Transcript Highlights:

• needed to make sure that these were contracts that we needed.
• Grants management software program, we need there procurement contracts and contracts in general, we
• And we'll continue the contract review and the updates.
• So, I felt that was a breach of contract.
• Of the 800 contracts reviewed, how many of those were renewed, and how many of those contracts went away

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have the contract, and we monitor the contract performance. >> Yeah.
• We have the contract, and we monitor the contract performance. >> Yeah.
• on the contract?
• Negotiated contracts. Yeah. Negotiated contracts.
• <02:28:39.840> you<02:28:40.240> contract these types of contracts you contract these

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• and prohibit sole-source contracting.
• The lawsuit against the Orange County Fair revealed that the Public Contract Code competitive bidding
• The Public Contract Code was written to guard against favoritism and promote fair competition.
• contracts.
• People don't realize how lucrative these contracts really are.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Agriculture met with a quorum and heard one bill, SB 1223 by Senator Padilla, after SB 1410 was pulled from the agenda. SB 1223 would require state and county fairs to use competitive bidding standards for contracts and prohibit sole-source contracting. The author and witness argued the bill was needed to close loopholes in the Public Contract Code after media reports and lawsuits alleged corruption and manipulated contract awards at certain fairs, including allegations that RFPs were written to favor a single bidder. No witnesses testified in opposition. Committee members expressed support, describing the issue as a matter of transparency and proper state contracting. A motion was made to pass the bill to the Appropriations Committee. The committee voted 4-0 in favor, with the bill placed on call for the absent member before the meeting concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've given some funding to the defender general for public defense contracting and training.
• We've given some funding to the defender general for public defense contracting and training.
• We've given some funding to the defender general for public defense contracting and training.
• Um I was a school board, we contract.
• public defense contracting and training. public defense contracting and training.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House Caucus of the Whole received a budget review from House Appropriations Chair Rep. Shay on H.951, the FY27 budget. He said the budget totals about $9.334 billion across all funds, with a 1.6% increase overall and a 2.1% increase in the general fund, and stated that it balances, fills required reserves, meets pension obligations, and largely reflects the governor’s January budget requests. He also noted that budget documents were emailed to members and that Appropriations Committee members and Joint Fiscal Office staff would be available in the House well during lunch for follow-up questions. Shay described the budget as divided into ongoing base appropriations and one-time appropriations. Major ongoing investments highlighted included funding for designated and specialized service agencies, home- and community-based providers, Medicaid skilled home health services, Bridges to Health, AHEC primary care loan repayment and provider placement, Vermont screening and referral clinics, VHIP housing support, the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board, a homelessness and housing initiative, a disabilities housing coordinator, the Vermont Access Network, Flood Safety Act positions at ANR, a state mediator position, an attorney for the state ethics commission, an additional attorney at the Human Rights Commission, and funding for the Defender General’s public defense contracting and training. He also emphasized one-time funding for the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance program, a pension and benefits funding task force, provider stabilization grants, Meals on Wheels, Vermont Legal Aid’s immigration attorney and hotline, rental arrears assistance, manufactured home repair programs, HomeShare expansion, NOFA food and farm programs, food banks, conservation districts, VSAC Freedom and Unity scholarships, and the Community Resilience and Disaster Mitigation Fund. No votes were taken during the presentation; the meeting ended after a brief opportunity for questions, with members directed to continue discussion during noon office hours.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hold themselves out as assisted livings and market as assisted livings outside the CCRC contract.
• I don't know if they have a contract with them, to be honest with you, John.
• We talked a bit about the contract types. Yeah, that's right. So I appreciate that. Jim?
• So you sign the big contract, they're going to take care of you for the continuum, right?
• So you don't have to sign that big contract.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Continuing Care Retirement Communities met for its third meeting, focused on regulations, oversight, and enforcement. Staff and agency presenters reviewed the current framework: the Executive Office of Aging and Independence explained that assisted living regulations generally do not apply to CCRCs unless an assisted living component markets itself separately, and that CCRCs must submit marketing materials, contracts, and disclosure statements for public posting. The Attorney General’s office described Chapter 93A consumer protection standards and noted it is working on draft assisted living-specific regulations. DPH outlined its oversight of licensed nursing facilities associated with some CCRCs, including routine surveys, complaint investigations, and enforcement tools such as admissions freezes, fines, receivership, and license actions, along with federal CMS sanctions for certified facilities. Commission members and presenters then discussed gaps and ambiguities in how CCRCs are defined and regulated, especially whether communities without on-site skilled nursing should still be treated as CCRCs, how assisted living-like services within CCRCs are classified, and whether residents have enough clarity about the services they are buying. A major theme was disclosure: members raised concerns about entrance fees, refund timing and conditions, whether skilled nursing is on-site or provided by contract, and how residents can compare communities. Several participants suggested more standardized disclosure and possibly broader consumer protection rules, while others cautioned that overly rigid requirements could affect community finances and development. The commission also explored enforcement and resident protections. Some members argued that independent living residents are already covered by landlord-tenant law and that existing complaint systems and community education may be sufficient, while others said residents in supported or assisted settings within CCRCs should have clearer access to ombudsman services and oversight. The discussion turned to closure and ownership transfer, with members citing recent national examples of sales and bankruptcies that changed resident terms. DPH explained its closure process for licensed nursing facilities, and members noted that Chapter 197 of 2024 adds oversight for facility transfers and financial disclosures. The meeting ended with logistics for the next session at Brookhaven at Lexington on June 2, a public hearing on June 16, and a request to circulate the hearing notice broadly to residents and stakeholder organizations.

Transcript Highlights:

• businesses all sign long-term contracts businesses all sign long-term contracts with<00:51:54.319
• , so my question goes to those contracts that are referred to as evergreen contracts.
• goes to those contracts that are referred to as evergreen contracts.
• that are referred to as those contracts that are referred to as Evergreen<01:25:13.239> contracts
• because there's not really a contracts because there's not really a contract<01:27:03.560> it

Bills: HF2103, HF2793

Keywords: energy, renewable energy, ammonia, hydrogen, certificate tracking, funding, environment, community solar, energy policy, sustainability, solar garden program, regulation sunset, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And so those contracts really didn't even cover their costs.
• Then there are counties who contract with the managing entity.
• We have contractual claims payment timeframes with our contracts.
• We draft contracts. We create programs.
• Historically, we had a model where we did direct provider contracts.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee held a panel discussion on Florida’s mental health and substance abuse system, with representatives from DCF, AHCA, two managing entities, and two providers describing how the state’s behavioral health network is funded and operated. Members focused on the implementation of prior legislative investments, especially the $50 million in recurring funding from Representative Maney’s bill and the earlier $126 million community behavioral health appropriation. Witnesses said the newer funds were used mainly for crisis beds, discharge planning, outpatient services, regional collaboratives, and a USF Marchman Act report, while the larger behavioral health appropriation supported CAT, FACT, FIT, forensic teams, residential and outpatient services, and crisis care, with most dollars going directly to services and only a small share to administration. A major theme was access to crisis care and the role of mobile response teams, 988, and central receiving facilities in diverting people from Baker Act admissions and reducing readmissions. DCF and providers said mobile response teams have expanded, are being used to de-escalate crises and connect people to care, and have shown strong diversion results and reductions in Baker Acts in some regions. Members also asked about waitlists, children in crisis, and how to handle people without housing or support; providers said discharge planning is individualized but often constrained by homelessness, transportation, and a lack of safe placements, and several witnesses identified housing as one of the biggest barriers to recovery and stability. The committee also examined provider sustainability, reimbursement, and funding gaps. Witnesses described delays caused by contract timing, cost allocation rules, and Medicaid reimbursement rates that do not always keep pace with labor and operating costs, especially for smaller providers and rural networks. DCF and AHCA said managing entities can provide advances, retroactive rate adjustments, and technical assistance, and that Medicaid managed care plans have network standards and complaint/dispute processes. Members raised concerns about a reported $7 million loss in federal non-sustainable funds, provider closures, and whether there is a formal ombudsman process for disputes; DCF said the federal reductions were known and tied to one-time funds, and that the department generally handles provider issues informally while working with managing entities to preserve continuity of care.

Transcript Highlights:

• For contract slots.
• contracts.
• Well, I think the contract is still being negotiated.
• After July 31st of this year, we don't have a contract.
• Nine of them rely on that contract.

Summary: The committee heard an extensive Department of Social Services presentation on child care budget issues, including the Governor’s proposed 2026-27 budget, federal CCDF changes, Prop. 64 revenue adjustments, and a one-time $11.5 million disaster-related infrastructure grant for licensed child care facilities affected by 2025 declared disasters. DSS said federal formula updates and lower Prop. 64 revenues would reduce funding and could result in about 4,176 CCTR slots being reduced, but the department said it was working to avoid impacts to currently enrolled children. The LAO supported aligning general child care funding with lower revenues and asked for more detail on the disaster grant. Members pressed DSS and Finance on why reductions were not being backfilled and why so many awarded slots remain uncontracted or unused; DSS said delays are largely due to providers building new infrastructure, licensing, staffing, and enrollment challenges, and that some unspent funds revert to the General Fund. The committee also discussed whether some contract dollars should be shifted to vouchers and whether more flexibility should be allowed for infrastructure and expansion costs. A second panel focused on the state’s commitment to expand child care and on rate reform. DSS reported that nearly 125,000 new slots have been awarded since 2021-22, but speakers from Stanislaus County Office of Education, Parent Voices California, and the California Budget and Policy Center argued that unmet need remains large and that the system still leaves many families without access. Stanislaus County described a large local shortage of infant and toddler care and said reimbursement disparities between child care programs and state preschool create disincentives for providers. Parent Voices gave testimony about the burdens and instability families face when trying to access care, especially for survivors and low-income parents, and called for a universal, publicly funded system. The Budget Center said only about 16% of eligible children were enrolled in 2024, urged expansion across the mixed delivery system rather than concentrating investment in TK, and called for faster rate reform and new revenue. LAO estimated that bringing certain CCTR adjustment factors up to CSPP levels would cost $88 million to $131 million ongoing. Members and witnesses discussed the single rate structure, automation needs, and the need for deadlines and a ramp-up plan; DSS said the goal is to eliminate disparities, but that policy decisions are still needed before automation can proceed. The committee then reviewed several trailer bill proposals. DSS outlined a 2026-27 COLA proposal that would apply a 2.41% increase through cost-of-care-plus payments, though the department said it had inadvertently excluded CalWORKs Child Care and the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program and would revise the proposal; LAO recommended making the COLA methodology uniform across programs. DSS also proposed replacing the market rate survey with the federally approved alternative methodology on a triennial schedule, limiting temporary absences in family child care homes to 20% of monthly hours, defining excessive unexplained absences as more than 30 days in a year, and aligning family fee deductions with new federal requirements so providers receive the full voucher value. Members generally supported the temporary absence change and asked about implementation timing for the family fee deduction, with DSS saying it was in contact with Riverside County. The committee also heard a brief update on the Early Childhood Policy Council reappropriation, which would extend unused funds through June 30, 2028 because prior costs came in higher than expected.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's not funding, there's not uh contracts, there's not grants related to that.
• They could have a supervised visitation contract plus their foster care contract, so they could have
• minimum standard violations, I was unable to contract with Providence.
• removed, which would have matched the DFPS adoption services contract.
• It wasn't required for the state contract.

Bills: HB 451, HB 645, HB 1041, HB 1151, HB 1155, HB 1536, HCR 12

Keywords: commercial sexual exploitation, child sex trafficking, human trafficking, child welfare, foster care, DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, juvenile probation, risk assessment, needs assessment, trauma screening, child abuse prevention, exploitation screening, validated screening tool, evidence-informed tool, conservatorship, juvenile justice, at-risk youth, trafficking prevention, Child Sex Trafficking Prevention Unit

Transcript Highlights:

• . contract. contract.
• was<00:35:07.000> about And their contract value was about And their contract value was
• of the contract. of the contract.
• <00:51:44.480> and What happens with these contracts and What happens with these contracts
• 100-year contracts on property? 100-year contracts on property?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with introductions and approval of the previous minutes, including a small amendment clarifying a note about “leakage” in a prior presentation. The committee then heard a presentation from Sarah Hall of the American Forest Foundation on the Family Forest Carbon Program, which she described as a voluntary carbon and forest management program for smaller landowners. She said the program provides annual payments and technical assistance, requires a forest management plan within two years, and is designed to support improved forest management while still allowing compatible uses such as recreation, hunting, and some harvesting. Hall emphasized that the program is intended as one tool among many and is not a fit for every property. She said most enrolled landowners did not previously have a forest management plan or work with a forester, and that the program helps bring “unengaged” landowners into active management. She also said the program is compatible with current use and other commitments on a case-by-case basis, and that landowners retain ownership of their land and timber rights while AFF holds the carbon rights for the contract term. She highlighted examples of landowners using the program to support taxes, family ownership, wildlife habitat, timber stand improvement, and continued recreational or business uses. Committee members asked about registry compliance in New Hampshire and the relationship between carbon markets and the program. Hall responded that AFF handles registry administration for landowners and would follow up on the specific registry count raised by a member. She explained that the program is funded through a mix of carbon market revenue, philanthropy, and grants, and that carbon credits are generated through landscape-level methodology and monitored using randomly selected plots compared with FIA data. She also noted that consulting foresters are key partners in the program and that AFF has paid more than $3 million to consultants nationwide.

Transcript Highlights:

• To meet this requirement, we have contracted with Webster County, our neighboring county.
• To meet this requirement, we have contracted with Webster County, our neighboring county.
• How counties do the contracted housing of state inmates.
• the state may choose not to contract the state may choose not to contract with<00:21:28.159>
• <00:32:12.880> that services under these contracts that services under these contracts that

Keywords: Reupload to restore attendance roll call Roll Call 00:00:00 Approval of Minutes from September Meeting 00:00:24 Presentation of the Kentucky Association of Counties Legislative Platform for the Upcoming 2026 Session 00:01:48 Discussion of Legislation Concerning Firefighter Death Benefits 00:35:43 Discussion of DNA Collection in Jails for Felony Arrests 00:45:52 Discussion of Federal Immigration Law Enforcement 00:54:18 Adjournment 01:15:39, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its sixth meeting, established a quorum, and approved the minutes from the October 21 meeting. The main agenda item was a presentation from Kentucky Association of Counties (KACo) leaders and county officials on jail funding and jail-system reform. Speakers said county jail costs have reached crisis levels, citing large and rising general-fund subsidies in counties such as Hardin, McCracken, and Warren, and noting that county general-fund contributions to jail funds have increased by 76% since 2019. KACo outlined a three-part legislative approach for the upcoming session: incentivizing regional jails, clarifying responsibility for pre-trial felony detainees, and redefining the model for housing state inmates in county jails. On regional jails, they proposed one-time state construction funding, statutory changes to allow former county jails to serve as 96-hour holdover facilities, broader participation of jailers on regional jail authority boards, an increased supplement for closed county jails, and a one-time payment for counties that close local jails and join regional facilities. Union County Judge Adam Onan described his county’s savings from contracting with Webster County and said regionalization can reduce costs where feasible. Harlan County Judge Executive Dan Mosley focused on pre-trial felony detainees, saying counties bear the full cost of housing people awaiting trial for long periods, sometimes years, and that pre-trial time is later credited toward state sentences. He argued the state benefits from that credit and referenced prior bills that would have reimbursed counties for time-served credit. Shelley Hampton then proposed replacing the current per diem model for state inmates with contracts requiring the Department of Corrections to pay actual housing costs and to support programming such as substance abuse treatment, cognitive behavioral programming, re-entry services, workforce training, and academics. No votes were taken on the jail proposals, and the meeting ended with the presentation and discussion of the county recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• And no, we did not have the vote to like stop a contract.
• but what it did is those those contracts but what it did is those contracts<00:57:04.319> were
• Um but we definitely had contract.
• And contracts and have those concerns.
• governor's office negotiated contracts governor's office negotiated contracts within<00:59:34.400

Bills: HF2431, HF2438, HF2783, HF1943

Keywords: higher education, college affordability, student aid, state grants, North Star Promise, scholarships, financial aid, Minnesota State, University of Minnesota, Office of Higher Education, tuition relief, work-study, child care grants, hunger-free campus, food insecurity, student parents, pregnant students, parenting students, sexual misconduct, Title IX

Transcript Highlights:

• Two, strengthen future contracts.
• issues as we got so we won the contract issues as we got so we won the contract I<00:10:21.360><
• cost under this contract term. cost under this contract term.
• Uh, you mentioned your contract. How long is your contract? That is a good question.
• this or has yet shown me in the contract this or has yet shown me in the contract where<00:19:10.400

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Zayo Group 00:00:50 Committee Report to LRC 00:18:12, 958, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Michael McCurley, president of Zo Education and a senior vice president with Zo Group, about the company’s role in providing broadband and managed network services to Kentucky schools. He said Zo Education serves all Kentucky K-12 public school districts in partnership with the Kentucky Department of Education, offering more bandwidth at lower cost than the prior provider and also providing cybersecurity and network protection. He emphasized that reliable connectivity is essential for instruction, testing, remote coursework, and school administration. McCurley also addressed the ongoing contract dispute involving the Kentucky Communications Network Authority and Open Fiber Silicom, saying Zo Education is not a party to the litigation but is concerned about possible disruption to schools and students. In response to committee questions, he said the company incurred unexpected costs when it had to reroute connections and build alternate network paths, including one school move that cost more than $50,000 to serve a site generating under $2,000 per month. He said outages and incidents are more frequent when Kentucky Wired access is unavailable, and that Zo could not have bid at its current price without access to Kentucky Wired. Committee members discussed the broader implications of the dispute and the state’s broadband structure. Senator Williams said the committee’s priority is avoiding disruption to students and noted concerns about infrastructure purchases and upgrades tied to the network, saying he had not seen clear contractual support for some of the expenditures. He also referenced a future audit and said the committee should preserve options and taxpayer funds. The committee then reviewed its report to LRC, including changes related to infrastructure purchases and water asset management technology, and agreed to submit the report without a committee vote. The chair announced the next meeting would be in January, with no December meeting scheduled, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• all of the um amendments and contracts all of the um amendments and contracts for<00:01:29.040><
• contract, as you recall, is a competitive procurement process.
• study and the amount of that contract study and the amount of that contract which<00:07:04.960><
• . contracts. contracts.
• <00:26:03.840> are to remain um after these contracts are to remain um after these contracts

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• "Do we have any other questions about contract number 43?" "No.
• Now, we will address Contract 43.
• Do I we will address contract number 43.
• <00:06:40.720> reviewed to consider this contract reviewed to consider this contract reviewed
• We're going to cancel these contract.

Keywords: This live stream stopped early and will be uploaded as a complete video later today or tomorrow morning., 958, all

Summary: The committee first considered a pulled contract involving the Department of Education and heard from KDE staff Karen Worth, Matthew Courtney, and later Mickey Ray Marinelli. Members asked about contract 42, which related to the 21st Century Community Learning Centers program and broader federal budget uncertainty. KDE explained that the program is forward-funded, so current-year and next-school-year funding were secure, but future funding remained unclear because federal decisions were still in flux. Members asked to be kept informed of any changes and expressed support for the program. The committee then discussed contract 43, a $105,000 general fund agreement for a communications/digital media consultant. KDE said the position was created to help increase awareness of resources for district staff, administrators, and teachers, including Read to Succeed, numeracy, MTSS, website usability, standards resources, and the Kentucky Learning Hub. Members questioned why the work was being routed through the Green River Co-op, whether the role was new, how long it had been vacant, how many similar positions existed, and whether the work amounted to internal marketing. KDE said the selected employee was coming from Thomas More University, the position had existed for about one year, the vacancy had been less than six months, and the role was intended to improve communication and online resources. Some members voiced concern about growing administrative spending and whether more positions were needed. Both contracts were ultimately approved as reviewed without objection after motions, seconds, and roll-call votes. The committee then announced that the September 25 meeting would instead be held on Tuesday, September 9 at 9:00 a.m., and adjourned after a motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's long-standing contract law. When your kid...
• to a contract with legal obligations.
• With contracts like that, this bill undoes it.
• All of the content, all of the apps your kid can't make the contract... ...can't make the contract or
• Because this is contract-focused and... ...harm because this is contract-focused.

Bills: HB285, HB317

Keywords: HB285, TJ's Law, traffic infraction, traffic ticket, uniform traffic ticket and complaint, minor driver, juvenile driver, parent notification, guardian notification, emergency contact, law enforcement, citing agency, traffic citation, driver safety, youth safety, Alabama traffic law, Section 12-12-56, Children and Senior Advocacy, House Judiciary, reasonable effort

Transcript Highlights:

• Approval and execution of the contract must occur soon in order to allow adequate Execution of the contract
• I'll just give you a couple of details about the contract, Mr. Chair.
• The total maximum contract amount will be $158,000.
• This is re-upping our contract with Perrin Knight.
• The maximum contract amount for this one is $475,000.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's no allegation that, oh, and getting EEC that contract was going to get Tara Simmons a raise,
• The next allegation is that there was a provision in the contract between Simmons and EEC, and we're
• The actual contract strikes out the word 'legislator' deliberately, so Representative Simmons was not
• Eisentrout said the contract language... Ms.
• Eisentrout said the contract language included the word legislator.

Summary: The Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings held oral argument before the Legislative Ethics Board in the matter of Representative Tara Simmons, docketed as Legislative Ethics Board case 2025-5. The hearing concerned Simmons’ motion for summary judgment in an ethics complaint alleging violations of RCW 42.52.020 (conflicts of interest) and RCW 42.52.070 (special privileges), based on her work involving an EEC proviso, her employment relationship with EEC, a campaign surplus donation connected to AEJG and Jerry Stone, her involvement in an AEJG-EEC subcontract dispute, and related text messages with Anthony Powers. No evidence was taken; the session focused on legal argument over whether the alleged facts, if accepted as true, were sufficient to establish violations as a matter of law. Simmons’ counsel argued the complaint was legally insufficient because the alleged actions benefited her employer or others, not Simmons herself, and that existing board opinions allow legislators to support employers absent a direct personal benefit. He also argued the board was effectively trying to adopt a new bright-line rule prohibiting legislators from funding employers, which he said would be an improper retroactive change. Board staff, through Assistant Attorney General Julia Eisentrout, opposed summary judgment and argued the facts were enough to show Simmons had an indirect financial or other interest in EEC’s funding, that her job duties and legislative actions created conflicts, and that her actions around the donation, subcontract dispute, and text messages could be viewed as using her position to secure special privileges. A board member asked whether the allegations themselves were sufficient and whether the standard required assuming the facts as alleged; staff responded that the motion failed because the record contained sufficient facts to proceed, and that any factual disputes should be resolved at hearing. After rebuttal, the ALJ closed the oral argument and turned the matter over to the Legislative Ethics Board for deliberation. No ruling was issued during the hearing, and the board was to decide whether to grant the summary judgment motion or set the case for an evidentiary hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any contract that's currently out there will be fulfilled to its fullest extent.
• So my question goes to those contracts that are referred to as evergreen contracts, ironically in this
• contract that takes you into 2040 as a power purchase agreement at a certain price.
• in the contract to extend it, you know, beyond a certain term?
• Mitigating contracts, because there's not really a contract; it just says we have the ability to potentially

Bills: HF2103, HF2793

Keywords: energy, renewable energy, ammonia, hydrogen, certificate tracking, funding, environment, community solar, energy policy, sustainability, solar garden program, regulation sunset

Transcript Highlights:

• that for contracts all of their<00:06:13.800> contracts<00:06:14.360> or<00:06:14.599>
• addenda<00:06:15.599> should their contracts or addenda should their contracts or addenda
• <00:06:31.840> um one uh relative to DH HS contracts um one uh relative to DH HS contracts
• <01:34:57.960> Services<01:34:58.800> is contracted Services is contracted Services is
• Some of the contracted staff that we do use, they're statewide contracts that are administered by the

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began as a Division 3 work session on HB 71, but much of the early discussion focused on whether a previously discussed non-germane amendment could be considered or voted on that day. Members and the chair debated process and notice requirements, and the clerk’s guidance was that the amendment needed a separate public hearing before the full Finance Committee. The amendment was described as requiring DHHS contracts and addenda to include compliance with the Patient Bill of Rights, with a repeal date so the requirement would expire on November 30, 2026. The motion to move OTP on HB 71 with the amendment was withdrawn, and the committee agreed the amendment would be scheduled for a future full Finance hearing instead. The committee then turned to HB 71 itself and heard testimony from DHHS representatives John Williams and Jenny O’Higgins on the fiscal note and policy implications. Members questioned the estimate that the bill could put $12 million to $18 million per year in federal funding at risk, including HUD and Office of Refugee Resettlement funds. DHHS explained that the estimate was based on a broad reading of the bill’s term “specified alien,” which they said was not clearly defined in the bill, so they analyzed it using the federal definition of “alien” and assumed the bill could affect lawfully present non-citizens as well as undocumented individuals. They said the figure represented a worst-case scenario and that they were not claiming the loss was certain. Members also pressed DHHS on whether the bill could affect emergency sheltering in schools, public academies, or institutions of higher learning during disasters. DHHS said the language could create conflicts with federal funding conditions because emergency shelter programs generally cannot impose barriers on who may be sheltered, and they warned that excluding certain people could affect refugee-related and HUD funding. Questions were raised about whether the bill’s language would apply to private institutions as well as public ones, and whether the state could still use schools in short-term emergencies. DHHS said the language was broad, that they could not answer every legal question definitively, and that they would need input from public health and legal staff. No final vote on HB 71 was taken in the portion provided; the committee remained in discussion/work session mode after the amendment motion was withdrawn.