Transcript Highlights:

• And it was in my head at the time, a couple of years ago, to kind of make note of this, that this is
• Look at, you know, I'm looking at some of these op buds for fiscal year 2026: we're talking about $4.9
• Just if you could guide us on this, we're getting a special into our analysts' note that, and it gets
• All right, I don't know who's taking notes, but if we want to note Representative Brown in opposition
• All right, I don't know who's taking notes, but if we want to note, Representative Brown, Okay, great

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• significantly between when the SCPP endorses a proposal and ultimately when those bills are heard in fiscal
• If you have any further questions on those bills, I would be happy to share our fiscal notes, and that
• If you have any further questions on those bills, I would be happy to share our fiscal notes, and that
• So the two bills that are under the Left One study, we prepared fiscal notes on them during the last
• related to coal investments very similar to what we've been hearing and then one other thing I'd like to note

Summary: The Select Committee on Pension Policy Executive Committee approved the June minutes and received a brief update from Assistant Attorney General Jesse Yoder, who had no litigation updates but offered to answer questions. Actuary Michael Harbour then previewed the September full committee meeting, which will include a report on the financial condition of the DRS-administered pension plans and the state actuary’s recommended economic assumptions. He also cautioned that any actuarial pricing done over the summer could change if assumptions are updated, and suggested taking votes on potential legislation later in the interim, possibly in November or December. A discussion followed about the Left 1 benefit improvement and where the funding came from. Harbour said the benefit tied to SSB 5791 (2022) was paid from the Left 1 trust fund, while a separate Left 2 benefit improvement was in SHB 1701, and he agreed to double-check the issue with DRS after members raised conflicting information. Members then discussed the broader Left 1 study, including whether IRS approval is a key barrier and whether options are limited to merger or closure. Several members asked to hear from Ice Miller, which has been advising on the tax issues, and staff said the committee should receive a written response in the next couple of weeks and could have Ice Miller appear in October. The committee reviewed and adjusted its interim work plan. September will include the actuarial presentations, a more detailed Left 1 study update, and a presentation on PERS and TERS Plan 1 COLAs, including a recap of the bill recommended this year and initial considerations for an ad hoc COLA. October is expected to include DRS administrative and performance updates, with November reserved for the State Investment Board update and a final Left 1 study update, and December may include an educational presentation on excess compensation. Members also requested a future briefing on the month-of-death benefit discussion. The September agenda was adopted, correspondence materials were noted, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will be able to provide you with the balance of $4.1 million at the end of fiscal year 2025 and the
• This also provides unexpended balance authority within the biennium for the same purposes in fiscal year
• The request to amend right to include the balance of authority there is the fiscal on board and from
• Coast Guard standards. oil spill incidences in fiscal year 2024 alone has been stranded multiple times
• need in terms of the fiscal note in your opinion and what would you do with that?

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we'll note that other questions may be ruled out of order.
• This fiscal year, FY25, is the first fiscal year of the operations of the Office of the Veteran Advocate
• Just noting that. Thank you.
• We did not include that revenue in our fiscal 26 budget going forward.
• That's fiscal year 2025 as we go into the end of 2025.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from Senate Chair Robyn Kennedy and House Chair Chynah Tyler, who emphasized that the fiscal year 2026 hearing was focused on the Health and Human Services budget, asked members to keep questions budget-related, and noted that no public testimony would be taken. They also highlighted the choice of Doherty Memorial High School as the venue to showcase Worcester’s investment in career and technical education. Committee members then introduced themselves before the first panel, the Executive Office of Veterans Services and the state veterans homes, began testimony. Secretary John Santiago said the governor’s FY26 proposal would support implementation of the HERO Act, which he said is now about 95% implemented, including higher disabled veteran annuities, expanded behavioral health benefits, and other service expansions. He described efforts to reduce veteran homelessness, including nearly $20 million in ARPA-funded housing and outreach initiatives, and said the agency has delivered more than 100,000 supportive services to nearly 8,500 veterans. Leaders from the Chelsea and Holyoke veterans homes reported on staffing, quality measures, electronic medical records, and major construction projects at both facilities, including a new Chelsea campus and the new Holyoke home. Members asked about funding transfers, geographic equity in access to the homes, outreach to women veterans and veterans of color, suicide prevention, Gold Star family support, and the impact of federal uncertainty; Santiago said the homes are now licensed and certified, that the current budget is sufficient, and that the agency is expanding engagement and data collection. The second panel, the Office of the Veteran Advocate, testified that its FY26 request is about $3.3 million, up from the current $2 million, to cover staffing, a larger office, and higher technology costs. Veteran Advocate Bob Notch said the office is a new independent oversight agency created in 2022 to examine systems, coordinate with local veteran service officers, and investigate fatalities or serious harm involving veterans in state care. He said the office’s work depends on research, data, and collaboration with other agencies, and that current funding is only enough for minimum operations. In response to questions, Notch and Deputy Commissioner David O’Callaghan discussed the difficulty of tracking veteran suicides, the need for better data across agencies, and the office’s role as an oversight body rather than a direct service provider. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• You can see here the last four fiscal years broken down into three big buckets here.
• assistant director uh for fiscal assistant director uh for fiscal management<00:42:34.720> for
• allocated since fiscal year 2021. allocated since fiscal year 2021.
• Um I can tell you since fiscal court.
• And so the fiscal courts have much more latitude in those appointments.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Committee on State Government met for its first meeting and heard a presentation from the Kentucky Center for Statistics (KY Stats) by Executive Director Matt Barry and Legislative Director Calli Arnold. The presentation reviewed KY Stats’ statutory background, its evolution from KESUS, its board membership, and its role in housing Kentucky’s longitudinal data system and labor market information office. Barry explained that KY Stats links data from multiple state sources, validates and cleans it, deidentifies it, and uses it to produce reports, evaluations, and responses to data requests for policymakers, practitioners, and the public. Barry described the scale of the system, noting more than 6,000 active data elements, 178 unique file types, and data from 48 sources across 26 agencies. He highlighted the agency’s privacy and security practices, including separate servers for source data and deidentified reporting data, and said KY Stats does not use real-time data. He also outlined the types of reports produced, including the annual high school feedback report and a recent life outcomes report tracking the 2017 public high school cohort’s postsecondary education, completion, wages, and employment outcomes. Members asked about the timeliness and availability of data, especially SNAP and Medicaid information, and Barry said most data arrive annually or quarterly and that Medicaid data had been used in a limited one-time project rather than as an ongoing feed. Questions also focused on artificial intelligence; Barry said KY Stats has not integrated AI but is exploring it cautiously because of privacy and security concerns. Several members encouraged further work with AI tools, while Barry emphasized that any use would need to protect confidentiality. The committee also discussed staffing and funding, with Barry saying KY Stats has about 49 total staff and annual funding of roughly $3.1 million in state general funds, plus federal labor-related funding. Committee members praised the agency’s work and suggested legislators may not fully understand its capabilities. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the fiscal note...
• Thank you for those comments, and thank you for pointing out the fiscal note.
• The amount of people this would impact, but in the fiscal note analysis, they actually did some research
• I think, again, the fiscal note indicates that there are about 3,000.
• But I think that the estimate that's in the fiscal note of around 3,000 potential surviving spouses is

Bills: HB249, HB 1186, HB2313, HB2408, HB2508, HB2730, HB2974, HB3045, HB3232, HB3336, HB3710, HB4044, HB4236, HJR133, HB249

Keywords: ad valorem taxes, property taxes, homestead exemption, disabled veterans, senior citizens, tax payments, installment payments, municipal tax revenue, hotel, convention center, tax code, economic development, local government, municipality, tax revenue, qualified projects, municipal taxation, hotel project, municipality funding, veteran

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, thank you, and I appreciate the discussion, of course, looking through the fiscal note.
• Um, and then back to the fiscal note, we're adding on top of that and some extra FTEs.
• note.
• Um and then back to the fiscal note,<00:15:53.600> we're<00:15:54.000> adding<00:15:54.320
• <00:24:59.279> in getting a fiscal note on this bill in getting a fiscal note on this bill

Bills: HF3418, HF3739, HF3791, HF3356, HF3695, HF3430

Keywords: pedestrian safety, traffic safety, roadway improvements, nonmotorized transportation, crosswalks, sidewalks, bike lanes, complete streets, Vision Zero, Toward Zero Deaths, MnDOT, Department of Transportation, Department of Public Safety, local road authority, county roads, city streets, tribal transportation, capital improvements, safety design solutions, grant program

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from February 25, 2026, and the chair noted the absence of Representative Katie Jones due to the birth of her baby. The chair also acknowledged that the committee would be discussing difficult topics related to the June 14 killing of Mark and Melissa Hortman and Gilbert. The main business began with House File 3418, which Chair Tabke moved for possible inclusion in a future omnibus bill, and the committee adopted the A1 author’s amendment. The bill was described as a pedestrian safety measure prompted by a fatal Moorhead crash involving a young boy; it would create an opt-in program for communities to use pre-made traffic safety templates, with the state covering 80% of project costs to speed implementation of measures like lane narrowing, rumble strips, and bollards. A Moorhead testifier said the city could have acted faster with such funding, and members generally supported the goal while raising concerns about overlap with existing Safe Routes to School and active transportation programs, the bill’s fiscal note, and how communities would be selected. MDOT testified that it already supports similar community demonstration projects and has funded about 30 such projects since 2019. HF 3418 was laid over. The committee then took up House File 3739, a memorial highway bill for Mark and Melissa Hortman. An A1 amendment to shift funding away from trunk highway funds and toward legislative budgets was moved but not adopted after members argued memorial signage should continue to be paid for with private funds, as in prior memorial highway designations. The bill author explained the memorial was intended to honor Melissa Hortman’s service and connection to Highway 610, and members discussed the length of the proposed memorial stretch and whether it should be narrowed to the area she represented. Several members supported the tribute but expressed concern about using public funds and about setting a precedent for future memorial highways. The committee indicated the bill would move on to Ways and Means with other issues still to be worked out.

Transcript Highlights:

• But one last question: there's a lot of fiscal costs, and I'm sure it's a very involved fiscal note,
• > note sure it's a very involved fiscal note sure it's a very involved fiscal note but<00:58:30.799
• /c><01:49:24.599> can requested a a fiscal note so that we can requested a a fiscal note so that
• I hope that we can get a fiscal note back and take a look at them.
• <02:16:04.840> note funding and uh we will get a fiscal note funding and uh we will get a

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Released apparently not as a fiscal note and also passed out of committee without any name folks.
• Does it have a fiscal note? It does.
• It could possibly have gotten moved to the floor for concern over a fiscal note. Yeah.
• Okay, Senator Hall, she's learning fiscal notes. No fiscal notes, right? No enhancement of penalty.
• And you're going to kick off bills that are local and uncontested that have fiscal notes.

Bills: SJR4, SJR40, SJR81, SCR37, SCR39, SB22, SB32, SB33, SB36, SB38, SB95, SB209, SB249, SB311, SB326, SB365, SB458, SB609, SB660, SB664, SB693, SB732, SB745, SB760, SB762, SB779, SB783, SB785, SB868, SB871, SB883, SB921, SB955, SB993, SB996, SB1008, SB1057, SB1067, SB1151, SB1171, SB1210, SB1255, SB1265, SB1267, SB1271, SB1307, SB1313, SB1316, SB1318, SB1321, SB1332, SB1365, SB1426, SB1470, SB1484, SB1494, SB1559, SB1592, SB1596, SB1598, SB1637, SB1677, SB1706, SB1758, SB1762, SB1786, SB1809, SB1818, SB1822, SB1841, SB1871, SB1967, SB2064, SB2077, SB2112, SB2148, SB2320, SB2406, SB2407, SJR36, SJR81, SJR50, SJR4, SJR40, SJR27, SCR22, SCR12, SCR39, SCR38, SCR37, SB921, SB609, SB660, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB304, SB1023, SB204, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB1119, SB1505, SB1215, SB1302, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB955, SB957, SB541, SB266, SB1415, SB53, SB1352, SB785, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB1062, SB711, SB746, SB1404, SB1448, SB507, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB667, SB1059, SB1567, SB310, SB311, SB505, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB1350, SB462, SB827, SB1585, SB1484, SB1273, SB927, SB1227, SB1229, SB1353, SB1464, SB1709, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1841, SB1008, SB2016, SB1173, SB1163, SB996, SB1370, SB1321, SB1101, SB860, SB993, SB693, SB1537, SB1332, SB1307, SB963, SB493, SB984, SB619, SB1122, SB455, SB522, SB1057, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1877, SB1277, SB32, SB732, SB731, SB268, SB1822, SB1589, SB397, SB1058, SB1267, SB2112, SB1930, SB532, SB508, SB292, SB291, SB901, SB1333, SB1436, SB1494, SB964, SB779, SB1378, SB2312, SB1719, SB287, SB2143, SB1245, SB261, SB1247, SB2406, SB2407, SB1882, SB618, SB38, SB393, SB1371, SB1365, SB2243, SB2226, SB2039, SB1919, SB1895, SB1598, SB1493, SB1810, SB1791, SB1706, SB1644, SB1238, SB783, SB458, SB22, SB651, SB897, SB1809, SB1080, SB745, SB826, SB989, SB1320, SB1437, SB2320, SB2289, SB1171, SB664, SB1637, SB2064, SB868, SB1079, SB1243, SB1504, SB1851, SB1879, SB2237, SB1257, SB2034, SB1522, SB883, SB249, SB1318, SB1151, SB596, SB1191, SB226, SB570, SB870, SB991, SB60, SB365, SB1067, SB1786, SB326, SB1401, SB1592, SB1728, SB1265, SB586, SB529, SB217, SB209, SB1923, SB1559, SB1839, SB387, SB1874, SB1872, SB1873, SB1921, SB1883, SB1677, SB95, SB1620, SB1838, SB2024, SB2429, SB1999, SB511, SB2309, SB2166, SB871, SB510, SB33, SB2420, SB1860, SB1541, SB1316, SB1314, SB1313, SB1426, SB1398, SB1869, SB1750, SB1871, SB36, SB855, SB1233, SB760, SB2425, SB2037, SB1758, SB1759, SB2365, SB1924, SB762, SB1271, SB1818, SB605, SB1405, SB1762, SB1968, SB1977, SB2077, SB2148, SB2321, SB1967, SB1662, SB1663, SB2124, SB2204, SB1855, SB863, SB37, SJR39, SCR1, SCR27, SCR32, SCR42, SCR6, SB2232, SB819, SB2078, SB2252, SB1962, SB2253, SB825, SB1577, SB1184, SB2018, SB2206, SB1901, SB1030, SB2368, SB1963, SB1960, SB1643, SB1625, SB1299, SB841, SB668, SB584, SB231, SB2411, SB1085, SB2431, SB2231, SB1490, SB530, SB34, SB1261

Keywords: economic stabilization fund, state finance, constitutional amendment, budget management, financial security, emergency powers, legislative authority, governor powers, disaster management, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, SCR 37, Senate Concurrent Resolution, Panama Canal, Texas ports, port infrastructure, maritime trade, shipping lanes

Transcript Highlights:

• And I, along with Senator Menendez, will have some questions on that fiscal note because I'm as far as
• Well, it's okay, gentlemen, because the fiscal note already has built-in growth. I've just read it.
• TEA submitted different assumptions in their fiscal note response.
• But we do call out all of those assumptions in the fiscal note to make it clear.”
• “The assumption, but we do call out all of those assumptions in the fiscal note to make it clear that

Summary: The Senate Committee on Education K-16 convened with a quorum, adopted its committee rules, and heard opening remarks from members introducing staff and outlining priorities for the session. Members from both parties emphasized education as a major issue, while several Republicans framed the committee’s work around school choice and parent empowerment. Senator West and other Democrats stressed protecting public schools, listening to Texans, and considering the effects of vouchers or education savings accounts on school districts and communities. Chairman Creighton laid out Senate Bill 2, the Texas Education Freedom Act, describing it as a universal education savings account program modeled on similar programs in other states. He said the bill would provide about $200 million for a universal eligibility pool and additional funding for students with disabilities and lower-income families, with priority weighting for former public school students. He also highlighted anti-fraud measures, vendor pre-approval, criminal background checks, cybersecurity protections, annual testing requirements for participating students, and the use of the Comptroller rather than TEA to administer the program. Creighton repeatedly said the bill is not a voucher and argued it would not take money from public schools, which he said would receive separate historic funding increases. Members questioned Creighton about the 500% of federal poverty line definition, the adequacy of the $10,000 ESA amount, whether the program would favor students already in private school, how microschools and homeschool pods would fit, and whether the bill protects religious liberty and private-school autonomy. Democrats raised concerns about disability protections, 504 students, foster children, public-school funding, open records, and the historical context of vouchers. Republicans generally supported the bill as a way to expand options for parents and students, while also asking about administration, fraud prevention, and data security. After member questions, the committee began invited testimony, with EdChoice President Robert Inlow presenting in support of SB 2 and citing the growth and reported success of school choice programs nationwide.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are still working on signing the contract for this current fiscal year.
• And it's important to note that a public guardian is considered to be a professional guardian for the
• They collect evidence, including medical and financial records, court documents, facility notes, and
• Is that something we could ask to make a note of? Yes, sir. Okay. Absolutely. Thank you, Chair.
• Of the issues noted on audit, to protect their department IT and resources.

Summary: The Human Services Subcommittee met to receive updates on implementation of House Bill 1349, which created guardianship transparency measures, and on the Department of Elder Affairs’ Office of Public and Professional Guardians (OPPG). The Clerk of Courts Operations Corporation described the statewide guardianship database for judges and a public-facing website, noting the system went live in March 2025 after a soft launch in 2024. Officials said the database now includes information from all 67 clerks, with 388 users, about 6,400 wards, and 518 professional guardians. Members asked about unique identifiers, data duplication, training, and how the system is being used; CCOC said it is working to use registration numbers as identifiers, improve search functions, expand training, and seek continued funding. Secretary Michelle Branham then outlined OPPG’s implementation of HB 1349 and its broader oversight role. She said the department has doubled education requirements, expanded transparency through the Sentry system, and brought investigations fully in-house in August 2024. She described the complaint and investigation process, including legal sufficiency review, regional investigators, mandatory in-person interviews, and possible outcomes ranging from corrective training and fines to suspension or revocation. Members asked about complaint categories, disciplinary actions, whether guardians can be suspended during investigations, and how older cases are handled; the secretary said most complaints are administrative/technical, serious allegations are referred to law enforcement, and one older case discussed remained ongoing. The Auditor General’s office presented its operational audit of OPPG, covering July 2022 through January 2024 and follow-up on prior findings. The audit identified problems with monitoring private professional guardians and public guardian offices, complaint processing timeliness, incomplete public profile information, late registration renewals, failure to assess contract penalties, weak collection safeguards, missing follow-up on required public guardian reports, lack of needed rules, and Sentry system access/security controls. In response, Secretary Branham said the department does not dispute the findings and has already taken corrective steps, including launching Sentry, hiring additional monitors, moving investigations in-house, adding automated renewal reminders, updating forms, and drafting new rules. She also said the department plans to seek subpoena power and stronger fines in the next legislative session. The subcommittee took no formal vote and adjourned after members’ questions were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:06:04.160> But those uh fiscal implications are.
• But those uh fiscal implications are.
• <00:28:08.240> As of the fiscal impacts for this bill.
• As of the fiscal impacts for this bill.
• Um, we were not contacted in the beginning for a fiscal impact on this.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our most recent report on the local government financial audit reports reviewed for the 2022-23 fiscal
• For the current fiscal year, we are appropriated $43.2 million for our operations, and we budget for
• The contents of the report include recommended statutory and fiscal changes, an overview of audit and
• I should note that the presiding officers are the ones that dictate the protocols for such requests,
• And then the second product is Policy Notes, which is a free electronic newsletter.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to receive annual overviews of its oversight responsibilities and the work of the Auditor General and OPAGA. Committee staff reviewed the committee’s authority over state and local governments, enforcement of audit-report filing requirements, repeated audit findings, Transparency Florida reporting, and lobbying compensation audits. Auditor General Cheryl Norman described her office’s independence, audit standards, quality control, and major audit areas, including the state’s annual financial and single audits, school district and university audits, operational and performance audits, and attestation work. She also noted staffing shortages, recruitment efforts, and a request for carry-forward funds to study salaries. Members asked about whether audits can quantify recoverable dollars, how school district spending comparisons are handled, and how to raise concerns about DCF-related audits or a local city audit that has been pending for years. Norman said her office can quantify findings when possible, sometimes compares costs across districts in operational audits, and that members can bring specific concerns to the appropriate deputy auditor general or the committee. She also explained that citizen or local-government audit requests may require payment of audit costs. OPAGA Coordinator Kara Collins-Gomez outlined OPAGA’s role as a legislative research unit that conducts studies directed by law, the presiding officers, or the committee, and described its policy areas, methodologies, contract monitoring, and recurring statutory reports. Deputy Auditor General Matthew Tracy explained how to read operational audit reports, including findings, criteria, condition, cause, effect, recommendations, and management responses. Deputy Auditor General Greg Senators explained financial audit reports, including audit opinions, required supplementary information, internal control and compliance findings, federal program compliance, and management letters. The meeting concluded with thanks to the presenters and a motion to adjourn, which passed without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I'll note that there is an A15 amendment that is coming later.
• I'll note that 14 days is part of the proposed A-15 amendment.
• Um and uh I think I should note Um and uh I think I should note just<00:59:23.280> to<00:
• Um that uh it's got a zero fiscal Um that uh it's got a zero fiscal impact,<01:02:30.840> which
• some changes made to address the fiscal some changes made to address the fiscal impact<01:02:38.880

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Public Safety Policy Conference Committee met on May 8, 2026, with all conferees present. The chair opened with decorum instructions, explained that the meeting was policy-only, and noted that no public testimony had been signed up. Members then introduced themselves, with several noting they were retiring at the end of the session or year. The committee adopted a series of provisions, mostly by unanimous voice vote, including House language on identity theft and financial crimes updates, supervision abatement and restitution considerations for corrections, protective-order enhancements for murder penalties, prediction markets, victim-notification requirements for plea and sentencing hearings, research data privacy, ignition interlock and impaired-driving license changes, DOC licensing and sanctions for juvenile/adult community-based residential facilities, criminal-conviction employment and licensing standards, jail medication procedures, domestic abuse law changes, and a grant-use extension for dual-status/crossover youth funding. Several items were described as technical or clarifying changes, while others updated law to address AI-related identity theft, foreign protective orders, victim privacy, and corrections oversight. The committee also heard discussion on a Senate provision allowing victims of domestic violence to petition for wireless account and phone-number transfers. A witness supported the concept but urged changes to better align the state language with existing federal law; members noted the issue might need another vehicle or further work. For the domestic abuse item, staff explained that an A15 amendment would later adjust the warrantless-arrest window from 28 days to 14 days. On the jail-medication item, a member emphasized the changes were clarifying and not an admission that last year’s law was flawed. All adopted provisions passed by voice vote without opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• > responsible governor's proposed fiscally responsible governor's proposed fiscally responsible
• <00:02:48.879> responsibility investments with fiscal responsibility investments with fiscal
• 36:15.760> know<00:36:15.839> fiscal course that uh you know fiscal course that uh you
• Share your notes.
• So, I would expect important to note.

Bills: HF4598, HF4884, HF3732

Keywords: workers' compensation, Minnesota workers' compensation, Workers' Compensation Advisory Council, reinsurance association, Workers' Compensation Reinsurance Association, WCRA, occupational disease, presumption, first responders, firefighter cancer, PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder, police officer, paramedic, emergency medical technician, correctional officer, security counselor, public safety dispatcher, temporary total disability, permanent partial disability

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 will come to order.
• branch of agencies who have responded when either here or following up, as Senator Smallwood-Quavis noted
• The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 is now adjourned.
• The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 is now adjourned.
• The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 is now adjourned.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee 4 met to consider a large block of budget items as part of the Senate Democrats’ budget package. The chair highlighted major budget themes including investments in affordable housing and homelessness programs, full funding for Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention Program rounds 7 and 8, support for economic development through the CalCompetes tax credit, consumer protection and financial regulation funding, and technology, resilience, and data security programs. Members also noted the broader budget process and the extensive number of hearings and public comments received. During member comments, Senator Smallwood-Quarris raised concerns that the committee had not received all requested information from departments and said that was unacceptable, while also urging more investment in Expo Park ahead of the Olympics and in arts and cultural programs. Senator Cowan praised the transparency of the Senate budget plan, the work of staff and agencies, and the committee’s oversight role. Public testimony included support from the California State Association of Counties for fully funding HAP at $1 billion and meeting a September 1 distribution goal, and from the Small Business Development Centers for $26 million in GoBiz funding for SIP and TAP loan and technical assistance programs. The committee then voted on items in blocks. Most items were approved unanimously, while one larger block passed 3-1 with Senator Nilo voting no and another block passed 3-0 with Senator Nilo not voting. Items 20 and 42 were also approved 3-0 with Senator Nilo not voting. After concluding public comment and votes, the subcommittee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, I got Senate Bill 117 drafted because, um, if you look at the original fiscal note, the people of
• /c><01:01:57.040> Colorado<01:01:57.680> were fiscal note, the people of Colorado were
• fiscal note, the people of Colorado were going<01:01:58.000> to<01:01:58.160> lose<01:01
• it brought the fiscal note down to the it brought the fiscal note down to the people<01:02:39.119
• You saw the fiscal note.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The Senate convened, established a quorum, approved the previous day’s journal, and received several committee reports and House messages. Committee reports advanced a number of bills and appointments, including Senate Bill 163, House Bill 1320, Senate Bill 160, House Bill 1210, and several board and commission appointments recommended for the consent calendar. The chamber also received House action on multiple bills, including concurrence in Senate amendments to House Bills 1239, 1262, and 1110, a request for a conference committee on House Bill 1084, and transmission of several other measures to the Revisor of Statutes. The Senate then took up Senate Joint Resolution 22, designating July 12-18, 2026, as Plastic Pollution Awareness Week. Senator Cutter spoke in support, arguing that plastic pollution harms environmental and human health, disproportionately affects vulnerable communities, and cannot be solved by recycling alone. The resolution was adopted on a 25-9 vote, with several senators recorded in opposition, and co-sponsors were noted. The chamber also recognized guests from the Colorado Society of Enrolled Agents and the National Association of Tax Professionals, as well as visitors from the Colorado School of Mines and former Senator John Evans. Later, the Senate considered special orders on the consent calendar, including House Bills 103, 1026, and 1051, and adopted the committee reports and the bills. House Bill 1026 was amended and House Bill 1051 was advanced to third reading and final passage. The Senate also took up Senate Bill 117, concerning permissible methods for the sale of lottery tickets. Senator Bridges explained that the bill was intended to respond to lottery rules allowing online sales and credit card purchases, but said the measure had been narrowed in committee and then raised constitutional concerns under Colorado’s prohibition on slot machines outside limited gaming areas. The transcript ends during that debate, before final action on Senate Bill 117 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Secretary will also note the roll.
• Additionally, late yesterday afternoon, the JLBC issued a fiscal note, and it estimated that the bills
• Okay, just to be clear, so the fiscal note of 441 is approximately what the fiscal note was or would
• To that point, so members in the audience, if you look at the fiscal note and what JRBC has put out,
• Chairman, just to clarify what the governor has asked for, if you look at members' fiscal note, it's

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The joint House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees met to hear identical conformity bills, HB 2153 and SB 1106, which would align Arizona tax law with the federal Internal Revenue Code as of Jan. 1, 2026, including some retroactive provisions for tax year 2025. Staff explained that the bills would exclude three federal provisions: the higher federal SALT deduction, the new senior deduction as written in H.R. 1, and the deduction for interest on new car loans. They would instead include a $6,000 retirement-income deduction for taxpayers age 60 and older, a $6,000 Roth IRA contribution deduction, a higher dependent tax credit, and a deduction for child and dependent care expenses above the federal credit. JLBC estimated the package would reduce general fund income tax revenue by about $441.3 million in FY 2026. Members also discussed that the Department of Revenue’s forms had been issued assuming full conformity, and staff and supporters argued the bills were needed quickly to avoid confusion and amended returns during filing season. Committee members and sponsors largely framed the bills as tax relief and a way to provide certainty for taxpayers and preparers. Supporters said the package would help families, seniors, and workers, and noted that the Arizona version was negotiated to keep the overall tax relief roughly comparable to full conformity while shifting benefits away from the SALT deduction and toward child credits, retirement income, and child care. The sponsors also criticized the governor’s executive action and urged prompt passage so taxpayers would know how to file. Opponents argued the bills would reduce state revenue, worsen the budget outlook, and disproportionately benefit higher-income taxpayers and corporations. Several witnesses and members also raised concerns about the child care deduction, the retirement-income deduction, and the business expensing provisions, while supporters responded that the bill was designed to help working families and encourage saving and investment. Public testimony was mixed. The Arizona Society of Certified Public Accountants and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club supported the bills, emphasizing early conformity, filing certainty, and reduced confusion for taxpayers and software providers. Opponents included Save Our Schools Arizona, the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, Opportunity Arizona, and several individuals, who argued the package would deepen budget problems and favor the wealthy. One witness objected to a federal school-choice-related provision she said was being tied to the bill, though committee members said the measure before them was a tax conformity bill and not a school finance bill. The hearing included extended debate over the fiscal impact, the governor’s prior requests for some of the same tax changes, and whether taxpayers would need to file amended returns if the legislature later changed course. The transcript ends during testimony from NFIB, with no final committee vote or action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because I did see that you had a billion dollar fiscal note, so I'm, I'm trying to figure out what are
• Senator Schwertner what's the fiscal note on this? I'm sorry? The fiscal note amount on this?
• The fiscal note was like $800,000 but that had to do with the administration through the comptroller
• Are you, according to the fiscal note on this bill, it doesn't mention the actual cost to local county
• Are you aware that the fiscal note on that bill also noted that there probably is a local cost to that

Keywords: HCR65, HCR19, Senate resolutions, memorial, community impact, legislative proceedings

Summary: The recent Senate meeting primarily covered two resolutions, HCR65 and HCR19, both of which were passed unanimously with little to no opposition. HCR65 was introduced in memory of Tracy Lee Vincent of Longview, while HCR19 was presented to honor the late Terrell Lynn Roberts of Angleton. The meeting included brief addresses from several senators, who shared personal reflections on the impacts of the individuals being honored and expressed gratitude for their contributions to the community. This collaborative atmosphere showcased the members' capacity for camaraderie and respect, emphasizing the importance of human connection in legislative proceedings.

Transcript Highlights:

• During fiscal year 25, $3.2 billion was provided.
• As a reminder, Adrian noted this, but these maps show only districts.
• The witness also noted there were several charts about the programs.
• He said he had a return-on-investment question and noted that Dr.
• But I’ve made a note to get that information for you. Thank you very much.

Summary: The committee first approved the May 18 meeting minutes and then received a Legislative Audit presentation summarizing Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions for fiscal year 2025. Auditors said the department distributed about $4.6 billion in grants overall, including $3.2 billion from the Public School Fund, $1.1 billion in federal funds, and $268 million from other state and miscellaneous sources, across 56 Public School Fund programs, 14 other state programs, and 29 federal programs. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, master principal bonuses, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance funding; audit staff and Department of Education representatives explained that the report was only a distribution summary and not a recipient-level audit. Members also questioned why many districts showed lower funding, and staff said the decline was largely due to reduced federal and one-time COVID-related funds. Senators and representatives also discussed whether some incentive programs, such as master principal and national board bonuses, were tied to student outcomes, and whether Economics Arkansas was the sole entity named in special language for financial literacy funding; department staff said they would follow up on several details. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on consumer price index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global, with discussion of CPI-U and core CPI estimates for future fiscal years. Dr. Carlos Silva explained that the forecasts generally trend toward about 2 percent over time and that recent projections may have understated actual inflation because of recent shocks. Members asked about the accuracy of past projections, and he said he would provide more detail later if needed. The bulk of the meeting focused on the final adequacy report on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. BLR staff reported that Arkansas had about 32,800 teachers and 473,000 students in 2025, with a statewide student-to-teacher ratio of about 14 to 1, average teaching experience of 11.9 years, and a slight increase in National Board Certified teachers. The report found that districts with higher poverty and minority concentrations generally had less experienced teachers, and that teacher shortages remained widespread, especially in special education, math, science, and foreign language. Members asked about licensure exceptions, alternative preparation pathways, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, and the cost and return on investment of traditional versus alternative routes. Staff said some licensure exceptions are being phased out under Act 304 of 2025 and that they would follow up on several requested details. The report also found that teacher retention averaged 87 percent statewide in 2025, with districts retaining teachers at higher rates than charters, and that 30 percent of surveyed teachers were considering leaving the profession. Principals and teachers identified school leadership as the strongest positive factor in recruitment and retention, while workload and salary were the strongest negative factors. On salaries, BLR reported a statewide average teacher salary of $60,254 in 2025, with districts averaging $60,458 and charters $55,724. Arkansas ranked 45th nationally on average teacher salary in 2025, though its cost-adjusted ranking improved to 36th; among SREB states it ranked 12th, and among neighboring states it ranked fourth. Members asked about starting salaries, salary compression, district step increases, and whether the report should be shared more broadly with educators and school leaders. Staff said they would provide follow-up information on several questions, and the committee took no formal action beyond receiving the presentations and asking for additional data.