Transcript Highlights:

• Section three is another section that is related to banks, and we’re taking that section out in the next
• <00:07:45.280> Section what's required to be there. Section what's required to be there.
• Section three<00:07:45.919> is<00:07:46.160> another<00:07:46.479> section<00:07
• <00:09:39.680> Um<00:09:40.160> section Yes. So that is section four.
• Um section Yes. So that is section four.

Bills: HF3676, HF3683, HF3395

Keywords: Safe at Home, address confidentiality, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, harassment, victim privacy, survivor protection, confidential address, protected address, secret address, identity protection, residential confidentiality, program participant, nondiscrimination, court disclosure, protective order, service of process, driver's license, state ID

Summary: The committee first approved minutes from February 19 and February 26, while skipping the February 24 minutes because of a drafting error that would be corrected later. It then took up House File 3676, a Safe at Home program bill described by Rep. Nash as arising from a constituent’s dangerous identity exposure and intended to tighten protections for participants, including allowing emancipated minors to enroll. Testimony from the Secretary of State’s office explained that the bill would clarify who may apply for a minor, require proof of guardianship, strengthen court findings before a participant’s physical address can be disclosed, increase penalties for harmful disclosure, prohibit discrimination based on participation, require state agencies to designate a Safe at Home contact person, allow use of the Safe at Home card as proof of residence for certain ID purposes, and require judge training. Members raised concerns about federal compatibility, constitutionality of court-related provisions, and the need for a fiscal note on the felony penalty. Several sections were noted as being removed or modified in a later engrossment, and the committee voted to re-refer HF 3676 to the Transportation Finance and Policy Committee. The committee then heard House File 3683, which would direct the state budget forecast to include the estimated cost of fraud. Rep. Nash argued that fraud is a significant but unquantified drain on state resources and said the bill would adapt existing forecast language used for inflation to track fraud costs. Minnesota Management and Budget Deputy Commissioner Anna Mingi testified that fraud is unacceptable and that the agency works to prevent and detect it, but said the twice-yearly forecast is not the right tool for this kind of retrospective analysis. She explained that if fraud is identified, the forecast would reflect reduced spending through program integrity actions rather than a separate fraud-cost line item. The bill was moved and referred to the general register after a roll call was requested.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, I should say sections 9 and 10 and then House sections 12 and 13.
• So Senate sections 9 and 10, House sections 12 and 13.
• So, reversing those changes from this section.
• Uh so, all the section would be section.
• <01:30:56.800> 14 explain about what Senate section 14 explain about what Senate section 14

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then it Section two of that.
• That section of it? >> Yes. >> Okay.
• >> we're just striking that section >> we're just striking that section >> and
• <02:09:19.360> Um section at the end on page three. Um section at the end on page three.
• >> Um the finding section is always an easy >> Um the finding section is always an easy one

Keywords: 9:00am HB 155 9:30am HB 1102 10:30am HB 1109 11:00am HB 1356 11:30am HB 1469 1:00pm HB 1323 2:00pm HB 1376, 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with unanimous committee approval of amendment 2026-2021S to HB 2. Senator Lang explained the amendment corrected a drafting error so that $2.5 million in state funds, matched with federal money for a total of $5 million, could be spent during the biennium rather than lapse at the end of the fiscal year. The money is intended to stabilize Medicaid per diem rates for county nursing homes, and members agreed without objection to adopt the amendment and continue working from the bill as amended by the Senate. The committee then discussed HB 155 and a proposed amendment, 2026-201H, dealing with the business enterprise tax. The House side described the proposal as a compromise that would raise the filing threshold from $250,000 to $375,000 and create a trigger that would reduce the BET rate by 0.05% for each $100 million in combined business tax surplus, down to a floor of 0.25%. Senate members opposed lowering the rate at this time, arguing that tax relief should focus on the filing threshold, which they said would remove filing burdens for about 3,500 small businesses, and that rate cuts should be considered in a budget cycle rather than an off-year. Concerns were raised that one-time revenues, such as tax amnesty receipts or federal repatriation-related surpluses, could unintentionally trigger reductions. Representative Sweeney later offered a revised approach by moving the effective date of the trigger mechanism to January 1, 2028, and said he was also willing to carve out tax amnesty revenues or adjust the effective date to avoid using one-time funds. The Senate remained unwilling to agree to a rate reduction, though it expressed openness to raising the filing threshold further. The committee ultimately did not resolve the business tax issue and recessed to continue discussions at a later time. The final item discussed was HB 1102, concerning an increase in the research and development tax credit paired with changes to state park fees. House members supported the R&D credit increase but opposed tying it to higher park fees, citing concerns about tourism, especially at border parks, and noting that the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources had said it did not need the increase. Senate members defended the park fee changes as a fairness issue, arguing that New Hampshire residents should pay less than out-of-state visitors and that the department had not raised rates in many years. No vote was taken on this item during the discussion captured here.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, I move to amend House Bill 3148, page 16, section 1, line 8, by inserting after the word A, To
• amend House Bill 3148, page 16, section 1, line 8, by inserting after the word A and before the word
• On page 16, section 1, lines 19 through 20, by inserting after the comma and before the word dealer,
• Page 19, section 1, line 9, by inserting after the word Oklahoma and before the word motor, the word
• On page 19, section 1, line 16, by insert, and 17. Fines.

Bills: HB2936, HB2937, HB2951, HB2960, HB2979, HB2980, HB3062, HB3082, HB3087, HB3148, HB3152, HB3262, HB3264, HB3266, HB3268, HB3269, HB3278, HB3299, HB3544, HB3606, HB3678, HB3790, HB3903, HB3996, HB4139, HB4140, HB4142, HB4143, HB4144, HB4260, HB4272, HB4296, HB4324, HB4339, HB4341, HB4342

Keywords: HB2936, children, child protection, adoption, Oklahoma Adoption Code, gestational carrier, gestational agreement, surrogacy, intended parent, preplacement home study, home study, prospective adoptive parent, foster placement, child abuse, child neglect, child sexual abuse, child sexual exploitation, lewd molestation, sex offender registry, Oklahoma Sex Offenders Registration Act

Transcript Highlights:

• The changes on line 1.5 that runs onto page two replaces a section related to the report by the guardian
• The change on page two, line three deletes two sections from the uniform laws provision that is in the
• <00:02:37.680> related onto page two replaces a section related onto page two replaces a section
• <00:03:08.959> This<00:03:09.519> section<00:03:10.080> set<00:03:10.319>
• This section set a business after five.

Bills: HF2300

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're asking that you oppose the sections of the bill that allow municipalities to further raise
• Sections 70 and 71 hurt travel and tourism, an industry also negatively impacted by the pandemic.
• So the first sections that I would like to address are Sections 55 through 59.
• The first sections that I would like to address are Sections 55 through 59, which are the sections that
• Finally, MAAO also supports Section 49.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a hybrid hearing on several property and local tax bills. The main focus was H.56, the Municipal Empowerment Act, which the Healey-Driscoll Administration, the Massachusetts Municipal Association, MAPC, and Salem Mayor Dominick Pangallo supported as a package of local options and administrative reforms. Supporters said municipalities need more tools to relieve pressure on property taxes and fund services, citing proposed increases to local meals and lodging taxes, a new local vehicle excise surcharge, senior property tax relief, one-year override flexibility for emergencies, and central valuation of telecom and utility property by DOR. The administration said the bill was based on municipal listening sessions and was intended to give cities and towns optional, not mandatory, revenue tools. Opponents, including the National Federation of Independent Businesses, argued the tax increases would hurt restaurants, hotels, tourism, and small businesses and add to affordability concerns. The committee also heard testimony on H.3211, dealing with deeds excise receipts, from Norfolk County Commissioner Richard Staidi. He said Norfolk County is financially stable but needs additional revenue for major capital needs at its agricultural school, especially a new cafeteria and other aging facilities, and also to support county programs such as veteran transportation services. On S.2020, a bill to allow settlements of tax liability, Greater Boston Legal Services, the Asian American Civic Association, and several individual taxpayers urged creation of a more workable offer-in-compromise process at DOR. They said the current system is too subjective, requires an unaffordable $5,000 threshold, lacks clear standards and appeal rights, and leaves low-income taxpayers stuck with unmanageable debt, license suspensions, or business closures. Supporters said the bill would give both taxpayers and DOR a practical way to resolve liabilities and bring people back into compliance. The committee also took testimony on S.1966, which would require nonprofits selling property to disclose any back-tax obligations to buyers. Senator Peter Durant said the bill was prompted by a personal experience in which a tax bill arrived after a nonprofit property purchase was already completed, and he argued the disclosure would prevent buyers from being surprised by retroactive tax liability. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair closed the session after hearing from all scheduled witnesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our concern is when you look at section 5 of the bill and you couple it with section 11 of the bill,
• Section 11.
• That'd be section 6. And Section 11 taken in concert.
• So not Section Section 11, not Section 5, but Section 6 and Section 11.
• So on the equal and uniform, I guess section 6.

Bills: HB148, HB203, HJR30

Keywords: HB 148, Texas Education Code, Texas Education Agency, TEA, artificial intelligence, AI, machine learning, automated scoring, constructed response, open-ended answers, student assessments, state testing, standardized tests, public schools, education policy, assessment instruments, school accountability, test scoring, 2026-2027 school year, ad valorem tax

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm trying to catch up with your section C. We're at page five.
• I'm trying to catch up with your section C. We're at page five, section C. Page five.
• Chair, I move to amend House Bill 3851, page 2, Section 1, line 1, by deleting sections 1 and 3 in their
• entirety, and by renumbering the subsequent section.
• We removed Sections 1 and 3. Members, are there questions on the amendment?

Bills: HB3334, HB4248, HB4454, HB3851

Keywords: alcohol regulation, retail, recordkeeping, reporting, state laws, HB4248, hemp beverage, hemp drinks, THC beverage, cannabis beverage, intoxicating hemp, age restriction, under 21, minor possession, youth access, public health and safety, Title 63, Oklahoma Statutes, retail sales, alcohol-style regulation

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, anyway, Senate Bill 2184 is the duplicate sections bill. It doesn't add any new law.
• What it does is it merges multiple versions of the statute and repeals duplicative sections.
• And this has happened before in the past where we've had the duplicate sections bill in the Senate, but
• This has happened before in the past where we've had the duplicate sections bill in the Senate, but it
• And it just messes everything up, and it makes the next duplicate sections bill even larger.

Summary: The Rules Committee met briefly and first took up Senate Bill 2184, described as a clean duplicate-sections bill that does not create new law but consolidates multiple versions of statutes and repeals duplicative sections. In response to a question about what happens if such a bill does not pass, members explained that the duplicate provisions remain in statute, which can create confusion and make future cleanup bills larger; they also referenced a prior attorney general request aimed at guiding judges when duplicate sections remain. The committee then voted 7-0 to report SB 2184 as due pass. The committee next considered an amended version of Senate Bill 171, using a PCS as the working draft without objection. The bill would increase the number of armed security personnel/sergeants from one to two, with the additional commission coming from an existing staff member rather than a new hire; the commission would end when that person leaves service. After brief discussion, the committee voted 7-0 to report SB 171 as due pass.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a point of reference, the governor had included this language in Section 25 of her FY26 budget.
• As a point of reference, the governor had included this language in Section 25 of her FY26 budget.
• The delinquent reporting bill would make changes to Chapter 32, Sections 18 and 22, which are parallel
• Section 8... Chapter 32 that deal with data reporting.
• Section 18 includes all Commonwealth Retirement Boards, whereas the provision we cite to in Section 22

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several public service and retirement-related bills. Senator Kelly Dooner and Rep. O’Rourke supported a Taunton home rule petition to extend Chief Walsh’s service during the city’s transition to a new public safety facility, citing the need to manage new equipment, cameras, and 911 systems smoothly. Senator Lovely testified in favor of bills expanding retirement savings access through the SMART Plan and the CORE Plan, arguing that automatic enrollment and broader eligibility would help state, municipal, and nonprofit workers save for retirement. No questions were raised on the Taunton petition, and the hearing later moved through the remaining testimony without any votes taken during the transcript. Mary Waldron of the Old Colony Planning Council and Jeffrey Walker of the Southeast Regional Planning and Economic Development District urged support for legislation protecting regional planning agencies from being required to make retroactive payments to the State Retirement Board for past employer contributions. They warned that the costs would be unsustainable, could force layoffs or closures, and would jeopardize their ability to provide transportation, housing, economic development, and planning services. Bill Keith and Patrick Charles of PEREC testified on several retirement administration bills, including measures to ease statement-of-financial-interest filing rules, require payment for certain creditable service purchases, and clarify the definition of wages to include sick, vacation, and personal time; committee members asked questions about regional transit authorities joining retirement systems and about adding local retirement board representation to a proposed commission. Jonathan Osimo and Rob Fabino of the Massachusetts Teachers Retirement System supported bills to penalize delinquent pension reporting by employers and to create a special commission to study retirement credit purchases, saying better reporting would improve retirement processing and that a broader review could improve fairness and sustainability. Eddie Boynton of the Braintree Education Association backed the SMART Plan bill, describing how automatic enrollment and low-fee fiduciary oversight could protect educators from high-cost supplemental retirement products. Matthew Nugent testified for a bill to divest public pension funds from firearms and ammunition. After the final witnesses, the chairs asked if anyone else wished to testify, heard none, and then adjourned the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section. And then on page six is the third section of the finance, 'The Road Ahead'.
• So again, each of the sections is laid out that way. Through our major policy areas.
• Governor vetoes of that section. On page 46 is the high-level budget spreadsheet.
• The first section is about what actually passed during the session, so starting on page four are all
• Each of The sections in these reports are essentially assigned to one of our analysts.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you have a specific section that you think would impact that or a specific software that you would
• Is there a section that you? No, I can get back to you if there's a specific.
• In particular, the sections pertaining to procurement, critical infrastructure, and technology.
• And third, I'll be discussing the procurement and technology sections of this bill.
• Similarly, Section 10 bars state contracting related to the state.

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 1178, the Foreign Interference Restriction and Enforcement Act. Senator Grohl explained that the bill expands state restrictions and disclosure requirements related to foreign countries of concern and designated foreign terrorist organizations, including foreign-agent registration, gift bans for public officials, ethics training, procurement limits for IT and critical infrastructure, restrictions on sister-city/sister-state affiliations, changes to linkage institutes and in-state tuition provisions, and new criminal penalties for certain offenses committed to benefit foreign governments or terrorist organizations. Senator Polsky raised questions about higher education, election technology, federal FARA overlap, and whether the bill would affect candidates or events involving CARE; the sponsor responded that the bill focuses on foreign countries of concern, ownership/control, and gifts, and does not prohibit speaking at events. An amendment clarifying definitions, willful violations, and ethics-training content was adopted, and after supportive testimony from Kelly Curry and Robert Pierce, the committee reported CS for SB 1178 favorably. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1622, which provides a one-time waiver of the automatic fine for a late-filed financial disclosure if the filing is made before the maximum fine accrues and the filer has not previously received such a waiver or accrued the maximum fine in prior years. Carrie Stillman of the Commission on Ethics testified that the bill supports transparency and makes the fine and appeals process more efficient, noting it was a commission recommendation. The bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee held confirmation hearings on appointments in Tabs 3 through 26. No senator requested separate votes on any appointee, no public testimony was offered, and the block of appointments was approved and recommended favorably to the full Senate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to Texas section, American Society of Civil Engineers.
• I serve as ASCE Texas section vice president As such, my honor is to oversee the infrastructure report
• we release the grades, I invite ASE Texas President Mark Wood to provide an overview of the Texas section
• Established in 1913, ASCE Texas section represents more than 11,000 civil engineers statewide.
• So ASE Texas section members are really truly civil engineering leaders.

Keywords: Texas, Infrastructure Report Card, ASCE, population growth, climate change, investment, public safety, engineering standards

Summary: The meeting focused on the release of the 2025 Texas Infrastructure Report Card, highlighting key findings and recommendations for improving infrastructure across various sectors in the state. Julie Jones, Vice President of ASCE Texas, opened the session by introducing key speakers, including Dr. Art Wood and committee co-chairs Griselda Gonzalez and Austin Mazzarelli. Throughout the discussion, the report's grades were revealed, showing the state's infrastructure received an overall grade of 'C'—adequate but requiring significant attention and investment. Emphasis was placed on the rising challenges posed by climate change and increased population growth, underscoring the need for strategic investments in infrastructure to support Texas' economic growth and public safety.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is the Speaker relying on H.R. 4, section 14(a)(3) to set and administer committee and office budgets
• During the 88th legislative session, the text of H.R. 4, section 14(a)(3), is...
• During the 88th legislative session, the text of H.R. 4, section 14A.3, was not relied on to set and
• comport with Article 3, section 44 of the Texas Constitution?
• comport with Article 3, section 44 of the Texas Constitution?

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then section 9 is new.
• And then section 9 is new.
• And then section 9 is new.
• And then section 9 is new.
• And then section 9 is new.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So there's some other sections of law that apply to this.
• The next section that I'd like to review with you is...
• We would recommend repealing this section altogether.
• The following section is in the same grouping here for Century Code 54.
• So we're looking for kind of a language cleanup in that section.

Summary: The task force reviewed survey results from state agencies on potential statutory revisions, with Levi reporting 70 proposals from 20 agencies and noting that about 33 might become agency pre-file bills. Members discussed the need to share the survey more broadly within higher education and to better coordinate issues involving IT and other cross-agency functions. The task force then heard from the Office of Management and Budget on three topics: concessions, architect/engineering pre-qualification, and legal notices. OMB said the concessions law is outdated and inconsistent with current practice, and suggested a collaborative rewrite to allow best-value evaluation, raise the threshold, and standardize solicitation templates. On architect/engineering pre-qualification, OMB proposed expanding authority beyond current state-agency limits and creating uniform templates. On legal notices, OMB proposed modernizing publication requirements, exploring online and abbreviated notices, and working with newspapers and other stakeholders on technology and accessibility improvements. Members asked about where concession revenues go, whether political subdivisions must follow the same rules, and how to move from discussion to action. The task force agreed to have OMB work with Legislative Council and affected stakeholders to develop bill drafts, and the motion passed unanimously. The University of North Dakota then presented a series of proposed revisions focused on public buildings and procurement. UND asked to rework the definition of construction so routine maintenance and one-for-one replacements over $250,000 would not automatically trigger public-improvement requirements, suggested raising the threshold to $500,000, and asked for more flexibility based on project complexity and risk. UND also proposed changes to public bid advertisements to reflect electronic bidding, revisions to construction manager-at-risk selection criteria, changes to architect/engineer procurement rules, an increase in the direct-hire design threshold, and a higher legislative-consent threshold for privately funded projects. The task force supported having UND work with counsel and OMB to develop bill drafts, and that motion also passed. The Department of Public Instruction concluded with proposed cleanup to credentialing and education statutes. DPI recommended reviewing its credential categories for relevance, possibly transferring credentialing authority to the Education Standards and Practices Board, removing outdated school safety patrol language, clarifying waiver provisions, and updating dyslexia screening reporting requirements so the statute reflects current practice. Members focused mainly on whether the dyslexia reporting requirement should remain, and DPI said the screening itself would continue even if reporting language were revised. No votes were taken on DPI’s suggestions, and the task force recessed after the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• In other words, what does it have to do with dividing the city of Tampa into three sections?
• The executive branch position on this is that the rest of Article 3, Section 20 cannot be saved.
• Senators, Article 3, Section 20A is not optional as it relates to complying.
• It did not overturn Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. News flash.
• But the Supreme Court did not overturn Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.

Summary: The Senate convened in special session with an opening prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved to the special order calendar to consider congressional redistricting legislation, beginning with Senate Bill 8D and then substituting the identical House Bill 1D. The bill would establish Florida’s congressional districts. Senator Gaetz, presenting the measure, said the Governor had proposed the map to address population growth and to draw race-neutral districts, and argued that mid-decade redistricting is legally permissible and has occurred before in Florida and other states. He repeatedly said the Legislature could accept, reject, or amend the proposal, but that the Governor had the prerogative to propose it. The floor debate focused heavily on the legality and timing of the map, especially after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Louisiana redistricting decision was announced during the session. Several senators, including Rouson, Sharief, Smith, Polsky, Arrington, Bracy Davis, Bernard, Nathan, and Berman, questioned whether the map complied with the Florida Constitution’s Fair Districts Amendment, the Voting Rights Act, and equal protection principles. They raised concerns about the short notice, lack of statewide public hearings, the use of partisan data, the absence of sworn testimony from the Governor’s representatives, the claimed severability of the Fair Districts Amendment, and the impact on minority communities and communities of interest. Gaetz generally declined to offer legal opinions, saying those issues would ultimately be for the courts, but he relayed the Governor’s position that race-based provisions in the Fair Districts Amendment are unconstitutional and that the proposed map is race-neutral and compact. Members also debated whether the map’s population data and compactness scores justified the district lines, with critics arguing that the plan cracked and split communities in places such as Central Florida, Tampa Bay, and South Florida. Gaetz said the Governor’s office relied on 2020 census data plus updated population estimates from the Office of Economic and Demographic Research and the American Community Survey, and that the mapmaker said he drew the map himself without outside consultants. After questions concluded, the Senate adopted a motion to substitute HB 1D for SB 8D, read the bill a third time, and proceeded to debate the House bill. The transcript ends during debate, with no final vote on passage shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you go to R17 on Article 2, it's section 17 House side, section 26 Senate side.
• 17 House side, section 2, it's section 17 House side, section 26<00:09:24.320> Senate<00:09:24.720
• A20 to Senate language article 2 section A20 to Senate language article 2 section 14.<00:27:13.039
• adopt Senate language article 2 section adopt Senate language article 2 section 71516<00:42:22.240
• is amended in section 21 as amended. is amended in section 21 as amended.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um the next<00:10:42.160> uh<00:10:42.880> section<00:10:43.800> section<00:10:45.040
• section um two um is all next uh section section um two um is all the<00:10:48.480> same<00:10
• Um and then section four is original.
• So as I read this though, I mean the section one is the general energy policy, but section four only
• /c> policy, but section four only talks policy, but section four only talks about about about um um um

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• was attached to the bottom upper section was attached to the bottom section,<00:29:53.760> you
• two and just move forward remove section two and just move forward with<00:56:48.319> section
• Um, and my request I with section one.
• two and proceed with Section one, renumbering Section three to Section two.
• And then striking section that? Okay. And then striking section two Okay.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all