Transcript Highlights:

• Senators, if you will please take up Tab 1, Senate Bill 964 on financial disclosures by Senator Wright
• by deleting the current statutory language that requires Form 10 to be filed with the individual financial
• The reason is that the financial disclosures that are required are electronically filed, and this particular

Bills: S0964

Keywords: financial disclosures, ethics, government transparency, gift reporting, procurement

Summary: The committee convened with a quorum present and Senator Polsky excused. The main bill heard was Senate Bill 964, sponsored by Senator Wright on behalf of Senator Stewart, which revises financial disclosure reporting requirements for certain gifts and honoraria. The bill is intended to conform the filing process for Ethics Commission Form 10 by clarifying that it is filed with the Commission, rather than attached electronically to financial disclosure forms, and to allow the Commission to update its rules accordingly. Carrie Stillman, executive director of the Ethics Commission, testified in support of the bill, saying it clarifies the filing location and reflects current practice. There was no debate, and the committee voted unanimously to report SB 964 favorably. The committee then took up confirmation hearings for appointments listed in Tabs 2 through 15. No appointee was requested to be heard separately, and the committee approved all of the nominees in one vote. The meeting concluded after a motion to rise was adopted.

Bills: SB 312, SB 945, SB 946, SB 1367, SB 1861, SB 2044, SB 2337, SB 2403, SB 2819, SJR 54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Transcript Highlights:

• reporting that a draft would have to be by March 31st, and then the same of the next one, which was the financial

Bills: HB1329

Keywords: government spending database, public expenditure transparency, open data, government transparency, school district spending, state spending, local government finance, education finance, budget database, expenditure reporting, salary transparency, benefits data, public records, Legislative Management study, North Dakota, school board training, superintendent, principal, business manager, higher education spending

Summary: The division first discussed Senate Bill 1540 and related amendments involving implementation mechanics, procurement exemptions, and an emergency clause. Bank of North Dakota representatives explained that, based on a timeline review with DPI, the project would be very difficult to implement for the 2026-27 school year without exemptions from state purchasing and IT oversight rules and without an emergency clause; they said the normal procurement process could take about 240 days and that a 15-month implementation window would likely push the start to 2027-28 if those changes were not adopted. Members also raised a separate policy question about a criminal penalty placeholder in the bill, and the committee agreed that the sentence was unnecessary and should be removed. The committee deferred means-testing questions and fiscal-note issues to the next morning, with the understanding that the bill would be drafted in a way that made it workable if it advanced. The committee then turned to the water budget bill and reviewed the latest amended version, which included changes to the Water Topics process, Southwest Pipeline line of credit provisions, Red River supply funding, Mouse River project amounts, general water funding, studies on Missouri River intakes and water governance/finance, and a carryover/transfer adjustment. Chris Cattermas of the Department of Water Resources said most of the carryover funds were already obligated, with the largest unobligated amount in flood control. After review, Senator Thomas moved a do-pass recommendation on the bill as amended, the motion was seconded, and the committee approved it unanimously. The chair noted that other bills would be taken up the next morning, including 1013, 1014, and 1540.

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, if you want transparency of that, a couple of the issues that came up with this is, first of
• I mean, it was devised as a transparency website, and it would be information that legislators could
• So I think transparency is always a good thing. They can see where spending's going.
• So I appreciate getting more of this information out, more transparent.
• But I think part of the reasons it's been promoted to, Transparent, but I think the part of the reasons

Bills: HB1329

Keywords: government spending database, public expenditure transparency, open data, government transparency, school district spending, state spending, local government finance, education finance, budget database, expenditure reporting, salary transparency, benefits data, public records, Legislative Management study, North Dakota, school board training, superintendent, principal, business manager, higher education spending

Summary: The Education Division met with all members present and first took up House Bill 1329, which would create a transparency database and website for school spending information. Senator Schaible offered Amendment 0204 to turn the bill into a study, citing concerns that the proposal would impose major data-collection burdens on 168 school districts, require new data standards and privacy protections, and likely cost far more than the $500,000 in the bill. Several members supported transparency but agreed the implementation costs and technical feasibility were unclear. The committee adopted the amendment 4-1, then passed HB 1329 as amended on a 5-0 vote, with Senator Shively to carry the bill. The committee then discussed House Bill 1540, the education savings account/voucher bill. Representatives from the Bank of North Dakota and the Department of Public Instruction explained that they had not been consulted on the original drafting and outlined needed administrative changes, including clarifying the Bank as administrator, using a third-party program manager, involving DPI in rulemaking, adding audit and appeal procedures, and adjusting language on eligible purchases and school disqualification. They also said the current timeline was likely too aggressive to launch by the 2026-27 school year and estimated the program would require about 15 months to implement, with a fiscal note now around $5.1 million. Members also discussed policy-related amendments on means testing and application timing. Senator Shively proposed a 300% of poverty-level means test and a sign-up period to reduce costs and limit open-ended enrollment, while Senator Axman proposed a tiered approach that would keep all students technically eligible but phase in funding levels by income, preserving access for students who qualify for other federal supports. DPI said it could not currently disaggregate some data by family income and that the appeal process and procurement timeline still needed work. The committee did not move HB 1540 out that morning and instead recessed to continue discussion later after members had time to review the administrative and fiscal issues separately from the means-testing proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Certainly, what we're talking about today is a financial transaction.
• Senate Bill 540 on Office of Financial Regulation by Senator Martin.
• Senate Bill 540 on Office of Financial Regulation by Senator Martin.
• Ash Mason, Office of Financial Regulation, waiving in support. Thank you.
• On information, Ash Mason, Office of Financial Regulation, waiving in support. Thank you.

Bills: S0266, S0394, S0540, S0632, S0642, S0832, S0834, S1028

Keywords: public adjuster, contract cancellation, state of emergency, vulnerable adults, disciplinary actions, financial regulation, information security, financial exploitation, licensing, transportation, insurance, TNC, ride-sharing, automobile liability, bail bond, insurance regulation, foreign insurers, financial disclosure, premium reporting, residential property insurance

Summary: The Committee on Banking and Insurance met with a quorum and took up several bills, beginning with SB 834 on insurance requirements for nonprofit religious organizations and health care sharing ministries. The bill repeals a recent restriction on licensed insurance agents marketing or selling faith-based health care sharing programs. Supporters argued the change restores free speech and consumer education while preserving existing fraud and disclosure protections; opponents said allowing agents and brokers could create consumer confusion and has been associated with bad actors. A title amendment was adopted, and after debate the committee reported the bill favorably. The committee also heard and passed SB 642, which extends reporting and duty requirements to foreign and alien bail bond insurers, and SB 394, a technical bill updating reinsurance intermediary manager law to match current DFS practice. SB 266, which lets vulnerable adults rescind public adjuster contracts without penalty, was reported favorably after testimony from supporters in the insurance and elder law communities and a public adjuster who said the intent was good but the bill may need refinement. SB 832, a residential property insurance transparency bill requiring rate breakdown reports and a consumer resource center, also passed after discussion about consumer clarity and whether the required cost categories can be compiled as written. Later, the committee approved SB 540, which creates cybersecurity requirements for mortgage and money service businesses, closes a regulatory gap for certain investment advisers, adjusts OFR examination-payment deadlines, changes de novo charter requirements, allows virtual credit union meetings, and makes other financial regulation updates. Several amendments were adopted, including a substitute amendment removing fintech sandbox provisions. Finally, SB 1028 on Citizens Property Insurance Corporation was reported favorably after debate over a commercial lines clearinghouse intended to reduce Citizens’ exposure and shift more business to the private market; members discussed taxpayer risk, market competition, and consumer protections. The meeting ended with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• have on Floridians, and that's why there is the need to register in Florida so that we can have transparency
• Or statements of financial interest. Thank you, Mr.
• The maximum automatic fine for the late filing of the financial disclosure, and the reporting person
• The financial disclosure process and transparency compliance goals for our public officers and employees
• The Commission believes that this bill supports the transparency and compliance goals of the statute

Bills: S1622, S1178

Keywords: financial disclosure, statement of financial interests, ethics, late filing, late-filed disclosure, automatic fine, waiver, Florida Commission on Ethics, public officials, state officers, local officers, state employees, ethics enforcement, government transparency, sunshine law, reporting persons, penalty reduction, first-time offender, election ethics, general revenue fund

Summary: The committee met with a quorum present and first took up Senate Bill 1178, the Foreign Interference Restriction and Enforcement Act, sponsored by Senator Garcia. The bill would expand state restrictions on foreign countries of concern and designated foreign terrorist organizations, including creating a state registration framework for foreign agents, banning gifts to public officials from covered foreign entities, requiring ethics training on foreign influence, tightening procurement limits for information technology and critical infrastructure, restricting sister-city/sister-state encouragement, revising linkage institute rules and tuition provisions, and criminalizing certain conduct tied to foreign governments or unauthorized enforcement of foreign law. Members asked extensive questions about how the bill would affect election technology, software development, federal foreign-agent registration, educational exchanges, and the treatment of organizations such as CARE; the sponsor said the bill focused on ownership/control and foreign countries of concern, not specific components or general participation in events. An amendment by Senator Grall was adopted to clarify definitions, align penalties with willful violations, and specify that new ethics training content is additive. The committee then heard supportive testimony from Kelly Curry of State Armor and Rob Pierce of American Global Strategies, both of whom argued the bill would help Florida counter foreign influence, protect data and infrastructure, and improve transparency. CS for SB 1178 was reported favorably by roll call vote. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1622, which provides a one-time waiver of the automatic fine for a late-filed financial disclosure under specified conditions, including that the filer submitted the disclosure before the maximum fine accrued and had not previously received such a waiver. Carrie Stillman of the Commission on Ethics testified in support, saying the bill preserves transparency and compliance goals while making the fine and appeals process more workable. The bill was reported favorably by roll call vote. Finally, the committee took up confirmation hearings for appointments in tabs 3 through 26. No separate votes were requested, no public testimony was offered, and the block of appointees was recommended favorably to the full Senate by roll call vote. The meeting then concluded with no further business.

Bills: SB 312, SB 945, SB 946, SB 1367, SB 1861, SB 2044, SB 2337, SB 2403, SB 2819, SJR 54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Transcript Highlights:

• issue one or more subpoenas to compel BlackRock Incorporated, State Street Corporation, or any other financial

Bills: SB312, SB945, SB946, SB1367, SB1861, SB2044, SB2337, SB2403, SB2819, SJR54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Summary: The Senate Committee on State Affairs was called to order and a roll call showed most members present, with one absent. The chair explained that the committee had arranged witnesses for a later meeting but had received responses from some parties declining to testify, prompting Senator Bettencourt to offer a written motion for subpoenas. The motion authorized the committee chair, under Senate Rule 11.20, to issue subpoenas to BlackRock, State Street, or other financial services companies affecting Texas public pension investments, along with their subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, employees, agents, or representatives. The subpoenas would require testimony and production of records concerning investment practices, the impact on Texas public pension funds, and any investments intended to further political or social causes. Members discussed the importance of obtaining testimony and the limited but necessary use of subpoena power. The committee then voted, with 10 ayes, no nays, and one absent, to adopt the motion. With no further business, the committee recessed until the call of the chair, planning to return after the local calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• We must not allow financial. This wasn't about risk, it was about politics.
• We must not allow financial. This episode illustrates why SB 946 is needed.
• It's a transparency amendment.
• Senate Bill 2337 is about proxy advisors and proxy advisor transparency.
• Their advice is not tied to financial performance.

Bills: SB312, SB945, SB946, SB1367, SB1861, SB2044, SB2337, SB2403, SB2819, SJR54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 945, 946, 2044, 2819, 2403, 2337, and 312, with all bills left pending after testimony. SB 945 would restrict insurance companies from denying or limiting coverage based on oil and gas activity or ESG-related goals, and supporters argued it would protect Texas energy producers from politically motivated shareholder activism and insurance discrimination. SB 946 would bar creditors from using social credit, ESG, DEI, or religious/political affiliation as a basis for denying or limiting credit; witnesses said it would prevent viewpoint-based financial discrimination and protect access to capital for Texas businesses. SB 2337 would require proxy advisory firms to disclose when recommendations are based on non-financial factors or when they give conflicting advice to different clients; supporters said the measure would increase transparency and curb ESG-driven influence over shareholder voting. SB 312 would direct public retirement systems to focus on financial returns rather than social or political objectives, with the author saying the bill responds to activist pressure on pensions and would reinforce fiduciary duty. The committee also took up election and ethics measures. SB 2044 would strengthen electioneering restrictions for publicly funded education institutions and personnel, prohibiting use of official resources to promote political agendas; testimony focused on alleged school district electioneering in bond and tax elections. SB 2819 would prohibit county elections administrators from holding certain officer positions appointed by elected officials, addressing potential conflicts of interest. SB 2403, the Texas Ethics Commission sunset bill, would restructure complaint handling with a three-tier violation system, risk-based complaint prioritization, longer response times, bipartisan preliminary review panels, and expanded hearing options; members discussed amendments aimed at dismissing minor complaints, clarifying categories, and adjusting lobbying and penalty provisions, but the amendments were withdrawn during committee consideration. Across the ESG and finance bills, invited witnesses from the American Energy Institute, Heartland Impact, Consumers Research, ADF Action, Texas Civil Justice League, and related groups generally supported the measures, arguing that banks, insurers, proxy advisors, and asset managers have used ESG or reputational-risk standards to discriminate against energy, agriculture, firearms, and religious organizations. No opposition testimony was presented in the excerpt, and the committee closed public testimony on each bill and left them pending.

Bills: SB312, SB945, SB946, SB1367, SB1861, SB2044, SB2337, SB2403, SB2819, SJR54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Transcript Highlights:

• They deserve a government that values transparency, not just in theory but in practice.
• The substitute enhances procedural protections and administrative transparency.
• Senate Bill 2337 is about proxy advisors and about proxy advisor transparency.
• Their advice is not tied to financial performance.
• So this now takes me to the second element that I mentioned: transparency.

Bills: SB312, SB945, SB946, SB1367, SB1861, SB2044, SB2337, SB2403, SB2819, SJR54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Transcript Highlights:

• issue one or more subpoenas to compel BlackRock Incorporated, State Street Corporation, or any other financial

Bills: SB312, SB945, SB946, SB1367, SB1861, SB2044, SB2337, SB2403, SB2819, SJR54

Keywords: public school funding, education, budget allocation, financial transparency, state law, local control, fiduciary responsibility, public retirement systems, investment management, proxy voting, financial factors, insurance, political shareholder proposals, fossil fuels, greenhouse gas emissions, environmental regulation, discrimination, credit extension, social credit, value-based standards

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm bringing to you House Bill 16, which is coming from your select committee on blockchain, financial
• on well, your select committee on well, your select committee on blockchain,<01:08:36.719> financial
• <01:08:37.199> technology,<01:08:38.000> and blockchain, financial technology, and
• blockchain, financial technology, and digital<01:08:38.640> innovation<01:08:39.120> technology

Bills: SF0028, SF0030, SF0031, SF0032

Keywords: voting, elections, electronic voting systems, transparency, public testing, voter registration, qualified elector, residency requirements, voting rights, mortgage modification, priority, electronic signatures, real property, financial covenants, 911 services, emergency response, grant funding, next generation technology, government accountability, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• And so there was an issue with a perceived lack of transparency in that.
• It's not about transparency. That valid? It's not about transparency.
• I am in support of fair elections and transparent government.
• I am in support of fair elections and transparent government.
• security and the transparency. security and the transparency.

Bills: SF0028, SF0030, SF0031, SF0032

Keywords: voting, elections, electronic voting systems, transparency, public testing, voter registration, qualified elector, residency requirements, voting rights, mortgage modification, priority, electronic signatures, real property, financial covenants, 911 services, emergency response, grant funding, next generation technology, government accountability, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• This will ensure more transparency and accountability. On taxpayer funds.

Bills: HB3985, HB3883, HB4335, HB3416, HB3417, HB3418, HB3619, HB3624, HB3463

Keywords: property rights, public nuisance, compensation claims, government enforcement, Oklahoma Safe Neighborhoods Act, public utility, municipal water, wastewater services, liability protection, third-party contractors, infrastructure maintenance, emergency response, regulatory compliance, animal welfare, pet shops, commercial breeders, county regulations, animal shelter licensing, county purchasing, procurement practices

Transcript Highlights:

• This is just making sure that there's transparency in the process.
• This bill's called the Protections for Financial Exploitation of Protected Adults Act.
• Essentially, it establishes a framework for financial institutions to Intervene when they suspect a protected
• adult is being targeted for financial exploitation or fraud.
• I hope that there will be some training or guidance for financial institutions so that this is consistently

Bills: HB3041, HB4428, HB4429, HB1064, HB3265, HB3721, HB3028, HB3313, HB3588, HB3020

Keywords: credit card transactions, payment methods, service charge, consumer rights, financial regulation, public finance, pension, pension fund, retirement system, board of trustees, proxy voting, proxy proposal, shareholder vote, shareholder activism, fiduciary duty, pecuniary factors, nonpecuniary factors, ESG, environmental social governance, social goals

Transcript Highlights:

• through the financial disclosure process.
• <00:01:26.240> disclosures required to file financial disclosures required to file financial
• and accuracy through the transparency and accuracy through the financial<00:02:17.520> disclosure
• determining a defendant's financial determining a defendant's financial ability<00:08:11.280>
• determining a defendant's financial determining a defendant's financial ability<00:54:37.680>

Bills: SB2040, SB2248, SB2530, SB2732, SB2871, SB2919, SB3076, SB3300, SB3301

Keywords: freedom of speech, elections, campaign finance, non-natural persons, regulated participation, constitutional amendment, financial disclosures, government transparency, public confidence, Senate confirmation, conflicts of interest, state ethics commission, campaign contributions, state contracts, transparency, conflict of interest, government ethics, pretrial release, bail reform, financial ability

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on several bills. SB 2248 would expand financial disclosure requirements to certain gubernatorial nominees subject to Senate confirmation. The State Ethics Commission supported the measure, saying disclosures should be filed before confirmation so the public and interested parties can review them in advance. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support, with 22 supporters, no opposition, and one comment. SB 2530 would broaden Hawaii’s campaign contribution ban for state and county contractors to include officers and immediate family members, and would extend the ban to certain grantees and their officers and family members, with specified contract thresholds. The Campaign Spending Commission said the bill is its own proposal and would align the thresholds with procurement guidelines. Testimony was entirely favorable, with 30 in support, no opposition, and two comments. Members asked about conforming amendments and how the existing prohibition on soliciting contributions applies; CSC said the calendar-day language clarifies current practice and that the solicitation ban already applies to contractors, with the bill extending the same standard to officers and immediate family members. SB 2732 would require courts to consider a defendant’s ability to pay when setting bail, including excluding public benefits from income calculations and clarifying the 40-hour affordability benchmark for those above 150% of the federal poverty level. The Office of the Public Defender, the Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, and the ACLU of Hawaii supported the bill, arguing that unaffordable bail creates wealth-based disparities, contributes to jail overcrowding, and can cause severe collateral consequences for people not yet convicted. There was one opposition testimony and 18 supporters. Committee discussion focused on when the 40-hour period should begin, how income would be verified, and whether misrepresentation could affect bail; the Public Defender said the measure should be read to start from initial appearance and that judges could address false statements through existing remedies. SB 2871 would prohibit discrimination based on perceived characteristics, association with someone who has or is perceived to have protected characteristics, and intersectional combinations of characteristics. The Department of Education supported the intent but asked for clear definitions, while the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission said the bill does not add new protected classes and simply codifies the Lamb v. University of Hawaii decision on intersectional discrimination. LGBTQ+, civil rights, ACLU, and other advocacy groups testified in support, with one opposition testimony and a total of 27 in support, two opposed, and one comment. The committee then heard SB 2919, which appropriates funds for one full-time public deputy public defender position. The Public Defender’s Office said the position would provide statewide legal support and a centralized resource on constitutional, appellate, and immigration-related issues; several advocacy groups supported the measure, and committee questions focused on how the new position would complement existing training and keep staff updated on changing law.

Transcript Highlights:

• one of a package of bills that's come over from the House to do some due diligence in increasing transparency
• We have some problems there, so we're going to go to an annual versus a biannual financial statement
• We have quite a few very small communities that get into financial problems because they're having a

Bills: HB3002, HB3416, HB3417, HB3418, HB3419, HB3463, HB3919, HB3985, HB4303

Keywords: counties, county officers, education, training, sunset law, county purchasing, procurement practices, budget management, public accountability, emergency procurement, reverse auction, bidding process, competitive bidding, public procurement, city council regulations, public works, bidding procedures, construction contracts, transparency, public trust

Bills: HB220, HB259, HB463, HB536, HB750, HB830, HB950

Keywords: child exploitation, online reporting, platforms, cyber crime, PROTECT Act, excavation, demolition, infrastructure repair, BEAD Program, utility damage, construction coordination, contact point, emergency services, telephone charge, wireless service, reporting requirements, communications district, wireless communication, school safety, community permits

Bills: HB 148, HB 334, HB 554, HB 762, HB 1520, HB 1593, HB 3526, HB 3810, HB 5092, SB 2215, HB 2607

Keywords: family leave, leave pool, county employee, sick leave, vacation leave, family care, pandemic, guardianship, severance pay, political subdivision, contract termination, misconduct, public funds, suicide prevention, peer support, fire departments, mental health, advisory committee, fiscal transparency, local government