Transcript Highlights:

• And I say that the content of those issues.
• The infrastructure issues are not as serious.
• When we put in projects, there's no guarantee that that gets funded.
• Do we have a guarantee that if a city or county cannot fund police and fire and core services, a guarantee
• I can't guarantee what will happen tomorrow. I can't guarantee what will happen next week.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we want to look for ways that we can address that issue.
• We can address that issue.
• So there is no provision in the bill to guarantee that they will go to a rural area.
• So there is no provision in the bill to guarantee that they will go to a rural area.
• So there is no provision in the bill to guarantee that they will go to a rural area.

Summary: The committee took up a large health and human services agenda and first approved HB 711, the Spectrum Alert bill, which would create a statewide alert system for missing autistic children and require FDLE to coordinate training with state and local agencies. The measure drew a supportive waiver from the Florida Smart Justice Alliance and passed unanimously, 24-0, reported favorably. Members then considered CS for HB 229 on health facilities, which modernizes the Health Facilities Authority Act to allow additional nonprofit health system structures to use tax-exempt financing. Two amendments were adopted: one requiring advance notice, public hearings, and stakeholder notifications before a nonprofit hospital closure, and another removing a property tax exemption for a nonprofit hospital that closes and fails to maintain emergency services for 120 days, applied retroactively to January 1, 2025. The Florida Hospital Association opposed the amendments, citing workforce and nonprofit-status concerns, but the bill as amended passed 24-0. The committee also approved CS for HB 1405 on juvenile justice status offenders, expanding early truancy intervention, parent involvement, and shelter placement review timelines; it passed 24-0. CS for HB 27, joining the Social Work Licensure Interstate Compact, and its linked public records bill CS for HB 29 both passed unanimously after supportive testimony from several advocacy and business groups. The committee then debated HB 111 on out-of-network referrals and HB 1083 on patient access to records. HB 111 would require referring practitioners to inform patients in writing when a referral is out of network and to apply out-of-network payments to deductibles; it drew opposition from medical groups over administrative burden and patient-care concerns, but passed 17-8. HB 1083 would shorten the time for producing medical records to 14 working days and standardize access rules, with amendments clarifying portal access and delaying the effective date to January 1, 2026; despite opposition from some health information and provider groups over HIPAA and access concerns, it passed 19-7 as amended. Later, the committee approved HB 883, allowing autonomous practice for psychiatric nurse practitioners with the required credentials, after strong support from nurse practitioner groups and opposition from psychiatric and medical associations; it passed 23-3. HB 1297, which aligns Florida’s electronic prescribing exceptions with federal law and removes several state exemptions, passed 19-7 despite opposition from hospice, emergency physician, rheumatology, and medical groups concerned about paper prescriptions in emergencies and hard-to-find medications. HB 1353 on home health care services and CS for HB 989 on foster home licensure transfers both passed unanimously after supportive amendments. The committee also heard HB 1505 on parental rights, which would require written parental consent for many health care services, surveys, and biofeedback devices for minors and expand parental access to records; the bill drew extensive support testimony but also questions and concerns about confidentiality, abuse reporting, and existing exceptions, and the transcript ended before a final vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I don't know if it's a volume issue of providers, if it's a cost issue, or if it's just not in the
• And I don't know if it's a volume issue of providers, if it's a cost issue, or if it's just not in the
• Again, to give a very candid example, that's not an issue—it's an issue of waiting in Suffolk and Middlesex
• Senate held a hearing on this issue in April.
• , electrification issues, alternative fuel source issues on the propulsion of the vehicles—something

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight heard testimony on several bills. Senator Mike Moore supported S. 2185, which would delay implementation of the heavy-duty omnibus/advanced clean truck requirements while requiring the Commonwealth to purchase or lease electric medium- and heavy-duty vehicles starting in 2025; he argued the delay is needed because infrastructure, grid capacity, vehicle availability, and costs are not yet ready. The committee also heard strong support for S. 2156/H. 3318, which would require free menstrual products in public buildings, with advocates and students describing period poverty and the need to treat menstrual products like other basic restroom supplies. Senator John Keenan testified for S. 2158, a bill to let municipal light plants protect proprietary and competitively sensitive information from public disclosure while keeping board meetings and minutes open, saying it would help level the playing field against larger competitors. A major portion of the hearing focused on S. 2125/H. 3384, the language access and inclusion bill. Testimony from the AAPI Commission, Mass Speaks coalition members, Mass Appleseed, MLRI, ATASK, MAPC, the Boston Bar Association, Mass Advocates for Children, and others described barriers faced by limited-English-proficient residents in accessing MassHealth, DCF, courts, domestic violence services, schools, and other state services. Witnesses cited untranslated documents, inadequate interpretation, delays, and the burden placed on bilingual staff and children; several also pointed to recent federal moves toward English-only policy as making state action more urgent. Committee members asked questions about implementation, interpreter availability, and the role of technology and remote participation, and the chair noted the bill had been reported favorably in a prior session and intended to be again. The committee also heard testimony on time-zone legislation. Dr. Karin Johnson, representing sleep medicine interests, supported H. 3405 for permanent standard time and opposed S. 2157 for permanent daylight saving time, arguing that standard time better aligns with circadian rhythms and health, while permanent daylight saving time would worsen morning darkness and sleep disruption. Members questioned the strength of the scientific evidence and discussed school start times, geography, and whether Massachusetts should align with neighboring states. No votes were taken during the hearing, and testimony continued on additional bills as the session progressed.

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate that there is no guarantee fund backstop here.
• <01:19:29.400> But, uh guarantee fund backstop here.
• But, uh guarantee fund backstop here.
• <01:19:34.400> uh instances where there is no guarantee uh instances where there is no guarantee
• <01:40:53.240> with and the department has no issue with and the department has no issue with

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• types of issues.
• types of issues.
• has the ability to address the issue has the ability to address the issue directly<00:44:49.680>
• <00:52:41.040> that would would address the issue that would would address the issue that
• I can guarantee you they are going to flow in our water streams. I can guarantee you they are.

Keywords: 920, all

Summary: The Alabama Senate convened with a prayer by Pastor Jeremy Ward and the Pledge of Allegiance led by Sophia Woods. A quorum was established with 27 senators present, and the Senate adopted routine motions to excuse absent senators, dispense with the previous day’s journal, and allow bills and committee reports to be introduced throughout the day. The chamber also referred Executive Message 69, appointing Brandy Williams to the Alabama Fire College and Personnel Standards and Education Commission, to the Committee on Confirmations. The Senate received several Judiciary Committee reports. House Bills 41 and 149 and Senate Bills 230, 87, 169, 238, and 233 were reported favorably, with amendments on Senate Bills 87, 169, and 233. Those measures received second reading and were placed on the calendar for the next legislative day. The Senate also adopted Senate Joint Resolution 31, commending Mackenzie Grace Stigel, and Senate Joint Resolution 32, recognizing the Alabama School of Mathematics and Science for its national ranking; guests from the school were welcomed in the gallery. The Rules Committee report was then adopted by a 33-0 vote, setting a special order calendar that included Senate Bill 71 on administrative rules, along with several other bills on dredging, county subdivisions, legislative matters, public corruption, rural hospital investment, minority affairs, campaign finance, and natural resources. The chamber then took up Senate Bill 71, the “sound science” bill, which would limit state agencies from adopting environmental rules more stringent than federal law and require science-based standards where federal law is absent. Senator Coleman-Madison offered an amendment to preserve stronger scientific and causal standards, arguing the bill could weaken protections in heavily burdened communities; the amendment failed on a roll call vote of 25 nays to 1 yea. Senators then continued debating the bill’s effect on ADEM’s authority, emergency rulemaking, federal standards, and environmental enforcement in Alabama.

Transcript Highlights:

• Show me the guarantee.
• There is no guarantee. It is not there, senators. There is no guarantee.
• Why couldn't they study this issue?
• There are so few guarantees in government.
• or one of the most important issues.

Summary: The Senate took up Committee Substitute for Senate Joint Resolution 2F, a proposed constitutional amendment on property tax reform. The measure would increase the homestead exemption in stages, lower the assessment cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, and limit county and municipal ad valorem tax revenues to specified uses such as public safety, education, infrastructure, natural resources, debt service, employee benefits, and certain administrative costs. Supporters, led by Senator Avila, argued the proposal would provide meaningful property tax relief and push local governments to rein in spending, while opponents warned it would shift costs to fees, reduce local flexibility, and threaten funding for core services. Several amendments were offered and rejected. Senator Sharief proposed an income-based circuit breaker for property tax relief; Senator Smith offered a sunset clause; and Senator Berman proposed revising the ballot statement to better match the amended proposal and remove outdated references. Each amendment failed on recorded votes. During questioning and debate, senators pressed Avila on the ballot language, the effect on local services, whether the legislature could later restrict local spending by statute, and whether renters would benefit. Avila said the ballot language was not his and repeatedly stated he was presenting the governor’s proposal, while also saying local governments would need to prioritize budgets and that future legislatures could address implementation details. After the amendment votes, the joint resolution was read a third time and moved into final debate. Supporters said the proposal would give homeowners relief and force fiscal discipline at the local level. Opponents, including Senators Nathan, Bracey Davis, Smith, Polsky, and Errington, argued the measure was rushed, lacked a completed fiscal analysis or replacement revenue, and could harm police, fire, libraries, parks, housing, and other local services. They also criticized the ballot summary as misleading, especially regarding the staged homestead exemption increase. The transcript ends during debate, before any final vote on the joint resolution itself.

Transcript Highlights:

• that over time you are guarantee that over time you are guaranteed<00:07:58.440> to<00:07:58.639
• <00:08:33.959> to Minnesota over time you're guaranteed to Minnesota over time you're guaranteed
• And we are not really talking about this issue.
• This is a workforce issue as well, as well as being a behavioral health issue.
• <01:31:33.719> and you're dealing with this issue and you're dealing with this issue and you're

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The government issues that jurisdiction. The government issues credits. credits. credits.
• guaranteeing loans to help expand this. guaranteeing loans to help expand this.
• they're they're issuing tons. they're they're issuing tons.
• So, that isn't like a carbon issue, that's just an encumbrance issue.
• important issue to consider. important issue to consider.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with introductions, approval of the March 6 minutes as amended to add an attendee list, and a brief overview of the day’s agenda. The committee heard two presentations from carbon project developers, with the first from Dylan Jenkins of Finite Carbon. He described Finite Carbon’s work in improved forest management projects, its role in developing carbon methodologies and protocols, and its experience with projects in New England, Appalachia, Alaska, and Canada. He also outlined the difference between compliance and voluntary carbon markets, the role of registries and intermediaries, and the types of buyers in the market, including large corporate buyers and long-term off-take partners. A major focus of the presentation was how forest carbon projects are structured and how credits are monetized. Jenkins distinguished between removals and reductions, explaining that removals come from new forest growth while reductions are tied more closely to baseline assumptions and standing stock. He said improved forest management projects can generate both types of credits, and that removals generally command higher prices because they are easier for buyers to understand and verify. He also emphasized that carbon project commercialization can occur before, during, or after credit issuance, and that landowners may be paid through a variety of structures, including leases, advance fees, per-unit payments, or off-take agreements. Jenkins then addressed the committee’s tax-related questions, saying House Bill 123 appeared intended to treat carbon credit sales similarly to timber sales for local tax purposes. He argued that carbon credits are a forest product and that taxing them can be reasonable in principle, but he stressed that lawmakers should distinguish between commoditization and commercialization when deciding what event to tax. He noted that credits may be created but never sold, and that in some programs landowners retain timber and carbon rights while in others the developer has deeper control over those rights. In response to questions, he said the industry uses protocols, verification, and third-party oversight to address baseline and quality concerns, but acknowledged that baseline setting remains a major point of debate in the market.

Transcript Highlights:

• proceedings. process so that we can have an effective deliberation and decisions on the critical issues
• The recent amendments guarantees that the modernization process will be overseen by CPUC in consultation
• This bill guarantees a plan that provides a public benefit while maintaining reliable voice services
• The way this bill is drafted, there's a little, if any, protections or guarantees for the workforce to
• Whatever the practice has been in the past, we all know, if it's not in the bill, then there's no guarantee

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• protection, but it wasn't a guarantee. protection, but it wasn't a guarantee.
• I know you've been working on this issue I know you've been working on this issue for<00:51:44.480
• . issue. issue.
• is a statewide issue.
• theft issue is a statewide<01:42:37.920> issue.

Bills: HF2233, HF1999, HF1995, HF1614, HF2781, HF1775, HF1316, HF2127, HF2521, HF689, HF2380, HF1273

Keywords: Uniform Special Deposits Act, special deposit, banking law, financial institutions, escrow, escrow account, trust account, security deposit, beneficiary, depositor, creditor process, garnishment, attachment, levy, setoff, recoupment, financial market infrastructure, retirement benefits, compensation, earnest money

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:24:06.440> It<00:24:06.560> is no guarantee guaranteed prize.
• It is no guarantee guaranteed prize.
• The main issue comes down to it's law. The main issue comes down to it's law. Yes, sir.
• said I got a I have an issue. said I got a I have an issue.
• , but addictive issues addictive issues, but addictive issues abroad. abroad. abroad.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• adds that so that any customer who subscribes with a facility that has consolidated billing is guaranteed
• It does not have the same risk to consumers of being overcharged because you are guaranteed a discount
• All this legislation does is provide clarity for community solar subscribers, guaranteed discounts for
• All this legislation does is provide clarity for community solar subscribers, guaranteed discounts for
• So there was a lot of discussion about the issues with flooding and whether this bill would impede on

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met and first considered SB 321 with Senate Amendment 1, the community solar utility billing bill. The sponsor explained that it would consolidate the two-bill system for community solar subscribers into one utility bill, with the utility forwarding the subscriber fee to the solar facility through an escrow mechanism so costs are not shifted to other ratepayers. Testimony from the solar industry, the Public Advocate, and environmental advocates supported the measure, emphasizing easier enrollment, fewer barriers for low-income customers, and guaranteed savings. The committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, but after a roll call vote it was released from committee. The committee then heard SB 9 with Senate Amendment 1, a wetlands protection bill creating a state non-tidal freshwater wetlands permitting program. The sponsor and DNREC described a framework of exemptions, general permits, and individual permits based on wetland type and value, with an advisory committee to develop regulations. Witnesses explained that “exceptional value” wetlands would include unique wetland communities and high-functioning wetlands, and that the bill was intended to preserve important habitat while allowing farming, drainage, and other exempt activities to continue. Some members raised concerns about flooding, land classification, and the balance of the advisory committee, while supporters said the bill was the product of broad stakeholder consensus and would protect wetlands without unduly harming agriculture or development. Public comment on SB 9 was strongly supportive from environmental groups, the Delaware Native Species Commission, the Home Builders Association, the Farm Bureau, The Nature Conservancy, and affordable housing advocates, who said the bill balanced conservation with practical land use concerns. After remote testimony, the committee took a roll call vote and SB 9 was released from committee. The meeting concluded with remarks thanking the chair for her service and instructions for members to sign the backers before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think, looking at your model, it is not a guarantee that we get this version of this.
• It doesn't open the floodgates, but it addresses a very real issue.
• So I appreciate that there are always resource issues; that's a reality.
• So I'm wondering if this is a statewide issue.
• is a statewide issue.

Bills: HF2233, HF1999, HF1995, HF1614, HF2781, HF1775, HF1316, HF2127, HF2521, HF689, HF2380, HF1273

Keywords: Uniform Special Deposits Act, special deposit, banking law, financial institutions, escrow, escrow account, trust account, security deposit, beneficiary, depositor, creditor process, garnishment, attachment, levy, setoff, recoupment, financial market infrastructure, retirement benefits, compensation, earnest money

Transcript Highlights:

• Today there is one issue on the agenda, which covers the May Revision proposals for higher education.
• If we were to, about potential issues surrounding waiving interest from special fund loans.
• We're just trying to max out the COLA to get to the full amount of the guarantee.
• Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for your leadership on this issue in particular.
• Chair and committee and staff, thank you for your work on these important issues.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard May Revision proposals covering higher education, including the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the University of California, California Community Colleges, the California Student Aid Commission, UC College of the Law, San Francisco, and trailer bill reporting changes. For the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the administration proposed a one-time $10 million General Fund backfill to repay a special fund loan taken to cover litigation costs, plus provisional language to adjust for a pending legal expense and to repay the loan without interest. The LAO opposed shifting costs to the General Fund and raised legal concerns about an interest-free loan under Proposition 26. Senators asked about whether the $10 million would cover the litigation and about the estimated $245,000 in interest savings. For UC, the May Revision maintained the Governor’s ongoing support and included budget language requiring campuses to grow by 2,968 California undergraduates in 2026-27. UC also sought $1.5 million in one-time General Fund support for the First Star foster youth program. UC described strong outcomes for the UCLA program, while the LAO recommended rejecting the new spending because UC already has overlapping outreach programs, including the Early Academic Outreach Program, and because the need for new state funding was not clear. Senators debated whether the proposal duplicated existing services and discussed the program’s reported college-going and completion rates. The committee also heard a request for $1 million ongoing General Fund for UC College of the Law, San Francisco, to maintain campus safety services; the college described its shared-campus model and public-interest mission, while the LAO noted the college was also raising tuition and that the proposal would maintain, rather than expand, current security spending. The committee then reviewed community college proposals. Finance outlined a larger May Revision package centered on a 4.31% SCFF COLA, enrollment growth funding, categorical COLAs, a one-time Adult Learner Demonstration Project allocation, deferred maintenance, and other ongoing and one-time items. The Chancellor’s Office supported the package but asked for more enrollment growth funding, a higher growth rate, and additional policy changes. The LAO recommended at least funding the statutory 2.87% COLA, then considering whether to redirect remaining funds to enrollment growth, categorical COLAs, or one-time priorities; it recommended rejecting the Adult Learner Demonstration Project. Senators questioned the use of the discretionary COLA to cover paid pregnancy disability leave, the impact on hold harmless and basic aid districts, and whether the state should instead create a separate categorical. The Chancellor’s Office and Finance said the COLA approach was intended to provide flexibility, though Finance said it was open to further discussion about districts that would not receive direct funding. For student aid, Finance described May Revision changes to Cal Grant and the Middle Class Scholarship, including a one-time reduction tied to lower estimated costs and a later true-up, as well as proposals for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. CSAC supported the financial aid investments but urged more time and clearer implementation planning for Workforce Pell, noting the need for state approval processes, data linkages, and likely ongoing administrative workload. The LAO recommended rejecting additional Golden State Teacher Grant funding and cautioned that the Workforce Pell trailer bill and one-time funding were premature given the new federal rules and unclear workload. Senators also raised concerns about the Middle Class Scholarship reduction, the need to support students facing higher living costs, and the decline in CADA/DREAM Act applications, with CSAC saying the drop did not reflect reduced need and that outreach should be strengthened. The final item was a set of technical trailer bill changes to shift some UC, CSU, and community college reporting from annual to biennial and consolidate reports; Finance said there were no programmatic changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• This issue was litigated.
• This issue was litigated.
• This issue was litigated.
• This issue was litigated.
• This issue was litigated.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is a real issue.
• So this is a real issue.
• The state does not spend money when a guarantee is issued.
• No issues of constitutionality, no issues of Sharia law, no issues of the Second Amendment, no issue
• law, no issues of the issues of Sharia law, no issues of the second<04:41:36.080> amendment,<

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• adds that so that any customer who subscribes with a facility that has consolidated billing is guaranteed
• They do not have the same risk to consumers of being overcharged because you are guaranteed a discount
• All this legislation does is provide clarity for community solar subscribers, guaranteed discounts All
• So there was a lot of discussion about the issues with flooding and whether this bill would impede on
• identified, is there a mechanism to have a professional consulting company come in and settle this issue

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met to consider two Senate bills. SB 321, with Senate Amendment 1, would change community solar billing so subscribers receive one consolidated utility bill instead of separate bills from the utility and the solar provider. Supporters said the bill would simplify enrollment and payment, improve customer retention—especially for low-income customers—and include safeguards such as guaranteed savings and an escrow mechanism to prevent cost shifts to other ratepayers. After public testimony from solar developers, the Public Advocate, the Sierra Club, and others, the committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, so the vote was circulated to absent members and the bill was later reported out for floor action. The committee then heard SB 9, with Senate Amendment 1, a long-negotiated wetlands protection bill. The sponsor and DNREC explained that it would create a state non-tidal wetlands program with exemptions for certain agricultural, conservation, and routine activities, general permits for some lower-impact projects, and individual permits for higher-value wetlands. Witnesses described the bill as a compromise among environmental, agricultural, development, and local government stakeholders, while some members raised questions about flooding, landowner impacts, wetland delineation, and the role of the regulatory advisory committee. Public testimony was broadly supportive from environmental groups, the Farm Bureau, builders, engineers, and affordable housing advocates. The committee then voted to release SB 9 from committee. At the end of the meeting, members offered thanks and remarks recognizing the chair’s service and leadership on environmental and energy issues. Both bills were ultimately released from committee and reported out.

Transcript Highlights:

• On the issue of deferring retirement, is this, you know, we all know that we have a retirement age of
• Well, that's an issue.
• Well, this issue, go ahead, Anthony.
• This is an issue brought to us by the DRS, the Department of Retirement Services.
• And I would invite you to continue to monitor this issue as a...

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's in the D... ...that do this guaranteed. Well, it's a line of credit for this.
• , but it isn't as big of an issue.
• And so there's issues, but I think they're solvable.
• So it's an issue that's been 2,000-plus years that there's been housing issues.
• Chairman, if the carrier would issue moving on the amendment, I'm ready to second.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2014, the budget for the Industrial Commission, with Representative Kempenich walking through the agency’s major components: the administrative office, Bank of North Dakota, housing finance, Department of Mineral Resources, and the State Mill and Elevator. He described mostly special-fund operations, including bond payments, economic development programs, the rail loan program, the Rebuilder’s Loan Program, housing incentive funding, abandoned well reclamation work, lignite research, litigation reserves, and a capacity purchase arrangement for a future natural gas pipeline. He also explained several one-time funding items, such as grid resiliency grants, housing-related transfers from the Strategic Investment Fund, and enhanced oil recovery funding repurposed from a prior salt cavern study. Members asked about the reduction in housing incentive funding from the Senate version, the use of one-time Strategic Investment Fund dollars for ongoing housing programs, and whether a trigger should be added to increase housing funding later. Kempenich said no trigger was discussed and emphasized that housing needs vary widely across the state. Another exchange focused on the enhanced oil recovery grant program, which he said would be driven largely by the Energy and Environmental Research Center and would use repurposed funds. A longer discussion covered the natural gas pipeline capacity purchase, including its purpose, possible routes, and the idea that the state would be buying capacity rather than immediately building a pipeline. The committee adopted Amendment 25.0181.0207 on a 21-1 vote, with one member absent and not voting. The committee then passed HB 2014 as amended on a 21-1 vote, with one member absent and not voting. Representative Kempenich was designated to carry the bill. The chair then noted this was the final budget hearing for the committee, with one bill remaining to be heard later.

Transcript Highlights:

• When you say it doesn't guarantee a payment.
• I don't see any First Amendment issues or access to justice issues.
• issue.
• These people have chronic debilitating issues.
• This is a bipartisan issue.

Bills: HB 1181, HB3704, HB1363, HB1610, HB1615, HB1620, HB3223, HB1317, HB2884, HB2176, HB4027, HB1664, HB933, HB2613, HB3353, HB2086, HB4101, HB3441, HB4145, HB3455

Keywords: judiciary, judges, justices, retired, legal assignments, judicial conduct, notary public, criminal offense, education requirements, official documents, record retention, implicit bias, bias training, judicial training, judge education, court personnel, continuing legal education, CLE, state bar, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals