Transcript Highlights:

• Judge, Collaborative Courts, Orange County Superior Court.
• courts.
• health courts, drug courts, or DUI courts, they all provide...
• Other courts experienced similar delays in processing filings, but also recordings of judgments.
• Now we'll move to Issue 3: Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal, court-appointed counsel. Mr.

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:

• It's a combination of General Fund, civil filing fees, and criminal penalties.
• So civil filing fees, you know, are first paper filing fees, and obviously criminal—it's a mix of revenues
• It's a combination of General Fund, civil filing fees, and criminal penalties.
• So civil filing fees, you know, are first paper filing fees. Thank you. Service.
• So civil filing fees, you know, are first paper filing fees and obviously criminal, they're a mix of

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation held a hearing focused first on courthouse facility funding and then on the Governor’s proposed court facilities budget. Legislative Analyst’s Office staff outlined the state’s court-facilities funding structure, including the 2002 shift of trial court facility responsibility from counties to the state, the main funding accounts, the insolvency of the construction fund, the move to General Fund support, the backlog of deferred maintenance, and the large estimated cost of needed new construction and repairs. Judicial Council representatives and judges from Los Angeles and Mendocino described severe seismic, safety, ADA, security, and maintenance problems, with examples of floods, elevator failures, asbestos-related closures, and long-delayed or underfunded projects. They argued that chronic underinvestment is making facilities less safe and more expensive to maintain, and that courthouse conditions directly affect access to justice and public confidence. Committee members pressed witnesses on how projects are prioritized, whether population and filing volume are adequately reflected, why reassessments have not been updated since 2019, how long acquisitions and construction take, and what level of funding would actually close the gap. Members also questioned the fixed county contribution, the use of General Fund backfills, and whether the state should set a clearer long-term funding target for the judicial branch. LAO staff emphasized that any new General Fund commitment would require tradeoffs with other budget priorities and said the Legislature must decide its appetite for funding. Judicial Council staff said the current prioritization was based on the 2019 reassessment and trailer bill language, that a new reassessment would cost about $14 million, and that acquisition delays are often driven by willing-seller issues and CEQA requirements. The chair asked for written testimony and indicated the committee would consider a future field hearing. In the second panel, Judicial Council and Department of Finance representatives reviewed the Governor’s budget proposals for court facilities. They said the proposal includes continued backfill for the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, several new construction and reappropriation items, relocation of Los Angeles courtrooms from the Spring Federal Building, and completion of a fire/life-safety project in Orange County. A court executive from Ventura testified that courthouse conditions affect public trust, employee morale, and the quality of service, citing roof leaks, elevator breakdowns, and HVAC failures as examples of why sustained facilities funding is needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• The consequences are severe: late and reinstatement fees, court costs, and impound charges piled onto
• dollars worth of fees.
• I just have to pay fees upon fees upon fees. So I really hope that you rule in favor of this bill.
• fees, At brick-and-mortar locations, schools that are paying annual LLC filing fees direct with the
• Fast forward, we go to court.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Transportation

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held a public hearing on several bills related to driver’s license suspensions, junior operator training, online driver education, and regulation of e-bikes/scooters. A major focus was the Road to Opportunity Act (H. 3662/S. 2368), which would end license suspensions and registration holds for unpaid fines and fees unrelated to road safety, create hardship waivers and payment options, and replace suspension with nonrenewal in some cases. Supporters included the Attorney General’s office, ACLU, CPCS, Greater Boston Legal Services, transportation and anti-poverty advocates, and several affected residents who described job loss, housing instability, and difficulty paying toll and fee debts. They argued the current system punishes poverty, disproportionately affects Black and Latino residents, and is costly to enforce. Some testimony also noted that the bill would preserve suspensions for dangerous driving offenses. District Attorney Marion Ryan testified in favor of two bills: one allowing partial payment plans for certain RMV penalties and another closing a loophole that makes the penalty for violating a hardship license less severe than driving after a full suspension. Senator Sear and Representative Reed also spoke for the Road to Opportunity Act, while the AAG said the Attorney General supports it. Committee members asked about RMV implementation and whether the agency supports payment plans; Ryan said the RMV has been cooperative but believes legislation is needed. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee also heard testimony on bills affecting young drivers. Senator Lovely and Representative Cruz supported a bill to create a junior operator license training fund, expand access for low- and moderate-income families, require refunds in some cases, and allow earlier passenger privileges. Another bill would make virtual instructor-led driver education permanent; AAA and several driving school owners supported it as an access and convenience measure, while other instructors opposed it, arguing in-person instruction is safer and more effective. Finally, Senator Collins and others testified for a transportation safety bill regulating motorized bicycles, scooters, e-bikes, and mopeds, increasing fines, requiring insurance for commercial use, and requiring public hearings and accessibility review for new bike lanes. Advocates for blind and disabled pedestrians supported that bill, while some transportation and business voices backed it as a safety and planning measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Reed, are you looking at fees as well in other states and how they assess fees?
• and the Appeals Court.
• It was about whether to get attorney fees, how to file for that, and whether it was a final order.
• and the Appeals Court and the Supreme Court.
• It was about attorney fees, how to file for that, and whether it was a final order to get that.

Keywords: Freedom of Information Advisory Council, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you guys charge origination fees? Do you charge all sorts of- of other fees on top points.
• The Supreme Court is clear. They say we...
• I get the Supreme Court ruling, but isn't that why we file bills and change statutes?
• And last, the substitute clarifies that when the petition is filed in an appropriate court.
• Keep the right to do business if they file a petition in the court and the court finds that their lack

Bills: SB 1113 , SB 1117 , SB 1206 , SB 1460 , SB 1802 , SB 1906 , SB 1917 , SB 2340 , SB 2455 , SB 2680 , SB 2690 , SB 705 , SB 748

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Keywords: SB 1113, converter's license, converter license, motor vehicle dealer, auto dealer, vehicle conversion, converted vehicles, direct sales, retail sales, trailer, semitrailer, manufactured trailer, chassis, manufacturer's statement of origin, MSO, Occupations Code, Transportation Code, Texas Department of Motor Vehicles, dealer licensing, general distinguishing number

Summary: The meeting of the Senate Business and Commerce Committee was marked by discussions on several significant bills, with a keen emphasis on legislative updates and committee substitutes. Notably, Senator Blanco presented a new committee substitute for SB2610, which modifies the employee cap from 100 to 250 and extends the update timeline for cyber security programs for small businesses. This substitute was adopted unanimously, reflecting a collaborative agreement among the committee members. Additionally, there were discussions surrounding SB1856 as Senator Crayton provided insights into how stakeholder feedback influenced the bill's committee substitute. The committee ultimately voted in favor, pushing it towards the local and contested calendar, indicating the bill's progression through legislative channels.

Transcript Highlights:

• Superior Court and Ramona R. v. Superior Court.
• Fees for arranging payment plans, legal filings for incarcerated people, and even participating in community
• service take money from low-income people who then must choose between paying a court fee or paying
• We anticipate the courts charging fewer fees moving forward, leading to even further reduction in the
• The courts are very clear: fees are used as cost recoupment and not punishment.

Committee: Senate Public Safety

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's default that must be given before filing an eviction suit for the Committee on Trade, Workforce
• HP 1734 by or relating to the transfers of court files in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship
• HB 1937 by Craddock relating to the certain tax and fee collection procedure.
• HB 2006 by PLA relating to expunction of arrest records and files by statutory county court refer the
• HB 2229 by Hernandez relating to the expunction of arrest records and files by a statutory county court

Transcript Highlights:

• > pet</c><00:05:06.080><c> fee.
• </c> and what the court has to consider. and what the court has to consider.
• </c> practicable as determined by the court. practicable as determined by the court.
• </c> court has to get involved and a court court has to get involved and a court makes<02:28:34.319><
• </c> any attorney's fees in collections. any attorney's fees in collections.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When we go through all the cases that are filed in the courts that the Associate Circuit Judge handles
• Asking for a court commissioner, that would primarily be the drug court, veterans court commissioner.
• We do have a drug court administrator, veterans court administrator.
• and veterans court.
• That will be on the notice, but there's a conflict at the court, Supreme Court.

Committee: House Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met with a quorum and first took up several bills in executive session. It voted House Bill 3144, relating to injunctions, due pass by an 8-4 vote; House Bill 3160, relating to preliminary injunctions and judicial proceedings, due pass by a 9-4 vote; House Committee Substitute for House Bill 2254, relating to post-conviction relief, due pass after adopting a technical committee amendment and substitute, by an 8-5 vote; House Bill 2206, relating to commercial activities, due pass by a 12-1 vote; and House Bill 2256, relating to minimum prison terms, due pass by a 9-4 vote. Members raised questions on HB 3160 about whether probate commissioners should be included in the bill’s language, and on HB 2254 about whether it was the same measure previously used to speed up the process. In public hearing, the committee heard House Bill 1711, the Uniform Interstate Deposition Discovery Act, which the sponsor and the Attorney General’s office said would streamline out-of-state depositions and subpoenas, reduce legal fees, and make Missouri’s process consistent with more than 40 other states. No opposition testimony was offered. The committee also heard House Bill 1713, which would simplify dissolution of deadlocked LLCs by allowing a judge to order dissolution more quickly, with the sponsor arguing it would reduce delay and litigation; no witnesses opposed it. House Bill 2427 would add judicial positions in St. Charles County, with the sponsor and members discussing the county’s rapid growth, docket pressure, staffing, and the need to reconcile differences among pending versions of the bill. No witnesses testified for or against that measure. The committee then heard House Bill 3086, which would create an additional associate circuit judge position in Miller County. The sponsor and a local attorney testified that Miller County’s caseload, tourism-related population spikes, municipal cases, and lack of commissioners justify moving up the statutory population threshold for a second associate judge. Members asked about treatment court staffing, courtroom space, senior judges, and whether similar arguments might apply in other counties. Finally, House Bill 3072 would allow the Industrial Labor Commission to modify attorney fee arrangements in permanent total disability cases when an attorney retires or dies and a new lawyer must take over; the sponsor said it would clear up an oversight and help manage ongoing medical issues. The committee also heard House Bill 2968, a cleanup bill to align circuit descriptions with prior recircuiting changes and to authorize a previously budgeted circuit judge position in the 25th Circuit. Testimony from the Judicial Conference explained that the bill would remove outdated geographic language and resolve ambiguity about the election date for the new judge. The meeting concluded after the public hearing on HB 2968, and members were told the next Judiciary meeting would be held the following Tuesday at noon in Hearing Room 3.

Transcript Highlights:

• To explain, Show Me Courts is your public access case net, your e-filings for attorneys, your judicial
• I file an expungement.
• fees when someone files at a different suit and those funds being used for this kind of effort?
• I don't particularly care to have people saying, well, Discretion since you write those filing fees in
• fees.

Committee: House Financial Institutions

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Superior Court can assess costs and reasonable attorney fees against a party who appeals the arbitrator's
• Seeking mandatory or requiring arbitration of all filed claims with the court that are tort actions seeking
• The mandatory arbitration proposal here is triggered when a lawsuit or complaint is filed in court, which
• In fact, Rule 1.3 of the Superior Court mandatory arbitration rules states that a case filed in Arbitration
• rules states that a case filed in the Superior Court remains under the jurisdiction of the Superior

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 6239, which would require civil arbitration for tort claims against the state and its subdivisions before trial. Staff explained current tort-claim procedures and said the bill would apply arbitration to claims of any dollar amount, with a fiscal note pending. The sponsor said Washington’s liability exposure is unusually high and argued the bill would promote early resolution without limiting jury trials, damage caps, or attorney fees. Members asked who pays for arbitration and whether trial rights are preserved; staff said costs are generally split and the bill preserves a jury trial de novo. Testimony on SB 6239 was sharply divided. Counties, cities, school districts, risk pools, and some public-safety groups supported the bill, saying rising liability and insurance costs are straining budgets and threatening core services. Opponents included trial lawyers, legal aid groups, victim advocates, journalists, and survivors of abuse, who argued the bill would create barriers to justice, delay relief, increase costs for claimants, reduce transparency, and retraumatize survivors by forcing private arbitration before a public trial. Several witnesses said the bill was too broad because it would cover employment, contract, and other claims, not just torts involving abuse or negligence. After public testimony closed, the committee noted the large number of sign-ins, with far more in opposition than in support. The committee then took up Senate Bill 6074, which would reinstate parole for certain felony offenses committed on or after July 1, 2027, allow eligible incarcerated people to petition the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board after serving 60% of their sentence, and create a parole implementation work group. Supporters said it would recognize rehabilitation and improve reentry, while some witnesses raised concerns about the bill’s prospective-only application, the 60% threshold, and the need to address racial disparities and parole criteria more fully. The sponsor said the parole bill was paired with tort-liability reform because criminal justice reform advocates have said liability changes are needed to restore parole in Washington.

Transcript Highlights:

• The courts in that particular case said that if a doctor did not change their opinion, The court said
• The employee can't file a tort suit.
• But we're asking to file and be able to file a suit, just like the employee is.
• attorney's fees via the safe... ...and also receive protection from penalties and attorney's fees via
• They went to court and the court said, yeah, you had a reasonable right to stop benefits because they

Bills: HB282 , HB293 , HB390 , HB456 , HB460 , HB561 , HB819 , HB1023 , HB1047 , HB1101

Committee: House Labor & Industrial

Keywords: employment discrimination, criminal history, rehabilitation, hiring process, human rights, gender identity, sexual orientation, workplace equality, labor rights, domestic abuse, unpaid leave, employee rights, workplace protection, mental health, survivor support, workers' compensation, employment benefits, claims process, fraud prevention, legal petition

Transcript Highlights:

• Courts may consider factors such as repeated copy-and-paste filings, lack of pre-suit notice, bad-faith
• Fourth, if a court determines a lawsuit is abusive, the bill allows for attorney fees and sanctions to
• So first, the court would be able to look at and say, okay, has he been filing all over the place?
• In these court cases, mine was just so happened to be filed in St.
• So all these fees are all attorney fees.

Committee: House General Laws

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• filing fee. the Secretary of State's office, but one of them that we all pay is a candidate filing fee
• That the salary of the Legislature correlates to what you pay for your filing fee.
• So the fee that we pay to file for office is a real exception to the rule of your other fees?
• What's the fee I'm paying?
• To be tackled sort of at the Supreme Court or the circuit court level on a myriad of topics.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with a quorum, approved the minutes from the prior meeting, and heard budget presentations from the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the State Auditor. The Secretary of State’s office described its FY27 budget, emphasizing efficiency gains from technology, election security work, and business services. It said it is operating with fewer staff than a decade ago, but rising costs and outdated statutory fees are creating deficits in service of process and other operations. The office asked the committee to consider either increasing fees or allowing it to retain a larger share of business-service revenue, and it also proposed creating an Office of Entrepreneurship to help small businesses navigate state government, grants, permits, and related services. Committee members questioned the Secretary of State’s office about fee increases, the current 50-50 split of certain revenues with general revenue, and whether the proposed entrepreneurship office would duplicate existing services. The office said it would complement, not replace, Commerce, SBDC, or grant programs, and would report metrics and policy recommendations to the legislature. The Attorney General then requested a one-time $2 million special revenue appropriation to hire additional lawyers and support staff, citing increased litigation, federal and state legal work, and the need to defend new laws. He also discussed embedded DMV lawyers handling DUI revocation hearings and said the arrangement costs the office just over $200,000. The State Auditor reported that his office is largely self-funded through special revenue and said he wants to reduce reliance on general revenue over time. He highlighted savings from renegotiated leases and an open government contract, discussed the need for more auditors in the Chief Inspector’s Division, and described fraud recovery and P-card operations. A major topic was delinquent land sales: the auditor said the office sold about 17,000 parcels last year and believes online bidding and better marketing could generate substantially more revenue, with the surplus potentially shared among counties, the state, and other programs. Members also asked about securities fee changes, fairness hearings, fire department audits, IT/cybersecurity, and how surplus proceeds from delinquent land sales should be handled. The committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is this bill going to just add another layer of review and filings and fees?
• If anyone other than the subject of those records would have to file any documents with the court with
• And so if you're attaching the juvenile case file without going to the court, information that is irrelevant
• While California does not have a specific late fee law, the courts have upheld only those late fees that
• I mean, the attorneys who are just filing, filing, filing, dozens and dozens of these lawsuits, you know

Summary: The committee heard several bills from Senator Umberg and Senator Allen, with testimony from supporters and opponents before roll-call votes were taken once quorum was established. SB 253, the annual State Bar fee bill, would keep fees unchanged while requiring two-year notice for substantial changes to the bar exam, including vendor changes, and returning to an older delivery method for the upcoming exam; it was presented as a response to recent State Bar problems and the February bar exam failure. SB 25, the Pre-Merger Notification Act, would require certain merger parties to provide California’s attorney general the same Hart-Scott-Rodino materials filed federally, so state antitrust review can occur in parallel with federal review; supporters said this would reduce delay and uncertainty, while members questioned whether it would add another layer of review. SB 36 would strengthen price-gouging enforcement after the January 2025 Southern California firestorms by requiring rental-listing platforms to report suspected gouging, expanding consumer and prosecutor remedies, and allowing warrants in housing-related cases; supporters said it would close loopholes, while opponents from business groups raised concerns. All three bills were later approved on roll call, with SB 36 and SB 413 placed on call before final passage and SB 253 and SB 25 moving forward on committee votes. The committee also heard SB 413, which would streamline access to juvenile case files in certain civil cases brought by or on behalf of the youth who is the subject of the file, allowing attorneys to use heavily redacted records without first petitioning the juvenile court. Supporters, including Los Angeles County counsel and county associations, said the current petition process is costly, slow, and routinely granted, creating delays in civil litigation and court congestion. Opponents, including the Youth Law Center, argued the bill would weaken longstanding juvenile confidentiality protections by bypassing judicial review and could expose sensitive information unnecessarily. After discussion about redactions, sealing, and the scope of access, the bill was passed on a do-pass-as-amended vote. Finally, Senator Wahab presented SB 436, which would extend the notice period for nonpayment of rent from three days to 14 days. Supporters, including tenant advocates, legal aid groups, and several local governments, argued the change would reduce unnecessary evictions, give renters more time to obtain assistance or a paycheck, and help prevent homelessness. Opponents, including apartment associations, property owners, and the California Association of Realtors, said the bill would burden landlords, especially small owners, and could unintentionally affect commercial leases; members also raised concerns about repeated late payment and the lack of stronger guardrails. The author said she would work on clarifying commercial coverage and safeguards, and the bill remained under discussion as the hearing continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• The 10 is dealing with technical legal issues, filings with the court, and all that stuff.
• The 10 is dealing with technical legal issues, filings with the court and all that stuff.
• Plaintiff attorneys have to report to the court, ...litigation costs you see are attorney's fees.
• Plaintiff attorneys have to report to the court what their attorney's fees are in order to get paid.
• the 10-10s, filing 10-A responses, filing 10-09 appeals when they get to ...10-10s, filing 10-10A responses

Summary: The Labor and Industrial Relations Committee first took up House Bill 680 by Rep. Weibel, which proposes a major overhaul of Louisiana’s workforce development system. The bill and a large amendment package were described as modernizing workforce planning, consolidating some state-level strategy and administration, and strengthening coordination with local workforce partners, employers, and regional stakeholders. A transition advisory team with an 18-month sunset was added to help implement the changes, and members repeatedly raised concerns about preserving local input for different regions, parishes, and cities. Rep. Weibel, the secretary of Louisiana Works, parish officials, and other supporters said the goal is to shift more resources from overhead to training and direct services while keeping local boards and parish involvement in place. Testimony from a Utah official and from local government and business representatives emphasized that similar consolidations can create efficiencies without eliminating local responsiveness. The committee adopted the amendments and then reported HB 680 with amendments. The committee then heard House Bill 780 by Rep. Furman on workers’ compensation. The bill seeks to streamline disputes over compensation and medical benefits, reduce litigation, and lower costs by restoring an expedited preliminary determination process and changing the standard for penalties and attorney fees to an arbitrary-and-capricious standard. Supporters, including lobbyists and defense attorneys, argued that the current process is outdated, overly technical, and too litigious, especially because adjusters now often work remotely and the statute still relies on fax and certified-mail procedures. They said the bill would speed up decisions, reduce unnecessary attorney-fee claims, and help employers and injured workers alike. Opponents, including attorneys for injured workers, argued the bill would make it harder for workers to recover penalties when benefits are delayed, shift the burden in favor of insurers, and fail to address understaffing and defense costs. Members debated whether the bill’s new standard should replace the current “reasonably controverted” language; an amendment to restore that language was offered but opposed by the author and other members and was not adopted. The committee adopted technical amendments and other committee amendments, heard additional testimony, and continued debating the bill’s substantive changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• As a committee bill file, please speak to that.
• And the district court, which did what the district court should do, looked at the statute and looked
• So I went back, and I did what our court, our Supreme Court, is supposed to do.
• Had the court simply gone by, At this point, not only a waste of financial resources, had the court simply
• And that's a big red flag on our Supreme Court.

Committee: Joint Government Operations Interim Committee

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then when I filed suit, they never appeared in court.”
• There's a statute that says we don't have to pay filing fees.”
• “No filing fees, but you have to pay fees for service?” “Exactly. That's exactly how it works.”
• I filed a motion to dismiss, which the court mostly denied.
• Have you all got his file from Ashley County Circuit Court?

Committee: All ALC-CLAIMS REVIEW/LITIGATION REPORTS OVERSIGHT

Summary: The committee first reviewed several wage-claim and labor-related litigation reports from the Department of Labor and Licensing. Members questioned the department’s authority and jurisdiction, whether it was acting like a court, and why it sought attorney’s fees and costs. Department staff explained that the claims arose under the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act and related labor statutes, that the department investigates small wage claims and can file suit when informal resolution fails, and that filing fees are waived by statute though service costs may be incurred. The committee reviewed individual cases, including one where the employer had not proven cash payments, another that had already been paid and dismissed, and a third where service could not yet be completed. The committee then voted to review or batch-file the labor items. The University of Arkansas System then reported on three pending lawsuits under the litigation-notification statute. One case involving a tenured professor alleging age and race discrimination had already been resolved and dismissed after the university re-engaged in discussions about a position. A second case involving a former employee alleging ADA and FMLA retaliation was moving forward after partial dismissal and an answer denying liability. A third case involved a former vendor employee alleging retaliation tied to a parking ticket; members asked about individual-capacity exposure for a university police sergeant, and counsel explained that punitive damages could potentially create personal exposure. The committee reviewed each report. The Department of Finance and Administration presented a proposed tax settlement reducing a sales-and-use tax assessment from about $48,000 to $20,000, with interest and penalties waived, and the committee approved it. The Claims Commission then presented several claims and settlements, including an unpaid salary differential for the Department of Health, reissued warrants, unpaid bills for DHS, and multiple negotiated settlements involving UAMS, Arkansas State Police, and ARDOT; these were generally approved or batched for approval. The most extensive discussion involved a settlement between the Teacher Retirement System and Tetronics International Limited in liquidation, arising from losses tied to the failed Blue Oak project; members questioned the company’s liquidation status, the prior investment loss, and why the matter was settling for $65,000, and the committee ultimately affirmed the settlement. The committee also heard a disputed tax-sale claim involving the Commissioner of State Lands, where a claimant argued that excess proceeds from a 2009 tax sale should have gone to her family rather than escheating to the county. After testimony from the claimant and counsel, members debated sovereign immunity, heirship, and whether the committee could or should award the $4,200 overage. The motion was amended and then replaced with a motion to hold the matter over for further review in a future joint session, which passed. Finally, the committee considered an appeal by Andrew Simpson challenging dismissal of his claim against the Arkansas Court of Appeals; after Simpson and court staff explained the underlying dispute, the committee reviewed the dismissal and the matter was held over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, one court has the ability to pick a bailiff; the other court does not.
• Right now, one court has the ability to pick a bailiff; the other court does not.
• Okay, so that's a fee, and then it says an industry standard merchant fee ...
• This is essentially the merchant fee; it is like the interchange fee.
• There are two different fees. Mr. Garcia: There are two different fees, right?

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, heard the invocation and pledges, and then took up a series of memorial resolutions and recognitions. Members adopted memorial resolutions honoring former President Jimmy Carter and Dr. Alice Gail Hudgens, with remarks highlighting their public service and community impact, and adopted resolutions recognizing Victoria College’s 100th anniversary and May 2025 as Mental Health Awareness Month. The chamber also recognized Texas A&M system interns and later granted permission for several committees to meet while the House was in session. The House then moved through a long third-reading calendar, passing a number of bills on wide margins. Measures approved included SB 304 on municipal court jurisdiction over nuisance abatement ordinances, SB 608 on reporting evidence collection kits, SB 2312 creating a Texas Advisory Committee on Geopolitical Conflict, SB 494 creating a petroleum theft task force, SB 530 on postsecondary accreditation, HB 45 giving the Attorney General a role in prosecuting human trafficking cases, HB 35 on peer support for first responders, HB 47 and HB 3073 on sexual assault policy and prosecution, HB 318 and HB 3000 creating rural sheriff and ambulance grant programs, HB 554 on Juneteenth fireworks sales with county opt-in authority restored, HB 705 and HB 932 joining licensure compacts for cosmetology and occupational therapy, HB 849 allowing county park boards to meet by video conference, HB 1119 on mental health bed reporting, HB 3041 on students with nontraditional secondary education, HB 713 on maternal mortality review reporting, HB 3104 on Webb County bailiff appointments, HB 3970 on electricity planning for large loads, HB 4042 on Railroad Commission safety provisions for gas distribution pipelines, HB 4490 protecting next-of-kin information, HB 1731 on the physician assistant compact, HB 2607 on Walker County Hospital District governance, HB 3689 on Texas Windstorm Insurance Association funding, HB 1788 on continuing education for barbers and cosmetologists about abuse and trafficking, HB 1612 on hospital direct payments for uninsured patients, and HB 138 on health impact cost and coverage analysis. Several bills drew extended debate or amendments. HB 353, creating a trespass offense near schools and daycares, prompted questions about constitutional concerns and property rights before passing. HB 3211 on optometrists in managed care plans received a perfecting amendment and a Medicaid-related amendment setting a minimum payment level. HB 1056 on gold and silver specie and a state-based currency prompted detailed questioning about its mechanics and fees, followed by a point of order challenging the caption. The House also adopted or postponed a number of items, including postponing HB 2520 and HB 1359 until later in the calendar before later passing both, and laying several bills on the table subject to call. Many measures passed overwhelmingly, while a few, including HB 3326 on loan forgiveness for adjunct professors and HB 3237 on energy consumption goals, passed with narrower margins.

Transcript Highlights:

• If a suit is filed, they can do that.
• We've got HB 759, Court Fees, by Representative Smith. You're recognized to explain your bill.
• It's a fee for service. You file a lawsuit, and Representative Gottlieb does a lot of those.
• with that fee for service.
• That's a 2008 fee.