Transcript Highlights:

• Facilities, and at private marinas.
• > program<00:10:36.800> shall facility management lease program shall facility management
• projects in the special management area. projects in the special management area.
• So that's the larger management area.
• . management. management.

Bills: SB2982, SB2367, SB2818, SB2944, SB2022, SB2240, SB2986, SB2547, SB2401, SB3031, SB3035, SB3032

Keywords: foreign influence, campaign finance, contributions, state elections, transparency, election integrity, Ala Wai Small Boat Harbor, Ala Wai Harbor, DLNR, BLNR, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Board of Land and Natural Resources, state boating facility, small boat harbor, public-private partnership, PPP, marina management, harbor lease, fast lands, submerged lands

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures, beginning with SB 2982 on campaign finance, which would prohibit foreign entities and foreign-influence businesses from making contributions and expenditures. The Attorney General’s office testified first, followed by the Campaign Spending Commission, which supported the bill but asked for clarification on constitutional review authority and additional implementation time for certifications, forms, and procedures. Common Cause also supported the measure, arguing it would help protect elections from dark money and foreign influence. No vote was taken. The committee then took up SB 2367 on a state boating facilities lease program for the Ala Wai small boat harbor. DLNR supported the bill, while UPW opposed it, warning about privatization of a public asset and possible job displacement. Several members of the public supported the concept but urged amendments to protect public access, affordability, youth ocean programs, and state employee jobs. Committee members questioned DLNR about the scope of the lease, the role of the Board of Land and Natural Resources, and whether public access and existing concessions would remain protected. DLNR said current leases would remain, the board would retain approval authority, and employees would not necessarily be displaced, but members indicated more discussion and possible amendments were needed. For SB 2818 on boating penalties, DLNR testified in support and there was no opposition testimony. The committee also heard SB 2944 on conservation, which would require wildlife viewing guidelines that substantially conform to NOAA guidance and reporting requirements; DLNR said it stood on its written testimony. SB 2022 on water code penalties drew support from DLNR’s Commission on Water Resource Management, which said the bill’s two-tiered penalty structure would preserve deterrence while keeping the current $5,000 penalty for first-time or non-harmful violations. The Board of Water Supply submitted comments, and Ulupono Initiative supported the measure as a needed enforcement tool. Committee members discussed whether the higher penalty ceiling should be phased in and asked for stakeholder input on the amount of the penalties. Finally, the committee began SB 2240 on land use, which would require water availability certification from the Commission on Water Resource Management before a district boundary amendment proceeds to the Land Use Commission. DLNR supported the bill and said it often reviews project documents that lack sufficient information on water needs and availability, so the measure would allow earlier review and comment. The committee also indicated it would seek amendments and further feedback on the water penalty bill before it moved to the next committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• I am currently the Game Management Advisory Commission Commissioner for the Island of Oahu.
• Thus far, management appears to be managing to near extinction.
• Thus far, management appears to be managing to near extinction.
• <01:04:24.720> regarding Water Resources Management regarding Water Resources Management regarding
• management management um<01:04:57.440> and<01:04:57.599> exempt<01:04:58.000> state

Bills: SB2341, SB2306, SB2782, SB2161, SB17, SB2358, SB2367, SB2240, SB2547, SB2401, SB3031, SB1406, SB521, SB3247, SB1654, SB1112, SB1301, SB2443, SB2996

Keywords: historic preservation, Hawaii Revised Statutes, construction, state review, burial sites, cultural artifacts, development review, phased review, administrative fees, bureau of conveyances, land court, transaction fees, public services, cost recovery, notary public, fraud, real property, Bureau of Conveyances, title recording, property rights

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures related to hunting, trespass enforcement, conservation banking, coral reef resilience, and search and rescue. SB 2130 would require DLNR to increase the percentage of public land acreage designated for public hunting areas; DLNR offered comments, the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council expressed concern, and a Game Management Advisory Commission member urged adequate funding for both study and maintenance of any expanded hunting areas. SB 2128 would require forfeiture to the state of firearms or motor vehicles used in hunting trespass on private land; the Hawaii Cattlemen’s Council supported the bill, and another signer testified without additional detail. The committee also heard SB 3053, which appropriates funds to DLNR’s Division of Aquatic Resources for mangrove removal and shoreline/stream maintenance in the Westlock and Middleock shorelines and watersheds. DLNR supported the measure and noted staff involved in mangrove removal work; no other testimony was offered. On SB 20005, which authorizes conservation banks for compensatory mitigation in habitat conservation plans and incidental take licenses, DLNR supported the bill but said a House measure, HB 1802, would place key safeguards in statute rather than administrative rules. Earthjustice opposed SB 20005 for lacking statutory safeguards and said it would support incorporating the House language, while CARES supported the bill as a modernization that could reduce permit processing time and provide more predictable costs. A lengthy discussion followed on SB 3201, which would direct DLNR to prioritize coral reef resilience and set performance targets for coral cover and herbivore biomass. DLNR said it supported the intent but wanted more flexibility because outside factors such as climate and emissions policy affect reef conditions; the Nature Conservancy shared that concern and asked for more flexible language. For the bill, For the Fishes strongly supported stronger protections and suggested adding abundance as a metric, while NOAA and DLNR discussed the difficulty of setting universal benchmarks because reef conditions vary by location. Randy Kosaki and CARES supported the bill, emphasizing coral decline and the need for measurable goals, while committee members asked about restoration projects, benchmarks, and whether the bill’s deadlines were meant to require a plan rather than immediate achievement. Finally, the committee took up SB 2937, which would create a search and rescue card program and special fund to reimburse state, county, and volunteer search-and-rescue operations. DLNR’s wildlife division said it stood on its written testimony, and the Hawaii SAR Alliance supported the concept but said Hawaii first needs a stronger search-and-rescue framework, including a state coordinator, before implementing such a program. No votes or final actions were taken on any of the measures in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so I mean management of Monaca Yeah.
• Maybe Monaca management can come up.
• It could be, but it's which groups are best managed by the SFA versus those that should be managed by
• They're managed and the ground.
• It's difficult to manage but big list.

Bills: SB2003

Keywords: Mauna Kea, land management, University of Hawaii, astronomical observatories, leasable lands, natural resource management, stewardship authority, 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees on Water, Land, Culture, and the Arts and Education heard testimony and discussed SB 20003, which would require the auditor’s report under Act 255 to include a recommendation on whether the Monarch Stewardship and Oversight Authority is fit to continue managing Monaca lands. Testimony focused on the bill’s reversion language, the role of the auditor, and whether the measure gave the auditor too much discretion without clear criteria. The Office of the Auditor’s position, read into the record, was that it had strong reservations because the bill did not provide standards for assessing fitness and asked that the requirement be held or amended. Other testimony suggested a work group with relevant agencies and Hawaiian practitioners to manage the transition and reduce conflict. Committee members debated whether the bill should simply restore the original reversion language or also require an audit-based fitness determination. Several members questioned the need for a 2031 audit when Act 255 already provides for a performance and financial audit in 2031 and noted that the bill could shift authority away from the legislature. In response, the committee chair explained that the measure was intended to restore language removed during conference and to address the transition back to the University of Hawaii if the authority was not meeting the act’s purpose. The committees ultimately recommended SB 20003 be passed with amendments. The amendments would strike the auditor/audit section, add language addressing timelines by providing a 10-year lease extension and sublease extension, and make technical changes including a defective date. The committees voted to adopt the amended measure and send it forward as an SD1. The transcript also included a separate Education Committee hearing on SB 3286, which would require the University of Hawaii to develop a facilities and student housing master plan and report to the legislature. University of Hawaii testimony said the system supports the intent but that the bill’s requirements are a heavy lift across 10 campuses and should follow development of a broader academic strategy. Members raised concerns about deferred maintenance, shifting priorities, and the lack of a systemwide plan, while the university said it already has a six-year capital improvement plan but acknowledged it does not fully incorporate the broader academic and housing strategy the bill contemplates.

Transcript Highlights:

• At the Office of Management and Budget.
• The Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management, along with Elon Musk and
• at the Office of Management and Budget.
• through our Office of Federal Financial Management.
• And a lot of people don't know a lot about the Office of personnel and management and the Office of Management

Keywords: nominations, Scott Cooper, Eric Ulan, federal workforce, Office of Personnel Management, Office of Management and Budget, accountability, collective bargaining

Summary: The committee convened to discuss the nominations of Scott Cooper for Director of the Office of Personnel Management and Eric Ulan for Deputy Director at the Office of Management and Budget. This meeting highlighted the critical roles both positions play in managing the federal workforce, which comprises over two million civilian employees. Concerns were raised regarding the current administration's approach to federal employment, citing issues like mass firings and the undermining of collective bargaining rights. Members expressed the need for better accountability and transparency within the federal system, emphasizing the importance of attracting talented public servants.

Transcript Highlights:

• recovery well is for a person seeking to recover stored water within an area of impact of an active management
• water storage infrastructure, or the middle line of a drainage channel within the storage area of a managed
• USF. ...infrastructure, or the middle line of a drainage channel within the storage area of a managed
• There are some special provisions in the fifth management plan, but this is something that typically
• with the policy statement so that implementation for permit holders, applicants, and staff is more manageable

Bills: SB1202, SB1287, SB1418, SB1785, SCM1007

Keywords: groundwater, water conservation, Arizona water resources, drought management, water quality, irrigation, active management area, domestic use, stock watering, water rights, small modular reactors, energy regulation, environmental compatibility, utility construction, agricultural use, industrial users, water storage, recovery well, Arizona Revised Statutes, water management

Summary: The Committee on Natural Resources, Energy and Water held a brief meeting and considered several water and energy measures. Senate Bill 1202, which would require the Arizona Department of Water Resources director to include additional information about each groundwater basin in the five-year water supply and demand assessment, was described as similar to a bill vetoed in a prior session. After a motion for a do pass recommendation, the committee approved it on a 6-3 vote with one absence. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1418, which limits county regulation of small modular nuclear reactors in certain circumstances, expands the definition of “plant” for siting purposes, and allows replacement of existing thermal units with SMRs without a new certificate of environmental compatibility in specified cases. Members noted that parts of the bill were similar to previously vetoed measures. The committee passed the bill 6-3 with one absence, with some members explaining their votes and one member saying they would support it for now but might reconsider on the floor. Senate Concurrent Memorial 1007 urged Congress to divest the Bureau of Indian Affairs of the San Carlos Irrigation Project Electric System and fund a system study and improvements. Supporters said the system is old, unreliable, and difficult for the federal government to manage, and that local public power entities could do a better job if divestiture were authorized. The memorial passed unanimously, 9-0 with one absence. Finally, Senate Bill 1785, which would codify a one-mile area-of-impact safe harbor for certain recovered stored water wells unless a separate hydrologic study is submitted, received testimony from a water attorney and an ADWR representative describing it as a codification of long-standing department policy. The committee passed SB 1785 on a do pass recommendation by a 9-3 vote with one absence.

Bills: HB 16, HB 1618, HB 2692, HB 2712, HB 2970, HB 3609, HB 3628

Keywords: water infrastructure, Texas Water Development Board, financial assistance, water supply projects, rural municipalities, water access assessment, aquifer storage, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulations, groundwater management, San Antonio River, pollution control, flood management, water quality, conservation district, bonds, utility rates, ratemaking, water services

Bills: HB 16, HB 1618, HB 2692, HB 2712, HB 2970, HB 3609, HB 3628

Keywords: water infrastructure, Texas Water Development Board, financial assistance, water supply projects, rural municipalities, water access assessment, aquifer storage, Edwards Aquifer, water injection, environmental regulations, groundwater management, San Antonio River, pollution control, flood management, water quality, conservation district, bonds, utility rates, ratemaking, water services

Bills: SB 410, SB 795, SB 2510, SB 728, SB 2689, HB 143

Keywords: Gulf Coast Protection District, navigation safety, special districts, state governance, Texas legislation, Gulf Coast, flood protection, storm risk management, coastal restoration, natural resources, prescribed burns, self-insurance, fire management, liability protection, rural land management, recycling, environment, sustainability, economic development, Texas Recycling Fund

Transcript Highlights:

• causing the injection, release, or dispensation of any material within Arizona for solar radiation management
• I do not have the time, of course, to go into everything about solar radiation management.
• SCoPEx was a planned experiment in the form of geoengineering known as solar radiation management.
• In the spirit of achieving consistency with our active management areas, I vote yes.
• In the spirit of achieving consistency with our active management areas, I vote yes.

Bills: SB1005, SB1202, SB1278, SB1279, SB1280, SB1287

Keywords: cosmetics, animal testing, prohibition, manufacturers, sales regulation, state preemption, groundwater, water conservation, Arizona water resources, drought management, water quality, solar radiation management, environment, regulation, Arizona Revised Statutes, weather modification, licensing, environmental impact, public safety, cloud seeding

Summary: The Natural Resources Committee approved the minutes from January 20 and January 27, 2026, then heard several bills related to weather modification, water policy, wildlife, cosmetics, and groundwater management. SB 1278 would ban intentional solar radiation management in Arizona and bar public entities or recipients of public funds from supporting related technology development. Supporters argued it was needed to stop harmful geoengineering, while opponents said it would block research and distract from real pollution problems. The committee voted 5-2 with one not voting to give SB 1278 a do pass recommendation. The committee then considered SB 1279, which would regulate weather modification licenses, require ADWR and ADEQ review of chemicals, public notice, and public meetings, and—under a proposed strike-everything amendment—shift complaint enforcement to ADWR and require rulemaking. Testimony was largely in support from stakeholders and SRP, while ADEQ was neutral but warned it lacked standards, resources, and expertise to develop the required chemical limits on the bill’s timeline. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed the bill as amended 5-2 with one not voting. Members next passed SB 1005, which would prohibit the sale of cosmetics developed with animal testing, with supporters citing cruelty concerns and industry alternatives; the bill received a do pass recommendation 4-2 with two not voting. SB 1202, requiring ADWR to include more detailed data in five-year groundwater supply-and-demand assessments, drew opposition from ADWR over feasibility, cost, and the risk of misleading conclusions, but still received a do pass recommendation 4-2 with two not voting. The committee also passed SB 1280, which would bar Game and Fish from using public funds to transport Mexican gray wolf pups into Arizona; wildlife advocates opposed it as harmful to recovery, while Game and Fish said it would not affect core responsibilities and was neutral. Finally, SB 1287, with a conforming amendment, was approved 5-1 with two not voting to extend certain irrigation grandfathered-right groundwater uses to subsequent active management areas. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, we're going to go ahead and start with Tab 2, Senate Bill 636 on beach management by Senator Leek
• Senate Bill 544 creates the Golf Course Best Management Practices Certification Act.
• It transfers responsibility for administering the Golf Course Best Management Practices Certification
• State park unit management plans serve as the foundation for all planning, improvement, and management
• State Park unit management plans serve as the foundation for all planning, improvement, and management

Bills: S0544, S0636, S0848, S0546

Keywords: golf courses, best management practices, fertilizer regulation, Department of Agriculture, environmental protection, certification, beach management, beach erosion, beach nourishment, coastal resilience, shoreline protection, critical erosion, critically eroded beach, Florida DEP, Department of Environmental Protection, coastal flooding, compound flooding, storm surge, inlet management, coastal engineering

Summary: The Environment and Natural Resources Committee met with a quorum and took up several bills. SB 636 on beach management, by Senator Leek, would create additional pathways for counties and municipalities to obtain critically eroded beach or area of critical state concern designations, shifting the process toward a more proactive approach. Senator Smith and Senator Harrell raised concerns about local capacity and funding, and the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association said the bill was an alternative pathway but emphasized the need for more recurring funding. The bill was reported favorably. The committee then considered SB 544, which transfers the Golf Course Best Management Practices Certification Program from DEP to FDACS and establishes certification and training standards there. Senator Smith and Senator Harrell asked about environmental oversight, taxation, and whether the change would affect state park restrictions; the sponsor said it would not change tax treatment or park rules and that DEP would still handle enforcement if BMPs are not followed. The Florida Springs Council opposed the bill, arguing golf courses are not agriculture and warning of weaker protections for springs, while the Florida Golf Course Superintendent's Association supported the move as a continuity and participation measure. After adopting a technical amendment, the committee reported the bill favorably, with Senator Smith voting no. SB 848 on stormwater treatment, also by Senator Trunow, was amended to clarify the role of water quality enhancement areas while stormwater rules are still being finalized and to make public-land project review forward-looking. Resource Environmental Solutions supported the amendment and bill as providing a clearer market for water quality credits, and the Florida Home Builders Association supported the measure. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably. SB 546 by Vice Chair Mayfield would require 30-day public notice before meetings reviewing the sale or exchange of state conservation lands, including at water management districts; after a technical amendment, it received support from conservation groups and was reported favorably. The committee also received a DEP presentation on the State Park Amenities Report, which said Florida’s 175 state parks drew over 28 million visitors and generated a $3.6 billion economic impact. DEP identified nearly $759 million in needed repairs and upgrades over 10 years and $1.39 billion in contemplated new construction and development in unit management plans. No votes were taken on the presentation, and the meeting adjourned after no further business.

Bills: HB55, HB212

Keywords: fishing, licensing, jubilee, Marine life, Alabama, regulations, HB212, aquatic plants, public waters, state waters, waterways, water management, aquatic vegetation, weed removal, vegetation control, lake management, river management, environmental regulation, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, DCNR

Transcript Highlights:

• [snorts] We have testimony in support from Hawaii Emergency Management Agency that I fear is very probably
• Seeing no other questions, we're going to move on to relating to emergency management, Senate Bill 2151
• First up, we have testimony in opposition from Hawaii Emergency Management Agency.
• agencies of any of emergency management agencies of any of their<00:22:09.360> abilities<00:22
• act um to their emergency management act um to allow<00:23:44.200> for<00:23:44.320> the

Bills: SB2109, SB2151

Keywords: emergency preparedness, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, multilingual resources, American Sign Language, public education, community resilience, disaster response, emergency management, governor powers, legislative oversight, public safety, 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Public Safety met on March 20, 2026, and the chair opened by noting severe rain and flooding conditions in Hawaii and said the committee would proceed with the hearing but defer decision-making until the next meeting on March 25. The first measure discussed was SB 2109, an omnibus bill on emergency preparedness communications. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support, including from state agencies and advocacy groups such as the Disability and Communications Access Board, Hawaii Emergency Management Agency, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Legal Clinic, the Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights, and others. Supporters emphasized the need for funding and planning for multilingual emergency materials and language access, citing current evacuation notices that were not available in languages such as Ilokano or Tongan. The chair stated that action on SB 2109 would be deferred until March 25. The committee then heard SB 2151, relating to emergency management and changes to the governor’s emergency authority. Testimony was mixed but heavily focused on concerns about executive power. Earthjustice supported the bill with amendments, saying it should narrow extraordinary emergency powers, add definitions for emergency and disaster, preserve transparency under the Uniform Information Practices Act, and lower the legislative threshold to terminate an emergency proclamation from two-thirds to a simple majority. Other supporters, including the League of Women Voters of Hawaii and some individuals, also backed reform. Opponents, including Hawaii Emergency Management Agency and numerous individuals, argued the bill still gave the governor too much power, used overly broad disaster definitions, and did not sufficiently protect constitutional rights; several urged major amendments or repeal of portions of Chapter 127A. Some opponents specifically objected to the two-thirds termination standard and to provisions they said could enable compulsory immunizations or other mandates. Members questioned Earthjustice about whether the bill would suspend constitutional rights. Earthjustice responded that the bill would not authorize constitutional violations, but would allow suspension of laws enacted by the legislature, and pointed to existing statutory procedures for individuals to challenge emergency proclamations. The witness described a Mauna Kea case in which a three-judge panel granted relief to an individual under the current statute, and explained that the process could potentially affect a broader proclamation if allowed to run to completion. The hearing continued with additional testimony and questions, but no final vote or committee action on SB 2151 was taken during this portion of the meeting.

Bills: SF2077, HF2439, HF841

Keywords: environmental protection, natural resources, wildlife management, public funding, community grants, pollution reduction, waste management, climate change, funding allocations, food support, emergency funding, shelf programs, Minnesota statutes, appropriation, 1183, house

Bills: SB 1194, SB 1215, SB 1253, SB 1268, SB 1302, SB 1484, SB 1532

Keywords: water management, bond issuance, eminent domain, regional authority, fee structures, local governance, environmental quality, oyster cultivation, coastal management, natural resources, marine ecosystems, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Texas Water Development Board, guidance principles, flood plan, state water plan, rule review, infrastructure, water discharge, general permit

Bills: HB402, HB402

Keywords: rural impact, legislation, agriculture, school funding, transparency, data assessment, rural communities, land bank authority, property acquisition, tax-delinquent properties, real estate management, local government revenue, floodplain management, stormwater drainage, emergency powers, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• SB68 proposes to simply update and align Alabama law with present-day emergency management operations

Bills: SB68, SB68

Keywords: emergency management, mutual aid, disaster response, local government, political subdivision, public safety, public health, emergency services, first responders, intergovernmental agreements, reciprocal aid, emergency preparedness, local emergency management organization, governing body, liability immunity, Alabama Code 31-9-9, Alabama Code 31-9-11, tribal agreements, federally recognized Indian tribes, state emergency management plan

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to know, you know, we can't manage what we don't measure.
• Water management in Texas is critical, 301 Water management in Texas is critical, not just for urban
• If you don't know what the numbers are, you can't manage it.
• And so who do you really have managing the district?
• And so who 351 do you really have managing the district?

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:

• I also serve as the president of the Campground Association of Management Professionals, which oversees
• Thank you so much, Chair Gates, Vice Chair Lalani, and members of the Land and Resource Management Committee
• So the, the state sets forward what they call best management practices, which are methods of, uh, promoting
• is really centered around what the state needs to do to invest and support proactive groundwater management
• , Chairman Gates, Vice Chairman Lalani, and members of the House Committee on Land and Resource Management

Bills: HB24

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Resource management will come to order. The clerk will call the roll. Chairman Gates.
• I'm the mayor of the city of Granberry, and we have a couple of other council members and city manager
• To those I'm gonna defer that to our city manager.
• We, it's hard enough to manage a city, especially when you're growing and you're moving out, because
• Hearing none, the chair moves to adjourn the Committee on Land and Resource Management.

Bills: HB24

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

Bills: SB 32, SB 464, SB 996, SB 1163, SB 1173, SB 1277, SB 1452, SB 1453, SB 1548, SB 1882, SB 1883, SB 2016

Keywords: ad valorem taxation, tax exemption, franchise tax credit, income production, personal property, fireworks, retail sales, regulation, public safety, holidays, municipal management, continuation elections, districts, debt management, voter approval, charter amendment, home-rule municipality, local government, petition requirements