Colorado Senate 2026 Legislative Day 097

Senators Amabile, Baisley, Ball, Benavidez, Bridges, Bright, Carson, Catlin, Cutter, Danielson,

Doherty. Exum. Frizzell. Gonzalez. Hendrickson. Judah. Kip. Kirkmeyer. Kirkmeyer.

Colker, Lindstedt, Liston, Marchman, Mullica, Pelton B, Pelton R, excuse, Rich, Roberts, Rodriguez, Martinez, Simpson, Snyder, Sullivan, Wallace, Weissman, Zamora Wilson.

The morning roll call is 32 present, 0 absent, 3 excuse. We have a quorum. Senator Catlin.

roll. Now, Senator Catlin, would you please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Please join me in

which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Approval of the

approved as corrected by the secretary. You wrote a motion. All those in favor say aye. Opposed no. The ayes have it. The motion is adopted. Senate services. Correctly printed. Senate bill 168, 169, 170. Correctly engrossed. Senate bill 6, 15, 78, 101, 151, 158, 159. Senate joint resolution 21. Correctly re-engrossed. Senate bill 266 and 145. Correctly revised. House bill 1110. Correctly re-revised. House bill 1084, 1202, and 1262. Correctly enrolled. Senate bill 105, 121 and 128. Senate joint resolution 16 and 18. Message from the house. How do we get out of here? The house is adopted and returns here with. Senate joint memorial 001. The house has voted not to concur in the senate amendments to house bill 1357, house bill 1363, house bill 1380, house bill 1399, house bill 1405, house bill 1409, house bill 1410, house bill 1411, and house bill 1412, and request that a conference committee be appointed for said bills. The Speaker has appointed Representatives Sirota, Chair, Brown, and Taggart as House conferees on the first conference committee on House Bill 1357, 1363, 1380, 1399, 1405, 1409, 1410, 1411, and 1412. The House has granted authorization to go beyond the scope of differences. The bills are transmitted herewith. The House has voted to concur in Senate amendments to House Bill 1305, House Bill 1373, and House Bill 1406 and has repassed the bills as so admitted. Third reading of bills consent calendar Mr Schaffler please read the titles of all the bills on the consent calendar

Before anything is moved, Mr. Schaffer, please ask Senator Danielson to the roll. Now Mr. Majority Leader.

Further discussion? Seeing none, the motion is the passage of all the bills and third-veter-bill's consent calendar. Are there any no votes? Senator Carson.

Senator Carson recorded as a no vote on Senate Bill 151.

Senator Zamora Wilson recorded as a no vote on Senate Bill 151.

Senator Bayles recorded as a no vote on Senate Bill 151.

Senator Rich recorded as a no vote on Senate Bill 151. And Senator Liston?

Senator Liston recorded as a no vote on Senate Bill 151. Seeing no further no votes with a vote of 34 eyes, zero no zero, absent, one excused. House Bill 1110 is passed. Co-sponsors. Senators. Judah. Marchman. Wallace. Sullivan. Cutter. Colker. Exum. Kipp. Bridges. Carson. Henriksen. Ball. Snyder. Mr. Majority Leader.

With a vote of 34 ayes, 0 no, 0 absent, 1 excuse, Senate Bill 78 is passed. Co-sponsors, Senators Pelton, B. Marchman, Colkin.

with a vote of 29 ayes, 5 noes, 0 absent and 1 excuse. Senate Bill 151 is passed. Co-sponsors. Senators Kip, Judah, Marchman, Cutter.

Third reading of the bills. Final passage. Mr. Schaffer will please read the title of Senate Bill 006.

Senator Kirkmeyer. Thank you Mr President I move Senate Bill 6 on third reading and final passage and ask for a yes vote

Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in opposition to Senate Bill 6 and had debate on this last week and I'm not sure if it's karma or if there's some special thing that these two senators have, because I don't feel very well today, but I really wanted to just come up and reiterate my position on this as a health care worker who does take care of patients as a job outside of this. I want to start off by saying that I completely agree with where these sponsors are coming from and the goal that they are trying to achieve, because I do think health care has played a role in our opioid crisis in this country. I think where I have an issue with this bill and where I was vocal about this is that we do have other options, and we have other options that can be utilized, and this bill is requiring and mandating that we only use an option that is brand new to the system, that is more expensive. and to me that oftentimes is not the best way to provide care. We have drugs. We've mentioned it. We have gabapentin. We use Toradol. We even use ketamine in the ER to address this to make sure that we have other options. They're not opioids. And what this bill is saying is it's saying that we have new drugs that are coming onto the market and we are going to require our insurance companies to offer those new drugs when an opioid is prescribed. And to me, it speaks volumes to the fact that there had to be an amendment to carve out Medicaid with this bill. There had to be an amendment to carve out the state health plan to this bill because of the cost and because we know it's going to increase the cost. And to me, there is a way to address this without necessarily increasing the cost. And if we're sincere and we genuinely want to do that, then let's give that option to say we don't have to just offer these brand new, more expensive drugs. Let's work with our providers. Let's offer these other drugs to make sure that they're not not that they are non-opioid and they address the same issue that they're trying to provide. And so for that, I ask for a no vote. I do think there's a better way of doing this. I agree with what they're trying to do. But Senate Bill 6, I think, misses the mark. Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. President. Members of this bill went through Health Committee where I serve, and I'm going to vote yes today. I thought I'd say briefly why. I am sensitive to the suggestions that, given the state of the drug market development, who is making these non-opioid class painkillers may be a bit narrow, and thus the benefit may be a bit narrow. I do think we need to look out for that kind of stuff happening in here. But at the end of the day I think the human disaster that has been inflicted on this country for decades due to rampant overprescription of opioid drugs is what is doing the work for me and inclining me to vote yes it just truly galling and shocking what you know we all been through due to regulatory failure going back to the 90s due to deceptive marketing practices blatant lying I mean a really toxic combination of things that have cost hundreds of thousands of lives and wrecked easily hundreds of billions of dollars of economic damage when you consider medical bills lost productivity to say nothing else. So I think we have to keep in mind where we've been. I think we have to keep in mind where we still are, 35 of 100 prescriptions written are opioid class drugs. That's after we think we've learned everything. That's after legislatures around the country like this one have passed many bills to try to have saner, less problematic prescribing practices. is it still blows my mind how prevalent these drugs are, notwithstanding what we know about how risky they are and the damage they've done some parts of the state more than others. So I appreciate where the concern is coming from. I think we all need to be sensitive about driving costs in the health care system. At the end of the day, insurance is pooling funds and pooling risk, and we may not need a particular painkiller opioid or not, but we pay in so that it's there for somebody else, and somebody else is paying in so we have coverage for what we might need. I think we lose sight of the basic principles of insurance that way. So anyway, in recognition of the disaster that we've been through for decades and are still going through, and the need to have some alternatives to off-ramp from the prescribing of some of these dangerous drugs, I'm voting yes on six.

Thank you, Mr. President. While I'm typically loathe to involve the state in mandates over private industry, in this case the insurance companies have stepped in far too often and overriding what the provider's decisions are, and this is a case where we're obviously addressing the opioid crisis at the same time. So I support this bill in that it does require insurance companies to play their appropriate role, to not get between the doctor and the patient, but to allow the doctor to do what is prescribed, what is best for their patients, and to do their job of just covering all of that, spreading that cost across all the subscribers to their policy, as the intent of insurance is in the first place. So I just think this is very much a narrow but very much worth it bill to address this issue. So I will be a yes vote. Thank you.

Samora Wilson. Mullica. Carson. Lindstadt. Sullivan.

Cutter. Wallace. Pelton B. Brazil. Bright. Catlin.

Mr. Schauffler, please read the time of the city Bill 15.

Senator Pelton B. Thank you, Mr. President. I move Senate Bill 2615 to third reading and final passage with a favorable recommendation.

Senate Bill 101 by Senators Pelton B. and Roberts and Representative Richardson concerning measures to assist local governments in complying with landfill methane emission reduction regulations adopted by the Air Quality Control Commission.

Further discussion. Seeing none of the motion is a passage of Senate Bill 101. Are there any no votes? With a vote of 34-I-0-0-0, absent when excused, Senate Bill 101 is passed. Those sponsors, Senators, Mr. Minority Leader, Catlin, Judah, Snyder, Ball, Kirkmeyer, Benavidez. Please add the President. Mr. Schauffler, please read the title of Senate Bill 159.

Senator Gonzalez. Thank you. Mr. President, we move Senate Bill 159 on third reading and final passage and ask for an aye vote.

Senators, Mr. Minority Leader, Rich, Frizzell, Zamora Wilson, Kirkmeyer, Roberts, Baisley, Bright, Catlin, Carson, Liston, Pelton B.

Senate Bill 158 by Senators Weissman and Ball and Rep Carter and Espinosa concerning early parole procedures for a youthful offender who has successfully completed a specialized program Senator Ball Thank you Mr President I move Senate Bill 158 on third reading and final passage and ask for an aye vote Further discussion

Senators, Mr. Minority Leader, Kirkmeyer, Frizzell, Zamora Wilson, Rich, Liston, Baisley Catlin Carson Bright Pelton B

Gonzales Judah Wallace Kip Marchman Danielson Colker

Thank you, Mr. President. I move the Senate resolve itself to the Committee of the Whole for consideration of general orders, second reading of bills.

Aye.

The committee will come to order, and the coat rule is relaxed for anyone who would like to take off their coat. Will the clerk please read the title to House Bill 1071.

Senator Cutter. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 1071 on second reading. Is there any discussion? Well. Oh, Senator Cutter. There are amendments coming to the desk. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read L-006? Amendment L-006, Min Re-Engross Bill, page 2, after line 1, section 1, legislative director.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This amendment really addresses some concerns about data sharing and privacy and reaffirms in the ledge deck that it's not an issue, just reaffirming our protections, that state and political subdivision employees are prohibited from disclosing personal identification and that this is not used for any purpose other than to capture speeding and other traffic infractions. Is there any further discussion of L-006? Seeing none, the question before us is the adoption of L-006. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Ayes have it. 006 is adopted. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read? L-005 Amendment L-005

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This amendment was in response to, well, particularly specifically Clear Creek County they have areas that it's very difficult to watch for and capture speeders. It is quite dangerous so this allows for these cameras to go up where there's a shoulder lane that makes it difficult to otherwise address speeding so I ask for your support On an amendment that shall be moved Oh move Senator Cunningham I move I move amendment L Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is the adoption of L-005. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed no. Ayes have it. L-005 is adopted. To the bill. Any discussion? Seeing none. Seeing none, the motion before us is the adoption of House Bill 1071. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. House Bill 1071 is adopted.

Will the clerk please read the title to Mr. Majority Leader.

Motion is to lay over Senate Bill 134. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. No. Ayes have it. That bill will lay over. Will the clerk please read the title to Senate Bill 26150?

Senator Ball. Senator Ball. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Move Senate Bill 150 in the committee report. I move Senate Bill 150 in the associated committee report from Transportation and Energy. Is there any discussion in the committee report? Senator Ball. Thank you, Mr. Chair. In committee, we had a couple of amendments, most of them pretty minor. Two were to make some tweaks to the language around the paratransit study in the bill. One was a technical cleanup around data. The third was an amendment that clarified how term limits work during the transition period. And then we had two other amendments that spoke to the geographic diversity of the board. Is there any further discussion of the Transportation and Energy Committee report? Seeing none, the motion before us is the adoption of that report. All those in favor say aye. Opposed, no. The aye has it. That report is adopted. To the bill, any discussion? Yes, Senator Ball. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members, Senate Bill 150 is the product of a lot of work and a lot of work that has happened over the course of several years. There have been three accountability committees that have formed in the last six years, all tasked with looking at RTD and, in particular, whether the governance structure of RTD makes sense. As I think most people here know, RTD is an outlier. It is governed by a 15-person elected board. It's one of only four elected boards in the country. And it doesn't have a great track record. RTD has struggled over the course of time. My co-prime sponsor will speak more about that. And not all of those problems are attributed to the board structure, but some of them are, and that's what this bill addresses. In particular, it reduces the size of the board. We've heard from many individuals, and this came out of the committee report, that the size of the board made it unmanageable. Fifteen people is almost half of this body, and exercising oversight with a board that large is very difficult. Second, it adds some much-needed expertise to the board. And then lastly, it maintains elected representation. People will still have the ability to vote for their representatives on the new structure that this board creates. Is there any further discussion? Senator Judah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members I think the first thing I want to do is recognize that this bill was or came from the late Senator Faith Winter and she really wanted to make sure that this was something we got done especially before she left the legislature To my co-prime's point, RTD just isn't working well and it hasn't worked for a really long time. RTD ranks next to last among peer cities in post-pandemic ridership recovery, is facing a largely preventable fiscal crisis, and continues to struggle with significant deferred maintenance, and as we all know, has not fulfilled many of its promises made to voters over the past 25 years. So when I talk about RTD to my constituents, I hear nothing but frustration and disappointment from working people who want to use the bus to commute but can't rely on it, to elderly, to disability riders who have no choice but to use transit systems that don't meet their needs. So simply put, RTD has failed to deliver the transfer system. Our region needs to thrive. The last thing I'll say is I think this is the perfect complementary bill to our land use bill we passed a few years ago and wanting to make sure that we are creating transit-oriented communities so people can live, work, thrive, age in the communities that they choose so they are not being forced out because they don't have reliable transportation when they can't afford it in the first place. So with that, I ask for an aye vote and we have an amendment. There is an amendment at the desk. What was that? Senatorial five. Thank you. There's an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read L-17.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. First, this one comes from RTD, and so we want to thank them for working with us on this. This simply strikes the mandated two-year term for the board chair. This amendment ensures that chairpersons can run for multiple terms while not setting a requirement of two-year terms which would create simple logistical issues and again this comes from rtd and we want to make sure that we're working in good faith and and pass this amendment is there any further discussion of l017 seeing none the motion before is the adoption of l017 all those in favor say aye aye opposed no eyes have it l017 is adopted there is an amendment at the desk the clerk please read L020. L020 amend the bill page 15. Thank you Mr. Chair. L20 just public finance expertise for the at-large appointment criteria. This was also a big deal for RTD and ourselves as well, making sure that there is expertise on the board when it comes to contributing to the future of RTD, and it clarifies that public finance expertise may include operating in capital budgeting, fair revenue and subsidy structures, capital program delivery, asset management, and life cycle capital planning, or financial management of public transportation, and I ask for an aye vote. There may be more discussion.

is and I'm a no vote on this L020. Further discussion on the amendment? Seeing none the motion before us is the adoption of amendment L020. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed no. I think the ayes still have that one. The amendment is adopted. Senator Judah. Thank you Mr. Chair. I move L24. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read L24. Amendment L24. Senator Judah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is just a technical cleanup. Sorry, I move L24 to the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a technical cleanup to paratransit study. This amendment makes a minor technical change to the language relating to paratransit study, and I ask for an aye vote. Is there any discussion on L24? see none the motion for us is the adoption of L24 all those in favor say aye those opposed no the ayes have it and L24 is adopted there is an amendment at the desk clerk please read L26 amendment L26 amendment printed bill page 13 line 21 strike thank you

union and this simply states that the labor seat in this bill will be the product of recommendations made by the governor for that seat and on that note I move L026. All right any discussion on L26? Seeing none the motion before us is the option of amendment L26. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed no The ayes have it L26 is adopted There is an amendment at the desk Will the clerk please read L Amendment L amend the bill Thank you Mr Chair L-027 is the second of two amendments that deals with the labor seat, and this amendment... I move L-027. To the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. L-027 comes from a discussion that we had in committee around conflicts of interest with that seat, So I'd like to thank the good Senator from Woodland Park who proposed an amendment in committee. We talked about that amendment after committee and drafted something that was very similar to what was proposed. And that is this amendment, which states that the labor seat and the board must recuse themselves if there is any conflict of interest in what they are voting on. And I encourage an aye vote. Is there any further discussion on L27? Seeing none, the motion before us is the adoption of L27. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. L-27 is adopted. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read L-28? Amendment L-28. Senator Ball. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L-028. To the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. L-028 comes at the request of the City of Denver, and it provides that after 15 years have passed with the new board structure, we will conduct a review like the Accountability Committee that produced this bill, to assess whether the new structure created by this bill has been effective. I encourage an aye vote. Any further discussion on L28? Seeing none, the motion enforces the adoption of L28. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it, and L28 is adopted. Further discussion on the bill? Do you want to move yours? All right, we are to the bill.

There is an amendment at the desk. Clerk, please read L-16.

Senator Mullica. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move amendment L-16. To the amendment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to take a quick opportunity to thank the sponsors for the stakeholding that they've done on this bill. I heard this bill in committee and had a lot of conversations with the sponsors in regards to some of the concerns I have and really appreciate that. And Amendment L-16 addresses two of my big concerns and gets me to a place where I can support it. And these concerns were also mentioned in committee. What this amendment does, Amendment L16, is that when we do the appropriation of these districts, that we keep it to population as a sole consideration rather than bring in ridership. And it also lowers the threshold for petitions from 1,000 down to 250 to make sure that folks can get on the ballot. And so it addresses those two things. Those were two of my big concerns. Would ask for a yes vote.

Senator Baisley.

There is an amendment at the desk. The clerk, please read L-14.

Senator Baisley. Mr. Chairman, I move L-14 to Senate Bill 150.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And so what this amendment would do would be to recognize that there is an organizational conflict of interest that would exist from having the union member as a board member when there's also a collective bargaining agreement that would take place. So what this amendment would do would not just be to recognize that and recuse that member from voting, but also to eliminate that person from all participation in conversation about collective bargaining, because there should not be any undue influence coming from that board member. That should be someone who steps aside entirely from that conversation. That's what would be appropriate. There should not be any pressure coming to bear from that role. So I respectfully ask for an aye vote on L14.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to thank the good Senator from Woodland Park for bringing this. I agree with the spirit of this. This is the amendment that we just passed, L019, which does more or less the same thing as this amendment. So encourage an aye vote because with the passage of L027, this amendment is now moot.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for the good center from Denver. Just to clarify, it is not in conflict with the previous amendment. It simply adds that that member would not be included in conversation, not just in votes, but in conversation about collective bargaining as well. So I urge an aye vote on L-14.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to clarify. I misspoke. I encourage a no vote on this amendment. Thank you.

Aye.

No.

Amendment L-19. Amendment printed bill page 15 line 8 strike 2

amendment? I move L019. Thank you. Any further discussion on this amendment? Seeing none, the motion enforces the adoption of amendment L19. All those in favor say aye. Those opposed no. The ayes have it. Amendment L19 is adopted. Further discussion on the bill. Senator Baisley.

The clerk please read L-15.

Senator Baisley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move L-15 to Senate Bill 150.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So this adds an entirely new section at the end, just before the closing paragraph of the bill, that would refer back to the people before this new board would be increased in numbers and asking the people if that's what they would like to see done for the board that represents them. So this is a referral to the people through the Secretary of State, so it would be a ballot measure that would ask them first before this board adds new members that they would be voting on and that would be assigned for the governor to be voting on. This changes the whole complexion of that board, that representation. It changes the people's representation on that board. So it seems only right and proper that the people be asked for their permission prior to this going into law. So I propose that we move L-15 and add Section 10.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I encourage a no vote on this amendment. Colleagues, this body has changed the statute that was originally enacted in 1980 15 times since then. RTD is a creature of statute. We have the power to change it. This bill does not disenfranchise anybody. It doesn't take away the right to vote. This is well within our power to make this change, and I encourage a no vote on Amendment L015.

Thank you, Mr. Sharon. I would acknowledge that we have the power, but it just seems like an overreach perhaps from us. So I'd like to walk in with a little more humility and ask the people's permission first. Thank you. I ask for an aye vote.

Aye.

No.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members, I want to talk about this bill because I oppose the bill. I think some of the things mentioned, including the amendment from my colleague from Teller County, I think, was a good amendment. Because when this passed to create the elected board in 1980, the voters said, we need a 15-member board. And that's after it was a fully appointed board before that. And then we went to the ballot and we have now elected people from 15 different districts. Changing it to five districts makes those districts almost as big as a congressional district, which is really prohibitive for people running for that seat, which, although the bill does provide an increased salary, I think it's $36,000 a year, it's still not much. And it is a part-time kind of appointment. But the real issue is that the voters voted for a 15-member board. And this bill, and I'm not going to sit here and vouch for everything RTD does and that they've not made significant mistakes, because they have. And they may continue. But there's nothing in this bill that says making it five elected officials and four appointed officials changes that. They are still expecting a shortfall in the near future of over $100 million. This bill doesn't talk about how we're going to help them to get there. It also, having four people on the board that are appointed with some expertise, which I agree with, I don't recall who said it, that we can, every board, even us, can purchase expertise if we need to. That's not the issue. So why is it that we think five elected people and four appointed people is going to change anything? It doesn't change anything that is the real issue. I mean, there hasn't been major concerns about corruption on that board. So it's not the individuals, and this is a part-time gig for them. I spoke, well, I didn't speak, I did, but he presented at a meeting this weekend one of the board members from North Denver, and he indicated that all 15 of the board members were opposed to this. I didn't have a chance to check that out, but I'm just telling you what he said. If the elected board members are opposed to this, and making this board this way, they pointed out to me, this will be the first board in the country over transportation that is what they call a hybrid board, half elected and nearly half appointed. That's not done anywhere. And we know how appointments can be manipulated. There was a discussion at some point earlier about when the governor makes appointments, we're going to have a new governor, and after that we'll have a new governor in a few years. Those appointments can change. But really if we going to fix RTD the way to fix it is not changing the composition of the board It addressing the problems within RTD that they are not addressing right now And how do they do that Even the most basic dollars. We aren't giving them anyway. Yeah, they can go to the ballot, but it's difficult when you're underwater already. So I agree that this is a blow against democracy in many ways. And I supported the amendment to go forward to take this to the ballot. And if people agree to that, then fine, change it. But I don't see what this bill does that will improve RTD. So I urge a no vote on the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to come up and say a few positive words about this bill and reiterate where we are as the RTD district. We have some of the lowest ridership restoration post-COVID in the country. Two out of every ten buses that are supposed to show up don't arrive on time. We have numerous bus routes through the service optimization plan that was passed during COVID that are still well behind restoration. Numerous unfilled promises across the district for RTD lines that communities have paid for are still not under construction and are behind schedule. We can have concerns about democracy, but the truth is bus riders, folks who rely on RTD every day, are being failed by this agency and continue to be failed by this agency. I don't think those concerns justify continuing to keep people in a situation where they're funding a transit agency that doesn't actually provide them service. So this bill is a small step, I think, to provide some accountability to an agency that desperately needs it. I urge an aye vote not because it's just the right thing to do, but because there are communities who are completely underserved who are paying these taxes year after year after year, not receiving adequate service. So it's a good thing. Let's make buses arrive on time. Let's make buses arrive in communities that are paying for them. I urge an aye vote.

Those opposed no.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move the committee rise and report.

The committee has met and had a number of bills under consideration. Will the clerk please read the report?

Mr. President, the committee of the Holbeck's leave to report it has had into consideration the following tax bills being the second reading thereof. Makes the following recommendations thereon. Senate Bill 150, as amended, passed in second reading, ordered engrossed and placed in the calendar for third reading and final passage. House Bill 1071 as amended passed on second reading ordered revised and placed in the calendar for third reading and final passage Senate Bill 134 laid over until April 24 2026 and retaining its place on the calendar Senator Roberts

The motion is adopted in the committee of the whole report. Are there any no votes? With a vote of 34 ayes, 0 noes, 0 absent 1 excuse, the committee of the whole report is adopted. Senate Bill 150 is amended, passed on second reading, an order revised, placed on the third reading, and final passage. House Bill 1071 is amended, passed on second reading, an order revised, placed on the third reading, and final passage. Senate Bill 134, later into 424, 2026, and retaining its place on the calendar. Consideration of memorials.

Resolutions? It doesn't matter. Mr. Majority Leader.

The motion is layover for SJR 23 to Tuesday, April 21st, 2026. All those in favor, say aye.

Opposed, no. You guys have it. and S.J.R. 23 will lay over until Tuesday, April 21st, 2026. Consideration of memorials, Majority Leader Rodriguez.

The motion is to lay over SM001, Thursday, May the 14th, 2026. All in favor say aye.

The ayes have it. And SM001 will lay over until Thursday, May 14th, 2026. In response to a request from the House for a Conference Committee on House Bill 1357, 1363, 1399, 1405, and 1411. The Senate conferees are Senators Zimbabwele, Chair, Bridges, and Kirkmeyer on the First Conference Committee of House Bill 1357, House Bill 1363, 1399, 1405, 1411. Also in response to requests from the House for Conference Committee on House Bill 1380, 1409, 1410, 1412. The Senate referees are Senator Bridges, Chair, Amabile, and Kirkmeyer on the first conference committees of House Bill 1380, 1409, 1410, and 1412. Senator Amabile.

The motion is Senator Amabile's request to go beyond the scope on all those bills? All them bills, all those in favor say aye.

Polls no. The ayes have it, and that permission is granted. Message from the governor. This is your fault.

Signing of bills. The President has signed Senate Joint Memorial 001.

Announcements. Senator Coker, Coker, Coker.

Senator Wiseman.

So today it just 149 action only Very good Further announcements Seeing there is more announcement to be had Senator Mobley Thank you Mr President

Very good.

Senatorial 5. Senator Immobile.

Very good. Senator Judah.

I ask for a moment of personal privilege.

We'll observe a moment of silence and the chimes will be rung.

Thank you, Senator. Mr. Majority Leader.

I move the motion. All those in favor, say aye.

You guys have a descendant. We'll recess until 12 p.m. today.