Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, we have all the surface. We also have minerals that the previous owner did own, if they did.
• “So those surface acres would be leased for surface purposes, so like hunting and grazing, for example
• “That's not 13 million surface acres.
• That surface and minerals, 2.1 million on the surface, 2.1 million minerals directly underneath that
• You know, it takes that group to be able to convert to surface water or to start on surface water, and

Summary: The committee heard testimony first from the Texas General Land Office and School Land Board. GLO officials described the agency’s role in managing more than 13 million acres of state lands and mineral interests for the Permanent School Fund, overseeing the Alamo, coastal programs, veterans’ services, and federal disaster recovery. They said the agency has generated about $6 billion for the Permanent School Fund since Commissioner Buckingham took office, and that its disaster recovery portfolio is about $14 billion across multiple events, with more than 22,000 housing units rebuilt or reconstructed since Hurricane Harvey. Members asked about land purchases such as Brewster Ranch, rare earth mineral leasing, SpaceX-related beach access, and whether the lands are public access lands; GLO staff said the holdings are managed to maximize revenue for education, that most land is leased rather than open to public access, and that they are coordinating on coastal access and compliance. On the School Land Board, members sought clarification on the difference between GLO-managed lands and the Permanent School Fund Corporation’s investment role, and staff explained that GLO generates the revenue while the separate corporation invests it. No votes or formal actions were taken. The Board for Lease of University Lands then testified. University Lands officials explained that they steward 2.1 million acres of surface and mineral interests in West Texas for the Permanent University Fund, which supports UT and Texas A&M institutions. They said a 2025 lease sale produced about $50 million in bonus revenue from 28,000 acres, and described the Board for Lease’s role in approving lease forms, lease sales, and development agreements. Members asked about the size and use of the PUF, how distributions work through UTIMCO, whether PUF money can be used for athletics, and how the land is managed; the witness said the fund is a constitutional endowment, the land is largely leased rather than sold, and distributions are generally used for buildings, labs, and other permanent structures, with some institutions also using a portion for operations. No votes or formal actions were taken. The committee then took up municipal utility districts. Testimony from a law firm, the Texas Municipal League, Fort Bend County Commissioner Vincent Morales, and Johnson Development largely supported MUDs as a financing tool for infrastructure tied to growth. Witnesses said MUDs help fund water, sewer, drainage, roads, parks, and related infrastructure, allowing development to proceed without shifting costs to existing taxpayers and helping keep housing affordable. They emphasized that MUDs are created with disclosure to homebuyers, are subject to the Open Meetings Act and Public Information Act, and are overseen by TCEQ for bond issuance and related financial stress tests. Members questioned whether MUDs are taxing entities, whether they can be created inside city limits or ETJs, how much control cities and counties retain, and whether MUDs are becoming permanent local governments; witnesses acknowledged they levy taxes and debt, can exist within city limits with city consent, and often function as long-term local entities. The committee did not take any formal action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're member-owners of ours.
• Oh, and we'll pick up any rocks that we've surfaced, because when you decompact land, you surface things
• And then it also has who the owner of the project or the owner of the output or the PPA is.
• Most states consider geothermal a surface owner.
• So even if you're developing in the subsurface, the surface owner still benefits from that development

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Energy Development and Transmission Committee met in interim session and approved the November 6 minutes. Chair Novak outlined the committee’s study agenda, including large energy users such as data centers, geothermal, landowner relations, wind and solar, and other energy topics across the state. The meeting was framed as informational only, with no bills or formal legislative action taken beyond the minutes approval. Testimony focused first on landowner relations. Oliver County Commissioner Dave Berger described the county’s energy history and local support for coal and related development. North Dakota Farmers Union President Matt Perdue emphasized proactive, face-to-face communication with landowners, respect for property rights, and the need for developers to be transparent about tradeoffs; he also discussed insurance and liability concerns tied to easements. Committee members asked about eminent domain, local versus state authority, and how communities can better understand the revenue and infrastructure implications of energy development. Department of Agriculture Deputy Commissioner Tom Bodine then described the department’s ombudsman programs for pipeline restoration and reclamation, wind restoration, and royalty oversight. He said the programs provide confidential, third-party assistance on reclamation and royalty disputes, but do not provide legal advice. Senators raised concerns about post-production deductions in royalty leases and whether the ombudsman can explain them; Bodine said the program can clarify statements and deductions but cannot resolve legal disputes. He also said the department has not received requests related to fiber lines. Representatives from Grid United and One Oak described their project development and landowner engagement practices. Grid United’s Brent Johnson discussed the North Plains Connector transmission project, its route selection process, voluntary acquisition approach, and efforts to avoid eminent domain by working closely with regulators, counties, townships, and landowners. One Oak’s Danette Welsh and Tom Giltner described the company’s midstream operations, extensive North Dakota footprint, and emphasis on direct landowner communication, consistent local regulation, careful construction practices, and post-construction reclamation. Members asked about setbacks, zoning consistency, invasive species prevention, outside advocacy groups, and eminent domain use; One Oak said it has not used eminent domain on its North Dakota projects, largely because most gathering lines are negotiated easements.

Transcript Highlights:

• die they project Killers When projects die they deprive<00:04:43.919> land<00:04:44.160> owners
• /c><00:04:44.479> of<00:04:44.600> lease<00:04:44.880> revenues deprive land owners
• of lease revenues deprive land owners of lease revenues towns<00:04:45.960> of<00:04:46.160><
• We're a solar and storage developer and owner-operator based out of Boston.
• operator based out of Boston um we owner operator based out of Boston um we operate<00:06:56.479>

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have small business owners.
• Behaves poorly goes too far much in violation of the rights of the property owners.
• . owner in place.
• I'm a local business owner. I'm a real estate investor.
• So we have to go out, we have to get surface water.

Bills: HB1520, HB1525, HB1530, HB1535, HB2068, HB2091, HB2347, HB2372, HB2805, HB2815, HB2867, HB3154, HB3482, HB3483, HB3663, HB3781, HB3901, HB3915, HB4135, HB4153, HB4158, HB4329, HB4331

Keywords: Angelina and Neches River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, Special District Local Laws Code, local government, natural resources, board of directors, director training, board governance, public testimony, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, ethics, complaint system, general manager, board president, staggered terms, removal of director

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 332 would simply add a 15th reason to protect and remediate surface waters.
• HB 332 would simply add a 15th reason to protect and remediate surface waters.
• <00:10:00.160> water to improve the quality of surface water to improve the quality of surface
• For example, if a district decides to do an in-lake treatment, it still would have to seek a surface
• 35:08.639> who associations back property owners who associations back property owners who may

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 332, a bill to add protection and remediation of surface waters as a new authorized purpose for New Hampshire village districts. Prime sponsor Rep. Rosemary Rung said the bill is intended to give local voters in lake communities a voluntary tool to address cyanobacteria blooms and other water-quality problems through village districts, including the ability to raise revenue, adopt ordinances, and pursue treatments or watershed management measures. She emphasized that the proposal is meant to complement, not replace, state law and that any district action would still need to comply with existing permitting and environmental requirements. Supporters, including Andrea Laro of New Hampshire Lakes and Elizabeth Harper of the Lake Sunapee Protective Association, said the bill would help municipalities collaborate on lake protection when state resources are limited. They argued that local districts could bring subject-matter expertise, access grants and technical assistance, and respond more quickly to problems such as septic impacts, runoff, culvert repairs, and in-lake treatments. They also suggested clarifying the bill’s wording around “protection and remediation” to better define the scope of authorized activities. Opponents, including Steve Wolf and Chris Norwood of the New Hampshire Association of Realtors, argued that village districts can already be overly broad and sometimes expand beyond their original purposes. Wolf said existing town and state agencies already handle shoreline protection and warned that village districts can impose ongoing taxes and create governance problems. Norwood urged a study bill instead, citing concerns about the scope of village districts and examples where some districts have taken on planning and zoning powers beyond their original mission. No vote or final action on HB 332 was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Once you're below the surface, it gets dark and murky very quickly.
• When he didn't surface, the supervisor searched the area, but Joseph wasn't there.
• Brady didn't surface for 30 minutes.
• LLC where the owner would otherwise be exempt if they were selling as an individual.
• a sale by a single owner LLC where the<00:45:10.800> owner<00:45:11.040> would<00:45:11.200

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill seems to prevent landowners and surface right owners from being able to get full recovery for
• I'm curious to know how landowners or surface right owners currently have the opportunity to request
• If the surface owner makes a complaint and sees scarring or other defects on the land after a well is
• Does the landowner or surface owner have the ability to request remediation, or is it a conversation
• If a landowner or surface owner says, 'Hey, thanks for plugging the well, but there's a problem here,

Bills: SB1191, SB1314, SB1319, SB1333, SB1346, SB1439, SB1509, SB1510, SB1613

Keywords: SB1191, Oklahoma Energy Initiative Act, Oklahoma Low Carbon Energy Initiative Board, low carbon energy, clean energy, energy policy, renewable energy, board repeal, statutory repeal, administrative board, energy committee, natural resources, Oklahoma statutes, 17 O.S. 802.3, groundwater, indemnity fund, well drilling, pollution prevention, regulatory compliance, SB1319

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, they both deal with surface water management and surface water fees, so they are the same type of
• water management and deal with surface water management and surface<00:03:54.560> water<00:03
• I'm a property owner, also Cheyenne.
• as a surface water management program. as a surface water management program.
• <00:19:42.000> water Title 16's reference to surface water Title 16's reference to surface

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• grateful to Senator Flores and Senator Flores' staff for their willingness to work with municipal... owner
• Thank you very much. that we don't prevent homeowners and structure owners who have occupied structures
• Surface water access is also extremely limited.
• Decatur, Bridgeport, and Runaway Bay have historical agreements for surface water use.
• So we're back in that category again, needing surface water.

Bills: SB1169, SB1285, SB1583, SB1611, SB1898, SB1976, SB2160, SB2161, SB2658, SB2661, SB2662, SB2692, SB1055, SB1359, SB2660

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• Our property, our groundwater property rights owners.
• Underneath the surface in place.
• owner.
• Groundwater, surface water?
• We have to get surface water.

Bills: HB 1520, HB 1525, HB 1530, HB 1535, HB 2068, HB 2091, HB 2347, HB 2372, HB 2805, HB 2815, HB 2867, HB 3154, HB 3482, HB 3483, HB 3663, HB 3781, HB 3901, HB 3915, HB 4135, HB 4153, HB 4158, HB 4329, HB 4331

Keywords: Angelina and Neches River Authority, river authority, Sunset Advisory Commission, Texas Sunset Act, Special District Local Laws Code, local government, natural resources, board of directors, director training, board governance, public testimony, open meetings, public information, conflict of interest, ethics, complaint system, general manager, board president, staggered terms, removal of director

Transcript Highlights:

• You can see the other two surfaces in the report.
• of surface rights there.
• Surface second quarter 2024. Yes.
• Is the operator the same as the owner? Mr.
• However, the surface... Estate is variable.

Transcript Highlights:

• I represent the Texas Association of Groundwater Owners and Producers.
• At some point it may still be surface water. It just depends.
• At some point, it may still be surface water. It just 152 depends.
• We need to know how much groundwater pumping affects surface water flows.
• Property owner that it sets.

Bills: HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management

Summary: The committee met to hear House Bills 27 and 24 on groundwater issues in East Texas, with members and witnesses focusing on a proposed large-volume groundwater export project and the need for more science before major permitting decisions are made. HB 27, which was within the special session call, would direct the Texas Water Development Board to conduct a hydrogeologic study of the aquifers in the affected area and temporarily pause new export permits while the study is underway. HB 24, a separate bill that would limit certain production and export permits to 5% of modeled available groundwater, was laid out but the chair said it would not be moved out of committee. Testimony on HB 27 was largely supportive, though some witnesses were neutral. Supporters, including representatives from a water supply corporation, the Trinity River Authority, Environmental Defense Fund, and the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, said the region lacks enough hydrologic data, that the proposed pumping could affect private wells, surface water, and local economies, and that the state needs better information on sustainable yield and groundwater-surface water interaction. Several witnesses emphasized that groundwater conservation districts need clearer tools and better data, while also noting concerns about property rights and the rule of capture. Committee members discussed the scale of the proposed project, the absence of a groundwater conservation district in Houston County, and the possibility that the study should examine desired future conditions and maximum sustainable pumping rather than only modeled available groundwater. The committee adopted the committee substitute for HB 27 and voted it out favorably to the full House with a recommendation that it do pass, be printed, and be sent to the Committee on Calendars. The roll call was unanimous, 11 ayes and 0 nays. After the vote, members briefly reflected on the complexity of the issue and the need to continue working on broader groundwater policy in the interim and next session. HB 24 was discussed later in the meeting, but no final action on that bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, you know, what surface piece.
• reducing um additional imperous surface reducing um additional imperous surface so<00:12:38.320>
• Um and I think the concern surfaces.
• based on impervious surface in that 250. based on impervious surface in that 250.
• impervious surface impervious surface and<00:29:02.000> and<00:29:02.480> isn't<00

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of a surface estate has an inherent right, either directly or through the owner. through a wind energy
• What does it mean that a surface owner has that inherent right?
• And so the surface owner has. has that right.
• The surface owner, however, under this bill can lease that right out to a third party. party through
• Establishes that the right of us of a surface estate owner to capture wind energy is not This section

Bills: HJR34, HB 113, HB184, HB198, HB247, HB367, HB449, HB1778, HB514, HB576, HB632, HB1395, HB2225, HB2582, HB2494, HB766, HB2715, HB2712, HB3069, HB3505, HB 1269, HB4224, HB3609, HB5032, HB2240, HB5180, HB3348, HB4668, HB4909, HB4665, HB4895, HB3395, HB3157, HB4762, HB4395, HB4325, HB4952, HB4386, HB4273, HB2760, HB2697, HB2820, HB1828, HB1768, HB1579, HB1773, HB1871, HB2035, HB2448, HB2492, HB1411, HB4753, HB4666, HB4529, HB1499, HB1610, HB2028, HB1506, HB886, HB3546, HB796, HB223, HB1475, HB3556, HB4638, HCR126, HB38, HB 104, SB1008, SB1106, SB1172, SB2629, SB2964, SB616, HB2214, SB552, HB3181, HB3628, HB589, HB3529, HB3354, HB333, HB2914, HB4130, HB4131, HB24, HB 1160, HB3962, HB4115, HB2295, HB5398, HB1407, HB3800, HB2613, HJR138, HB42, HJR34, HB 129, HB677, HB426, HB668, HB1699, HB2017, HB2128, HB2038, HB3783, HB3717, HB2316, HB3686, HB2563, HB3883, HB4021, HB2788, HB2663, HB3305, HB3173, HB3474, HB 1105, HB3531, HB3490, HB3597, HB 1295, HB3512, HB3010, HB3112, HB4215, HB3223, HB3464, HB3120, HB4214, HB4511, HB3704, HB4081, HB4783, HB4063, HB2783, HB4937, HB5085, HB2510, HB3426, HB4361, HB 1169, HB2516, HB2347, HB4034, HB4700, HB3560, HB5150, HB3860, HB3146, HB3924, HB 113, HB184, HB198, HB247, HB367, HB449, HB1778, HB514, HB576, HB632, HB1395, HB2225, HB2582, HB2494, HB766, HB2715, HB2712, HB3069, HB3505, HB 1269, HB4224, HB3609, HB5032, HB2240, HB5180, HB3348, HB4668, HB4909, HB4665, HB4895, HB3395, HB3157, HB4762, HB4395, HB4325, HB4952, HB4386, HB4273, HB2760, HB2697, HB2820, HB1828, HB1768, HB1579, HB1773, HB1871, HB2035, HB2448, HB2492, HB1411, HB4753, HB4666, HB4529, HB1499, HB1610, HB2028, HB1506, HB886, HB3546, HB796, HB223, HB1475, HB3556, HB4638, HCR98, HCR92, HCR126

Keywords: HJR 34, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, ad valorem tax, property tax exemption, real property, border counties, U.S.-Mexico border, United Mexican States, border security, border security infrastructure, landowner, county tax base, local government, tax relief, property value increase, infrastructure improvements, voter approval, November 2025 ballot, statutory construction

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, do you not want to talk about surface water stuff?
• And then for both ground and surface water, we have water use permits.
• So, regarding the back and forth with the, you asked specifically on the well owner, land owner, um,
• There's very little interaction with the actual well owner.
• So there's quite a bit of interaction with land owners for water... ...owners for water. >> And then

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As Chairman of the Committee and as the representative of the thousands of property owners in my house
• I represent the Texas Association of Groundwater Owners and Producers. Producers.
• Surface water to groundwater. We need to know, you know, we can't manage what we don't measure.
• Scope that you might develop for a groundwater-surface water interaction study.
• I'm here today on behalf of the Texas Association of Groundwater Owners and Producers.

Bills: HB24, HB27, HB24, HB27

Keywords: groundwater, conservation, water permits, sustainability, resource management, 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You have to live in Arizona for two years, and the home has to be owner-occupied for two years.
• two years and the home has to be owner occupied for two years.
• It allows the property owner to have a permit to be able to stock his freezer, not transferable.
• submitting a reclamation plan to require the owner or operator to notify each property owner within a
• in Pinal County and 1,100 feet below land surface in the Phoenix AMA.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The meeting was a rapid review of a very large bill package, with the chair repeatedly asking staff to keep descriptions high level and many bills placed on third-read consent or consent calendars. A major theme was artificial intelligence: bills would require minors to be told when they are interacting with AI, allow AI-assisted divorce arbitration by consent, create an AI education program, privilege certain AI communications, and require K-12 instruction on ethical and practical AI use. Other education measures addressed school district superintendents, health instruction, anti-Semitism prohibitions, fetal development standards, and school safety, including a bill allowing concealed firearms on school grounds under specified conditions. Several health and public safety bills were also discussed. These included funding and oversight measures for childhood cancer research, nursing care complaint timelines, firefighter cancer data collection, limits on pharmacy penalties, and a bill making it a felony to administer abortion-inducing drugs without consent. Members also heard bills on overtime wage enforcement, domestic violence evidence standards in parenting cases, probation limits for dangerous crimes against children, and a measure expanding manslaughter liability to online encouragement of teen suicide. One sponsor strongly opposed a provisional medical licensing bill for foreign-trained applicants, while other sponsors emphasized rural health access, nurse anesthetist reimbursement parity, and the need for a dental board member who is an oral surgeon. A large portion of the meeting focused on water, land, energy, and state agency oversight. Bills would streamline or change rules for small modular reactors, new power plants, water supply determinations, groundwater transportation fees, water hauling, and state land disposition. Members also considered measures affecting the State Land Department, including audits, oversight boards, continuation, land-use maps for data centers and energy projects, and rules for mineral leases and solar or wind siting. Other topics included wildlife and ranching, Mexican wolf policy, annexation, housing and development incentives, transportation and towing rules, digital driver licenses, and a proposed four-year moratorium on municipal and county fee, tax, and utility-rate increases, which drew questions about stakeholder input and the impact on enterprise funds and local utilities. No recorded roll-call votes were taken in the transcript; most items were simply presented, briefly discussed, and left on consent or calendar status, with one bill noted as held in rules and another pulled for further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, surface water is more expensive to treat than groundwater.
• So surface water fees collected for surface water can't be used to maintain sewer plants or water plants
• So those well owners, instead of having to do their own surface water treatment plants or anything like
• Groundwater and 26 treat brackish surface water.
• The brown or black squiggly line at the top is the land surface.

Summary: During the meeting, legislative members discussed the practice of municipalities diverting water and sewer revenues to their general funds, which impacts infrastructure maintenance and project delays. Vice Chair Sparks proposed limiting public testimony to two minutes, which was adopted without objection. The committee heard from various witnesses, including Perry Fowler from the Texas Water Infrastructure Network, who emphasized that utility revenues should primarily support water services and that transfers should be transparent and justified. He noted that many utilities face financial pressures that could hinder infrastructure projects. Larry French from the Texas Public Policy Foundation highlighted the significant financial impact of water loss and general fund transfers, estimating the annual loss at $1.5 billion. He argued that these transfers can create disincentives for municipalities to address water loss issues. Brian Butcher, Assistant City Manager of Sugar Land, defended the city's cost allocation model for general fund transfers, asserting that they are necessary for equitable service provision and operational efficiency. The committee also discussed the implications of rising construction costs and the need for better procurement processes to ensure effective use of taxpayer dollars. The second part of the meeting focused on the New World Screwworm and the state's preparedness to manage potential infestations. Dudley Hoskins from the USDA outlined the federal response efforts and the importance of collaboration with state agencies. He emphasized the need for ongoing surveillance and the production of sterile flies to combat the pest. Dr. Philip Kaufman from Texas A&M discussed the historical context of the screwworm and the challenges posed by its potential reintroduction, urging proactive management strategies among livestock producers. The committee acknowledged the need for increased resources and research to effectively address the threat of the screwworm.

Transcript Highlights:

• The pore space owners are presumed to be the surface owner unless that right has been given away by lease
• , other surface owners, that it's stable, and it's staying put.
• 27.160> right the surface owner unless that that right the surface owner unless that that right
• surface<00:10:47.480> owners,<00:10:47.800> that<00:10:47.960> it's<00:10:48.280
• > stable, other surface owners, that it's stable, other surface owners, that it's stable, and<

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:25 HB 667 Discussion 01:21 HB 667 Roll Call Vote 03:56 HB 677 Discussion 05:01 HB 677 Roll Call Vote 11:51 HB 535 Discussion 13:33 HB 535 Roll Call Vote 34:46 HJR 77 Discussion 38:33 HJR 77 Roll Call Vote 44:23, 958, all

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 667, described by the sponsor as a cleanup measure to a 2024 solid waste law. Testimony said the bill would clarify issues involving indirect access to protected information, contractors and consultants, Open Records Act interactions, and remedies when protected material is obtained. The committee voted 13-0 to pass the bill favorably and recommended it for passage on the House floor. The committee then took up House Bill 677, which would establish Kentucky’s legal and regulatory framework for carbon dioxide geological sequestration and help the state seek EPA primacy over Class VI injection wells. Supporters said the bill was the product of 18 months of work among industry, landowner, environmental, and cabinet stakeholders, and argued it would promote economic development, protect landowners, and support carbon-capture investment and related infrastructure, especially in Western Kentucky. An amendment was adopted by voice vote, and the bill then passed favorably with committee amendment attached. Finally, the committee discussed House Bill 535 as amended by a committee substitute. The bill would authorize securitization for certain investor-owned utilities with out-of-state assets, including Kentucky Power, to refinance assets such as the Mitchell plant and certain regulatory assets, with a two-year rate freeze and PSC review for net savings. Sponsors and supporters framed it as an affordability and jobs measure that could finance new natural gas generation at Big Sandy, create several hundred construction jobs, and support long-term economic development in Eastern Kentucky. Members raised concerns about utility fees, PSC discretion, and transparency; sponsors said the proposal would not be approved without overall savings and that applications would also be reviewed by the legislature, the Attorney General, and EPIC. The committee adopted the committee substitute and then passed House Bill 535 favorably, with several members explaining their votes and some noting continued reservations for floor consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• owner agreement pursuant to the Surface Damages Act is executed with the landowner.
• No, or is are you saying the surface owner?
• A new Surface Damage Act agreement could not be instated without voiding the existing contract.
• Any transfer that happens on the surface is still subject to that lease.
• Surface Damage Act.

Bills: HR1038, HB3263, HB3127, HB2997, HB3115, HB2123, HB3587, HB3028, HB2035, HB3369, HB3620, HB3621, HB3622, HB3624, HB3175, HB3173, HB3178, HB1979, HB4476

Keywords: Oklahoma Youth Expo, OYE, 4-H, FFA, agriculture, agricultural education, youth expo, livestock show, junior livestock, scholarships, youth leadership, Oklahoma City, rural communities, ag mechanics, engineering contest, farm youth, student recognition, ceremonial resolution, house resolution, livestock competition