Transcript Highlights:

• Senator, I don't know that the data is the right term. I've seen it firsthand.
• So just to, you could take that data with you now. Thank you. Thank you.
• So just to, you could take that data with you now. Thank you. Thank you.
• So I'm not sure why the data matters.
• Madam Chair, I'd be more than happy to ask the opposition about data as well.

Bills: HB2020, HB2032, HB2033, HB2249, HB2313, HB2318, HB2378, HCR2003

Keywords: interference, disruption, educational institutions, public order, conduct rules, statewide assessment, student testing, academic standards, third grade reading, reading retention, promotion and retention, school accountability, assessment window, testing window, test scores, school report cards, nontest data, graduation rates, dropout rates, education data privacy

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from February 18 and March 4, 2026, then took up HCR 2003, the Protect Girls in Sports in Arizona Act. Supporters, including Superintendent Tom Horne and several athletes and coaches, argued the measure would protect fairness, safety, and privacy in girls’ sports and locker rooms by requiring sports to be designated male, female, or co-ed and by limiting access to certain private spaces. Opponents, including the ACLU and Arizona Education Association, argued the resolution was discriminatory, would function as a bathroom ban, and could create enforcement and privacy problems. The committee passed HCR 2003 on a 4-3 vote, giving it a due pass recommendation. The committee then heard HB 2020, which would make certain threats or disruptions at educational institutions by minors a class 1 misdemeanor instead of a class 6 felony, and passed it 4-3. HB 2032, which shifts the statewide testing window later in the school year and changes related score deadlines, drew support from school leaders who said it would better reflect full-year learning; it passed 6-1. HB 2033, allowing school districts and charter schools to choose paper-and-pencil statewide testing by governing board vote, also passed 6-0 with one member not voting. HB 2318, establishing term limits for school district governing board members, was amended to clarify the limit applies only after two consecutive four-year terms beginning after a specified date; it passed 4-3 despite opposition from the Arizona School Board Association over impacts on rural districts. The committee next approved HB 2378, which changes eligibility rules for School Facilities Oversight Board members so certain architect and engineer members may not have school-construction business interests, passing 4-3. HB 2313, which prohibits teacher strikes or organized work stoppages and reduces school funding if a strike occurs, passed 4-3 after testimony from educators who said it was punitive and could worsen staffing shortages. Finally, the committee considered HB 2249, which expands the Parents’ Bill of Rights to require written parental consent and notification regarding school facilitation of social transitioning and creates significant civil penalties for violations. Opponents warned it was vague, punitive, and likely to chill ordinary school interactions, while supporters said it was needed to stop schools from hiding information from parents. After adopting a six-page amendment, the committee passed HB 2249 on a 4-3 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, of the few dozen cases that data.
• sensitive data under the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act.
• The primary effect of classifying data as sensitive data is that it changes that data from being data
• The primary effect of classifying data as sensitive data is that it changes that data from being data
• about data practices and data privacy. about data practices and data privacy.

Bills: HF3642, HF2700, HF3615

Keywords: virtual currency, kiosks, prohibition, customer payouts, cryptocurrency regulation, consumer privacy, data privacy, health data, sensitive data, Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act, personal data, data broker, targeted advertising, geofencing, location tracking, health care privacy, patient privacy, consent, minor privacy, children's privacy

Summary: The Commerce Finance and Policy Committee met on House File 3642, which would prohibit virtual currency kiosks in Minnesota. The bill was laid over, and the committee adopted a DE1 author’s amendment. Chair Kaggel and Representative Perryman described the measure as a response to widespread scams using crypto kiosks, especially against older adults and other vulnerable people, and said they would continue working with the Department of Commerce and other stakeholders. Testimony from law enforcement and advocates strongly supported the ban. A St. Cloud police sergeant and a Woodbury detective described cases in which victims lost large sums, said the current safeguards and refund rules are being bypassed, and argued that the kiosks are difficult to investigate because funds move quickly and often overseas. An AARP Minnesota volunteer also supported the bill, saying kiosks are a preferred tool for scammers and that existing protections have not kept pace with the problem. The Department of Commerce said it strongly supports the bill and reported that it has received 120 complaints over three years involving nearly $1 million in reported losses, with 2025 the worst year so far. The main opposition came from CoinFlip’s general counsel, who argued that the problem is fraud generally, not kiosks themselves, and said Minnesota already has consumer protections, including refunds for eligible victims. He urged stronger regulation rather than a ban, citing blockchain analytics, hold periods, and 24-hour customer service as alternatives. Committee members then asked questions about how long kiosks have operated in Minnesota, how many there are, who owns them, and the scale of losses; Commerce said there are hundreds statewide, operated by a variety of companies, and that reported losses are likely undercounts.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's also any group that's part of the controlling group that controls the data.
• uh from<00:10:45.040> the<00:10:45.279> sale<00:10:45.440> of<00:10:45.600> data
• ,<00:10:45.920> then<00:10:46.160> you're from the sale of data, then you're from the
• sale of data, then you're you're<00:10:46.480> you're<00:10:47.040> covered<00:10:47.360
• ><00:11:07.360> the controlling group that controls the controlling group that controls the data

Bills: HB351, HB351

Keywords: ad valorem tax, road funding, local government, referendum, Choctaw County, data privacy, consumer rights, personal data, data protection, Alabama Personal Data Protection Act, 1136, house, all

Bills: HB282, HB283, HB95

Keywords: government contracting, state agencies, local agencies, procurement, marketing contracts, advertising contracts, media monitoring, fact-checking, news ratings, bias ratings, misinformation, journalistic standards, news accuracy, vendor certification, contractor certification, public relations, media analytics, government procurement, Alabama, data privacy

Bills: HB1663, HB2335, HB2597

Keywords: reimbursement, public employees, travel costs, Hawaii statutes, government funding, workforce development, internship, internal recruitment, employment, qualifications, civil service, artificial intelligence, data governance, open data portal, Hawaii, chief data officer, chatbot, public services, data transparency, 910

Transcript Highlights:

• a complicated nexus with personal data. a complicated nexus with personal data.
• data so that consumers may be aware of who is buying and selling their personal data.
• purchasing that data purchasing that data from<00:09:33.880> realtors.
• the sale of data, not the sharing<00:10:04.640> of<00:10:04.760> data.
• sharing of data. sharing of data. Thank<00:10:06.880> you.

Bills: HF4456, HF4544, HF3698

Keywords: data broker, data brokerage, consumer privacy, personal data, data privacy, Minnesota attorney general, registration, public registry, civil penalties, enforcement, special revenue fund, privacy rights, data sales, data collection, consumer protection, chapter 325M, controller, processor, data broker registry, transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• We're also reviewing EIDBI billing data We're also reviewing EIDBI billing data in<00:15:29.400>
• We were looking at them with with data We were looking at them with data<00:31:02.680> analytics<
• through that your data data analytics. through that your data data analytics.
• And so, data analytics looks at trends and outliers.
• And so, data the strongest tools.

Bills: HF3542

Keywords: data privacy, investigative data, welfare system, public funds, transparency, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• But this is data privacy.
• and have a say so over data that belongs to us.
• But this is data privacy.
• and have a say so over data that belongs to us.
• and have a say so over data that belongs to us.

Bills: HB351, SB109, HB351, SB109

Keywords: ad valorem tax, road funding, local government, referendum, Choctaw County, Tuskegee University, education funding, Alabama Education Trust Fund, appropriation, agricultural research, data privacy, consumer rights, personal data, data protection, Alabama Personal Data Protection Act, peer-to-peer car sharing, vehicle insurance, liability, shared vehicles, taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• data privacy on private companies. data privacy on private companies. Right? Right? Right?
• that data or misuse that data.
• that data or misuse that data.
• It has positive effects and it will lead to the protection of data privacy and better data management
• protection of data privacy and better<00:09:11.040> data<00:09:11.279> management<00:09

Bills: SF0020, SF0021, SF0022

Keywords: data privacy, government accountability, personal data, data retention, resident rights, stable token, liquidity, trust account, Wyoming, fund distribution, financial regulation, state commission, decentralized, nonprofit association, merger, conversion, liability, membership, governance, indemnification

Bills: SF0020, SF0021, SF0022

Keywords: data privacy, government accountability, personal data, data retention, resident rights, stable token, liquidity, trust account, Wyoming, fund distribution, financial regulation, state commission, decentralized, nonprofit association, merger, conversion, liability, membership, governance, indemnification

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:

• First of all, you'd have to create data points of what information you want.
• Well, first of all, you need to determine what data points you want to collect.
• I mean, he asked me, he says, well, what data points do we need?
• So that way, the most expensive tier, we actually have solid data on.
• The 200 percent A was chosen because the data is there for that.

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:

• follow the data that's already in law. follow the data that's already in law.
• currently use national data sharing. currently use national data sharing.
• What is that data?
• data to be handled in Minnesota. data to be handled in Minnesota.
• ownership should not be public data. ownership should not be public data.

Bills: HF3479, HF4205, HF3782, HF4081, HF4138

Keywords: foreclosure, mortgage, redemption period, homestead, Minnesota Statutes, automated license plate reader, ALPR, license plate recognition, vehicle surveillance, Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, BCA, data privacy, government data practices, law enforcement data, surveillance technology, location data, vehicle tracking, warrant requirement, probable cause, exigent circumstances

Transcript Highlights:

• And the data tells us that, too.
• And the data tells us that, too.
• And the data tells us that, too.
• And the data tells us that, too.
• And the data tells us that, too. better. And the data tells us that, too.

Bills: HF3542, HF3819

Keywords: data privacy, investigative data, welfare system, public funds, transparency, child care, licensing, inspections, compliance, program integrity, 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3542, authored by Representative Hudson, and first adopted the February 25 minutes. Hudson explained that the bill, as amended in a DE1, would require agencies to disclose to the public, legislators, or the press the existence of certain investigations only after the subject has been notified and the agency has decided to reduce, suspend, or withhold payments. He said the amendment was intended to avoid tipping off subjects before notification while still increasing transparency about investigations involving public funds. A separate A3 amendment was withdrawn after the DE1 was adopted. Several members questioned the bill’s scope and timing, asking what “existence of an investigation” meant and whether the proposal would disclose information before findings were complete. Hudson clarified that the bill was aimed at identifying who is being investigated, not revealing investigative details. The committee then heard extensive public testimony from child care providers and advocates, who opposed the bill and argued it would expose providers to harassment, threats, and stigma before any findings were made. Testifiers described recent threats, ICE-related disruptions, audits, overpayment findings, and the burden of CCAP compliance, saying the bill would punish providers for paperwork errors and worsen safety concerns, especially for Somali and other providers of color. A board member of the Minnesota Child Care Association also opposed the bill, saying providers had been chilled from speaking publicly because of death threats and harassment, and warning that disclosure of investigations could intensify that climate. In response, Hudson said the bill was not about targeting child care providers generally and was limited to confirmed ongoing investigations after notice to the subject. The committee then heard from Inspector General Keys, who explained that CCAP investigations are administrative, not criminal, and are based on evidence of repeated errors or financial misconduct rather than intentional fraud. He said the office looks for patterns beyond simple mistakes and that the bill’s notice requirement would not impede investigations. The discussion ended amid a brief procedural dispute over comments directed at Hudson, after which the chair returned to the bill and the Inspector General’s testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, the harvest data, location data collected from the digital tagging from down to the pinpoint
• of latitude and longitude, as well as the data from the mandatory and voluntary reporting is subject
• If people feel that their data is not protected, they may stop using the digital tagging system or provide
• the confidence to continue to use digital tagging, which helps parks and wildlife collect accurate data
• However, most of the time, the data was summarized on a county level. level which was adequate from a

Bills: SCR13, SB1248

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, TPWD, harvest reports, wildlife harvest data, public information act, open records, confidentiality, hunter privacy, angler data, game animals, game birds, fur-bearing animals, nongame animals

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently, harvest data and location data collected through digital tagging include pinpoint latitude
• and longitude, along with data from mandatory and voluntary reporting.
• That location data, down to the pinpoint of latitude and longitude, as well as data from mandatory and
• If people feel their data is not protected, they may stop using the digital tagging system or provide
• However, most of the time the data was summarized.

Bills: SCR13, SB1248

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, TPWD, harvest reports, wildlife harvest data, public information act, open records, confidentiality, hunter privacy, angler data, game animals, game birds, fur-bearing animals, nongame animals

Summary: The Senate Committee on Water, Agriculture, and Rural Affairs met without a quorum at first, then later established quorum and proceeded with testimony and votes. Senate Bill 1248, by Chair Perry, was explained as a narrow Open Records Act exception to protect harvest report location data collected through Texas Parks and Wildlife’s digital tagging system. Support testimony came from Matt Wagner of the Texas Chapter of The Wildlife Society, who said the bill would protect private land and sensitive biological information while preserving useful wildlife data. No one testified against the bill, and it was left pending until later in the meeting. The committee then heard Senate Concurrent Resolution 13, which urges the State Department and the International Boundary and Water Commission to press Mexico to comply with the 1944 Water Treaty and deliver its share of Rio Grande water. Senator Hinojosa, farmers, municipal officials, and other witnesses described severe water shortages in South Texas, low reservoir levels, crop losses, the closure of the Valley sugar industry, and the need for alternative supplies such as desalination, reuse, and drainage-runoff projects. Members also discussed treaty enforcement, regional drought, and the role of cartels and Mexican water storage, while emphasizing that Texas must also invest in its own water infrastructure. The committee also considered Senate Bill 740, which the committee substitute amended to require the Public Utility Commission to adopt a standardized application form for system improvement charges and complete related rulemaking by September 1, 2026, applying only to applications filed on or after that date. Members discussed concerns about water wholesalers using the process to delay cases and drive up costs, and the need for more transparency and PUC resources. The committee voted to adopt the substitute and report SB 740 favorably. After returning to the earlier items, the committee voted SB 1248 out favorably and recommended it for the local and uncontested calendar, and voted SCR 13 out favorably as well. The committee then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• ensures that private data stays private during the data challenge appeals process.
• ensures that private data stays private during the data challenge appeals process.
• as non-public or private data.
• data on every purchase we make, so they can data mine that and resell that for a profit.
• <01:26:07.800> is the data Practices Act if the data is the data Practices Act if the data

Bills: HF1662, HF1224, HF1836, HF1367, HF1168, HF1999, HF1792, HF102, HF2127, HF104

Keywords: veterans, veterans affairs, State Soldiers Assistance Program, Veterans Stable Housing Initiative, MAXIS, human services data, data sharing, eligibility verification, informed consent, private data, benefits coordination, veteran housing, veteran assistance, Department of Human Services, Children Youth and Families, state benefits, federal benefits, privacy, public assistance, foreclosure

Transcript Highlights:

• ." data." data."
• Data brokers are in the business of scraping data from any and all websites.
• Data brokers are in the business of scraping data from any and all websites.
• Um, the data, uh, um, companies or the data, uh, um, companies.
• data.

Bills: HF3794, HF3408

Keywords: surveillance, price discrimination, wage discrimination, automated decision systems, consumer protections, data privacy, biometrics, consumer protection, price setting, biometric data, retail, privacy, 1183, house

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from March 3, 2026, and then received a presentation from the Minnesota Office of the Attorney General on the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act. Assistant Attorney General Caitlin Miko and Deputy Attorney General Jessica Whitney reviewed the law’s scope, consumer rights, business obligations, and enforcement history. They said the law took effect July 31, 2025, gives Minnesotans rights to access, delete, and opt out of sale, profiling, and targeted advertising, and is enforced by the Attorney General with penalties up to $7,500 per violation. They reported more than 200 complaints in the first six months, many warning letters, and a shift from education to active enforcement now that the initial warning-letter period has expired. Committee members asked about how the universal opt-out works, what happens when companies deny deletion or editing requests, how the office determines willful noncompliance, and whether the law could burden small businesses. The AG’s office said the opt-out can be set through privacy-protective browsers or extensions, companies must respond to consumer requests within 45 days, small businesses are exempt as defined by the SBA, and investigations look for patterns and evidence of willful conduct rather than minor technical violations. The office also said it needs additional funding to fully staff enforcement efforts and noted that it has already issued subpoenas and civil investigative demands. The committee then took up House File 3408, the Stop Grocery Surveillance Price Gouging Act. The author explained that the bill would prohibit retail grocers, physical and online, from setting individualized prices based on consumer information, would limit certain uses of facial recognition and electronic shelf labels, and would preserve narrow exceptions for discounts and loyalty programs. Public testimony followed from the Minnesota Farmers Union in support, arguing that grocery consolidation and surveillance pricing could worsen already high food costs and harm fair competition. The Minnesota Grocers Association opposed the premise that grocery stores use surveillance pricing, said shelf prices are generally uniform and set from a single storewide database, and argued electronic shelf labels are efficient and not nefarious. A technology company representative similarly said ESLs do not use personal data or facial recognition, prices are uniform, and a 2025 study found no meaningful price increases after ESL adoption. The bill was laid over for possible further discussion after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's really a data bill.
• they do need certain data.
• states already that are sharing data states already that are sharing data from<00:37:44.760>
• with OD map that deidentified EMS data with OD map that data<00:38:46.520> that<00:38:46.640>
• > things<00:38:47.800> like data that data is limited to things like data that data is

Bills: HF1379, HF1596, HF2260, HF1429

Keywords: nonopioid directive, opioid refusal, opioid-free care, pain management, health care directive, advance directive, patient autonomy, informed consent, substance use disorder, opioid epidemic, prescriber immunity, provider liability, emergency medical services, EMS, health record, Minnesota Department of Health, health care agent, medical power of attorney, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota government data practices

Transcript Highlights:

• acquire, store, process, manage, use, maintain, display, distribute, dispose of, transmit, or retrieve data

Bills: SB156, SB467

Keywords: gun violence, firearm safety, special counsel, data collection, community initiatives, grants, Attorney General, public safety, suicide prevention, cybersecurity, information security, state agency, data protection, confidentiality, 909, all