to 37 cases.
• The graphs underneath represent the pretrial case types.
• I believe there was a Spady case, State v. Spady.

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to begin its study of charitable gaming and the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations, a study directed by Senate Bill 2334. Legislative Council gave an overview of the constitutional and statutory framework for charitable gaming, site authorizations, rent limits, proceeds, and recent legislative changes. The Attorney General’s Gaming Division then clarified the financial flow of gaming, explaining that in fiscal year 2025 North Dakota had about $2.5 billion in gross gaming proceeds, with roughly 88-90% paid back in prizes and about $256 million available to organizations after taxes; most of that activity came from electronic pull tabs. Members asked for more detail on winnings, replays, rent, and the breakdown of manufacturer/distributor revenues, and the AG’s office agreed to provide supplemental information. The committee also heard from the League of Cities and the Association of Counties about local site authorization. Cities said they have a limited role in approving gaming sites, can adopt policies after public hearing, may charge up to $100, and can set certain conditions, including local nexus requirements, but cannot require donations or force a specific charity or site. The League said it had worked with stakeholders on a model policy to provide more consistency, though members raised concerns that local requirements could become too restrictive for charities serving broader areas. Counties said the issue is mostly a city matter, with little county involvement beyond minimal site fees and general site approval. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance testified in support of the study and provided IRS-related material suggesting charities may use asset diversification, while emphasizing it had not taken a position on whether charities should own bars. Members questioned whether bar ownership is being used for site stability or to channel charitable gaming dollars, and whether city policies might disadvantage charities with broader missions. The committee also discussed the relationship between gaming organizations, manufacturers, and distributors, including restrictions on incentives and interference, and asked for more information on those entities and their ownership. Later in the meeting, the Racing Commission gave its regular update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, ADW providers, purse and promotion funds, a new TRPB contract, and concerns about cease-and-desist actions from other states. Finally, the State Hospital superintendent briefly reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, including the SORT team, training, and security assistance for the hospital campus.

Transcript Highlights:

• “The future depends on what we do in the present.”
• Also, it depends on, you know, how clear is liability?
• Part of a rate case.
• New York, so it depends.
• REVIEWS RATE CASES.

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate convened, approved the prior journal, and then moved through a series of budget-related and ceremonial items. The chamber accepted Rules and Finance Committee reports and took up several budget extender and budget implementation bills, including the main appropriations extender and later a transportation, economic development, and environmental conservation budget bill. Senators questioned the sponsor extensively about the status of the remaining budget bills, the use of messages of necessity, and the absence of joint budget conference committees. The extender bill passed 59-2, and later budget-related measures were advanced after reconsideration and amendment. A major portion of the session focused on the environmental and energy provisions in the budget bill, especially changes to the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act. Senators debated extending emissions targets, the role of cap-and-invest, utility affordability, ratepayer impacts, and the structure of a proposed blue-ribbon commission. Supporters said the changes were needed to give the state more time to implement the law and to protect affordability, while opponents argued the bill was a political delay that would not lower energy costs and relied too heavily on subsidies and future planning. The bill also drew questions about electric vehicle rebates, thermostat control programs, emergency diesel generation for Micron, and how imported electricity and out-of-state emissions would be treated. The Senate also adopted several previously adopted resolutions honoring the 50th anniversary of the National Black Caucus of State Legislators, India Independence Day, the New York State Veterans Hall of Fame, and the 50th anniversary of Interfaith Works of Central New York. Senators spoke in support of each resolution, highlighting the contributions of Black legislators, Indian-American communities, veterans, and refugee and interfaith service organizations. The Veterans Hall of Fame ceremony was specifically noted as a chamber event, and guests were recognized from the floor and gallery. In addition, the Senate restored recalled bills to the third reading calendar through reconsideration votes and amendments, including a highway law bill and another recalled bill, and then stood at ease for scheduled conferences and a Veterans Hall of Fame ceremony before resuming session. The transcript ended with discussion of a separate bill affecting automobile insurance serious-injury standards, with questions about what claims would remain available and whether the change would improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it'll be dependent on how easily we can get to some agreements.
• um chemical dependency work that we've<00:24:35.600> been<00:24:35.760> doing.
• those programs are almost all dependent those programs are almost all dependent on<00:25:44.080>
• And I think the mayor is going to make the case of what the state can do.
• And I think the mayor is going to make the case of what the state can do.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , so it really depends on the case, how it originated, what the facts are, and who we've been working
• , so it really depends on the case, how it originated, what the facts are, and who we've been working
• , so it really depends on the case, how it originated, what the facts are, and who we've been working
• , so it really depends on the case, how it originated, what the facts are, and who we've been working
• , so it really depends on the case, how it originated, what the facts are, and who we've been working

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It really depends on the case. Right?
• It really depends on the case. Right?
• It really depends on the case. Right?
• It really depends on the case. Right?
• It really depends on the case. Right?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: Finance Division 3 met for a work session on House Bill 519, which concerns funding for Waypoint. The chair noted general support for the organization but said the bill would likely need to be suspended and folded into the budget process because the committee did not yet know available revenues or what amount, if any, could be committed. Kya Fox, director of the Division for Behavioral Health, testified that the department supports the bill and the program, explaining that it had been funded with other available funds, including $100,000 for 2024 and $400,000 for 2025, under a contract running through June 30 of this year. She said the shelter serves a unique population of young adults and is part of the department’s children’s system of care and Mission Zero efforts to reduce barriers to psychiatric discharge and emergency department use. Members questioned Fox and Waypoint representatives about the budget placement of the request, the difference between the efficiency budget and prioritized needs, and whether state budget documents would show any internal Waypoint revenues. Fox said the request appears as a general fund item and that the state would not see Waypoint’s internal financial operations in the budget. A legislative member explained that prioritized needs are critical services already in place but not necessarily included in the efficiency budget, and another member said the distinction is not strictly applied. The committee also raised a separate question about how DHHS would handle any future state or federal restrictions on DEI practices; Fox said that was a question for department leadership and legal staff, but that the department follows state law and contract requirements. Waypoint CEO Bor Alvare and Director Mandy Lancaster then described the shelter and related services. They said the shelter serves ages 18 to 24, is a 14-bed open-room facility with half walls, and is staffed overnight by two full-time workers. They said admission is first come, first served, with some vulnerability factors considered, and that they do not discriminate by race, gender, or sexual orientation. They reported no known incidents of sexual violence, though some youth are turned away each night because the shelter is full. They also explained that Waypoint provides broader services beyond the shelter, including outreach, drop-in centers, housing support, rental assistance, and family mediation, and said they serve about 400 youth and young adults in Manchester alone. The discussion ended with questions about whether lowering the upper age limit would affect the program; Waypoint said most residents are already in the 18-to-23 range, but that housing shortages make the current age span important for helping young adults avoid chronic homelessness.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was about the rate cases, so utility companies come forward to the P.S.C. and they bring a rate case
• Generally, there is a Negotiation, a case is seen through, the 120 days after that rate case is all the
• rate cases or routine procedures."
• What happens with a case like this?
• What happens with a case like this?

Keywords: 993, senate, all

Summary: The Senate convened, approved the prior journal, and then took up a series of utility and public service bills and resolutions. A resolution sponsored by Senator Scarcella-Spanton designating April 9, 2026, as Yellow Ribbon Day was adopted after remarks honoring veterans, active-duty service members, and their families. The chamber then moved through several Public Service Law measures focused on utility affordability, consumer protections, and PSC procedures, with some bills laid aside and others advanced. Among the bills passed were measures by Senators Mayer, Cleare, Hinchey, Comrie, and Parker. Debate on the Mayer bill centered on limiting utility expenses and fees recoverable in rate cases; supporters said it was part of a broader package to reform PSC practices, while opponents argued it would not lower current bills and had been softened from earlier versions. The Webb bill creating a residential utility usage monitoring program drew extended debate over whether it would meaningfully reduce costs, who would pay for the program, and whether it could lead to government monitoring of household usage; supporters said it would give consumers more control and transparency, while critics said it would not lower rates. The Gonzalez bill, which would add consumer protections during PSC investigations and delay shutoffs in certain circumstances, also passed after questions about whether it applied to rate cases, with the sponsor saying rate cases were explicitly excluded. Several members explained their votes, with supporters emphasizing affordability, transparency, and consumer protection, and opponents arguing the package would not address immediate rate relief and could burden ratepayers or encourage nonpayment. Senator Tedisco and others criticized PSC appointments and state energy policy, while Democratic sponsors argued the bills were part of a longer-term effort to reform utility regulation and address climate and affordability concerns. The chamber restored multiple bills to the non-controversial calendar before final votes, and the recorded results showed passage of the major utility bills by substantial margins, along with one amendment appeal being ruled nongermane and rejected.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it depends on what the underlying question of the case is.
• I think it depends on what the underlying question of the case is.
• I think it depends on what the underlying question of the case is.
• I think it depends on what the underlying question of the case is.
• I think it depends on what the underlying question of the case is.

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Felony cases and case processing time are significantly longer than misdemeanors.
• average felony cases.
• And it will only get longer and longer as these cases prolong and more cases come in.
• What is their case about?
• cases, August for child welfare cases, and October for juvenile delinquency cases.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that’s really dependent upon where this project goes.
• “Very design dependent.
• on, you know, the case managers and the client they've got.
• Wouldn't that be the case?
• I'm becoming too dependent on your wisdom. Oh, sorry.

Bills: SB2015

Keywords: corrections, rehabilitation, prison budget, department of corrections, adult services, youth services, correctional facilities, Heart River correctional center, Missouri River correctional center, James River correctional center, minimum security facility, county jails, regional jails, deferred maintenance, capital construction, strategic investment and improvements fund, Bank of North Dakota, line of credit, tasers, body cameras

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Human Resources division met with a quorum and spent much of the meeting on a proposed “medical home” concept for people with significant disabilities and medical needs. Matt Schwartz described the need for small, community-based homes so adults like his daughter could live in a least-restrictive setting without losing housing if service providers change. Architect Jeff Eubel presented a conceptual budget for one roughly 5,000-square-foot facility for four residents, explaining that the design would likely include four large sleeping units, common space, support areas, and medical infrastructure such as emergency power, oxygen, sprinklers, and accessibility features. Committee members and George Sink, joining by phone, raised questions about layout, zoning, ownership, staffing, and whether families would actually move loved ones into such facilities if they were far from home. The department said the concept was not in the governor’s budget and identified staff who could continue discussions; the committee did not take final action and instead discussed refining the language with interested members. The committee then turned to amendments related to long-term care and behavioral health funding. One amendment would reduce a planned $4 million general fund incentive payment and instead create a withhold-based quality program for nursing facilities, to be developed collaboratively by the department and providers and reported to Legislative Management by September 2026. The department said it could live with the language but preferred the governor’s timing; several senators questioned whether the committee should be directing an operational policy change and whether the study would simply delay implementation. No vote was taken, and the amendment was set aside for later consideration. A second amendment would clarify use of an existing $2 million general fund item for behavioral health services in nursing homes and basic care facilities, directing it toward training, technical assistance, consultation, and direct patient care for residents with medically based behavioral health disorders. Members noted the funding was already in the bill and discussed it in the context of other budget items, but again deferred action. The committee also clarified that a separate $750,000 juvenile justice diversion appropriation in House Bill 1425 was distinct from a similar amount in the budget and should likely remain in that separate bill. The chair indicated a goal of having amendments ready by the end of the week, and the committee recessed without final votes on the discussed items.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> It really depends on the situation.
• >> It really depends on the situation.
• >> It really depends on the situation.
• >> It really depends on the situation.
• , that case, that case, or<00:39:29.960> if<00:39:30.160> a<00:39:30.200> depicted

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures. HB 2271 HD2, making emergency appropriations for public employment cost items, drew support from state agencies and other entities, including HPHA, the University of Hawaiʻi, DLNR, OYS, DAGS, DOH, DOA/Biosecurity, and the Behavioral Health Administration; no opposition was noted. HB 2324 HD2, relating to the Hawaii Occupational Safety and Health Law, was supported by DLIR, which said the bill removes a duplicative Hoisting Machine Operators Advisory Board requirement and aligns whistleblower investigation timelines with federal standards. HB 2387 HD1, relating to workers’ compensation medical benefits, also received support from DLIR and the State Fire Council, with the chair noting 40 supporters and no opposition or comments. HB 2116 HD2, relating to grants, was presented as a response to federal SNAP-related eligibility changes. Supporters included the Office of Community Services, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Catholic Charities Hawaii, and several other organizations. Testimony said the bill would help nonprofits provide volunteer opportunities that could count toward an 80-hour monthly work requirement and help vulnerable residents avoid losing benefits; witnesses cited potential impacts on older adults and households with dependent children. HB 1682 HD1, relating to the disclosure of intimate images, drew strong support from advocates, the Uniform Law Commission, the Commission to Promote Uniform Laws, the Hawaii State Commission on the Status of Women, and others. Testifiers emphasized the harms of non-consensual image sharing, the need for civil remedies, confidentiality protections, and the bill’s alignment with a uniform act already enacted in other states. HB 2468 HD1, relating to internship programs, received support from the University of Hawaiʻi, DLIR, the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities, and others. Testimony focused on the Hālau Mua internship program, workforce development, and the need to clarify sponsor contracts, background checks, and onboarding; committee members asked about a former intern now working in an 89-day hire position and how to streamline hiring into civil service roles. HB 2091 HD2, relating to petitions to restrain and enjoin harassment of DOE employees, was supported by DOE, the Attorney General’s office, UPW, and others; the AG’s office requested a data-driven appropriation amount, and members discussed a $300,000 figure for the full two-year pilot. The chair also asked for confirmation of prior cost figures for HB 2116 before moving toward decision-making.

Transcript Highlights:

• dependence um that they were caring for. dependence um that they were caring for.
• That's not the case.
• That's not the case. So, as um swoop. That's not the case.
• In this case, that did not occur.
• , you know, that's the case.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Human Services and Homelessness received a briefing from Scott Morish of the Hawaii Department of Human Services on upcoming SNAP changes tied to the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act (HR1/OBBA) and on the federal government shutdown’s impact on November SNAP benefits. DHS described its SNAP workload and statewide participation, noting about 86,229 households and 168,947 individuals receiving benefits in September, with roughly $58–$60 million distributed monthly. Morish said DHS has already made system and policy updates in preparation for the November 1 implementation date. Most of the briefing focused on expanded able-bodied adult work requirements. DHS explained that the work rule now applies to additional groups, including adults ages 55 to 64, households with dependent children age 14 and older, people experiencing homelessness, veterans, and youth ages 18 to 24 who transitioned from foster care. The department said affected individuals must generally work or participate in qualifying activities for 80 hours per month, with noncompliance leading to a three-month benefit limit and a 36-month ineligibility period. DHS also reviewed exemptions, including for disability, pregnancy, caregiving, school or training, unemployment, and substance use treatment, and clarified that the new Indian Health Care Improvement Act exemption does not include Native Hawaiians. DHS said it received approval for Hawaii’s request for a non-contiguous-state exemption from payment error penalties through September 30, 2026, but must still make good-faith efforts to implement the work rules. Morish also outlined OBBA changes to non-citizen eligibility, saying that beginning November 1 only lawful permanent residents, COFA residents, and Cuban or Haitian entrants will remain eligible, while other previously eligible categories such as refugees, asylees, and some parolees will no longer qualify. He noted that ineligible non-citizens must still be included in household reporting and their income counted. The committee then discussed the federal shutdown’s effect on SNAP, with DHS saying USDA directed states to suspend November SNAP issuance because of insufficient funding; existing October benefits remain usable, and TANF and general assistance are not affected. DHS said it has posted FAQs and call-center messages, and is working with the Hawaii Food Bank on an additional $2 million in support and with nonprofit partners on a new Hawaii Relief program funded by TANF for families with dependent children. Members asked about eligibility for kūpuna and documentation for the relief program, and DHS said the TANF-funded program is limited to households with a child under 18, while FAQs are now available online.