Transcript Highlights:

• and our lease costs at the judicial and our lease costs at the judicial center<00:04:20.320>
• safety and security for our judicial safety and security for our judicial officers<00:05:14.800>
• There are five judicial officers.
• that we make in in the judicial branch. that we make in in the judicial branch.
• has absolutely zero transparency in it. has absolutely zero transparency in it.

Bills: HF3874, HF3875, HF3378

Keywords: judicial funding, Chief Justice security, fiscal year 2028, court system, judicial branch, judiciary, court notices, restitution, child protection, publication process, human services, Optum reports, data privacy, transparency, legislative oversight, 1183, house

Summary: The committee approved the March 3 minutes and then heard a presentation from the Minnesota Judicial Branch on House File 3874, which was laid over for possible inclusion in a finance bill. State Court Administrator Jeff Shorba and Chief Judge Michael Fritz testified in support of a supplemental funding request focused on judicial branch safety and security, along with funding to cover the employer share of Minnesota Paid Leave costs. Shorba said the branch is seeking help because it did not receive funding for paid leave in the last session and is having to hold positions open to absorb the cost. The safety and security request included five parts: personal data protection for judges and court administrators, home security, two additional staff positions for threat assessment and coordination, security for the chief justice at public events, and a revived courthouse security grant program for counties. Testimony emphasized rising threats and incidents involving judges and court staff, including examples of doxing, home surveillance, and threats involving litigants, and cited increases in reported incidents, threats, and disturbances. Fritz said the branch’s current response system is stretched and that more law-enforcement-trained staff would improve coordination and response. Members questioned why the judicial branch should receive state funding for paid leave when private employers must absorb the cost, and Shorba responded that the branch was excluded from end-of-session funding decisions and that the mandate should be funded for all branches of government. Members also asked about the threat-response process and whether local law enforcement should be used more directly. Another concern raised was whether State Patrol troopers assigned to judicial security would have the training needed for criminal-code enforcement, and Shorba said the branch is discussing that issue with the State Patrol. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am chambered in Fillmore County in the Third Judicial District.
• I spend most of my judicial district.
• <00:03:54.000> council allow both MDJa and the judicial council allow both MDJa and the judicial
• Um in your typical judicial branch one.
• Um, and so code of judicial conduct.

Bills: HF1151, HF1239, HF1240, HF2020, HF2514, HF2515, HF2451

Keywords: Compensation Council, salaries, state officials, judicial compensation, legislative process, public funds, misuse, law enforcement, accountability, state government, legislative auditor, compliance, transparency, retirement benefits, health insurance, dependents, state employees, Medicare, legislative studies, government oversight

Transcript Highlights:

• Will the judicial administrative officers work with their vendors to waive that fee for these types of
• There are courtesy forms that have been developed by the Judicial Administrator's Office of the State
• So someone in the judicial system would review that petition and decide what, if any, ex parte order
• But it would have some sort of judicial review before it's definitely granted. Oh, absolutely.
• What I understand from the judicial administrator is that it was assessed that the Judicial Administrator's

Bills: HR245, SCR30, SCR40, SB259

Keywords: transparency, justice, Epstein, Maxwell, investigation, human trafficking, government accountability, domestic violence, protective orders, online application, judicial administration, Louisiana, 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 3281 is the This is the same bill as Senate Bill 1433, the Guidance Transparency Act, which

Bills: SJR49, HB3281, HB4319, HJR1086

Keywords: wildlife, conservation, Oklahoma, regulations, permanent rules, administrative procedures, guidance documents, transparency, public inspection, rulemaking, rulemaking authority, specific authority, legislative review, agency rules, judicial rules, public safety, state agencies, legislative approval, 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Judicial salaries have also been an issue that the...
• The committee's substitute aims to strengthen judicial accountability. transparency by one, expanding
• I had a question about the judicial transparency information. Okay. And it starts on page 16.
• Is the judicial transparency information section in Senate Bill 293 and the committee substitute?
• So judicial pay plays into the democratic process and the true cure for our weakness in the judicial

Bills: SB260, SB263, SB293, SJR18

Keywords: school safety, Foundation School Program, education funding, student allotment, Texas education, SB 263, Texas franchise tax, cost of goods sold, COGS, broadcasters, television broadcasting, radio broadcasting, media tax, broadcast license, FCC, 47 C.F.R. Part 73, 47 C.F.R. Part 74, film production, television production, tax deduction

Transcript Highlights:

• So there is no judicial discretion at that point.
• And so as we're thinking about these sorts of circumstances, I just ask that we maintain judicial discretion

Bills: SB3073, SJR87

Keywords: Texas criminal procedure, magistrate, probable cause, written findings, arrest review, criminal justice, Article 15.17, pretrial release, judicial recordkeeping, court transparency, law enforcement, defendant rights, criminal proceedings, no probable cause, magistrate findings, bail reform, felony offenses, constitutional amendment, public safety

Summary: The Senate Committee on Criminal Justice met with a quorum present and took up three bills tied to bail reform and law enforcement records. Senator Huffman presented SJR 87, a proposed constitutional amendment that would require denial of bail for people accused of certain serious felony offenses if they have a prior conviction for, or are already on bond for, one of those offenses and there is probable cause to believe they committed another listed offense. Supporters said it would give judges a needed tool to detain repeat violent offenders; opponents from the ACLU of Texas and Texas Civil Rights Project argued it would mandate detention without individualized due process and weaken the presumption of innocence. The committee voted 7-1 to report SJR 87 favorably, with Senator Miles voting no. The committee then heard SB 3073, which would require magistrates who find no probable cause after an arrest to enter written findings supporting that determination. Senator Huffman said the bill was a narrow cleanup measure to improve transparency and provide guidance to law enforcement and prosecutors without limiting judicial discretion. With no invited or public testimony, the committee voted 6-1 to report SB 3073 favorably, again with Senator Miles dissenting. Finally, the committee considered SB 781, a committee substitute dealing with law enforcement file management and personnel records. Senator King explained that the bill would standardize policies already used in many Texas cities and under civil service rules, separating public and sealed personnel information while preserving access for criminal defense discovery. Senator Miles raised concerns that sealing exonerated allegations could hide patterns of misconduct and allow problematic officers to move between agencies. The committee adopted the committee substitute and voted 6-1 to report SB 781 favorably, with Senator Miles voting no. The committee then recessed subject to the chair’s call.

Transcript Highlights:

• General as to whether or not the records can be withheld from release, as they would be in any other judicial

Bills: HB1647, HB2612, HB3125, HB3158, HB3240, HB3506, HB3516, HB3707

Keywords: carbon sequestration, environmental policy, Texas, energy, climate change, regulatory council, geothermal energy, workforce development, education and training, energy industry, apprenticeship, energy production, energy policy, renewable energy, state council, administrative law, public information, transparency, government accountability, judicial process

Transcript Highlights:

• So there is no judicial discretion at that point.
• As we're considering these sorts of circumstances, I just ask that we maintain judicial discretion in

Bills: SB3073, SJR87

Keywords: Texas criminal procedure, magistrate, probable cause, written findings, arrest review, criminal justice, Article 15.17, pretrial release, judicial recordkeeping, court transparency, law enforcement, defendant rights, criminal proceedings, no probable cause, magistrate findings, bail reform, felony offenses, constitutional amendment, public safety, 1185

Transcript Highlights:

• Now if I recall correctly, and I may be wrong, but if I recall correctly, judicial candidates are subject
• I believe that's true that judicial candidates are subject to the same canons, the same rules that, that
• , that judges are when they run for election, for reelection, and the judicial, my understanding is,
• uh, Dean, that the judicial campaign finance rules are much more stringent than the ones we are under
• The judicial branch really is a is a is not involved in our actions here to make legislation.

Bills: SB 53, SB 54, HB16, SB 19

Keywords: voter registration, election procedures, provisional ballot, change of address, residence requirements, Texas Election Code, voting rights, judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments, political contributions, special legislative session, election code, transparency, campaign finance, election law

Transcript Highlights:

• And I may be wrong, but if I recall correctly, judicial candidates are subject to the same canon that
• I believe that's true, that judicial candidates are subject to the same canons, the same...
• My understanding is that the judicial campaign finance rules are much more stringent than the ones we
• going to come back next session, whether it's a constitutional amendment or what we do with the judicial
• Normally, there are some minor non-controversial matters of judicial administration also.

Bills: SB 53, SB 54, HB16, SB 19

Keywords: voter registration, election procedures, provisional ballot, change of address, residence requirements, Texas Election Code, voting rights, judicial administration, court reform, juvenile diversion, court security, mental health services, drug offenses, constitutional amendments, political contributions, special legislative session, election code, transparency, campaign finance, election law

Bills: HB29, HB39, HB77, HB153, HB183, HB211, HB263, HB299, HB324, HB519, HB520, HB533, HB538, HB559, HB562, HB805, HB823, HB1004, HB1011, HB1018

Keywords: insurance fund, retired employees, Ascension Parish, court clerks, premium costs, investment advisory board, HB 39, Act 283, peace officer, law enforcement officer, police certification, citizenship requirement, U.S. citizen, United States citizen, naturalization, lawful permanent resident, green card holder, immigration, public safety, law enforcement hiring

Transcript Highlights:

• Injunctions and long, drawn-out judicial proceedings are preventing that from happening. ...not attempt
• A potential solution to counter implicit bias in our judicial system is implicit bias training.
• Did you just say that the Texas Judicial Council recommends that the implicit bias...
• Well, we want our judicial system to be fair and impartial.
• Studies consistently demonstrate that implicit biases affect judicial decisions.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• It represents real threats and dangers that are judicially... system and the public face daily.
• Furlow, here for yourself and the 106th Judicial District, and you are against the bill.
• I urge you to support this bill to protect consumers, promote transparency, and promote transparency,
• We are begging for truth and transparency from our government for all Texans.
• It's going to change judicial rules or judicial financial interest or special interest in many . . .

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

Bills: HB1011, SCR11, SB41, SB49, SB107, SB123, SB224, SB292, SB425, SB479

Keywords: tax credits, higher education, workforce development, brain drain, economic incentives, public meeting minutes, transparency, government accountability, publication deadlines, open meetings, SB49, Louisiana elections, party primary, primary elections, BESE, State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, school board elections, election law, candidate qualification, ballot access

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair lays out House Bill 8, relating to public school accountability and transparency, including
• And so there's no transparency in that process. There's no ability to challenge. how it was graded.
• And it's way more transparent in this bill.
• That's why this process must be open and transparent.

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• That we're getting these assessments aligned and that we're making sure that the process is transparent
• Accountability and transparency are critical.
• Second, HB8 ensures consistent annual ratings, which give parents and taxpayers transparent information
• One of the things that's been a concern with transparency and trust is always having the agency select
• Transparency is key to ensuring students are better prepared for the future.

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• The chair lays out House Bill 8 relating to public school accountability and transparency, including
• It also prioritizes transparency for parents by ensuring they can review student answers for each question
• And so there's no transparency in that process. There's no ability to challenge how it was graded.
• The process for developing the instruments is pretty interesting, and absolutely it’s way more transparent
• That's why this process must be open and transparent.

Bills: HB8

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Summary: The House Committee on Public Education met to hear House Bill 8, which would replace STAAR with a new assessment and accountability system beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The chair described the bill as reducing testing time, limiting benchmark tests, adding beginning-, middle-, and end-of-year assessments, requiring faster score turnaround, involving Texas teachers in test development, and tightening accountability timelines and transparency rules. Members also discussed provisions on A-F ratings, cut scores, CCMR, local accountability plans, and TEA reporting requirements. Committee members and invited witnesses split sharply on the bill’s approach. Supporters, including the chair, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath, and Ed Trust’s Nicholas Munyon Penny, argued the bill would reduce high-stakes pressure, provide quicker and more actionable data, limit over-testing, and better align assessments to Texas standards while preserving criterion-referenced accountability. They said the new system would help teachers and parents intervene sooner and would improve transparency, including parent access to student responses and automatic rescoring in some writing cases. Opponents, including Rep. Hinojosa and student witness Ella Moran, argued the bill still increases testing and replaces one high-stakes test with multiple TEA-created tests. Moran testified that STAAR creates anxiety, disrupts instruction, and does not reflect real learning, while Hinojosa said the House had previously passed a better bill based on a nationally norm-referenced model and criticized the new proposal as a concession to the Senate. Questions also focused on AI scoring of writing, rescoring rates, and whether the bill’s new accountability rules would be reliable and fair. The committee did not take a final vote during the portion provided, but the chair said a vote on HB 8 would be called after public testimony later in the day.

Transcript Highlights:

• bill is the process or the original bill is the process or the original bill is the process or the judicial
• part of of the process of how judicial part of of the process of how judicial part of of the process

Bills: HB 10, HB 12, HB 147, HB 1522, HB 422, HB 675, HB 204, HB 748, HB 912

Keywords: regulatory reform, government efficiency, administrative law, rulemaking, agency deference, judicial review, de novo review, Texas Government Code, Administrative Procedure Act, state agencies, plain language, regulatory burden, regulatory reduction, cost-benefit analysis, fiscal note, public benefits and costs, contested case, rule challenge, Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office, advisory panel

Transcript Highlights:

• It should include public interest advocates, folks with a track record of fighting for transparency,
• This is not a radical idea without judicial deference as a safeguard a true independent panel is our
• It should include public interest advocates, folks with a track record of fighting for transparency.
• Yet without judicial deference as a safeguard, a truly independent panel is our next best defense.
• This amendment adds additional transparency to our local government and I move passage mr.

Bills: HB10, HB 12, HB147, HB1522, HB422, HB675, HB204, HB748, HB912

Keywords: regulatory reform, government efficiency, administrative law, rulemaking, agency deference, judicial review, de novo review, Texas Government Code, Administrative Procedure Act, state agencies, plain language, regulatory burden, regulatory reduction, cost-benefit analysis, fiscal note, public benefits and costs, contested case, rule challenge, Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office, advisory panel

Bills: SB 251, SB 608, SB 487, SB 535, SB 761, SB 955, SB 957, SB 958, SB 988, SB 990, SB 1019, SB 1021, SB 1120

Keywords: criminal law, magistrates, Bell County, judicial authority, legal framework, evidence collection, sexual assault kits, reporting, law enforcement, transparency, confidentiality, victim protection, stalking, indecent assault, invasive visual recording, criminal justice, privacy rights, sexual assault, victim rights, plea bargain