Video & Transcript Research : 'landlord software'

Page 1 of 173
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Elections Finance and Government Operations Committee 3/9/26

Elections Finance and Government Operations

Transcript Highlights:
  • feasibility study to determine the efficacy of allowing local candidates to utilize the board's reporting software
  • feasibility study to determine the efficacy of allowing local candidates to utilize the board's reporting software
  • It's just we don't really kind of expanding the availability of the software.
  • Is it just we don't really kind of expanding the availability of the software.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Housing Finance and Policy Committee 3/18/26

Housing Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • It exempts small landlords with 10 or fewer units.
  • It exempts small landlords with 10 or fewer units.
  • It exempts small landlords with 10 or fewer units.
  • <01:01:49.839> utilize landlords utilize landlords utilize >> currently<01:01:52.079>
  • <01:11:08.320> couldn't says a landlord couldn't says a landlord couldn't report<01:11:10.640
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

House Housing Finance and Policy Committee 3/18/25

Housing Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • <00:10:36.800> could landlord changed the new landlord could landlord changed the new landlord
  • are better landlords.
  • are better landlords.
  • are better landlords.
  • are better landlords.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Housing Finance and Policy Committee 3/10/26

Housing Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • Uh and so I from his uh direct landlord.
  • <00:32:40.960> and<00:32:41.120> the<00:32:41.279> landlords staff of the landlords
  • and the landlords staff of the landlords and the landlords themselves. themselves. themselves.
  • what have you of landlord tenant items. what have you of landlord tenant items.
  • putting this in some sort of a landlord putting this in some sort of a landlord tenant<00:37:29.200
Bills: HF3600, HF3809, HF3608
HI
Transcript Highlights:
  • And due to gaps that may be in the information available to a landlord, they may enlist a professional
  • For<00:15:43.600> example,<00:15:44.480> a<00:15:44.800> landlord<00:15:45.360><
  • c> will<00:15:45.839> typically For example, a landlord will typically For example, a landlord
  • , they may enlist a professional landlord, they may enlist a professional such<00:16:10.160> as
  • I think the language maybe now suggests that it could apply to a landlord who owns multiple properties
Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.
NM

New Mexico 2026 Regular Session

Senate - Finance Feb 6th, 2026 at 05:01 pm

Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:
  • We are seeking simply to add the word software to the information.
  • I guess I just really want to say this: modern software is no longer tied to hardware.
  • Senate Bill 132 fixes that by expanding the equipment replacement plan to include software replacement
  • because software is just as critical as hardware.
  • that they've implemented, when we kicked it off, Enterprise resource planning software that they've
Bills: SB193, SB132, SB35, SB145
NM

New Mexico 2026 Regular Session

Senate - Rules Feb 4th, 2026 at 09:26 am

Senate Rules

Transcript Highlights:
  • As we know, software and cloud services and things of that nature are dwindling.
  • Lastly, when it comes to this, the software, I forgot to talk to you about.
  • Before I signed on to the bill, what type of cybersecurity does the software updates have?
  • We're seeing about 15 million per year, and what are you currently spending on software.
  • Madam Chair, currently today we are spending over 15 million dollars today on software.
Bills: SB132, SM16, SM17
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

House Housing Finance and Policy Committee 2/18/26

Housing Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • <01:26:42.560> has repercussions and then the landlord has repercussions and then the landlord
  • What protections does the landlord have?
  • So this helps make landlords whole.
  • So this helps make landlords<01:39:16.159> whole.
  • This helps keeps our landlords whole.
Bills: HF3403, HF3410, HF3424
AZ

Arizona 2026 Regular Session

01/27/2026 - House Commerce

Commerce

Transcript Highlights:
  • So we're looking at the landlord-tenant obligations.
  • to recover the charges imposed on the landlord by the utility provider.
  • Additionally, it authorizes a landlord to charge an administrative fee associated with submetering of
  • In the regular Landlord Tenant Act, it is explicitly prohibited for landlords to upcharge utility fees
  • That explicit prohibition does not exist in the Mobile Home Landlord Tenant Act, so that's what this
Summary: The committee heard and acted on several bills. HB 2192, a child influencer bill, would require compensation for minors featured in monetized content to be placed in trust, allow takedown requests for content as minors become adults, and create remedies for sexualized depictions of minors. The sponsor and Google described it as a modern Coogan-trust style protection; some members raised concerns about the age-13 and age-18 provisions, but the bill received a do pass recommendation on a 9-0 vote with two present. HB 2501, an agency bill, conformed Arizona’s definition of appraisal management company to federal law and passed unanimously. HB 2693, which revises bona fide association rules to allow statewide chambers or business leagues to operate self-funded multiple employer welfare arrangements, drew support from the Chamber and small-business advocates but opposition from a coalition citing possible federal preemption; it passed as amended on an 8-1 vote. HB 2010, the digital goods disclosure bill, required clearer notice that online “purchases” may be licenses, prorated refunds if access changes, and removed some penalty language in amendment; supporters said it would reduce consumer confusion, while retailers argued federal law already covers the issue. It passed as amended 11-0. The committee also approved HB 2279, which limits liability for Grand Canyon river outfitters for inherent risks of rafting while preserving claims for gross negligence or intentional acts, despite constitutional objections from opponents; it passed 7-4. HB 2690, which tightens unemployment insurance eligibility by adding work-search and fraud cross-check requirements, was opposed by advocates who said it would add red tape and burden eligible claimants, but it passed 7-4. HB 2310, clarifying that qualified marketplace contractor agreements may be terminated unilaterally by the contractor, passed 10-0. HB 2555, requiring retail businesses to accept cash for purchases of $100 or less and banning cash fees, passed as amended 9-1 after debate over consumer access and business flexibility. Finally, HB 2199, which expands required education for RV park managers and shifts some enforcement duties to the Department of Housing, passed as amended 7-0 with three present. The committee then considered HB 2459, which would let mobile home park landlords recover actual utility charges and add an administrative fee for submetering; supporters said it would address overcharges and improve transparency, while opponents warned it could increase costs and confusion. The transcript cuts off before the final action on HB 2459.
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Judiciary Committee Meeting - 2026-04-09

Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:
  • Expanded protection language broadens the language from just residents to include landlords, employers
  • ,<00:57:34.440> but<00:57:34.600> to<00:57:34.720> include<00:57:35.000> landlords
  • , residents, but to include landlords, residents, but to include landlords, employers,<00:57:37.400
Summary: The Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee approved the minutes from March 25 and March 26, then took up House File 4077, a bipartisan bill authored by Representatives Greenman and Roach. The bill would prohibit municipalities from entering into non-disclosure agreements with private entities that restrict disclosure about land development, economic development, or publicly funded projects, while preserving existing Chapter 13 data practices rules and trade secret protections. The authors argued the bill is needed to prevent secret agreements and backroom decision-making that undermine public transparency, and they moved that the bill be re-referred to the general register. Several local officials and residents testified in support, including a St. Louis County commissioner, the mayor of Lonsdale, and residents from Farmington and Hermantown. Supporters said NDAs had been used in connection with data center and other development projects to keep elected officials and the public in the dark, eroding trust and limiting community input. They described the bill as a common-sense transparency measure and said existing law already protects legitimate trade secrets. Opposition came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Business Partnership, which argued that NDAs are often necessary in early-stage economic development discussions to protect sensitive business information and remain competitive with other states. They warned the bill could discourage investment, jobs, and tax growth, and said it would impose a one-size-fits-all state mandate that limits local discretion. Committee members then debated whether the bill was too broad and whether it should be narrowed to data centers; supporters responded that the issue extends beyond data centers to other forms of economic development. A roll call vote was requested on the motion to re-refer the bill to the general register, but the final vote result was not stated in the transcript excerpt.