Bill Owen — Made a light remark while transitioning to the next bill and addressing Representative Parker.
Bill Owen — Representative Parker is cited as having already explained the bill, including that its work is done in tandem rather than in isolation, emphasizing the bill’s collaborative framework.
Philip Oehlerking — Was identified in the roll call as Vice Chair O'Over King.
Marty Joe Murray — Was called during the roll call as Representative Murray.
Marty Joe Murray — Asked for clarification on what acting in good faith would look like in the trust context.
Marty Joe Murray — Representative Murray is recognized and then asks about the one-third allocation, questioning whether a more flexible allocation based on need was considered.
Hardy Billington — Was called during the roll call as Billington.
David Casteel — Was called during the roll call as Castile.
Doug Clemens — Was called during the roll call as Clemens.
Jeff Hales — Was called during the roll call as Hales.
John Hewkin — Was called during the roll call as Hukin.
Stephanie Hein — Likely called as 'Hine' during the roll call.
Stephanie Hein — The speaker jokingly says Representative Parker 'owns the day today.'
Stephanie Hein — The sponsor calls on Representative Hine for a question.
Stephanie Hein — Referenced in connection with a question about funding sources.
Stephanie Hein — Representative Hine said she prefers keeping funds subject to the biennial sweep, noting that not everyone agrees, and then continued by asking about the marijuana funding and how it might be used, including for expungement-related initiatives.
Bill Owen — Bill Owen is identified and addressed as Chair/Chairman Owen during the committee meeting, including being called to order and later being directly addressed by the witness.
Bill Owen — Thanked the witness and emphasized keeping Missouri trust law current and attractive for trust formation.
Dave Hinman — During the roll call, the chair noted that Representative Dave Hinman had joined the committee, updating attendance.
Brandon Phelps — Was called during the roll call as Phelps.
Bruce Sassmann — Likely called during the roll call as Sassman.
Terry Thompson — Terry Thompson is called during roll call, then appears as the representative asking a question, and finally speaks in support of the bill, noting that Kansas has a similar clause.
Cameron Parker — Introduced himself and began explaining the bill and his representation of the 150th district.
unidentified witnesses — Sponsor says witnesses will explain the process further.
unidentified witness who chaired the committee — Sponsor says a witness who chaired the drafting committee can explain further.
John Chalas — John Chalas, a St. Louis trust and estate attorney, testified about recurring trust-contest litigation in his practice and explained that the bill is a cleanup measure meant to clarify Missouri law on no-contest clauses. He described how trust contests often involve multiple interlocutory hearings and why all parties are named, noting that nominal defendants who do not assert claims are not at risk. He said the bill limits overly broad no-contest clauses by tying them to Missouri fiduciary standards, especially the trustee’s duty to act in good faith, which cannot be reduced below that standard in a trust document. He also discussed the Missouri Supreme Court’s NOPIC decision and said the bill clarifies that the Section 420 free-look process is not the only way to challenge enforceability, preserving the ability to contest a clause even when doing so carries disinheritance risk. He further explained that a court’s initial ruling in a trust contest does not bar later claims based on different facts or circumstances, and concluded by emphasizing that beneficiaries should not be penalized for bringing claims when a trustee acts in bad faith.
Andy Briscoe — Identified himself as the registered lobbyist for the Missouri Bar and stated support for the bill.
Mr. Chalas — Briscoe thanked him for explaining the bill.
a lady with a crown — An unidentified person was jokingly referenced as possibly bringing something for Representative Parker.
expert witness (unnamed) — The sponsor refers to an unnamed expert witness who may be able to answer questions about the bill’s funding, including where the money comes from and whether the fund can be used for personnel costs.
John Voss — Representative Voss is recognized and asks what the risk would be if the expungement fund is not created.
John Voss — Called on to ask questions of the witness.
John Voss — Representative Voss apologized to the witness and sponsor for initially overlooking language in the bill, then clarified that the provision on page one, section one, subsection two, line eight states that remaining funds at the end of the biennium do not revert to general revenue.
Eric Cheneings — Testified in favor of House Bill 2967 on behalf of the Judicial Conference and described the bill as a housekeeping framework measure.