Transcript Highlights:

• And what we need that for is we need to roll that forward to buy more, uh.
• So we need the, the, the test kits, uh, we need the bait, uh, we need peace officer status.
• We, we need our funds roll forward more than we need anything.
• We really don't need any.
• We need more flies.

Transcript Highlights:

• And for that, of course, we need funding.
• The needs might be a little bit different.
• Their needs, their treatment needs are the same. Thank you. And now to the Penal Code...
• , a greater need there.
• , a greater need there.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• What we need is a reduction in rent.
• And then these other gimmicks in the budget, we need to fix. We need to eliminate the rollover.
• Do you need closing comments?
• reforms, we need transparency.
• I need you here.

Bills: HB2352, HB2388, HB2418, HB2499, HB2500, HB2579, HB2584, HB2804

Keywords: funding, auditor general, county treasurer, procedural reviews, state appropriations, HB2388, Arizona Commerce Authority, ACA, small modular reactor, SMR, nuclear energy, advanced nuclear, data center, data centers, economic development, study, appropriation, general fund, jobs, wages

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2584, which would prohibit public funds from being used for genetic sequencing equipment made by companies owned or controlled by entities domiciled in a foreign adversary. The sponsor said the bill is intended to prevent sensitive genetic data from being sold or used against the United States. There was little public testimony, and the committee approved the bill on a 13-5 vote for a do pass recommendation. Members then considered HB 2804, a rural development and housing tax credit bill that would let the Department of Housing allocate up to $2 million per year in credits for qualifying rural affordable housing projects, with the program set to expire in 2037. Supporters, including the sponsor, the mayor of Flagstaff, and housing investors and developers, said the credit would leverage federal LIHTC dollars, attract private capital, and help finance affordable housing for seniors, veterans, and low-income residents in rural Arizona. Opponents from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club argued state LIHTC programs are inefficient, costly, and hard to oversee. The committee passed the bill 13-4. The committee also heard HB 2388, as amended, which appropriates $100,000 to the Arizona Commerce Authority to study the economic benefits of small modular reactors and data centers, with a report due by June 30, 2027. Supporters said the study could help Arizona plan for future energy and data-center growth, while opponents argued the agency already has other funding sources and should not receive additional money for the study. The amended bill passed 10-7. After a presentation from Auditor General Lindsay Perry on county treasurer procedural reviews and the Santa Cruz County embezzlement case, the committee approved HB 2352, which provides $2,385,900 in FY 2029 for the Auditor General to continue county treasurer reviews, on an 11-7 vote. The committee then unanimously approved HB 2418, as amended, which directs $600,000 to be evenly distributed among five major incident task force counties and codifies the longstanding distribution practice. Finally, the committee took up HB 2499, the first of two ESA administration bills, which would appropriate $2.6 million and 12 FTEs to the Department of Education for ESA administration and oversight beginning in FY 2027; the bill drew extended debate about ESA growth, accountability, testing, and spending oversight, but the transcript cuts off before the final vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• I believe that we need a secretary who has experience in child welfare, um, and that we need staff who's
• And so when we think about what CYFD needs, I think we need to think about it globally.
• I think we need to think about um Experience at the top, uh, and I think we need to think about, um,
• I don't think it needed to be said.
• , where your deficits are, what you need, what you need, what you need, how much money you need, what

Transcript Highlights:

• But we need more than that recognition to continue. We need the state's increased support.
• But we do need to get this right.
• , of special needs, and the communities should be looking at that bucket of needs.
• that has unique needs.
• We need a motion. Oh, that needs— I apologize. Dixon? We need a motion. Oh, that is—I apologize.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Housing met without a quorum at first and operated as a subcommittee, then later established a quorum and took up several housing-related bills. Early presentations focused on AB 2390, a cleanup measure to clarify streamlined housing approvals and how modifications are reviewed; AB 1890, which would increase state matching funds for Napa County farmworker housing centers; and AB 956, which would clarify accessory dwelling unit law by allowing more flexibility in how ADUs are built and by clarifying application of ADU protections in common interest developments. Supporters for these bills emphasized predictability, farmworker housing stability, and expanded housing options for multigenerational families, while opponents of AB 956 raised concerns about neighborhood density, infrastructure, and local control. AB 956 drew the most extensive debate. Committee members discussed whether it was a clarification or expansion of ADU law, the potential for triggering density bonus rules, and possible local government costs. The author accepted committee amendments to avoid allowing a third ADU/JADU combination that could trigger density bonus implications. The committee then voted to do pass AB 956 as amended to the Senate Committee on Local Government, with one no vote recorded and the bill held on call for absent members. The committee also took votes on the consent calendar and on AB 2390 and AB 1890, but those measures were likewise held on call for absent members after favorable motions. The committee also heard AB 939, which would let developers transfer income-restricted ownership units to qualified nonprofit affordable housing organizations without waiting 180 days after certificate of occupancy. Supporters, including Habitat for Humanity and California YIMBY, said the bill would reduce vacancy, carrying costs, and help preserve long-term affordability. The California Association of Realtors opposed the bill unless amended, arguing it could limit buyer choice, codify first-right-of-refusal practices, and reduce wealth-building opportunities for families. After discussion, the bill was moved to the Senate Appropriations Committee on a do pass motion and held on call. Later bills included AB 1165, which would require state housing agencies to create a fiscal analysis and financial plan for ending homelessness; AB 1184, which would add transparency and open-meeting style requirements for homeowners associations; and AB 2035, a narrowly tailored measure to help Laguna Woods Village update outdated CC&Rs by lowering the vote threshold needed to seek court approval. AB 1165 and AB 2035 both received broad support and were moved forward on do pass motions, while AB 1184 also advanced despite late opposition from the California Association of Realtors. The committee then began hearing AB 1573, which would add survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking to local housing element target populations, but the transcript cuts off before that bill’s testimony or any vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need more money. Help us, please. We need more money.'
• We need more money. And yet, please. We need more money.
• because that need has taken seven years to complete, to find that need.
• because that need has taken seven years to complete, to find that need.
• that need has taken seven years to complete, to find that need.

Bills: SF2434

Keywords: housing, development fund, affordable housing, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, expenditure provisions

Transcript Highlights:

• financial pathway... ...can sell or transfer water rights they no longer need, offering a much-needed
• So we need to create an agency. And you need to do this right away.
• So you need regional authorities.
• They need to be tested at the...
• We don't need to be breathing silica dust. We don't need to be breathing silica dust.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing covered a broad set of environmental and water-related bills, with much of the testimony focused on blue economy and circular economy proposals, drought management, drinking water safety, flood resilience, and water infrastructure funding. Supporters of bills such as H. 987 and H. 988 described grant programs for blue economy workforce development, research, small businesses, and public education about a circular economy. Other speakers backed measures on coastal erosion research, recreational boating dredging, cranberry water-right transfers, sand mining oversight, and a voucher program for home water filtration in PFAS-impacted communities. Several elected officials and advocates also urged passage of bills to require private well testing, improve school drinking water safety, and address sand mining pollution and PFAS contamination. Water supply and drought issues drew extensive testimony. Senator Eldridge and others supported legislation to let the state, through DEP and the drought management task force, impose regional water-use restrictions during droughts and make the task force permanent in statute. Advocates from watershed groups, farms, and environmental organizations said the current town-by-town approach is inconsistent and ineffective, and they described drought impacts on rivers, farms, private wells, and wildfire risk. A related bill on private wells was supported as a way to help homeowners test and remediate contaminated wells, especially in rural areas without public water. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to allow the Lynnfield Water District to join the MWRA, with local officials saying the move would help address PFAS and other contamination and improve supply reliability. Another major panel supported a water infrastructure funding bill, arguing that aging drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater systems need major new investment, including support for PFAS treatment, sewer rate relief, biosolids research, and regional interconnections. Members asked about costs, funding sources, and the relationship to existing revolving loan funds; witnesses said the bill would need to be paired with future bond funding and new revenue ideas. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs repeatedly invited written testimony and noted the large number of speakers.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I need to see how many people are going to need to be job seekers by 2020.
• It's a plan to identify the basic food items that are needed. ...needed, and what I heard was that in
• We'll need some additional funding.
• We need to, I guess I look at it as a sort of all strategies needed kind of thing.
• And that's why we need more data.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we needed to also understand where and how we would redeploy them as needed.
• They need to be a vetted peer; they need to be a properly trained peer.
• their needs.
• We need to clean up.
• need to occur.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Sometimes a landlord needs to get paid and needs to sell a property.
• paid and landlord needs needs to get paid and needs<00:05:07.440> to<00:05:07.680> sell
• And we need to start younger, I guess. So, how many would we need? And also, they need to be close.
• And we need to start younger, I guess. So, how many would we need? And also, they need to be close.
• So, how big do we how many do we need?" also, they need to be close.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:05 25 RS HB 534 - AN ACT relating to actions for forcible entry and detainer: 00:01:45 25 RS SB 111 - AN ACT relating to juvenile justice: 00:23:46 Children's Advocacy Centers of Kentucky: 01:13:26 Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) Treatment in State and County Correctional Facilities: 01:25:28, 958, all

Summary: The committee approved the September 18 minutes and then heard testimony on House Bill 534, which would automatically seal dismissed eviction filings and protect youth from public disclosure in forcible detainer cases. Rep. Susan Tyler Whitten and George Ecklan of the Coalition for the Homeless said the bill is aimed at reducing housing barriers for Kentuckians, especially those with dismissed cases, while preserving landlords’ rights to pursue rent, collections, damages, and other legal remedies. They said the proposal was developed with input from landlords, clerks, judges, AOC, and service providers, and noted that similar laws exist in other states. Several members, including Sen. Neimes, Rep. Deetsz, Rep. Cole Carney, and Sen. Thomas, expressed support while emphasizing that the bill is narrowly tailored to dismissed cases and should not affect legitimate landlord claims; Sen. Wheeler raised concerns about cases involving settlements or delays and whether future landlords should know about them. The sponsors responded that the bill only covers dismissed actions, that dismissals require a judge’s order, and that the goal is to remove barriers created by records that remain publicly visible even when a case is resolved. The committee then took up Senate Bill 111 on juvenile justice. Commissioner Randy White, Kentucky Hospital Association President Nancy Galvanny, and Dr. Clark Lester of the University of Kentucky said the bill would require a secure state-run facility for youth with high-acuity mental health needs in detention and, until that is built, create a process with incentives for private hospitals to provide inpatient treatment with safeguards and increased compensation. They argued that detention is not an appropriate setting for severely mentally ill, violent youth and that private psychiatric hospitals often refuse these referrals or discharge them early. Dr. Lester cited recent referral data showing high denial rates for juvenile justice youth in private hospitals in August and September, often due to aggression, and described a case in which repeated placement attempts failed because of violent and self-harming behavior. The presenters said the bill is intended to fill a service gap and improve safety and outcomes for youth, staff, and hospitals, but no vote or final action on the bill was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• , or maybe it is needed.
• But all of the parties that are involved here need to continue meeting and need to continue coming to
• , or maybe it is needed.
• We don't need any of our money.
• We don't need a bunch of outside people involved in it. We just need the department.

Bills: SB2015

Keywords: corrections, rehabilitation, prison budget, department of corrections, adult services, youth services, correctional facilities, Heart River correctional center, Missouri River correctional center, James River correctional center, minimum security facility, county jails, regional jails, deferred maintenance, capital construction, strategic investment and improvements fund, Bank of North Dakota, line of credit, tasers, body cameras

Summary: The committee first discussed a wastewater infrastructure bill, centered on whether state support should be provided as a grant or through the existing Clean Water State Revolving Fund as a low-interest loan program. Department of Environmental Quality official David Brushwine explained that the SRF already finances wastewater projects, can leverage federal funds with state bond proceeds, and could accommodate the Washburn, Lincoln, and Peasant projects if they are ready to proceed. Members noted that losing federal grant support would make projects harder for local residents to afford because costs would be recovered through utility rates or special assessments, but the projects would still be eligible for loans. Senator Magrum indicated he would likely concur with the budget after this discussion, and the bill was set aside for later consideration. The committee then turned to a proposed amendment for a four-plex housing project for people with disabilities or other special needs. Senator Mathern described Sections 7 and 8 as creating a design consultation appropriation and a revolving loan fund modeled on existing hospital and nursing home loan programs, while Section 9 would transfer $3.3 million from the state infrastructure fund. Members debated ownership, rent subsidies, repayment terms, and whether the state should finance the project directly or leave it to a private developer with Department of Human Services oversight. Concerns were raised that the state should not own the housing and that the proposal needed more work to be workable, but the committee ultimately reached consensus to adopt Sections 7 and 8 and leave out Section 9 for further conference committee discussion. The committee also reviewed provider inflation and long-term care rate issues, with members discussing whether to support a 2% and 1.5% inflation adjustment and how to handle the $5-per-day basic care rate. Staff explained that the $5 payment was already in the base budget, but members debated whether it should remain ongoing or be treated as one-time funding and paired with a study of rate rebasing. The committee agreed to have draft language prepared to remove the $5 from the base budget and add study language, then moved the bill forward for drafting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't need overnight don't need that.
• We don't<01:09:08.880> need<01:09:09.199> $50,000 don't need $50,000 don't need $50,000
• <01:47:26.560> Why need." But we all know it's a need. Why need."
• We need to split what do we need to do? We need to split those<02:22:22.960> lots.
• says we need to. says we need to.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, approved the journal, and heard several announcements about committee schedules and Capitol events, including Faith and Justice Lobby Day, Agriculture Week activities, and a tribute presentation for Sergeant Benjamin Pennington. The tribute honored Pennington’s Army service, his time at Fort Carson, and his death from injuries sustained in an attack on Prince Sultan Air Base; he was posthumously promoted to Staff Sergeant. A member also offered remarks recognizing the sacrifice of service members, and taps was played. The chamber then took up third reading and final passage on multiple bills. Senate Bill 39, concerning Fire and Police Pension Association disability and survivor benefits, passed 63-1. House Bill 1311, regarding use of a bond in lieu of retainage in construction contracts, passed 55-1 after a brief explanation of support from a member. House Bill 1184, continuing the Colorado Forest Health Council, passed 50-1; House Bill 1305, on inpatient behavioral health access, passed 64-0; and House Bill 1234, on access to child abuse or neglect records, passed 64-0. Senate Bill 50, requiring certain child care center policy disclosures to caregivers, passed 56-8. Senate Bill 84, preserving privileges for certain state entities in connection with information provided to the state auditor and fraud hotline duties, passed 42-12. House Bill 1186, continuing regulation of bail bonding agents by the Division of Insurance, passed 61-13. House Bill 1181, continuing the Barber and Cosmetologist Act, passed 51-13 after a member requested removal of their name as a co-sponsor. The House also moved Senate Bill 21 back to the general orders calendar and set several bills as special orders. In the House Special Committee on Legislative Interim Activities, House Bill 1331 was heard; the appropriations committee report was adopted after members noted a roughly $400,000 general fund reduction and a 3.3 FTE staffing reduction. The bill itself would suspend 10 interim committees, repeal two committees, and limit travel and per diem reimbursements to help address the budget gap. Supporters said the measure was similar to last year’s bill and encouraged continued policy work outside formal interim committees, while opponents argued that some committees, especially those related to water, behavioral health, and youth, should be preserved and questioned the prioritization of the Colorado Youth Advisory Council and related costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and so how do they, what is the criteria, and what need those in need?
• the emphasis of need and the emphasis of need and and<00:03:31.440> so, and so, and so, how<00
• what is the criteria and what need what is the criteria and what need those<00:03:37.480> in<
• But when we decide there's an urgent need, I think that funds should go for that need.
• Um need for.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:17:35.280> to likely need this program and need to likely need this program and need to
• Hansen, I just need to—we need to wrap it up. Okay, thank you.
• We need to do better, and we need to invest in this kind of work.
• We need to do better, and we need to invest in this kind of work.
• motans we need to do better and we need motans we need to do better and we need to<01:15:11.360>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• need to keep them open. need to keep them open.
• We need to collaborate. We need to not work as silos."
• We need to collaborate. We need to not work as silos."
• Need to come to school and you need to be at these meetings.
• We need more staff. We need to be able to focus more. We need more staff.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We need strong after-school programs. We need strong summer programs.
• We need teachers. We don't need people up sitting in the office with their feet propped up.
• We need to uphold that.
• Either they need to comply with the law, they need to follow the law of Title IX.
• we need to have today.

Keywords: educational reform, federal grants, bureaucracy, wealth disparity, public testimony

Summary: The committee meeting engaged in discussions focused primarily on educational reform, the influence of federal grants on local education systems, and the growing disparities in wealth and access to quality education. Members expressed concerns about the bureaucracy surrounding federal funding that hampers schools' ability to obtain necessary resources for improvement. Several members highlighted personal anecdotes from constituents, emphasizing the urgent need for reform to help students succeed in both K-12 and higher education environments. The meeting included public testimonies that provided insights into various community perspectives on these pressing issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:08:22.919> is it it it the most immediate need is it it it the most immediate need is
• <00:54:09.839> to and all the things that are needed to and all the things that are needed
• We learned that we need to be faster to meet the needs of our residents.
• and responding to their needs.
• c><01:48:44.080> invest still you need to you need to invest still you need to you need to invest

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Health and Human Services Finance and Policy Committee met on February 6, 2025, for an update on emergency medical services (EMS) policy and implementation. Senator Seberger described the work of the EMS Task Force, which traveled statewide to hear concerns from providers about staffing, reimbursement, and retention. She said the task force led to the Sprint Medic model and two innovation zones in Otter Tail and St. Louis counties, and she urged continued monitoring and possible reconstitution of the task force to evaluate what is working and what could be expanded statewide. She also said future EMS work should continue to explore alternative response models and telemedicine, but that the most immediate need is additional funding, especially to address unpaid non-transport calls. Dylan Ferguson, director of the newly formed Minnesota Office of Emergency Medical Services, gave a detailed update on the office’s structure and priorities after the transition from the Emergency Medical Services Regulatory Board. He described the office’s three divisions, the appointment of deputy directors, the first meetings of the advisory councils, and work on a statewide EMS strategic plan. He also reviewed the $24 million emergency ambulance aid program, explaining its 40-40-20 formula, the emphasis on rural services, the reporting and spending deadlines, and the positive response from ambulance providers. He noted that the $6 million Sprint paramedic grant program is underway, with Otter Tail County moving forward and St. Louis County still finalizing its application. Ferguson also outlined the office’s budget request for modest staffing and contract-cost increases, two rulemaking efforts to update outdated ambulance vehicle standards and expand medication options for basic life support services, and ongoing data collection on workforce needs, violence against EMS providers, and ambulance crashes. He highlighted the paramedic scholarship program administered by the Office of Higher Education, saying nearly 300 scholarships have been awarded. Members and Senator Seberger praised the EMS reforms and emphasized that non-transport calls create significant unreimbursed costs, especially for rural and volunteer services, but no votes or formal committee actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I know that we need more treatment. We need more beds. We need more facilities.
• We need more outpatient programming.
• We need all of those things.
• We need to make sure that we have access to the services that people need when they need them.
• The narratives in Massachusetts need to change. The narratives in Massachusetts need to change.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Mental Health, Substance Use, and Recovery held a public hearing on several harm reduction bills, including measures to decriminalize simple possession and paraphernalia, authorize overdose prevention centers, and expand access to naloxone for first responders. Chair Mindy Domb and Senator John Velis opened by describing harm reduction as an evidence-based public health strategy and noting Massachusetts’ recent decline in fatal overdoses. They emphasized that testimony would help shape whether and how the bills advance, and explained the hearing process, including time limits and written testimony. Testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including Rep. Kate Donaghue, Sen. Cindy Friedman, Rep. Marjorie Decker, Rep. Manny Cruz, public health professionals, recovery advocates, and people with lived experience, argued that harm reduction saves lives, reduces stigma, and can connect people to treatment. They supported overdose prevention centers and decriminalization as tools to keep people alive long enough to enter recovery, and several speakers described personal losses to overdose or family experiences with addiction. Some supporters also framed the bills as racial justice measures, arguing that criminal penalties for possession have disproportionately harmed Black and brown communities. Opponents, including Sen. Nick Collins and several South End residents, argued that overdose prevention centers and decriminalization would worsen public drug use, crime, and neighborhood disorder, especially around Mass and Cass. They said current approaches such as Section 35, diversion, and police leverage into treatment are more effective, and they urged more treatment beds and recovery facilities instead of harm reduction sites. Committee members questioned witnesses about research, local siting, crime data, and the relationship between harm reduction and treatment, and several members said neighborhood impacts must be considered alongside overdose prevention. The committee did not take a vote during the hearing; it continued receiving testimony and announced a later break before resuming on H. 2196 and S. 1393.

Transcript Highlights:

• we need it this small and we need it cheap.
• And so we need more linemen. We need HVAC people. We need all of those things as well as...
• And they need them quickly and they need them well trained.
• needs.
• They need them skilled, but they need them quickly, and they need a lot of them.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed the 2024-25 tuition waiver report for the North Dakota University System. Staff explained that waivers were reported for degree-seeking students and broken out by residency, institution, and waiver type. Members asked about partial versus full waivers, institutional discretion, athletic waivers, and whether campuses have published guardrails or transparency requirements. Staff said most waivers are set by institutions, with some statutory and board-required categories, and that athletic waivers are a small share of total waiver dollars. The report showed total gross tuition of $354.5 million, tuition waived of $38.9 million, and 11,193 of 42,040 students receiving some waiver. Members also discussed how waivers affect net tuition revenue, housing and food collections, and whether campuses are using waivers strategically compared with scholarships and other funding sources. The committee then heard a presentation on tuition rates by campus and State Board policy. Staff explained the board’s tuition factors for resident, Minnesota reciprocity, contiguous-state/U.S. nonresident, and international students, and noted that campuses often seek exceptions based on program-specific competition and enrollment goals. Members asked whether rates are based on cost or competition, and staff said campuses typically bring forward estimates and market comparisons when requesting special rates. The presentation also reviewed general fund appropriations versus net tuition revenue by campus, and members discussed how local tuition decisions and waivers do not directly affect the state funding formula, though they do affect institutional revenue and reserves. Questions were also raised about the Higher Learning Commission’s financial composite indicator and how it differs from the more intuitive reserve and revenue figures. The committee next received a broad overview of non-higher-education entities affiliated with the State Board of Higher Education, beginning with NDSU agriculture-related units. Dr. Greg Lardy described the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, the NDSU Extension Service, the Agricultural Experiment Station, and the branch research centers, emphasizing their statewide role in crop and livestock research, extension education, and county-based outreach. He outlined funding mixes for extension, the experiment station, and branch stations, noting that grants and contracts support both research and education, while the agronomy seed farm is self-funded through seed sales. Members asked about the new and vacant FTE pool, R1 research status, matching requirements for grants, and whether state appropriations count toward research expenditures. Dr. Lardy also highlighted major research impacts, including crop varieties, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, and NDAWN weather data. The Northern Crops Institute and the Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute also presented. NCI described its role in market development, technical services, and education for regional agriculture, its governance through the Northern Crops Council, and its funding from state appropriations, other states, and earned revenue. Members asked about the source of out-of-state funding, intellectual property, and the institute’s international reach. UGPTI then outlined its transportation research, federal and state funding structure, and work on road and bridge condition assessments, travel demand modeling, and workforce training. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that is we need more research, we need more education, and we need more outreach.
• We need more public gardens. We need public listening sessions.
• They need pollen for protein. They need nectar for carbohydrates.
• We need more money, but I don't know that we do need more money.
• And we need to pass.