Transcript Highlights:

• Our primary purpose is to provide support, business leadership, and economic opportunity for our members
• You would take the average of the amount paid by private payers, so not the government payers, but private
• It would be 150% of the private payers' average amount for that service.
• It's for private payer. Go ahead. It's a private payer issue, correct?
• Well incurred and unpaid, is the same chart going to apply to both a private payer and an insurer?

Bills: SB30, SB517, SB1313, SB1314, SB1316, SB1541, SB1698, SB1845, SB1860, SB2420, SB2429, SB 30

Keywords: gambling, criminal offenses, penalties, defense, electronic devices, tobacco advertising, youth protection, public health, criminal offense, retailer regulation, e-cigarettes, nicotine products, health, public safety, regulation, advertising restrictions, health and safety, elections, election audit, county elections

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you have any primary witnesses? I have no primary witnesses.
• involved in they thought they might need to and they thought that that cost spread over their rate payers
• wasn't a great big large district but spread over those rate payers would be about $2 a month in terms
• way to give flexibility to our water agencies so that they're not passing on the cost to the rate payer
• Did you have a primary witness? Do you want to introduce? No. No. Okay. Awesome.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• perspective or if it's a change in payer perspective or if it's a change in practice.<00:15:45.760><
• Given the association of counties' role as the primary payer for the non-federal share of Medicaid
• And so from our role as primary payers of the non-federal share of the Medicaid program, we have a seat
• <00:38:01.040> payers and so from our role as primary payers and so from our role as primary
• payers of<00:38:01.520> the<00:38:01.680> non-federal<00:38:02.320> share<00:38

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee to study long-term managed care met to approve the prior meeting minutes, with a clarification that “OB3” referred to the “one big beautiful bill.” The minutes were then approved. Chair Jim Kofalt outlined the day’s agenda, which included testimony from the Granite State Home Health and Hospice Association, the New Hampshire Association of Counties, and later DHHS. He also noted that future meetings were expected soon and that the meetings were being livestreamed on YouTube. Granite State Home Health and Hospice Association, represented by Kellyanne Totten and Amy Moore, urged inclusive planning and a cautious, phased approach if managed care is considered. They emphasized that home care providers are not uniform, with different licensing and service models, and said any pilot should include varied provider types, rural and southern regions, and agencies of different sizes. They warned that workforce shortages, inflation, and a possible 9% CMS cut to Medicare home health payments could force agencies to reduce service areas or service types. They also said the 2023 Medicaid CFI rate increase has begun to lose its effect. In response to questions, they said the rural health transformation fund may help with planning and telehealth but likely cannot be used directly for rates or recruitment/retention. They also described the New England Home Care Nurse Residency Program, a Department of Labor grant, as a way to bring new registered nurses into home care with added training and school partnerships. The New Hampshire Association of Counties, through county nursing home administrators Craig Labore and David Ross, revisited the earlier Step Two managed care discussions from 2016-2018. They said prior consultants found the long-term services and supports system was underfunded and needed investment to stabilize providers and expand community-based care. They argued the same concerns remain today and said a managed model would jeopardize the Medicaid quality incentive payment program and, for county nursing homes, the proportionate share payment program. Their testimony was generally opposed to moving forward with managed long-term services and supports without significant additional funding and safeguards.

Transcript Highlights:

• And unfortunately, so many in our medical community, our primary physicians, do not as well.
• And unfortunately, so many in our medical community, our primary physicians, do not as well.
• I've also been a primary care physician.
• We wear sunscreen, we perform our own cancer exams, and we go to the primary care doctor.
• The... ...young children with rampant decay in both permanent and primary dentition.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Health held a hearing focused on children’s health, disease prevention, screening, treatment, and pharmacy-related bills. The chair explained that the session was for public testimony only, with no votes or decisions taken that day, and outlined the three-minute limit for individual testimony. The committee then heard testimony on a range of bills, including H. 2413 on adding electromagnetic sensitivity to the state’s MAVEN registry, S. 1508 and H. 2433 on creating an amputation prevention task force, H. 2535 and S. 1551 on establishing a naloxone purchase trust fund, S. 1635 on authorizing pharmacists to provide opioid use disorder treatment, H. 2385 on creating a special commission on avian influenza, and S. 1497 on patient safety and non-FDA-approved compounded drugs. Testimony on H. 2413 came largely from advocates and individuals who described electromagnetic sensitivity as a real health condition and argued that adding it to the registry would improve data collection, provider education, and public awareness. Testimony on the amputation prevention task force bills came from the American Diabetes Association and podiatry groups, who said diabetes-related amputations are often preventable, disproportionately affect people of color, and could be reduced through earlier screening, better care coordination, and improved insurance coverage for preventive foot care. On the naloxone trust fund bills, a representative, emergency physician, and nurse testified that hospitals often cannot reliably send overdose patients home with naloxone because of billing and reimbursement barriers, and that a bulk-purchase fund would expand access at no added cost to payers or providers. The committee also heard strong support for S. 1635 from pharmacists and public health researchers, who said community pharmacists could safely initiate and maintain buprenorphine treatment and help close gaps in opioid use disorder care. On H. 2385, a local board of health chair supported a special commission on avian influenza, citing gaps in emergency preparedness and the need for clearer coordination across agencies. On S. 1497, a pharmacy representative opposed restrictions on compounded drugs from outsourcing facilities, warning that changes could reduce access to life-saving medications and harm patient safety. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Rates that these hospitals are receiving not only from public payers like Medicare and Medicaid, but
• also commercial payers as well.
• Rolls, Office, the amendment entitled Permanent Primary Date Solution.
• Third reading of a bill: An act establishing the 2026 state primary election date, House No. 4531.
• No. 5531, an act establishing the 26th State Primary Election Day.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate took up a series of resolutions and bills, beginning with unanimous adoption of resolutions congratulating two Eagle Scouts. It then advanced several local and special acts, including measures on Machado-Joseph disease awareness day, the Ipswich senior tax referral program, Swampscott conservation commission appointments, protections for individuals with disabilities in MassHealth day habilitation programs, continued employment in Brookfield, Marblehead parking fines, Natick’s home rule charter, and Boston affordable housing/branch library space. The chamber also suspended Joint Rule 12 to refer several House petitions to committees. The Senate enacted House bills authorizing additional wine and malt beverage licenses in Lexington and a means-tested senior property tax exemption in Melrose. It also passed Senate Bill 2603 on affordable car rentals after adopting an amendment; supporters said the bill would reduce rental costs by changing Massachusetts’ rental car insurance rules to align with most other states. Senate Bill 1057 on fentanyl test strips was also passed to be engrossed after Senator Creem argued the bill would expand access to a low-cost overdose prevention tool and save lives. Senator Moore then spoke in support of expanding Nikki’s Law to cover MassHealth day habilitation programs, describing the bill as a needed protection for people with autism and intellectual and developmental disabilities. A major portion of the meeting focused on House 4530, a FY2025 supplemental appropriations bill providing $234 million for hospitals and community health centers. Senators discussed the Health Safety Net shortfall, rising health care costs, underinsurance, and federal reimbursement; Ways and Means explained that about $93 million was expected back in federal financial participation, making the net state cost about $140 million. The Senate also took up House 4531 on the 2026 state primary election date, rejecting an amendment before passing the bill to engrossment. The chamber later adopted emergency preambles for House 4530 and House 4531, and all three final bills—Machado-Joseph Disease Awareness Day, the supplemental budget, and the primary election date bill—were enacted and sent to the Governor. The Senate adjourned in memory of Ricardo Barbosa after a memorial statement by Senator Miranda.

Transcript Highlights:

• So in third-party liability we make sure that we are the last payer.
• of Last Resort so in third are the payer of Last Resort so in third party<00:30:43.960> liability
• we prevent dollars from the last payer we prevent dollars from going<00:30:47.399> out<00:30:
• We have about 18 technical advisory committees, anywhere from physicians to primary care, that also ask
• <00:37:43.800> Care anywhere from Physicians to Primary Care anywhere from Physicians to Primary

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to review the Department for Medicaid Services’ program integrity work. Commissioner Lisa Lee and Program Integrity Director Jennifer Dudinsky outlined Kentucky Medicaid’s structure, funding, enrollment, and spending, including FMAP rates, the size of the Medicaid and KCHIP populations, the number of providers, and 2024 expenditures. They also described the managed care and fee-for-service populations, noting that managed care serves most members while fee-for-service is concentrated in long-term care and waiver populations. Most of the discussion focused on fraud, waste, abuse prevention, and provider oversight. The department described its provider enrollment and certification checks, revalidation requirements, site reviews, fingerprinting for some high-risk providers, and termination grounds such as false application information, Medicare actions, unreported ownership changes, and abandonment of a provider number. Members asked about nonprofit ownership reporting, MCO fraud oversight, and how the department tracks unusual CPT code utilization, especially in behavioral health. The department said it uses data analytics, audits, policy review, and collaboration with behavioral health staff to monitor those trends. Dudinsky explained the division’s four branches: provider licensing and certification, audits and compliance, recovery, and third-party liability/estate recovery. She described prepayment and postpayment audits, referrals of credible fraud allegations to the Attorney General, monthly meetings with the AG’s office, and coordination with the Office of Inspector General, CMS, HHS OIG, MCOs, and other partners. She also explained payment suspensions, stand-downs during law enforcement investigations, and recovery efforts for overpayments, provider/member fraud, and third-party liability. The department said its recovery and avoidance efforts produced more than $251 million in savings so far in 2025. No votes or formal actions beyond approving the minutes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Payers, impacted payers, meaning our health plans, will have to comply with electronic prior authorization
• If primary witnesses in opposition, please come forward.
• Any primary witnesses in opposition? Any primary witnesses in opposition?
• Are there any primary witnesses in opposition? Thank you.
• So I'm a private payer.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee met on April 22 and took up a special order of bills focused largely on prior authorization and utilization management in health care. The chair framed the discussion as part of a broader legislative effort to reduce delays and barriers to care, especially in behavioral health, chronic disease management, cancer treatment, and rehabilitation services. AB 384 by Assembly Member Connolly would prohibit prior authorization for inpatient mental health or substance use emergency admissions and related physician care; supporters said it would prevent dangerous delays in crisis care, while insurers and health plans warned about fraud, abuse, and ambiguity around residential treatment facilities. The bill was moved on a due pass as amended motion and passed the committee on a party-line style vote, with Republicans largely absent or not voting. The committee then heard AB 510 by Assembly Member Addis, which would require health plans, upon request, to provide a peer reviewer of the same or similar specialty when a treating provider appeals a prior authorization denial or modification. Supporters argued that specialty-matched review would make appeals fairer and more clinically informed; opponents said the requirement was too rigid and that timelines and electronic submission rules needed changes. After discussion about the need for timely, specialty-specific review, the bill was approved on a due pass as amended motion and placed on call. AB 539 by Assembly Member Schiavo would extend prior authorization approvals to one year or the duration of the physician’s prescribed treatment for chronic conditions; supporters cited repeated denials and treatment interruptions, while opponents raised concerns about overbreadth, fraud, and the need for shorter validity periods. The bill was also passed as amended and placed on call. The committee next considered AB 669 by Assembly Member Haney, which would bar concurrent and retrospective review for the first 28 days of medically necessary substance use disorder treatment and limit prior authorization for related outpatient medications. The bill was presented with a powerful personal story from Ryan Matlock’s mother about her son’s death after an insurer cut off treatment early; supporters said the measure would keep patients in care long enough to stabilize, while opponents argued it would reduce oversight and could allow lower-quality or non-evidence-based care. The bill was moved on a due pass as amended motion and placed on call. Finally, AB 512 by Assembly Member Harabedian would shorten prior authorization response times to 24 hours for urgent requests and 48 hours for non-urgent requests; supporters said delays can worsen outcomes, while opponents warned the timelines were unrealistic and could increase administrative burdens and safety issues. The bill was approved as amended and placed on call. AB 574 by Assembly Member Mark Gonzalez was then heard; it would allow up to 12 medically necessary physical therapy sessions for a new episode of care without prior authorization, with supporters emphasizing stroke and neurological recovery and opponents warning of reduced oversight and unnecessary care. The transcript ends during testimony on AB 574, before final action is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• . ...decades, Medicaid programs everywhere have not been known as really good payers for providers.
• They serve a very, very high proportion of public payer patients.
• They serve a very, very high proportion of public payer patients.
• We provide comprehensive primary, specialty, and emergency care.
• This is primary care.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s Medi-Cal program and on community health effects from recent immigration enforcement actions. Committee leaders said H.R. 1 would sharply reduce federal funding, increase administrative burdens, and worsen access to care, especially for Medi-Cal enrollees, immigrant families, rural communities, and reproductive health patients. The second half of the hearing examined how ICE raids and related federal actions are creating fear, reducing clinic and emergency department use, and disrupting children’s access to schools and early childhood education. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined the main H.R. 1 provisions affecting Medi-Cal: work requirements, semiannual eligibility redeterminations, shorter retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal support for emergency and lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for prohibited abortion providers. She estimated millions could lose coverage, with tens of billions of dollars in federal funding at risk. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warned the defunding provision could force clinic closures, service reductions, and loss of access to family planning, STI testing, and cancer screenings. The California Hospital Association said the financing changes could cut hospital revenue by tens of billions over 10 years and threaten access, especially for rural and safety-net hospitals. The Western Center on Law and Poverty argued the law would increase churn, paperwork, and uninsured rates, disproportionately harming working adults and people experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation timelines, notification systems, administrative costs, the effect on immigrant eligibility, and whether California could delay or mitigate some provisions. Bass said the state was still assessing federal guidance, planning county and provider outreach, and exploring a possible delay for work requirements and a transition period for provider-tax changes. Members also discussed how state budget actions may need to be revisited in light of H.R. 1, and how California might preserve access through state-only funding or other policy changes. In the second panel, CHIRLA, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Children’s Partnership described the health consequences of immigration enforcement. Speakers said raids and data-sharing fears are causing anxiety, trauma, and avoidance of care, with Los Angeles County reporting declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits after enforcement actions. The Children’s Partnership said school and early childhood absences are rising in some communities and that enforcement is undermining children’s emotional well-being and access to education. Members asked for more data and discussed possible state protections, telehealth, mobile care, and legal and policy responses to reduce fear and preserve access to health and education services.

Transcript Highlights:

• The primary reason for flagging this is because, as a health-focused arm of the state government, the
• Also, on payment recoupments, payers seem to have almost an unlimited time frame, going back one or two
• I believe our payers should also be limited to 90 days to determine if a payment was made inaccurately
• We had a list with every single insurance payer detailing who needed a prior authorization, for what,
• He was one of the few people that laid it out succinctly regarding what New Mexico is with our payer.

Transcript Highlights:

• But she is absolutely my primary care physician.
• But she is absolutely my primary care physician.
• But she is absolutely my primary care physician.
• But she is absolutely my primary care physician.
• And what as my primary care physician.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To date, such loans have been paid back with interest to ensure that the fee payers for the lending fund
• To date, such loans have been paid back with interest to ensure that the few payers for the lending fund
• Over the last few years, we've gotten the portion of payers who pay by electronic means up from the mid
• But if a payer simply refuses to, then we do have the penalty. Thank you for sharing that.
• This decrease reflects two primary things.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee held a May Revision budget hearing on state administration and related issues, hearing presentations from multiple departments and agencies. Early items included the Public Employment Relations Board on funding for implementation of AB 1 and a reduced request tied to AB 288, the Governor’s Office of Service and Community Engagement on a technical College Corps adjustment, and the Secretary of State on building security upgrades, election security grant matching funds, and payroll system readiness costs. The Department of Consumer Affairs presented a Board of Pharmacy modernization request and a General Fund backfill for the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education; the LAO raised no concerns on the pharmacy item but recommended rejecting the private postsecondary backfill and questioned interest-free loan language. The Employment Development Department outlined several large workload and benefit adjustments, including EDD Next document management funding, UI loan interest, DI/PFL benefit increases, WIOA adjustments, school employee benefits, an EMT training reappropriation, and a technical reversion correction; the LAO flagged the size of the DI/PFL increase and the expansion of the document management scope, while members asked about program impacts and timelines. The California Workforce Development Board presented an April adjustment to reimbursement authority for an interagency agreement with Caltrans, which the LAO said raised no concerns. Public comment on that item and others included support for workforce and apprenticeship initiatives, including the Jails to Jobs proposal and renewal of the Apprenticeship Innovation Fund, though those were not part of the May Revision package. The Department of Industrial Relations then presented several proposals: reclassifying legal positions, continuing modernization of the workers’ compensation EAMS system, Cal/OSHA data modernization, creating a Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, reappropriating funds for the California Opportunity Youth Apprenticeship program, and trailer bill changes requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and adjusting the statutory treatment of the workers’ compensation administrative director’s salary. The LAO generally found the IT and salary proposals reasonable but urged close monitoring of the new emerging technologies unit. Committee members, especially Assemblymember Ortega, pressed DIR on long vacancy rates, wage theft claim delays, low collection rates for Cal/OSHA fines, and whether new resources would improve outcomes; DIR said it was pursuing recruitment, classification reviews, and process modernization, while the LAO noted that staffing alone may not explain the delays. The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board also sought to make permanent a 2024 change to the 60-day reconsideration clock, saying it had reduced backlog and interim orders; the LAO had no concerns. Finally, the Department of Human Resources presented a statewide Employee Assistance Program contract consolidation that would lower costs compared with renewing separate contracts and requested one program manager position to oversee the contract and first responder services; the hearing continued with Finance’s response after the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving on to the next section, Department of Health, on line 131, the all-payers all-payer claims database
• database<00:16:02.760> fee all payers all payer claims database fee all payers all payer
• These sections make changes to the rural primary care residency training program.
• claims database, which is the state's primary health policy research database.
• to try to get more out of the uh payers to try to get more out of the uh payers and<01:25:04.680

Bills: HF4401, HF4466

Keywords: HF4401, Minnesota Medical Assistance, dental reimbursement, dental rates, critical access dental providers, Medicaid dental, MinnesotaCare, managed care plans, county-based purchasing plans, fee-for-service, oral health access, safety-net clinics, federally qualified health centers, rural health clinics, Indian health services, state-operated dental clinics, low-income patients, children's dental care, provider reimbursement, dental access

Transcript Highlights:

• Another one is integrating behavioral health with primary care. Yes, absolutely.
• are qualified to be a... and also get you paid, which would be Health Care Authority and private payers
• are qualified to be a... and also get you paid, which would be Health Care Authority and private payers
• then... thank you. ...licensed BHA, being licensed and certified with DOH, and then getting to the payers
• MCOs, eight ASOs, and 1,518 private health insurers to then get credentialed through all of those payers

Summary: The committee met for its final session before submitting a report to the governor and legislature, with introductions from state officials, legislators, advocates, providers, and facilitators. Staff explained that the meeting would focus on finalizing the committee’s strategic priorities and recommendations for a five-year behavioral health plan centered on prevention, early intervention, and community-based services. Members reviewed the draft overarching priorities, including the need for a statewide behavioral health vision and an executive-level role to coordinate behavioral health across agencies, and discussed how those priorities should reflect people with lived experience, families, and community voice. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on the draft recommendations and how they should be organized and worded. Members raised concerns that the document was too aspirational and not specific enough, and several suggested moving more detailed actions under the broader priorities rather than leaving them in a separate section. There was also discussion about the use of the term “evidence-based,” with tribal representatives and others asking for language that also recognizes practice-based evidence, promising practices, cultural specificity, and flexibility in funding and implementation. Members also discussed clarifying “early intervention,” adding examples such as universal screening, outpatient access, primary care integration, and home visiting, and ensuring the plan reflects accountability and community feedback. Other edits included clarifying credentialing recommendations to distinguish between licensure and payer credentialing, adding mentorship as a workforce retention strategy, and broadening Medicaid-centric language to include carriers and insurers more generally. Staff noted the report would be revised and sent back out for review by May 22, with comments due by May 27, in order to meet the June 1 submission deadline. No public comment was offered, and the meeting ended with thanks to members and facilitators for their work.

Transcript Highlights:

• In my primary...
• with the Florida Association of Counties for about 20 years, a little bit more than 20 years, and my primary
• fee, or if enough revenues are not actually collected over time, they have to be refunded to the fee payer
• there must be a reasonable connection between the fee collected and the benefits received by that fee payer
• That's the primary legal overview.

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2026 session and took up impact fees, with an opening overview from Eric Poole of the Florida Association of Counties. Poole explained that impact fees are one-time charges on new development used only for new infrastructure capacity, not existing deficiencies or maintenance, and must satisfy the dual rational nexus test. He traced their history in Florida and described how comprehensive plans, concurrency, and later mobility fees relate to local infrastructure funding. He argued that impact fees are restricted, tied to capital improvements, and are one tool for paying for growth. Panelists representing counties, cities, builders, and community developers largely agreed that growth creates real infrastructure costs but differed on how those costs should be allocated. County and city representatives said impact fees are a necessary, targeted way to fund roads, water, sewer, fire, schools, and parks without spreading costs across all taxpayers. They pointed to long periods without fee updates, rising construction costs, and examples of large increases justified by studies. Builder and developer representatives argued that fees are often unpredictable, can be doubled or tripled, and contribute to housing affordability problems; they also said the system can be inconsistent across jurisdictions and may encourage sprawl. Several witnesses emphasized that fees must be transparent, proportional, and tied to actual benefits, and some suggested a statewide framework or mobility-fee model with more consistency and peer review. Members asked about how long local governments can hold fee revenue, whether fees can generate profit, what they can be spent on, and whether they can pay for police stations, fire stations, or other public safety facilities. Witnesses said the funds must be used for capital projects and cannot be used for salaries or unrelated purchases, and that refunds may be required if money is not spent within the local ordinance’s timeframe. The discussion also covered examples of local fee increases, the use of impact fees versus direct construction or “pipelining” of infrastructure, and concerns about level-of-service changes and extraordinary-circumstance increases. No votes were taken; the meeting ended after the panel discussion and member questions, with the chair noting the conversation would continue.

Transcript Highlights:

• Notably... over one-third of this year's graduates chose to train in primary care specialties at a when
• Texas and the nation are facing historic primary care shortages.
• We are the primary facility in the state to conduct research related to respiratory disease. develop
• master's program in the state of Texas. hospital campuses and an extensive network of almost 100 primary
• Claim Database, the Texas All-Payer Claim Database, and the Texas All-Payer Claim Database.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• sets fee rates to ensure financial stability for the department while remaining responsive to fee payers
• The primary forum for this is our regular public board meetings, which also enable board members to ask
• We think additional funding outside of fee payers is going to be critical for that.
• I think we're seriously concerned as the largest facility fee payer in the state.
• I am seriously concerned, as the largest facility fee payer in the state.

Summary: The joint oversight hearing focused on DTSC’s implementation of SB 158 reforms, including enforcement, community engagement, fee stability, the hazardous waste management plan, permitting backlogs, and the Safer Consumer Products program. Senators and Assembly members emphasized protecting overburdened communities and asked how DTSC and the Board of Environmental Safety are using their authority to improve accountability, reduce delays, and address hazardous waste facilities and consumer product chemicals. The hearing also included discussion of extended producer responsibility programs and whether DTSC can support them more efficiently, including through coordination with CalRecycle. DTSC Director Katie Butler said the department is now more transparent, accountable, and fiscally stable, citing stronger enforcement actions, an interactive inspections map, expanded community outreach, and emergency response work on the Los Angeles wildfire cleanup. She said DTSC has made progress on fee reform, the hazardous waste management plan, cleanup grants, permit renewals, and safer consumer products rulemaking, including adding microplastics to the candidate chemical list. Board Chair Andrew Rakestraw said the board has held multiple public meetings and hearings, is working on fee rates and performance metrics, and is revising the hazardous waste management plan after public comment, including removing a proposal to send certain contaminated soil to municipal landfills. He also noted remaining concerns about fee structure, permit delays, and the pace of the safer consumer products program. Public witnesses offered sharply different views. A representative of the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance said SB 158 reforms have improved permitting and transparency, but urged more attention to risk-based decision-making, reduced duplication, and possible General Fund support for plan implementation rather than relying only on fees. Earthjustice argued DTSC remains too slow and that communities continue to suffer from long-delayed permits and weak protections, urging the Legislature to take a more active role and to prioritize eliminating hazardous substances rather than minimizing costs. Committee members pressed the witnesses on permit renewals, community impacts, and the pace of the safer consumer products program, while DTSC defended its progress and said further legislative collaboration may be needed on hazardous waste management and emerging waste streams.

Transcript Highlights:

• that's in your opinion um an primary that's in your opinion um an ambulance<00:26:08.399> and
• recommend speaking from the rate payers recommend speaking from the rate payers perspective<00:46
• <00:47:29.559> we<00:47:29.680> would and pass that on to rate payers we would and
• <00:54:08.760> Bill<00:54:09.359> roughly was about $2 per rate payer Bill roughly
• no matter what it is okay by rate payers no matter what it is okay so<00:56:01.440> we<00:56:

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures, beginning with SB 48 SD2 HD1 relating to combat sports. The Attorney General offered a technical comment on the bill’s effective date, and several testifiers from the combat sports community strongly supported the measure with amendments. They argued that boxing and MMA should be treated separately, that the current regulatory structure has made events too costly and reduced opportunities, and that more local oversight would help revive the sport and give youth a constructive outlet. Committee members questioned whether the bill’s medical staffing requirements would apply to boxing, MMA, or both, and whether the added requirements would increase costs and reduce access. The witness from the combat sports community said amateur boxing is already regulated through USA Boxing, that the DCCA should focus on professional boxing, and that for safety he would support two physicians and one ambulance for boxing and MMA events. The committee then took up SB 117 SD2 HD1 relating to transportation. The Department of Transportation and the Ulon Initiative testified in support, and the bicycling community was listed as supporting as well. Members focused on the bill’s rebate program for electric transportation devices, asking how successful it had been and whether removing the rebate would affect use. DOT said the program began in February 2023 and had issued about 500 rebates totaling roughly $166,000, aimed at helping people without vehicles access transportation options. The department explained that the bill would broaden access and increase the rebate amount, including additional assistance for low-income applicants. Finally, the committee heard SB 897 SD3 HD1 relating to energy and wildfire liability. The Division of Consumer Advocacy, the Public Utilities Commission, the Attorney General, Clearway Energy Group, Ulon Initiative, Kawai K, IBEW Local 1260, and Hawaiian Electric all testified in support, while the Hawaii Association for Justice was listed as opposed but not present. Supporters said the bill would help finance wildfire mitigation and infrastructure improvements through securitization, reduce wildfire risk, and address utility cost and credit concerns. Hawaiian Electric emphasized that the bill is forward-looking, would help protect customers from future wildfire-related cost increases, and requested amendments including a study on a future wildfire recovery fund. In questioning, members pressed Hawaiian Electric on the liability cap, asking whether it would have applied to the Maui wildfires and whether it would cover personal injury or wrongful death; the witness and company counsel clarified that the aggregate cap applies only to qualifying property damage, not personal injury or wrongful death, and said they would follow up on how the cap would calculate in a Maui-type event. Hawaiian Electric also said it would seek financing under the bill if enacted and updated members on settlement funding efforts, including raising the first $550 million in equity and divesting assets to help meet its obligations.

Transcript Highlights:

• When you go to any medical service, you go to a primary care physician for one visit, 10 minutes, they
• <00:17:46.200> care service you go to a primary care service you go to a primary care physician
• gave us their payer mix and their<00:55:13.040> um<00:55:13.839> the<00:55:14.040>
• <01:09:18.040> care you're not calling your primary care you're not calling your primary care
• never heard of a hospital or a primary never heard of a hospital or a primary care<01:09:41.040>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee discussed three ambulance reimbursement bills and tried to distinguish their approaches. House Bill 185 would require insurers to pay the full amount billed by an ambulance provider when there is no contract rate, with no balance billing to the patient; the Insurance Department clarified that emergency ambulance services are already covered under the benchmark plan, so the bill’s reference to policies without ambulance coverage is effectively meaningless. House Bill 725 would set reimbursement at 325% of the Medicare rate for non-contract ambulance services and prohibit balance billing. House Bill 316 was described as addressing the broader problem that Medicare/Medicaid rates are low and that current balance billing shifts costs to patients or municipalities; its sponsor said the bill would require insurers to pay a rate that gives providers a fighting chance to remain in business, and he viewed 325% of Medicare as the most logical option. Members debated whether insurers should pay the billed amount, a negotiated in-network rate, or a regulated percentage of Medicare. Some argued that out-of-network ambulance providers are underpaid and that in-network rates are often too low to sustain service, especially for emergency providers who cannot steer patients. Others said ambulance companies should not be able to bill whatever they want and questioned the fairness of charging insured patients or insurers more than the service is worth. There was also discussion of whether rate schedules should be reviewed by an oversight body and whether different costs in rural areas justify different reimbursement levels. A recurring issue was balance billing and who ultimately bears the shortfall. Several members said balance billing harms patients and often does not get paid, leaving cities and towns or property taxpayers to cover the difference for municipal ambulance services. Others argued that shifting the cost to insurance premiums would spread the burden more fairly, though it could raise premiums by a few dollars per person per month. No vote or final action was taken in the excerpt; the discussion focused on clarifying the bills and weighing their policy tradeoffs.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 236, as amended by primary House Sub 2, passes with favorable expression.
• House Bill 236, as amended by primary House Sub 2, passes with favorable expression.
• House Bill 236 as amended by primary House Bill 236 as amended by primary house<00:09:59.920> sub<
• I know KEES money comes from lottery money, but does homeschool payers pay taxes to the local schools
• payers pay taxes to the local schools? payers pay taxes to the local schools?

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Postsecondary Education met for its fifth meeting and first took up House Bill 236, which would remove dual licensure requirements for certain Kentucky EMS education and training programs licensed by the Kentucky Board of EMS. The sponsor and witnesses said the change would reduce red tape and costs for small EMS training providers, help address workforce shortages, and preserve existing training standards. The committee adopted a committee substitute, then passed the bill with favorable expression and adopted a title amendment. Members noted support from the Council for Proprietary Education and the Council for Postsecondary Education. The committee then heard House Bill 298 for discussion only, with no vote taken. The bill would extend KEES scholarship eligibility to students from non-certified schools, including homeschool, parochial, church, and other private schools, using dual-credit coursework, AP exams, and ACT scores to determine merit. The sponsor and a homeschooling witness argued the measure would create fairness for high-achieving students who are currently limited to the ACT supplement, and said homeschool students often take advanced coursework and dual-credit classes. Members asked about instructional hours, certification, eligibility criteria, and the fiscal impact; the sponsor said the bill had a fiscal note of about $290,000 in the first year and about $3.9 million at full implementation, and that the policy would apply to lottery-funded KEES dollars. Several members expressed support for both bills, while also seeking clarification on how homeschool and non-certified school programs operate and why some do not seek certification. The discussion emphasized that homeschoolers are treated as private schools under Kentucky law, that certification can be costly and time-consuming, and that the bill would not change existing academic standards for KEES eligibility. The meeting ended after the discussion of HB 298, with no committee vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• For our communities, the competition is really between rate payers and the salesperson.
• And I can tell you that, at least in our community, the rate payer is losing.
• We urge you to give a favorable report to S-2239, an act prohibiting the use of rate-payer funds for
• So if you believe the AG's report that $571 million was stolen from rate payers in the last 80s?
• Again, great payers should not be paying for that.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several energy-related bills, with the main focus on H. 3534/S. 2255, which would ban or sharply restrict residential third-party electric suppliers, and on related reform proposals. Supporters included the Attorney General’s office, municipal and regional planning officials, environmental justice groups, consumer advocates, and city officials from Boston and Chelsea. They argued that the residential competitive supply market has produced higher bills, deceptive sales tactics, auto-renewals into higher rates, and disproportionate harm to low-income residents, seniors, communities of color, and people with limited English. Witnesses cited AG reports estimating hundreds of millions of dollars in overcharges over time, described door-to-door and storefront marketing abuses, and said municipal aggregation programs have saved residents money while offering more stable rates. Several supporters said the Legislature should either ban residential competitive supply or adopt strong guardrails such as ending automatic renewals, banning incentive-based commissions, and capping rates relative to basic service. Opponents or industry representatives from the Retail Energy Advancement League, Vistra, and Constellation argued that the market can provide savings, longer-term price stability, and value-added products such as renewable options and time-of-use offerings. They said Massachusetts has already improved consumer protections through DPU proceedings, that complaints are relatively few compared with the size of the market, and that a ban would eliminate consumer choice. They also defended direct sales and commissions as normal features of a retail market, while saying they would support additional protections, licensing, bonding, and stronger oversight of bad actors. Committee members pressed both sides on whether the market truly saves money, whether automatic renewals should be banned, and whether the AG’s proposed reforms would be enough. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3972, a bill to extend utility shutoff protections during extreme heat, with Rep. Mindy Domb arguing that Massachusetts should treat extreme heat like extreme cold and protect customers facing financial hardship. Rep. Barrett also testified for H. 3450, a municipal broadband/right-of-way bill, arguing that communities need easier and cheaper access to utility poles and public rights of way to build municipal broadband. In addition, Senate Majority Leader Creem testified for S. 2239, which would bar utilities from recovering ratepayer funds for lobbying, promotions, trade association dues, and similar expenses. No votes were taken during the hearing.