Transcript Highlights:

• We are adding that back so that we are still evaluating the master's degree.
• are adding that back so that we are We are adding that back so that we are still<00:04:28.080> evaluating
• still evaluating the master's degree. still evaluating the master's degree.

Bills: HB59, HB128, HB59, HB128

Keywords: early voting, electoral participation, voting centers, Alabama elections, absentee ballot, HB128, Alabama Board of Nursing, Sunset Law, sunset review, nursing board, nurse licensure, registered nurse, RN, licensed practical nurse, LPN, advanced practice nursing, certified registered nurse anesthetist, CRNA, consumer member, board appointments

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, right now when it comes to initial evaluations of students with disabilities, we have to follow certain
• district has a shorter week, meaning there's fewer school days in that week, ultimately means that an evaluation
• that this legislation promotes more full weeks, 5 school days in a week, we get special education evaluations
• Evaluation team to go into the details of the study for you all. Um, the study does two things.

Transcript Highlights:

• It would define evaluation criteria based on performance and compliance in areas such as governance,
• that you will support Senate Bill 1574 in the interest of justice, so that the best courts can be evaluated
• Chair, as we develop this Centers of Excellence program, the initial proposal was that judges be evaluated
• We have to look in the mirror and see what's actually there; we have to be evaluated.

Bills: SB1211, SB1574, SB2774, SB2873, SB2900, HJR4

Keywords: hydraulic fracturing, sales tax exemption, oil and gas, environmental impact, water reuse, justice, judicial council, centers of excellence, court operations, recognition program, franchise tax, retail trade, tax classification, business regulation, economic impact, SB 2873, Texas Tax Code, electronic filing, e-filing, tax reports

Transcript Highlights:

• of over 16,000 treatment referrals and over 10,000 treatment referrals and over 10,000 clinical evaluations
• policies and procedures and implement all feasible recommendations made in two external program evaluations
• In observation number nine on page 36, we recommend DHHS evaluate its process We recommend DHHS evaluate
• And the status of prior external program evaluations as of November 2025 in tab D.
• be the framework, and it will flow from our policies and procedures and how often we need to re-evaluate

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee opened by approving the May 15 minutes and then recognized Pam Ellis for her long service with the Legislative Budget Assistant’s office and upcoming retirement. The committee adopted the consent calendar with two items removed for separate consideration, then approved transfers for the Administrative Office of the Courts and the Department of Environmental Services after questions about court benefit costs and dam project funding. The Department of Health and Human Services also received approval for a general fund transfer item. A major portion of the meeting focused on the Youth Development Center settlement fund. New administrator Jared Boyle, joined by the Attorney General, described the fund’s remaining caseload, the payment matrix, and the need for additional funding to begin hearings in August. Members raised concerns about administrative costs, attorneys’ fees, payday loans, structured settlements, and the long-term fiscal impact on the state. Boyle requested $55 million, but the committee ultimately approved a reduced appropriation of $20 million, with members noting the possibility of returning for more funding later depending on revenues and the October revenue review. The Department of Corrections then received approval for a smaller shortfall transfer and a larger overtime-related transfer, with officials citing a 52% corrections officer vacancy rate, ongoing recruitment, academy classes, and efforts to use civilian staff in some non-security roles. A late item from the Veterans Home was also approved to cover overtime, holiday pay, and indirect cost shortfalls within its existing budget. The committee then heard an informational presentation on implementation of Senate Bill 134 and the new federal Medicaid work-requirement rule. DHHS said it plans to submit a state plan amendment, seek approval for hardship exceptions, start with one eligibility check cycle, and use existing federal grant funding to make system changes. Finally, the committee received a performance audit of the Doorway opioid treatment program, which found weak written procedures, incomplete data use, reimbursement delays, and problems with the Governor’s Commission on Addiction Treatment and Prevention. Members discussed follow-up reporting, and the next Fiscal Committee meeting was scheduled for August 21 at 11:00 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• we've been undertaking in California to try to encourage more data sharing for the purposes of evaluation
• file matches up with the needs that we have today in deploying the new Workforce Pell program, in evaluating
• we've been undertaking in California to try to encourage more data sharing for the purposes of evaluation
• current law authorizes the commissioner to conduct investigations and examinations of insurers to evaluate
• The commissioner to conduct investigations and examinations of insurers to evaluate their market practices

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• At the board level, what we've tried to do is work to establish regional committees that evaluate the
• And we do, through the legislation also, we evaluate every year how the basic needs coordinators are
• We are doing an analysis of that, and I think we have another nine months of evaluating before we make
• But as I mentioned earlier, there are still some problems, and we are evaluating because we've gotten
• And, you know, we talk about evaluating student performance.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll now turn to the first order of business, the 2025 actuarial evaluation results, Luke Masselink,
• Today to share with you the results of the preliminary 2025 actuarial evaluation.
• The results of that experience study will then be folded into the 2025 actuarial evaluation report.
• The results from that will then be folded into our 2025 actuarial evaluation report.
• Now the study by the Joint Committee evaluated a few different options, but one of those options was

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to allow SNAP benefits to cover delivery costs, making this an important issue for Louisiana to evaluate
• So this resolution is about just gathering data and evaluating whether expanding access to grocery delivery
• So that's basically what the bill does. evaluate now, the study would possibly examine which populations
• So this resolution is about just gathering data and evaluating whether expanding access to grocery delivery
• Louisiana schools from 2018 through the present to qualified independent researchers for the purpose of evaluating

Bills: HR174, HR194, HCR98, SB39, SB124, SB190, SB236, SB270, SB273, SB359, SB415, SB426, SB437, SB451

Keywords: fenbendazole, cancer treatment, public health, FDA, clinical trials, patient safety, visual acuity, student health, de-identified data, longitudinal analysis, education policy, SNAP, food stamps, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, grocery delivery, delivery fees, service charges, online grocery, food access, food insecurity

Summary: The House Committee on Health and Welfare met on May 12 and first reported HCR 98 favorably without objection. The resolution asks the Louisiana Department of Health to study whether SNAP benefits could be used to pay grocery delivery fees and related costs, especially for elderly and mobility-limited recipients. The author said the measure would not change SNAP rules, only request a study, and LDH was not opposed. The committee then advanced several Senate bills. SB 273, on hospice care in inpatient licensed facilities, was amended and reported favorably; the bill requires documentation of hydration, nutrition, and care decisions and clarifies facility responsibility when multiple providers are involved. SB 415, creating the Empower Louisiana Food Purchase Program, was amended and reported favorably; the author described it as a privately funded, charity-run food card program for people in need, with LDH to develop rules. SB 437, a cleanup bill on judicially referred residential substance abuse treatment facilities, was reported favorably, with LDH explaining that facilities providing treatment must be licensed and surveyed. The committee also approved SB 451 on newborn hearing screenings, which updates terminology and expands reporting requirements to improve early detection and intervention for deaf or hard-of-hearing children. SB 426, modernizing the addictive disorder regulatory authority and creating a licensure pathway for peer support specialists, was reported favorably with amendments after testimony from behavioral health providers and training organizations. SB 236 on annual LDH reviews of kidney disease treatment in Medicaid, SB 39 creating provisional licenses for massage therapist graduates, SB 190 tightening oversight of nursing facilities in the CMS Special Focus Facility Program, and SB 124 allowing peer review sharing within a health system were all reported favorably, most with technical amendments. The committee also reported favorably HR 174 urging study of fenbendazole for cancer, SB 270 allowing terminally ill patients to use medical marijuana in health care facilities, SB 359 changing terms for a Morehouse Parish hospital district board, and HR 194 requesting de-identified school visual acuity screening data for researchers. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• loop, is the most common saying, right, where we make sure that there's somebody in the process evaluating
• Once implemented, the regulation itself would be independently tested and evaluated to determine whether
• And then third, the EO also tasks the Commerce Department with publishing an evaluation of state AI laws
• To my knowledge, again, that evaluation has not yet been published at the time of this presentation.
• Allman already referred to this, there is the Commerce Department evaluation that was due, that had a

Keywords: Technology and Science, Joint Commission on, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• environment can nationalize what should be a community-focused decision, making it harder for voters to evaluate
• environment can nationalize what should be a community-focused decision, making it harder for voters to evaluate
• turnout, but that's also going to reduce voter focus and draw out the local issues that need to be evaluated
• same points, but I just want you to remember that our local voters deserve opportunity to regularly evaluate
• And looking at the school district that you live in is part of that local community evaluation at that

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Children and Families heard public testimony on Senate Bill 1002, which would move St. Charles County school board elections and school levy/bond questions to the November general election, extend school board terms to four years, and allow candidates to voluntarily list party affiliation. The bill sponsor argued the change would increase turnout, broaden parent and taxpayer participation, and better align school board decisions with the broader electorate. Supporters echoed those points, saying April elections have low turnout, campaigning is difficult in winter, and November voting would give more residents a voice. Opponents, including school board members, parents, and the Missouri School Boards’ Association, argued the bill unnecessarily singles out St. Charles County, could politicize school board races, and might bury local issues on crowded November ballots. Several witnesses said school boards should remain nonpartisan and warned that four-year terms and the loss of staggered elections could reduce continuity and institutional knowledge. Others said limiting levy and bond questions to November could delay urgent district needs and reduce local flexibility. Some supporters and opponents also debated whether the bill should be statewide rather than county-specific. After testimony, the committee moved into executive session and voted Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1002 “do pass” by a vote of 10 aye, 5 no, and 1 present. The committee also voted Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 1135 “do pass” by the same 10 aye, 5 no, and 1 present margin.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, so staff, House Bill 2775, the history may be inappropriate or not done correctly, but we evaluate
• misprint on that okay so staff 2775 the history may be inappropriate or not done correctly but we evaluate
• themselves or others or suffering from a persistent, acute, or grave disability, a petition for evaluation
• must be filed, leading to transport to an appropriate evaluation agency.
• must be filed, leading to transport to an appropriate evaluation agency.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The meeting was a caucus-style run-through of many bills and resolutions across Appropriations, Commerce, Education, Federalism/Military Affairs/Elections, Government, Health and Human Services, Judiciary, ENRU, Public Safety, and Rural Economic Development. Measures discussed included housing and HOA rules, school policy and funding, health care licensing and records timelines, public safety and corrections funding, election and campaign rules, water and environmental policy, and several criminal justice and juvenile justice changes. Many items were described as being on third-read consent or consent calendars, with staff often noting that no questions were raised and no sponsor was present. Several bills drew sponsor explanation or member discussion. In education, members reviewed bills on teacher strikes, school safety, math placement, student outcomes, free school meals, parent permission for clubs, and school bond ballot disclosures. In health, bills covered prior authorization data reporting, nursing board rules and complaint procedures, pharmacist testing/treatment authority, opioid antagonist expiration dates, board continuations, and a constitutional amendment on refusing medical mandates. In government and public safety, members discussed DCS legal representation, inmate medical records, public safety parity funding, sheriff authority, border support funding, and a resolution supporting county sheriffs. In commerce and housing, bills addressed condominium and HOA authority, shade structures, pet restrictions, insurance certificates, apprenticeship definitions, automatic renewal contracts, and a state housing affordability district. There was notable discussion on House Bill 4044, which would create a Public Safety Parity Fund for DPS and DOC salaries using interest from the state rainy day fund and other revenue sources. The sponsor argued it would provide a reliable way to fund public safety pay, while others objected that it would consume interest needed to preserve the fund’s value and that a general fund appropriation would be more appropriate. The bill prompted extended back-and-forth, with some members supporting the concept and others saying it was fiscally irresponsible. Another point of discussion came on House Bill 2775, where staff noted a possible misprint in the bill history, and on House Bill 467, where staff clarified that the inactive voter list changes related to e-poll book status categories. No formal votes were recorded in the transcript, and the meeting appears to have been a review of measures before floor action.

Transcript Highlights:

• I mentioned that when we are asked to evaluate a project that is necessitated by a high accident rate
• /c><00:45:21.200> are<00:45:21.359> asked<00:45:21.599> to<00:45:21.760> evaluate
• <00:45:22.319> a<00:45:22.640> project when we are asked to evaluate a project when
• we are asked to evaluate a project that<00:45:24.160> is<00:45:24.800> necessitated<00
• >> We may have to do that evaluation. >> We may have to do that evaluation.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• couple of years, our research has focused on produced water characterization across New Mexico, evaluating
• treatment technologies at the pilot focused on produced water characterization across New Mexico, evaluating
• The resolution asks legislators to evaluate the science, but the science does not support the idea that
• treating produced water, which we would love to share with you, since legislators are being asked to evaluate
• Moreover, the fiscal analysis of HB 300 does not yet include a legal risk evaluation, nor does it mention

Bills: HM45, HB276, HB300

Keywords: Taos County, Questa, produced water, treated produced water, water reuse, water quality control commission, freshwater conservation, rural communities, acequias, Indian nations, tribes, pueblos, water rights, industrial water use, data centers, artificial intelligence, AI, quantum computing, economic development, renewable energy

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 6 contains a list of SPED professionals that may serve on a threat assessment team that evaluates
• adds educational diagnosticians and behavioral specialists to the list of professionals that may evaluate
• , we've included an additional 800 million in special education funding and covering $1,000 per evaluation
• It also includes evaluation dollars to be covered for if those evaluations requested by parents to see
• We're making sure from vision screening to certain evaluations related to potential special needs in

Bills: HB2, HB6, HB18, HB43, HB138, HB180, HB300, HB581, HB647, HB748, HB762, HB1240, HB1393, HB1397, HB1584, HB1734, HB2011, HB2254, HB2286, HB2434, HB2467, HB2468, HB2495, HB2516, HB2518, HB2529, HB2564, HB2712, HB2713, HB2715, HB2765, HB2898, HB3146, HB3161, HB3348, HB3800, HB4044, HB4341, HB4370, HB4384, HB4386, HB4396, HB4490, HB4809, HB5057, HB5323, HB5534, HB5668, SB203, SB317, SB719, SB731, SB801, SB867, SB1071, SB1232, SB1798, SB2082, SB2363, SB2603, SB2607, SB2717, SB2797, SB2841, SB2919, SB3038, SJR5, SB4, SB9, SB21, SB23, SB27, SB34, SB40, SB75, SB213, SB458, SB482, SB493, SB647, SB648, SB840, SB841, SB843, SB912, SB1241, SB1253, SB1350, SB1388, SB1423, SB1535, SB1559, SB1709, SB1789, SB1951, SB2037, SB2143, SB2155, SB2544, SB1, SB17, SB260, SB509, SB1506, SB1637, SB1833, SB2308, HB2525, HJR133, HB1393, HB26, HB388, HB2712, HB1633, HB685, HB2286, HB1606, HB1458, HB1240, HB2791, HB3146, HB1397, HB2061, HB647, HB4738, HB2563, HB128, HB581, HB766, HB2259, HB2358, HB4384, HB748, HB1734, HB5180, HB3806, HB3804, HB3803, HB1522, HB3597, HB1612, HB4224, HB1314, HB1237, HB3126, HB2856, HB3114, HB3505, HB5652, HB2025, HB3395, HB2495, HB18, HB2516, HB2713, HB24, HB519, HB609, HB1592, HB3348, HB120, HB6, HB1533, HB2421, HB2273, HB2464, HB2011, HB5057, HB5084, HB5534, HB5668, HB3424, HB2715, HB2564, HB2765, HB2898, HB3800, HB4396, HB4341, HB43, HB5686, HB2467, HB2468, HB2518, HB4310, HB4386, HB4490, HB180, HB5323, HB2, HB149, HB4945, HB2434, HB2529, HB3161, HB3745, HB4044, HB5155, HB5667, HB4996, HB2697, HB2492, HB2355, HB2282, HB2001, HB1902, HB1866, HB1445, HB1443, HB1306, HB1024, HB908, HB305, HB285, HB449, HB171, HB47, HB3464, HB2637, HB4263, HB5436, HB4429, HB3986, HB3966, HB3510, HB2560, HB2026, HB2688, HB4076, HB5246, HB3487, HB3486, HB4226, HB216, HB742, HB2402, HB143, HB5033, HB4413, HB4042, HB2440, HB4426, HB49, HB4112, HB3233, HB2310, HB5515, HB3627, HB2674, HB322, HB1481, HB126, HB3062, HB3421, HB3180, HB2530, HB2524, HB1916, HB3153, HB5650, HB4894, HB3120, HB1629, HB103, HB3234, HB3680, HB5698, HB3171, HB5693, HB2694, HB5664, HB3732, HB2508, HB2293, HB1991, HB2014, HB5331, HB5247, HB4751, HB4690, HB4668, HB4464, HB4395, HB4063, HB3833, HB3623, HB3214, HB3512, HB3250, HB3016, HB2520, HB2221, HB2213, HB3824, HB2067, HB1732, HB1562, HB700, HB1545, HB252, HB146, HB5596, HB1851, HB3619, HB3071, HB3556, HB851, HB4230, HB5320, HB5651, HB5670, HB5665, HB5437, HB5679, HB5699, HB5661, HB5662, HB5654, HB5672, HB5656, HCR141, HCR118, HCR127, HCR40, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB1749, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2683, SB1319, SB3038, SB3045, SB1538, SB3071, SB3065, SB823, SB3062, SB3074, SB1380, HB6, HB581, HB1393, HB1734, HB2286, HB2467, HB2468, HB2495, HB2529, HB2564, HB2765, HB2898, HB3146, HB3348, HB3800, HB4341, HB4386, HB4490, HB5057, HB5323, HB5534, HB5668, HB2, HB2715, SR530, SR552, SB482, SB493, SB841, SB912, SB1241, SB1350, SB1388, SB1559, SB1951, SB2143, SB2155, HB205, HB220, HB561, HB2078, HB2300, HB2652, HB3335, HB3441, HB4212, HB4879, HB5228, HB5616, HB205, HB220, HB561, HB2078, HB2300, HB2652, HB3335, HB3441, HB4212, HB4879, HB5228, HB5616

Keywords: public education, teacher compensation, certification, funding, school finance, educator rights, education funding, charter schools, staff compensation, state aid, retention allotment, mental health, telehealth, public schools, discipline management, behavioral interventions, rural health, hospital funding, healthcare access, mental health services

Transcript Highlights:

• The state also funded an evaluation of this program in the 22-23 Budget Act, but this evaluation has
• When will the program evaluation on outcomes be available?
• Regarding the evaluation funded in the 2022-23 Budget Act, those outcomes are available.
• intended to make it easier for people to seek better-paid work because employers will be able to evaluate
• And, you know, examples include, you know, we have the Butte Technology Center that helps evaluate and

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• initiatives, not in a statute so much, but in the settlement agreements, and through the process of evaluating
• approval, modification, and denial, and then it's followed up with an SPP cost recovery clause to evaluate
• And then it's followed up with an SPP Cost Recovery Clause to evaluate those costs.
• The public interest standard that the SPPs are evaluated under is what we use to evaluate settlement
• So our concerns: the lack of prudence and cost-effective evaluation at SPP investment encourages investment

Summary: The committee met to hear invited presentations on storm recovery and storm protection from the Florida Public Service Commission, Florida Power & Light, Duke Energy, Tampa Electric, Chesapeake Utilities, and the Office of Public Counsel. The PSC reviewed the history of storm restoration financing and utility hardening efforts after major storms such as Hurricane Andrew, the 2004-05 hurricane seasons, Irma, and Michael, explaining storm reserve funds, storm recovery bonds, and the current three-year storm protection plan process. The commission’s role in approving plans and later reviewing prudence of actual costs was emphasized, along with the types of work included in the plans such as vegetation management, pole replacement, undergrounding, feeder hardening, and substation flood protection. The utilities described their own storm-hardening investments and recent storm performance. FPL said it has spent about $4.9 billion on storm protection and recovery-related efforts, highlighted improved restoration times during Helene and Milton, and said it is expanding undergrounding, feeder hardening, and smart-grid technology. Duke Energy reported more than 40,000 hardened poles and structures since 2021, major gains from self-healing grid technology, and faster restoration during recent storms. Tampa Electric described a roughly $200 million annual storm protection effort, including vegetation management, undergrounding, substation hardening, and new storm surge protections, and Chesapeake Utilities discussed its smaller-scale hardening program, vegetation work, pole replacement, and rapid restoration after Helene in Nassau County. Committee members asked about how utilities prioritize neighborhoods for lateral hardening, whether maps of planned projects could be shared, how much each utility has spent on undergrounding and hardening, and how reliability comparisons are normalized against the national average. Public Counsel Walt Trierweiler argued that storm recovery and hardening costs fall too heavily on investor-owned utility customers, said the current framework lacks a meaningful cost-benefit or prudence check at the planning stage, and urged broader sharing of storm costs because the benefits extend to the whole state. Senators also discussed whether the commission can review the reasonableness of approved programs and whether future reports or recommendations from Public Counsel would be helpful. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a new addition that we haven't evaluated.
• <01:09:34.719> is copied from um and and the evaluation is copied from um and and the evaluation
• ,<01:09:59.040> we Administration does an evaluation, we Administration does an evaluation
• I don't know that we haven't evaluated.
• if Department of Public Safety evaluated if Department of Public Safety evaluated it.<01:11:35.120

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That was submitted in September of 2022, which then gave way to a more intensive program evaluation,
• which turned out to be so evaluation which turned out to be so extensive<00:03:46.040> that<00
• for um the first program evaluation for um the first program evaluation which<00:03:51.879> came
• We're currently working on some of the evaluation criteria and looking at the project differently.
• We're currently working on some of the evaluation criteria and looking at the project differently.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• good starting point is to document the best understanding of the staff's current processes and then evaluate
• that documentation, evaluate that practice, or both, until it's all accurate and reflected correctly
• limited documentation about the system that the apportionment team were able to provide, and we evaluated
• robust enough to handle whatever the Legislature chooses to do in terms of... are we in a position to evaluate
• In terms of are we in a position to evaluate? Are there too many factors?

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on the accuracy and reliability of OSPI’s school apportionment system. Auditors said the system, which calculates and distributes K-12 funding using multiple feeder systems and a core apportionment engine, is outdated, unstable, inefficient, and at high risk of failure. They reported weak controls over data input, documentation, oversight, and staffing, and said OSPI relies heavily on manual workarounds, a few knowledgeable staff, and vendor support. In limited testing of three districts, the auditors found the system calculated funding correctly for the 2023-24 school year, but they identified nine small input discrepancies tied to differences between budget materials and state law, which they said could compound into larger dollar amounts. The auditors recommended replacing or modernizing the system and noted that delays in doing so prolong risk. OSPI largely agreed that the current platform needs replacement and said it has been working toward a new system for years. Agency officials clarified that the Legislature requested a feasibility study in 2022, that the study found the system at risk of catastrophic failure, and that funding for a replacement is now in the state IT pool subject to OCIO/OFM gate reviews. OSPI disputed the audit’s characterization of the rounding and budget-law discrepancies, saying the issue was an agency rule and implementation choice, not an error that caused under- or over-allocation. Officials also said the current system is too old to easily absorb future formula changes, but that the planned replacement should be flexible enough to handle a new funding model if the Legislature adopts one. Committee members asked about the amount and timing of the $16 million project funding, whether smaller districts face greater risk, how many times data is entered, and whether the funding formula should be simplified. Auditors and OSPI both emphasized that formula simplification is a policy question for the Legislature, not the audit. Public testimony came from one online witness, who urged full implementation of the audit recommendations and modernization of the system. The subcommittee took no formal vote and adjourned after the presentations and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is relating to the University of Hawaii for tuition and special fees for donor evaluations of the
• this authorizes the use of the University of Hawaii tuition and fees special fund to conduct donor evaluation
• It requires the related report to the legislature to include any donor evaluation conducted using the
• donor evaluation conducted using the donor evaluation conducted using the monies<00:26:07.840> from

Bills: SB2057, SB2109, SB2400, HB1752, SB2599, SB2930

Keywords: immigration enforcement, sanctuary policy, detainer, ICE, federal immigration authorities, 8 U.S.C. 1357(g), 8 U.S.C. 1373, 8 U.S.C. 1644, deportation, undocumented immigrants, noncitizen, migrant rights, local police cooperation, law enforcement cooperation, hold request, judicial warrant, probable cause, civil immigration enforcement, county police, state police