Ray Reed — Mentioned as participating in conversations about the proposal's structure.
Bryant Wolfin — During roll call, Bryant Wolfin’s name is called multiple times, with one instance indicating he is present.
Bryant Wolfin — Representative Bryant Wolfin noted that a prior comment about districts that 'win too much' may have been referring to his district, treating it as a joking reference in the discussion.
Deanna Self — Deanna Self was marked present during roll call and responded 'Here.'
Deanna Self — Recorded as yes on the roll call.
Marla Smith — Marla Smith was called during the roll call.
Connie Steinmetz — Marked present during roll call.
Dean Van Schoiack — Marked present during roll call.
Dean Van Schoiack — Called during the roll call.
Dean Van Schoiack — Referenced as having said there is no oversight for MSHSAA and that it self-governs.
Richard West — Called during the roll call.
James Harris — James Harris of FGA Action testified in support of House Bill 2291, arguing that state lawmakers have a responsibility to act when local political subdivisions are not acting reasonably. He said permitting delays in places like Kansas City and St. Louis County can cost businesses time and money, criticized slow bureaucratic processes, and framed the bill as common-sense reform. In response to questions, he said about ten states have similar policies, clarified that some use 30 business days or 40 days, apologized for overstating the comparison, and concluded by saying the bill or a similar iteration could help rebalance the issue.
Richard Sheets — Richard Sheets, speaking for the Missouri Municipal League in opposition to House Bill 2291, said the bill’s definition of 'request' could be interpreted broadly enough to cover zoning and subdivision plan approvals. He argued that a single 30-day deadline may be too rigid for projects of different sizes and safety review needs, and noted that his organization would need to review any changes carefully because of possible unintended consequences. Sheets said they would work with the sponsor to tighten the bill, emphasizing that public input already occurs in zoning, subdivision, and plan processes, while building permits do not involve public hearings and broader language could affect permit timing.
Donna Swan — States that the Office of Administration supports the bill and thanks Representative Nolte for his work.
Mark Myers, District 39 — Presented House Bill 2403, the Rue Wells Act, and described the underlying situation involving Rue Wells.
Rue Wells — Rue Wells is discussed as the example in a transfer-hardship case: he came from a difficult home situation, was adopted into a better family in Liberty, Missouri, and was ultimately denied his hardship request, which cost him his senior year of basketball. The speaker emphasizes that the facts of his case were bad and that he was treated unfairly, using his story to illustrate how the system affected his life from a young age and how a move to a better family and school environment changed his circumstances.
Rue Wells's adoptive parents — Their appeal letter will be distributed to illustrate the burden of the process.
Mr. Mortimer — Referenced as having spent $20,000 to take the matter to court, illustrating the financial burden of litigation.
Steve Mortimer — Steve Mortimer explains that he was Rue’s legal guardian in Missouri and describes the family’s efforts to secure Rue’s ability to play high school basketball. He says the decision was made by board members who were biased and notes that the executive director did not consider the transfer necessary, criticizing the limited relief available through court action and TROs.
Rue — Rue is referenced as the student affected by the eligibility decision.
Rue — Rue was the subject of the appeal and the discussion about the board's interpretation of the bylaws.
Mike Lodewigan — Mike Lodewigan testified on behalf of the Missouri Council of School Administrators, introducing himself to the committee as the witness.
Wendy L. Hausman — The speaker referenced the chairman's comments about structuring the proposed group.
Don Mayhew — Don Mayhew, serving as Vice Chair, was mentioned during roll call and then again shortly afterward in connection with the motion to do pass, reflecting repeated procedural references to the same member within the same meeting segment.
Don Mayhew — The speaker says they agree with much of what Representative Mayhew said.
Michael Burton — Representative Michael Burton is first called during roll call, then called again on the motion to do pass, and later speaks to the chair to request clarification on the amendment.
Michael Burton — Michael Burton questioned the witness about how many states have similar policies and whether they use the same 30-day deadline, then shifted to whether the bill should allow more time for public input on projects, particularly at later stages such as planning and zoning for larger-scale developments.
Mark Boyko — Called during the roll call and marked present.
Mark Boyko — Thanks the sponsor and says the amendment language is less ambiguous for implementers.
Mark Boyko — The roll call continues and records a yes vote for Boyko.
Mark Boyko — A document was suggested to be shared with Representative Myrith and then to the committee.
Mark Boyko — The speaker referenced comments from Representative Myrath and said the committee has discussed appeals.
Darin Chappell — Called during the roll call.
Darin Chappell — A legislator begins speaking in support of the bill, citing experience as a former high school coach.
Bennie Cook — Bennie Cook was called during the roll call.
Bennie Cook — Named as part of discussions about how the proposal should be structured.
Bennie Cook — Mentioned as participating in conversations about the proposal's structure.
Bennie Cook — Referenced in connection with the director's testimony about 1,200 transfer appeals a year.
Bennie Cook — The speaker said the issue has received attention from Representative Cook.
Michael Davis — Called during the roll call.
Michael Davis — Called during the roll call on House Bill 1817.
Bill Irwin — Marked present during roll call.
Bill Irwin — Called during the roll call on House Bill 1817.
Martin Jacobs — Marked present during roll call.
Martin Jacobs — Recorded as no on the roll call.
Martin Jacobs — Recorded as yes on the roll call.
Martin Jacobs — Recorded as yes on the roll call.
Martin Jacobs — Addressed as 'Representative Jacobson' and asked to inquire; expressed mixed feelings but familiarity with people involved in the bill.
Martin Jacobs — The witness says Representative Myra was right about the case, agreeing that they had to pay out of pocket and emphasizing the financial burden involved.