Transcript Highlights:

• And third, how do we plan for variable and shared occupancy?
• Hybrid work means we shared occupancy?
• First, we've moderated our sharing ratio so it accounts for the new return-to-office requirements and
• </c><00:04:39.759><c> ratio</c> First, we've moderated our sharing ratio First, we've moderated our sharing
• </c><00:05:00.560><c> model</c><00:05:00.720><c> as</c> That includes using the sharing model as That

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• But the most important thing that I want to share with the Finance Committee that I didn't specifically
• As well as, you know, we share a city—you know, me the south part and you the north part—so I do want
• District Court ruled that it is unlawful for the IRS to share taxpayer addresses with ICE.
• While all of this unfolded, 47,000 taxpayer records were ultimately shared with DHS.
• Should I share? I'm not allowed to share yet. So we've got—we should have a second set of slides.

Bills: HB1717, HB1859

Keywords: affordable housing, sales tax, housing programs, tax incentives, economic development, religious organizations, development, housing opportunities, land use, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I share that background to make this point.
• In your prepared testimony, you mentioned burden sharing.
• I'll remind you respectfully that the comments that I made that you've just shared were shared on my
• Yes, Senator, I share your interest in this.
• I agree with you and share your concern.

Keywords: Department of Defense, nominations, Matthew Lohmeyer, Justin Overbaugh, global security, military readiness, NATO, Russia, China, defense infrastructure

Summary: The meeting was primarily focused on discussing nominations for key positions within the Department of Defense, specifically for roles such as the Undersecretary of the Air Force and the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. Senators expressed urgent concerns about global security threats, the need for robust military readiness, and the emphasis on effective collaboration with NATO allies amidst rising tensions with adversaries such as Russia and China. Several senators highlighted the challenges facing military infrastructure and defense capabilities, suggesting a critical need for improvements and investment in these areas to ensure national security.

Transcript Highlights:

• May from the University of California, Davis, to share some welcoming remarks.
• Assembly members, thank you so much for having us and for this opportunity to share.
• I appreciate you sharing about Beam Circular.
• It's so honored and happy to be here and to share our research.
• I appreciate you for taking the time to share.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I'm going to share a story.
• We share what we can. That is not confidential.
• That's the way I would answer your question about sharing.
• We can share data, we can share systems, but if they don't have the money or just the operation to be
• I don't know if the organizations present can share.

Summary: The committee heard budget and workload presentations from the Office of the State Public Defender, legal aid organizations, and the Judicial Branch. OSPD requested permanent funding for positions that had been temporarily funded to implement the Racial Justice Act, explaining that the work has become ongoing and now includes additional Supreme Court briefing, habeas proceedings, investigations, expert analysis, and data requests. The State Public Defender also presented the AB 625 public defense workload report, which found statewide staffing shortages, caseloads above recommended standards, and major gaps in investigators and support staff. Senators asked about racial bias claims, the volume of data requests, and the impact of Prop. 36, and OSPD said it would provide additional written information. The legal aid panel asked for a $50 million increase to the Equal Access Fund, $20 million to restart homelessness prevention services, and $10 million for health care access work, while also supporting Access to Justice Commission requests for loan repayment assistance, immigrant family preparedness services, and innovation grants. Witnesses described legal aid as homelessness prevention and cited examples involving eviction defense, domestic violence survivors, and immigration detention cases. Los Angeles Superior Court Presiding Judge Sergio Tapia discussed eviction data, low tenant representation, and court pilots in Compton and at Stanley Mosk that combine mediation, rental assistance, and legal help. Senators asked for service maps, outreach materials, and more detail on funding needs and federal funding losses. For the Judicial Branch overview, the Judicial Council and trial court representatives supported the Governor’s proposed budget, including $70 million for trial court operations, $21.7 million for employee health and retirement costs, and funding for appellate counsel, case processing, and courthouse construction. They said rising costs, staffing retention, and interpreter shortages continue to strain the courts, and described efforts to reallocate interpreter funds and recruit hard-to-find languages such as Mixteco. Senators pressed the branch and the Department of Finance on courthouse facilities, noting that the long-term need is far larger than the current budget proposal; Finance said the branch’s facility needs were estimated at about $22.5 billion over 10 years to start 68 projects and $29.4 billion to complete the remaining projects. The committee requested follow-up information on facilities, judgeships, and interpreter needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• 75% of the share.
• of the share.
• I've shared that with the president of the system.
• But the revenue share, actually, the athletic department had fully funded their revenue share.
• And I think you share those thoughts.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They share it with other companies and they also share it with the government.
• I don't know if they're willing to share that with us.
• And then again, to share that, I think, is where a lot of this sharing is probably happening for the
• That data is often pooled and shared across agencies.
• this information, sometimes it's getting shared.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:09:10.160><c> those</c> studies and examples and we share those studies and examples and we share
• And I'm sharing this as an vibrant.
• </c> I need to go back and share again. I need to go back and share again.
• I was encouraged to share.
• ><c> we</c><01:13:17.600><c> bring</c> sharing that's possible when we bring sharing that's possible

Bills: HB2437, HB1815, HB1614, HB1613, HB1612, HB2411, HB2597, HB2583, HB2474, HB1863, HB2590, HB1813, HB1838, HB2138, HB1967, HB1576, HB2139, HB1605, HB2113, HB812, HB1831, HB1707, HB2561, HB1805, HB2469, HB2472, HB2387, HB1658, HB1661, HB1664, HB1859, HB2276, HB2335, HB1656, HB2116, HB2272, HB2273, HB2340, HB2158, HB2339, HB2489, HB2159, HB2171, HB2338, HB2005, HB1952, HB1872, HB1676, HB2384, HB2614, HB20, HB1776, HB1565, HB2310, HB1975, HB1801, HB1668, HB2114, HB1972, HB1546, HB1518, HB1131, HB2208, HB2156, HB2268, HB2622, HB2581, HB2498, HB2443, HB1577, HB2033, HB2031, HB2023, HB1969, HB1973, HB1974, HB2315, HB2343, HB2501, HB2505, HB816, HB1562, HB1591, HB1853, HB1854, HB1871, HB1965, HB1966, HB1537, HB1541, HB276, HB2606, HB2270, HB1920, HB1756, HB1727, HB1718, HB1715, HB1713, HB1711

Keywords: arts education, student engagement, cultural literacy, public schools, funding, State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, SFCA, Performing Arts Grants Program, arts grants, culture and the arts, history and the humanities, King Kamehameha Celebration Commission, Works of Art Special Fund, one percent for art, public art, art in public places, relocatable works of art, DBEDT, Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism, DAGS

Transcript Highlights:

• with families and how to co-create a shared plan of care.
• to partner with families and how to co-create a shared plan of care.
• I can send it to Eman and Eman share it. Yeah, send it to Eman.
• Yeah, she'll share it with the committee at large.
• We don't have kind of like, you know, final things to be able to share.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Permanent Commission on the Status of Persons with Disabilities equity subcommittee met, approved the prior minutes, and heard a presentation from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health’s Cater Center (Care Coordination Assistance, Training, Education, and Resources for Kids). Presenters Toria Haffey and Patty Loza explained that Cater provides training and technical assistance to MassHealth’s Cares for Kids providers serving children with medical complexity, with a focus on enhanced care coordination, family partnership, racial/cultural/linguistic equity, community resources, education systems, shared plans of care, and transition support. They described five e-learning modules, flexible one-on-one and group technical assistance, case review support, and informal virtual “cafes” for providers. They also noted the program has been operating for about two to three years and currently works with five hospital-based providers, including Boston Children’s, BMC, Tufts, NeighborHealth, and Baystate. Committee members asked about the number of families served, the relationship to MassHealth, and whether the model could be expanded beyond Boston-area providers. The presenters said Cater does not track enrollment numbers because that is handled by providers and MassHealth, and they agreed there is room to broaden reach and improve data collection. Members suggested connecting Cater with regional disability and case management networks, the Health Equity Compact, ACOs, and DDS-related contacts. Questions also focused on funding stability amid federal Medicaid cuts and workforce shortages in family engagement roles; Cater said the work remains a priority for MassHealth, though funding is a concern, and acknowledged staffing gaps, especially for family partners with lived experience. After the presentation, the committee discussed a NIH strategic plan for disability health research that had been circulated for future review. Because members had not yet read it, they agreed to place it on the agenda for the next meeting. The meeting then adjourned with no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• When the voters approved the Fair Share Amendment in 2022, it was designed to bring in new revenue to
• Even the harshest critic of the Fair Share Amendment cannot dispute that we have used this opportunity
• The state collected over $2.4 billion in Fair Share revenue in FY24.
• That is not a fair share of this funding for our municipalities.
• This formula ensures a fair share of... ...the high cost of doing roads.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and adopted two ceremonial resolutions: one commemorating the dedication of the Woburn Battle Road Memorial as part of the Massachusetts 250th celebration, and another recognizing May 1-7 as Elks National Youth Week. The chamber then took up House Bill 4005, a fiscal year 2025 supplemental appropriations bill using FY24 Fair Share surtax surplus funds, and ordered it to a third reading before later considering it for passage to be engrossed. During debate on the bill, the House heard a lengthy presentation in support of the proposal, which would direct about $828 million to transportation and $353 million to education. The transportation spending was described as primarily supporting the MBTA, including workforce and safety funding, reserve replenishment, station and infrastructure improvements, reduced fares, and reimbursement for tunnel closure costs, along with smaller amounts for regional transit authorities and unpaved roads. The education side included additional special education circuit breaker funding, vocational school capital, early education workforce supports, early literacy, universal school meals, higher education endowment matches, Green School Works, and ESOL waitlist reduction, with the Inspector General directed to review circuit breaker cost controls. Members then debated several amendments. One amendment related to a school athletics policy was modified by a further amendment calling for DESE analysis before implementation; both the further amendment and the underlying amendment as amended were adopted. A transportation amendment to shift $50 million from MBTA funding to Chapter 90 municipal roads was supported by members emphasizing rural road needs but was rejected on a roll call, 25-120. Another transportation amendment adding at least $300,000 for Route 93 mitigation costs in Medford was adopted, 133-20. The bill itself then passed to be engrossed on a roll call, 140-14. The House also observed moments of silence for former First Lady Kitty Dukakis and for victims of the Santo Domingo nightclub collapse, and later adopted an order to meet the next day at 11 a.m. before adjourning in memory of former Representative Philip W. Johnston.

Transcript Highlights:

• enterprise data sharing.
• enterprise data sharing.
• enterprise data sharing.
• enterprise data sharing.
• </c> common data sharing agreements. common data sharing agreements.

Bills: HB1813, HB2429, HB2423, HB1996, HB1851, HB2546, HB2028, HB2583, HB2490, HB2545, HB2114, HB1859, HB2534, HB2474, HB1863, HB2475

Keywords: taxation, general excise tax, use tax, exemptions, Hawaii Revised Statutes, tax expenditure, tax expenditure evaluation, tax credit review, tax incentive, tax exemption, use tax exemption, income tax credit, DBEDT, Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism, Department of Taxation, fiscal oversight, budget accountability, tax policy, revenue loss, public spending

Summary: The committee opened with HB 1813 on taxation and HB 2429 on tax expenditure evaluation, taking mostly written testimony and limited oral discussion. On HB 2429, the Tax Foundation and Department of Taxation raised privacy and federal-law concerns, warning that the bill could require taxpayers to file duplicative returns and could risk disclosure of federal tax information if released publicly. Members and witnesses discussed using anonymized or summary reporting instead of individual public release, with the department saying summarized data would be preferable and that the state can ask for the information as a policy matter, but individual public release could create problems. The committee then heard HB 2423 HD1 on biodiesel, where Pacific Biodiesel said it can supply all biodiesel needed for B5 in Hawaii without imports and asked to move the implementation date earlier to November 2027 to allow rollout planning. HB 1996 HB1 on hearing aids drew broad support; a disability access representative said earlier insurance-based efforts had run into administrative problems and that this bill would immediately lower costs for consumers. HB 1851 HD1, also related to hearing aids, received support from the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, while the Tax Foundation argued the program would be better funded directly rather than through the tax system, citing overhead costs and blank provisions that should be filled in before passage. On HB 2546, the research activities tax credit, HCDC said the credit supports long-term R&D and should be converted from a first-come, first-served system to proration so more applicants receive some benefit; the agency described the credit as helping companies move from idea to commercialization and noted the state is leaving potential jobs and federal dollars on the table. HB 2028 HD1, relating to Labor Day for construction workers, drew support from labor representatives who said it recognizes construction workers and helps offset cost-of-living pressures, while the Tax Foundation opposed it as an industry-specific subsidy and flagged technical issues with undefined terms and blank credit amounts. The committee also heard HB 2583, HB 2490, HB 2545, HB 2114, and HB 1859 HD1. HB 2490, concerning coastal erosion at Mokuhiki Bay, received strong support from a temple representative who described severe shoreline loss, years of temporary emergency work, and the need for a long-term, nature-based solution in coordination with state agencies. HB 2545, involving HCDC and SBIR commercialization, was supported as a way to turn R&D into economic development; HCDC said it had more applications than it could fund and that the bill could help create high-wage jobs. HB 2114, the Hawaii Benefits Hub, received comments from ETS and DHS emphasizing support for the concept but cautioning that operational, policy, cybersecurity, and data-sharing standards must be carefully aligned. HB 1859 HD1 on workforce development drew strong support from workforce and philanthropic groups, who said Hawaii faces a long-term gap between projected living-wage jobs and the number of young people entering the workforce, and argued the bill would create durable infrastructure for coordination and long-term planning. No formal votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Since the foundation, higher education institutions have been subject to shared governance between the
• Sharing your support for UC's total research costs, including direct and indirect costs.
• I want to share with you a case from Dominguez Hills. This is from the physics department.
• And one of the things that I shared with all of you was Cal Grant C.
• And that's the future, I think, of an opportunity. shared with all of you was Cal Grant C.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee held an oversight hearing on how federal actions are affecting California higher education, with opening remarks from the chair and members emphasizing the importance of state-federal shared governance and the need to protect access, affordability, and campus diversity. The first panel included leaders from the CSU, University of the Pacific, California Community Colleges, and UC, who described broad impacts from federal grant terminations, changes to student aid, loan limits, visa and immigration policy, and proposed reductions to research support. Testimony focused on the elimination of Grad PLUS loans, caps on Parent PLUS and Pell-related changes, the loss or suspension of hundreds of grants, and the resulting harm to student support services, research, workforce pipelines, food assistance, and health care training. UC and CSU representatives warned of major losses in research funding, indirect cost reimbursement, and student opportunities, while community college leaders highlighted uncertainty around federal grants and the need to maintain services for low-income, first-generation, undocumented, and other vulnerable students. Committee members asked how the state could respond, including through intersegmental partnerships, dual enrollment, transfer pathways, and support for basic needs and nutrition programs. Witnesses said California could help by sustaining financial aid, protecting minority-serving institution programs, and investing in research, housing, and workforce development. Several speakers stressed that federal changes were creating instability for students and campuses, and that the effects would likely be long-lasting, especially in health care, teaching, STEM, and social work pipelines. A second panel then focused on equitable access. The California Student Aid Commission described state efforts such as the $3.9 billion investment in aid programs, the Cal Grant system, the Dream Act, and possible reforms to better serve adult learners, foster youth, undocumented students, and students with dependents. The Los Angeles Community College District reported that federal cuts and policy shifts are discouraging students from applying for aid, threatening TRIO and MSI/HSI-funded services, and reducing support for basic needs, counseling, and workforce programs. The Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities and the CSU Academic Senate echoed concerns about FAFSA confusion, international student restrictions, grant losses, and the erosion of equity-focused programs. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and discussed possible state responses.

Transcript Highlights:

• Success wasn't just individual; it was shared.
• Success wasn't just individual; it was shared.
• </c><00:04:19.519><c> values</c> grant reflects our shared values grant reflects our shared values bringing
• </c><00:32:09.639><c> things</c> well so could you maybe share things well so could you maybe share things
• </c> you being here thanks for for sharing you being here thanks for for sharing that<00:48:21.359><c

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We've been asked today to please share an overview of federal...
• What is different is the cost sharing.
• What is different is the cost sharing.
• The state has a data-sharing mandate that's been on the books since 2021.
• The state has a data-sharing mandate that's been on the books since 2021.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the cost of uncertainty in California health care, especially the effects of federal policy changes on coverage, access, and affordability. Opening remarks from committee leaders and members emphasized that California’s uninsured rate had fallen to historic lows under the Affordable Care Act and state policies, but that the expiration of enhanced federal subsidies, H.R. 1, and other federal regulatory changes could reverse those gains. Members repeatedly cited rising premiums, skipped care, medical debt, and the strain on low-wage workers, families, clinics, hospitals, and public programs. The first panel reviewed the federal landscape and state response. A federal policy analyst described the ACA’s coverage gains and consumer protections, then outlined current threats: H.R. 1’s Medicaid and marketplace cuts, the end of enhanced premium tax credits, shorter open enrollment, more verification requirements, and changes affecting preventive services and vaccines. Covered California reported that the loss of subsidies is expected to nearly double average monthly premiums, reduce enrollment, and push more consumers into bronze plans with higher deductibles; it also noted that California’s $190 million affordability fund is helping the lowest-income enrollees. HCAI’s Office of Health Care Affordability explained its work on spending targets, market consolidation review, and primary care investment, saying the goal is to slow spending growth rather than impose price caps. Committee members pressed witnesses on the practical effects of bronze plans, administrative burdens, immigration-related disenrollment, provider taxes, uncompensated care, and whether California can sustain current coverage levels without new revenue. Witnesses said bronze plans preserve essential benefits but shift more costs to consumers, and that H.R. 1’s verification and auto-renewal changes will likely reduce enrollment. They also said provider tax reductions could significantly weaken state financing over time, and that higher uninsured rates may increase uncompensated care and pressure premiums elsewhere in the system. The second panel, featuring UC Berkeley Labor Center and California Health Care Foundation experts, highlighted broader affordability problems across job-based coverage and Medi-Cal, citing medical debt, skipped care, and the role of underlying system costs, administrative waste, and lack of competition. They pointed to medical debt relief efforts such as Los Angeles County’s program as a short-term mitigation strategy while the Legislature considers longer-term policy and budget responses.

Transcript Highlights:

• We think that the Fair Share has a lot of capacity still left in it.
• You mentioned the Fair Share Act and the future of the Fair Share Act.
• the Fair Share tax.
• The first fiscal year we collected a full year of fair share revenue.
• We share the same alma mater, Chairman Finn. Thank you.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on the BRIGHT Act, a higher education capital bill that would use Fair Share surtax revenue to fund major repairs, modernization, and decarbonization projects across UMass, state universities, and community colleges. UMass leadership described a $4.8 billion deferred maintenance backlog, aging buildings, and the need to modernize facilities, improve accessibility, and reduce emissions. Administration officials said the bill would authorize $2.5 billion in capital funding, split roughly 50-50 between UMass and the rest of public higher education, plus additional targeted funding for housing planning, smaller modernization projects, campus master plans, and workforce skills grants. They emphasized that the financing structure is modeled on the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and would not raise student costs, while also supporting affordability through financial aid and free community college. Members raised questions about regional equity, the distribution of funds among the five UMass campuses and the 24 state university/community college campuses, project labor agreements, whether the bill would unlock private or federal matching funds, and how the system is preparing for AI and changing workforce needs. UMass officials said project selection is data-driven, based on deferred maintenance, safety, accessibility, sustainability, and programmatic needs, and that the flagship campus in Western Massachusetts would likely receive a large share because of its size and needs. They also said UMass Boston would receive its own share and would not be shortchanged by the Bayside project. On labor, they said PLAs are commonly used and they would follow existing board and building authority policies. On affordability, they said the university has shifted hundreds of millions into need-based aid and that the state’s recent support has helped keep tuition low for many students. DCAMM and higher education officials said the state’s public campuses account for a large share of state-owned building space and a disproportionate share of operational carbon emissions, making decarbonization a major driver of the bill. They said the legislation would allow larger, more comprehensive projects that can address deferred maintenance, energy efficiency, and program needs at the same time, while also making some projects shovel-ready through the Fair Share supplemental funding already appropriated. A later panel from the State Universities Council of Presidents argued the bill’s authorization is still too small to meet long-term needs and urged the committee to increase the bond cap and ensure a more equitable distribution among segments. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as Judge Tapia shared, representation matters, and it is so, Judge Tapia shared, representation matters
• And I'm going to share a story.
• We share what we can. That is not confidential.
• We can share data, we can share systems, but if they don't have the money or just the operation to be
• I don't know if the organizations present can share.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation heard presentations on the Office of the State Public Defender, civil legal aid funding, and Judicial Branch operations. The State Public Defender requested permanent funding for positions that had been temporarily funded to implement the Racial Justice Act, explaining that the workload has grown substantially through retroactive capital-case briefing, habeas proceedings, data requests, and related statistical analysis. She also presented findings from a public defense workload and staffing report showing that California’s county-based public defense system is under-resourced, with too few attorneys, investigators, and support staff, especially in rural counties, and that statewide standards and funding are lacking. Committee members asked about the scope of racial bias claims, the impact of collaborative courts and Prop. 36, and the need for statewide cost estimates and phased funding options. The committee then heard from legal aid advocates and a Los Angeles Superior Court judge in support of increased civil legal aid funding. Witnesses described the Equal Access Fund, homelessness prevention services, health care access, and immigration detention defense as cost-effective ways to prevent evictions, stabilize families, and reduce downstream public costs. They requested a $50 million increase to the Equal Access Fund, $20 million to restart homelessness prevention services, and $10 million for health care access work, along with additional targeted investments from the California Access to Justice Commission. Testimony emphasized the severe shortage of legal aid attorneys, the high demand for immigration representation, and the role of legal aid in domestic violence, housing, and family law matters. Senators asked for more information on service locations, outreach, funding losses, and how the requested amounts were calculated. In the Judicial Branch overview, Judicial Council and trial court representatives supported the Governor’s proposed budget, including a $70 million increase for trial court operations, $21.7 million for employee health and retirement costs, and funding for appellate counsel and case processing. They said the money is needed to offset inflation, supply chain costs, and staffing pressures, and to preserve access to justice. Senators pressed the branch and Department of Finance on interpreter shortages, midyear funding flexibility, courthouse facilities needs, and judgeship needs in inland counties. Finance officials said they were aware of the broader facilities backlog, and the committee requested follow-up information on the full capital and maintenance needs, interpreter funding, and updated judgeship and workload data. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I also want to share something else with you.
• And this one is an issue that my fellow teachers will call and share.
• It’s the cost-sharing issue or the co-pays.
• Existing federal law requires all cost sharing to count toward the MOOP.
• She's also a patient advocate and shares her own story of invisible costs.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> ultimately the shared responsibility ultimately the shared responsibility solution.<00:07:42.479
• </c><00:08:17.199><c> It</c><00:08:17.440><c> picked</c> share of share responsibility.
• It picked share of share responsibility.
• </c> the state portion of share the state portion of share responsibility<00:09:06.240><c> after</c><
• Uh, the next item, again, it's the state share of the shared responsibility for the health insurance

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House Budget Review Subcommittee on Personnel, Public Retirement, and Finance heard testimony from Bo Barnes, deputy executive secretary and general counsel for the Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS), on the TRS budget request for the upcoming biennium and how it compares with House Bill 500 as introduced. Barnes emphasized that the bill fully funds the system’s additional funding request to pay down TRS’s legacy unfunded pension liability, which he described as critical to the system’s long-term funding plan. He also explained that the pension and health insurance requests are broken into several line items, including legacy benefit items, state shared-responsibility payments for retiree health insurance, and reconciliation items that adjust for prior over- or underpayments. Barnes said the state portion of shared responsibility for retiree health insurance was funded below the request in House Bill 500, but he described the health insurance trust as a success story under the post-2010 shared-responsibility model. He said the trust is projected to be fully funded in about two years if medical inflation and federal subsidies remain stable, and he noted that any shortfall in the current budget would be reconciled later and could reduce investment income. In response to questions, he explained that the legacy benefit items are treated as part of the total actuarially determined employer contribution and that unpaid legacy benefits would have the same impact on the retirement trust as unpaid ADC amounts. Barnes also addressed questions about whether the $47.2 million SEEK-related teacher contribution reconciliation could be split between fiscal years, saying it could be done but would reduce investment income and potentially increase future contribution needs. He said the pension fund is currently about 61% funded and that TRS has received full funding for the pension for 10 straight years, with the state having provided full additional funding and more in recent budgets. He concluded by asking the committee to consider TRS’s original budget request, warning that underfunding now would be reflected in future actuarial calculations and could cost the Commonwealth more over time.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, shared our story.
• I'm sharing our story.
• Again, shared our story.
• I'm sharing our story.
• I had students share their insight.

Summary: The House Education Committee held a work session on reducing restraint and eliminating isolation in schools, then moved into a public hearing on House Bill 1795 and its proposed substitute. Chair Sharon Santos reviewed committee procedures and emphasized the short session timeline, then framed the discussion as part of a longer-running effort to address student restraint and isolation. Representative Callan, the bill sponsor, said the committee’s pilot and demonstration sites would help identify both benefits and implementation challenges for legislation. OSPI Acting Director of Policy and Legislative Affairs Misha Cherniski presented an update on the state’s demonstration project, saying it is in its third year and has $2 million per year in the current budget for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. He described intensive, targeted, and universal supports, including grants to pilot and demonstration districts, a technical assistance manual, and statewide professional learning. He reported that 68% of project sites saw reductions in restraint and isolation compared with the prior year, and said OSPI’s immediate policy recommendations are to extend prohibitions on dangerous restraints such as prone, supine, wall, mechanical, chemical, and noxious spray restraints, and to clarify the definition of “imminent likelihood of serious harm.” Committee members asked for more detailed disaggregated data by race, ethnicity, grade level, incident type, and sample size, and raised questions about authorized entities, student movement, and whether data captures incidents in nonpublic settings. Representatives from Auburn, Bainbridge Island, and Concrete school districts described how the grant-funded work has affected their districts. Auburn reported major reductions in isolation after removing its last isolation room, expanding behavior supports, and training staff through multiple professional development options; the district said the biggest challenge has been shifting staff mindset and navigating delayed access to vendors and grant systems. Bainbridge Island said it has used grant funds for universal staff training, administrator training, social-emotional MTSS work, and partnerships with multiple providers; it reported zero isolations and sharply reduced restraints, while noting the need to monitor nonpublic agencies closely. Concrete, a much smaller district, said the grant allowed it to hire a part-time BCBA, adopt Safety-Care training, and use OSPI’s manual and tracking tools, but staffing shortages and limited substitute coverage make it hard to attend demonstration sites or training in person. During the public hearing, the substitute bill was summarized as prohibiting certain restraints, banning isolation as a planned intervention, narrowing the definition of serious harm, and extending requirements to other providers of public educational services, while preserving lawful duties of school resource officers. Proponents included disability advocates, the Washington Education Association, and public school employees, who said the bill would reduce trauma and align practice with student safety and dignity. A parent testified about a child harmed by a room that was later used for involuntary confinement. A representative from a specialized learning center testified in opposition, arguing that a complete elimination of isolation for younger students could increase danger in some settings, that medical-provider requirements could be difficult to meet, and that specialized providers need broader exemptions. No vote was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's basically what that share is. Could I even compete?
• 100% he has a golden share. There's no other way.
• There's just a golden share. That's it. Thank you for that. Mr.
• It's going to make their shares worth 60% off retail.
• It is not a real share.

Keywords: Chinese Communist Party, retirement security, investment risks, SEC enforcement, Bipartisan action

Summary: The meeting primarily addressed concerns regarding the impact of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on American investments and the financial security of retirees. The chair discussed legislation aimed at ensuring the protection of American investors against the risks posed by Chinese companies. There was a consensus among the members regarding the necessity to enforce existing policies that require compliance from foreign companies wishing to trade on American exchanges. The discussion included testimony from various stakeholders highlighting the urgent need to limit exposure to the CCP in retirement portfolios. Additionally, there were calls for increased accountability of regulatory bodies such as the SEC to better shield American investors from potential loss.