Transcript Highlights:

• So that's this spread out over those between fiscal year 2027 and fiscal year 2030.
• So that's the fiscal year 2027 budget.
• Folks may recall this from fiscal year 2022.
• But I think it's important to note that that was not for the full fiscal year. Thank you.
• But I think it's important noting that that was not for the full fiscal year. Thank you.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state’s tax collection cap/62F process so it would be based on prior-year collections plus wage growth and include surtax revenue. The committee chair and House co-chair outlined the hearing process, and the first witness was Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, who testified as the committee’s subject-matter expert on both measures. He said the income tax proposal would lower taxes broadly but would reduce state revenue by about $5.4 billion when fully implemented, with an estimated $800 million hit in FY27, and he discussed possible effects on competitiveness, taxpayer savings, and public finances. On the 62F proposal, he said the revised cap would make refunds more likely, could have produced several large refunds in recent years, and would reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions. Committee members questioned Howgate about competitiveness, outmigration, prior tax ballot measures, spending growth, MassHealth, and the interaction between the income tax and surtax. He emphasized that taxes are only one part of the state’s overall competitiveness and that housing, public services, and other factors also matter. He also noted that the surtax is constitutionally restricted but can still support ongoing spending choices. After his testimony, the committee moved to the proponents’ panel. Proponents of both initiatives, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that the measures would improve affordability, help retain residents and businesses, and support job growth. They cited polling support, outmigration, small-business reinvestment, and comparisons to lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, said her model showed smaller revenue losses than critics claim and projected that the revised revenue cap would not create additional annual revenue losses while producing more regular taxpayer refunds. Committee members pressed the panel on competitiveness, prior ballot initiative implementation, and whether the measures would actually address broader affordability pressures; the hearing ended with the committee continuing to take questions from the proponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members before you is Senate Bill 2500, the General Appropriations Bill for the 2026-2027 fiscal year
• This is a fiscally responsible budget that reduces overall spending compared to last year.
• Okay, my notes. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to talk a little bit about teacher salaries.
• Do you think we have enough funding here to avoid that in this next fiscal year? Chair Garcia.
• For the Senator Seigley noted earlier, the millions that are watching us without hesitation.

Summary: The Senate began with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved into floor consideration of the 2026-2027 budget. Appropriations Chair Hooper presented Senate Bill 2500, describing a $115 billion budget that reduces overall spending from the prior year, maintains reserves, and includes a 3% pay raise for state employees and 5% raises for state law enforcement, firefighters, correctional officers, and park rangers. Committee chairs then outlined major spending in their areas, including K-12 education, higher education, health and human services, criminal and civil justice, transportation/tourism/economic development, and environmental and agricultural programs. Highlights included increased funding for school scholarships and safety, workforce and university programs, Medicaid and child welfare, corrections operations, affordable housing, rural communities, Everglades and water quality projects, and infrastructure. Members then asked detailed questions about several budget items. Senators sought clarification on the Emergency Management Trust Fund, arts and cultural grants, Florida Forever land acquisition versus conservation easements, teacher salaries, charter school capital outlay funding, EASE grants, New College funding, DOC inmate counts and reimbursement, lottery staffing, concealed weapons licensing positions, election security funding, iBudget waiver support, ADAP funding, Medicaid hospital rate reductions, and scholarship and enrollment supplements in K-12 education. Chairs explained that some reductions reflected technical shifts or right-sizing, that some funds were being moved below the line for better tracking, and that several items—such as ADAP and corrections operations—would likely remain conference issues with the House. After questions, the Senate substituted House bills for the budget and implementing measures and adopted amendments placing the Senate language onto the House vehicles to prepare for conference. The chamber passed the budget-related bills and several conforming measures, including bills on retirement, fuel taxes, the state agency law enforcement radio system, court trust funds, judgeships, and K-12 and higher education conforming changes. Votes on the major bills were overwhelmingly unanimous or near-unanimous, and the Senate repeatedly voted to accede to the House’s request for conference on the substituted bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have a fiscal note at this point of what the cost is going to be?
• So, the fiscal note on this is $600,000, and it includes reimbursement for the affected counties.
• The fiscal note on this is $600,000, and it includes reimbursement for the affected counties. >> [cough
• Do we have a fiscal note at this point Do we have a fiscal note at this point of<00:57:05.680>
• > is<00:57:37.600> $600,000 fiscal note on this is $600,000 fiscal note on this is $600,000

Keywords: 923, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• How much was the fiscal note originally? Yeah, a little over 3, 3.2.
• Well, obviously the fiscal note, we were told we got to get rid of the timeline to get rid of the fiscal
• Note once you first share. Why? What makes the difference in that and what caused the fiscal note?
• So, the fiscal note is really about the impact of making the services online.
• The fiscal note was calculated in collaboration with them. And so.

Bills: HB1106, HB3284, HB541, HB713, HB1403, HB1586, HB1942, HB2070, HB2844, HB2851, HB3151, HB3749, HB3940, HB3963, HB4454, HB4466, HB4795, HB5154, HB5394, SB1357, HB1052, HB4099, HB4638, HB5147

Keywords: child abuse, neglect, gender identity, sexual orientation, child welfare, marriage, family, Texas Commission, family welfare, marriage support, stability, premarital education, child development, strong families, direct patient care, healthcare, physicians, medical services, insurance regulation, maternal health

Transcript Highlights:

• And I see you do have a fiscal note of almost a million dollars.
• My second question or comment would be about the fiscal note.
• I have no issue with the fiscal note; I just don't think it's right.
• If it's passed, I believe there is a fiscal impact. No, a fiscal note attached.
• Yes, there is a fiscal note, but what I would say is, what is the cost of a lack of transparency?

Bills: HB256, HCR19, HB256, HB1308, HB1554, HB1743, HB2308, HB2351, HB2858, HB3676, HB3784, HB4312, HB4552, HB4823, HB4852, HB5007, HB5010, HB5520, HB5524, HCR19

Keywords: severe weather, adaptation plan, vulnerability assessment, environmental protection, state agencies, federal agents, transparency, law enforcement, identification, public trust, immigration enforcement, HCR 19, Texas concurrent resolution, federal immigration enforcement, masked agents, facial coverings, visible identification, uniforms, badges, name tags

Transcript Highlights:

• this is in the fiscal note what you know this is in the fiscal note what you know what<00:58:15.839
• <00:58:19.280> notes<00:58:19.640> are for I can only say the fiscal notes are for
• Finally, I just wanted to say that the fiscal note again is over $100,000.
• the fiscal note again is over the fiscal note again is over $100,000<01:38:41.159> I'm<01
• <01:54:01.400> note that obviously there's not a fiscal note that obviously there's not a

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 662, which would require public schools to include discussion of abortion procedures and show specified videos in health education classes. The prime sponsor argued the bill would ensure students receive medically accurate, age-appropriate, and nonpolitical information about abortion, saying the topic is important for informed decision-making and should be taught consistently statewide. He said the videos were intended for grades 9-12, that parents could opt out, and that the requirement was meant to supplement, not sway, students’ views. He also acknowledged the bill could be seen as limiting local control over curriculum and said the intent was to prevent the topic from being missed due to scheduling disruptions. Committee members questioned the sponsor about local control, the need for a video mandate, the source of his statistics, whether the bill could be biased or inflammatory, and whether the requirement should apply every year in high school. The sponsor said the videos were only a starting point, could be replaced by others, and were meant to be informational. He also said the bill was not intended to influence students’ decisions about abortion. Several supporters testified in favor, including representatives of New Hampshire Right to Life and others who said students should be told the “truth” about abortion and its consequences. They emphasized graphic or emotionally difficult aspects of abortion and argued that young people need this information to make informed choices. Opponents and skeptical witnesses raised concerns about prescribing curriculum, eroding local control, and the appropriateness of the material for younger high school students. The New Hampshire School Administrators Association said the bill was overly prescriptive, that health education standards are already set by the State Board of Education, and that the topics in the bill are not part of the current standards. That witness recommended the committee consider retaining the bill for further work or making it less prescriptive. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• OTHER TYPES OF REPORTS AS NOTED IN THE THIRD BULLET IS OPERATIONAL AUDITS OF DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARDS AND
• WE TYPICALLY NOTE THAT SOMETIMES WHEN WE NOTE THIS CONCERN WE EXPLAIN MAYBE INCURRING A CONTRACT TO OBTAIN
• WE NOTED 33 CARDS WERE CANCELED LATE, SEVERAL OF THEM WERE A YEAR AFTER THE SEPARATION OF THOSE FROM
• WE NOTED INSTANCES WHERE THE DISTRICTS DID NOT COMPLETE THESE INVESTIGATIONS OR REPORT THE PEOPLE TO
• OVER THE FISCAL 22-23 THEY HAD INCURRED AN EXCESS OF $2.8 MILLION.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• While framed as a federal fiscal While framed as a federal fiscal measure,<00:04:55.720> its<
• human and fiscal, grow larger. human and fiscal, grow larger.
• > operational The fiscal impact, the operational The fiscal impact, the operational strain, strain
• total fiscal impact. total fiscal impact.
• I'd note the um in '28 and '29.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, normally bills we look at the fiscal notes.
• There was a fiscal note for this in the House that said $0. We can speculate on the future.
• Senator Benavidez: Normally, bills, we look at the fiscal notes.
• <04:36:25.680> note<04:36:26.359> was program that was uh the fiscal note was program
• it's not in the fiscal note, but how do it's not in the fiscal note, but how do you<04:48:30.280

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the journal, and received several committee reports. The Finance Committee reported Senate Bills 155, 49, and 116 with amendments and favorable referral to Appropriations, and House Bill 1188 favorably to Appropriations. The Business, Labor, and Technology Committee reported House Bill 1110 with amendments and a favorable recommendation to the Committee of the Whole, placed on the Consent Calendar, and also recommended confirmation of several appointments, including members of the State Plumbing Board, State Electrical Board, and Workers’ Compensation Cost Containment Board. The chamber then proceeded out of order for personal privileges and a resolution honoring Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., including recognition of visiting members and students participating in its Capitol Day. The Senate next took up House Joint Resolution 1027 concerning remembrance of the Holocaust. The resolution emphasized the history of the Holocaust, rising anti-Semitic incidents, the importance of Holocaust and genocide education, and the need to confront hate and otherization. Senators Weissman and Ball spoke in support, stressing the dangers of hateful rhetoric, the need for vigilance and compassion, and the importance of learning from history. HJR 1027 passed unanimously by roll call, 35-0, and the roll call was listed as co-sponsors. Announcements followed recognizing the Sikh community’s Vaisakhi observance and a langar lunch at the Capitol, along with a proclamation for Sikh Awareness Appreciation Month. There were also notices about a Republican caucus, a Legal Services Committee meeting on Senate Bill 2683 and a litigation update, and a brief personal privilege remark about tax day and agriculture. The Senate then recessed until 10:30 a.m., later raised the call, and moved into special orders for second reading of a large group of House bills on the Consent Calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• I completely recognize and appreciate the fiscal challenges that we have.
• So, as LAO noted, it appears that the state has met its funding commitment.
• To the point that had been noted, most of their work is accessible to the public.
• And third, we want to remain fiscally prudent with our taxpayer dollars.
• We are just one fiscal downturn away from, say, a $100 billion deficit.

Summary: The hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision proposals for transportation, natural resources, climate, and related programs, with the Department of Finance and the LAO presenting competing views on the state’s fiscal condition. Finance said the budget remains balanced over two years, with major climate-bond, water, parks, transportation, DMV, and agriculture proposals, while the LAO argued the state still has a structural deficit and should reject or defer many new discretionary spending items, preserve reserves, and be cautious about ongoing commitments. The LAO specifically questioned the timing and scale of new spending for programs such as Clean California, Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, and the Golden Gate Fields acquisition, and urged more clarity on future obligations and revenue scenarios, including for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes proposal for Bay-Delta water quality implementation. Secretary Wade Crowfoot and Finance described it as an enforceable, science-based alternative to a more traditional regulatory approach, with the state’s $25 million request intended to support early implementation, monitoring, habitat restoration, and environmental flows. The LAO countered that the Water Board has not yet adopted the updated Bay-Delta plan, that the proposal may be premature, and that the Legislature should wait for more information on the state’s total funding commitment and the program’s long-term costs. Several members expressed support for the program as a way to reduce conflict and protect water reliability, while others echoed concerns about timing and fiscal exposure. The committee also examined the proposed $125 million Proposition 4 contribution toward acquiring the Golden Gate Fields property for a shoreline park and habitat project. State officials said the acquisition is a time-sensitive, once-in-a-generation opportunity, with an appraised value of $175 million and additional philanthropic and local funding expected to close the gap. Members questioned whether the project had gone through the usual competitive process, whether the site is the best use of scarce park bond dollars, and how public access, habitat, and disadvantaged-community priorities would be protected. The discussion ended without a vote, and the committee moved on to transportation items including Clean California litter abatement, the Games Route Network, homeless encampment coordinators, and DMV modernization and field office proposals, with LAO recommending rejection or delay on several of those requests as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• There was no change, right, in the fiscal note.
• There was a fiscal note of zero, right? Right.
• There is no change in a fiscal note, and again, we're not eliminating SALT.
• Well, it's that, I mean, that would go out typically in the financial note or in the fiscal note.
• I didn't personally call any school districts. ...financial note or in the fiscal note.

Summary: The House opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then approved the House Journal for the 58th day by roll call vote, 123-1. Members also introduced a number of special guests, including physicians, sheriffs, students, interns, and a police chief, before moving to third reading and perfection of bills. House Bill 1758, dealing with permanent daylight saving time in Missouri, was debated at length. Supporters said it would end the twice-yearly clock changes and argued it could benefit children, productivity, and quality of life. Opponents warned it would create darker morning commutes, safety concerns, and health issues tied to circadian rhythms. The bill passed third reading by a vote of 107-31 with two present. The chamber then perfected and printed House Bill 3329, which repeals expired or unused tax credits, and House Bill 3405, which clarifies that SALT/pass-through entity provisions are deductions rather than tax credits for Department of Revenue processing. Both bills were described as cleanup and efficiency measures, with supporters emphasizing accountability and reduced manual work at DOR; both moved forward without opposition in committee and were approved on the floor. Finally, House Bill 2426, a parental rights bill, drew extensive debate and an amendment. The bill would elevate parents’ rights in education, medical, privacy, and related decisions to a fundamental-rights standard and add provisions on school records, recordings, evaluations, and certain health-care decisions. Critics argued it was overly broad, could interfere with school operations and existing protections, and might create problems in areas such as IEPs, truancy, and medical consent; supporters said it simply codified and strengthened parental authority. House Amendment 1, focused on IEP procedures and requiring parental consent for major changes, was adopted 98-25 with six present, and debate on the underlying bill continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Committee on Fiscal Policy will now come to order.
• I will note that the requirements for drowning prevention and safe bathing in this bill are new.
• The fiscal impact statement goes on to say those offers may result in lower premium offers.
• This is the fiscal policy committee.
• This is the fiscal policy committee.

Bills: S0032, S0068, S0210, S0246, S0340, S0418, S0428, S0606, S0628, S1028, S1734

Keywords: injunctions, protection orders, domestic violence, serious violence, court procedures, enforcement, risk protection, statewide communication system, pediatric care, emergency departments, hospital regulations, patient safety, health care standards, public records, violence protection, confidentiality, defamation, specialty license plate, specialty plates, motor vehicle registration

Summary: The Committee on Fiscal Policy met and reported a series of bills favorably, covering health care, public safety, insurance, coastal resilience, juvenile justice, drowning prevention, transportation designations, and beach management. Senator Harrell presented CS/SB 68, requiring hospitals with emergency departments to adopt pediatric emergency care policies, training, designated pediatric readiness personnel, and participation in a national readiness assessment; it passed. Harrell also presented CS/SB 340, requiring nursing students to complete two hours of human trafficking identification training before licensure; it also passed. Senator Sharif’s CS/SB 32 and SB 210, creating a new injunction for protection against serious violence by a known person and the related public records bill, were both reported favorably. Senator Garcia’s CS/CS/SB 302 on nature-based coastal resiliency, Senator Jones’s SB 418 on law enforcement interaction with individuals with autism and the Blue Envelope Program, and Senator Martin’s CS/SB 1734 updating juvenile probation and detention officer definitions and related cost-share language were also approved. The committee then took up several drowning-prevention measures. CS/SB 606 by Senator Smith would add drowning prevention and safe bathing education to postpartum materials and direct the Department of Health to create standardized materials; an amendment removed a records-retention requirement, and the bill passed. SB 428 by Senator Yarborough would expand the state swim lesson voucher program from children ages 0-4 to ages 1-7; it received strong support from advocates, including a young swim instructor and autism advocates, and passed. The committee also approved CS/SB 246, a specialty license plate bill that was amended to include the UFC plate and a First Responders’ Resiliency Foundation plate, and CS/SB 1028, which revises Citizens Property Insurance and clearinghouse procedures to prioritize admitted carriers and prohibit public funds for the clearinghouse; that bill drew discussion about market competition, Citizens’ exposure, and potential impacts on policyholders. Additional measures reported favorably included SB 628, designating a portion of South Navy Boulevard in Pensacola as Warrior Sacrifice Way to honor the sailors killed in the 2019 Naval Air Station Pensacola attack, and CS/SB 636 on beach management, which would create a proactive pathway for coastal communities to obtain erosion-related designations and align with federal programs. Beach industry testimony supported the bill’s intent but raised concerns about perpetual easements and funding shortfalls. At the end of the meeting, members recorded additional votes on selected bills, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So a quick fiscal update for you.
• The management and fiscal advice that districts typically receive is to spend the most restricted and
• You were noting in the agenda which focused on the NAEP scores.
• So, as we face new fiscal challenges, it's important to think about where our investments are paying
• I also note in your report, we still have. two things.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Brad Hegger, House fiscal. Ben Stanley, Senate Nonpartisan Council.
• Uh, Dan Mueller, Senate fiscal. Dan Mueller, Senate fiscal. Sounds good.
• So, the total general fund changes on the Senate side nets out to be $736,000 in fiscal year 2026-27
• The Senate side makes a direct appropriation of $6.5 million per year, or for just fiscal year 26 and
• Um, and we also want to note that Um, and we also want to note that changes<00:46:59.200> to<00

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The conference committee on the Environment budget for Senate File 2077 met to introduce members and staff, then walked through the Senate and House budget spreadsheets side by side. Nonpartisan staff explained that the Senate budget was built around a smaller general fund increase and more use of environmental and dedicated funds, while the House met its target through several reductions, including cuts to DNR, PCA, and Board of Water and Soil Resources appropriations. The committee reviewed major agency items for the Pollution Control Agency, DNR, the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Zoo, and other accounts, including operating adjustments, permit-related funding, and transfers between funds. Several major differences were highlighted. For the PCA, the Senate included operating adjustments, permitting efficiency funding, composting grants, outreach funding, and a closed landfill investment fund approach that repeals an expiring statutory appropriation, while the House instead extends that appropriation for four more years. For the DNR, the Senate included operating adjustments, groundwater and AIS fee increases, aquatic invasive species funding, trail grants, outdoor schools for all, abandoned watercraft enforcement, and a sustainable foraging task force; the House had fewer of these fee and policy items and used reductions to meet its target. The committee also noted Senate-only policy provisions on outreach to diverse communities, field citations and mercury certification for skin-lightening products, disabled veteran license fee changes, and a moratorium on foraging rulemaking until July 1, 2027. Agency testimony followed. The MPCA commissioner praised both chambers for recognizing core agency work and urged adoption of operating adjustments, the closed landfill fund access, and the air appropriation increase. The DNR assistant commissioner supported operating adjustments, groundwater and AIS fee increases, and the veteran license proposal, but raised concerns about the Senate’s foraging task force language, saying it overweights consumptive users and could limit the agency’s ability to manage foraging without clear data. He also noted support for the land transfer funding and said the agency would continue working with the committee on unresolved issues. No votes were taken in this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I noted that on the comments earlier.
• The chair then noted that Senator Allen was ready for the next item on file order.
• SB 516, it's important to note, does not at this point contain any fiscal obligations to the state of
• California rightly expects public officials to act with integrity and fiscal prudence.
• And I just note that the examples that you gave all relate to ethics, not necessarily to fiscal and financial

Summary: The committee first heard SB 753, which would modernize California’s shopping cart recovery rules by allowing cities and counties to return abandoned carts directly to retailers, recover documented retrieval costs, and avoid the current impound-and-wait process. The author and supporters, including San Jose officials and the League of California Cities, said the bill would help clear streets, sidewalks, and waterways and reduce local costs. Grocers and retailers opposed the measure unless amended, arguing it would turn cart retrieval into a new cost burden and could create incentives for cities to charge too much for stolen property. After extensive discussion about notice periods, cost caps, and local ordinances, the committee adopted amendments and passed the bill 6-0 as amended. The committee then took up SB 445, which would speed up permitting and approvals needed for high-speed rail by requiring early engagement, setting rules for third-party coordination, and creating a dispute-resolution process. The author said the bill was narrowed from an earlier, broader transit proposal and was intended to reduce delays caused by utilities, local governments, and other entities. Supporters said permitting bottlenecks add major costs and delays to infrastructure projects, while opponents from utilities, cities, counties, telecoms, and special districts raised concerns about safety, reliability, affordability, and the need to review the pending amendments. The bill passed 8-1 to the Utilities and Energy Committee. The committee also heard SB 9, a narrower housing bill focused on accessory dwelling units. The author explained that it would require local ADU ordinances to be submitted to HCD for review and would make state standards control if a local agency fails to submit a compliant ordinance or respond to HCD findings. Supporters from housing and YIMBY groups said the bill would improve enforcement of state ADU law and prevent local barriers from slowing housing production. There was no opposition, and the bill passed 6-0. The committee then began hearing SB 79, which would allow more housing near major transit stops; the author and supporters framed it as a response to the housing shortage and transit underuse, and the hearing continued with extensive support testimony as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it was noted in the fiscal note.
• No, just two places that I see where we noted it in the fiscal note. All right, thank you.
• Just looking at the fiscal note on the back, so we don't know how much student debt is being held by
• Yeah, it’s only $1 the first year, but then it can be, per the fiscal note, up to a million dollars in
• Thank you. but then it can be per the fiscal note but then it can be per the fiscal note up<01:15:22.480

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It is past time to get our fiscal house in order.
• Because the resolution notes a $3.7 trillion cut to revenue over 10 years.
• Importantly, this budget represents a return to fiscal sanity.
• We must begin to right our fiscal ship.
• In the 2024 fiscal year, we spent 6.9 trillion dollars.

Transcript Highlights:

• that<00:07:40.720> they in the fiscal note, you'll see that they in the fiscal note, you'll
• Yes, there's a fiscal note.
• of the um fiscal note, I'm also looking of the um fiscal note, I'm also looking at<00:34:56.639>
• One is that when this bill was first introduced, the fiscal note was not yet completed.
• One is that when this bill was first introduced, the fiscal note was not yet completed.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I should get sticky notes so I can pass your notes next time.
• education and I should get sticky notes education and I should get sticky notes so<00:24:44.919>
• My name is Megan Bur, and I'm the nonpartisan fiscal analyst with Senate Council Research and Fiscal
• promise Alone um I also want to note promise Alone um I also want to note that<01:30:32.600>
• did not identify as having a fiscal did not identify as having a fiscal impact<01:37:57.440>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee received an informational presentation from the Office of Higher Education on college access efforts, with a focus on FAFSA outreach, the Get Ready program, and Direct Admissions Minnesota. Wendy Robinson said OHE’s role is to provide nonpartisan information, partner with K-12, colleges, and community groups, and use statewide programs to expand awareness of higher education options and financial aid. She highlighted outreach through brochures, virtual sessions, conferences, the State Fair, and events serving specific populations, as well as the Lumina-funded Connect College grant and the federally funded Get Ready program, which serves about 7,500 low-income students across 14 capacity-building schools and 28 additional schools with tutoring, college visits, application help, and financial aid support. A member asked for demographic data on Get Ready students, and staff said they would provide it later. Robinson also reviewed FAFSA outreach, noting that last year was especially difficult for students because of federal FAFSA problems. OHE’s Ready Set FAFSA sessions drew 1,300 unique registrations in October and 939 in January, and the agency continued training K-12 and college staff on state aid programs, FAFSA simplification, and implementation of North Star Promise. OHE said it also held FAFSA completion events with partners, including at the State Fair, and planned another financial aid event in Duluth. The bulk of the presentation covered Direct Admissions Minnesota. Robinson said the program is now in its fourth year, with 55 participating colleges and universities and 182 participating high schools in the third cohort, serving just over 32,000 students. She described the program as a broad, collaborative model that sends students letters listing colleges that would admit them based on junior-year performance, while preserving student choice and waiving application fees for participating schools. She said the program is intended to reduce anxiety about admissions, encourage FAFSA completion, and keep more Minnesota students in-state. Robinson previewed second-year data showing continued positive outcomes, including higher FAFSA completion, increased college enrollment, and more students staying in Minnesota. Participation increased among students eligible for free and reduced lunch, rising from 21% in the first year to 40% in the second year. She noted a continuing concern about American Indian and Alaska Native students, whose FAFSA completion declined and whose participation numbers were lower in the newest cohort, and said the agency would continue to study that data. She also said some of the increase in free-and-reduced-lunch participation may reflect the impact of North Star Promise and related financial aid messaging. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• notes were not a normal fiscal note process.
• <00:04:13.920> normal<00:04:14.280> fiscal fiscal notes were not a normal fiscal fiscal
• notes were not a normal fiscal note<00:04:14.959> process<00:04:15.480> it<00:04:15.560
• However, they're struggling right now to ensure compliance and act in a fiscally sound manner.
• Schools um as noted in um past Schools um as noted in um past testimonies<00:43:14.520> regarding<

Keywords: 1183, house