Transcript Highlights:

• And then on workforce development, I represent one of the state hospitals and also an area.
• So in looking at the BHCIP awards to date, we developed a methodology where we looked at and...
• At our last hearing, we heard about one critical component, which was the school fee schedule.
• As you heard in the previous hearing, the CYBHI Fee Schedule ...across the state of California.
• The Workforce Initiative includes five distinct behavioral health workforce development programs.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And do they have to renew their fee, the license, every year, or is that biennial?
• Our renewal fee is $100, and late fees are $200. I saw your fees went up a couple years ago.
• is $100 and um late Um our renewal fee is $100 and um late fees<00:05:43.759> $200.
• <00:05:44.400> And<00:05:44.479> then fees $200. And then fees $200.
• Workforce development type of perspective.

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 216, 5 February, 2026; 8:30 AM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first heard from the Board of Registration for Foresters, which said it is self-funded through applications and renewals and receives no general fund support. The board requested a budget increase from $62,755 to $77,035, mainly for technology upgrades to its database and website, a social media presence, and about $3,000 more for board travel. Members asked about contractual expenses, staffing, renewals, reserves, and office location; the witness said most renewals are now online, the board has a reserve but he did not know the exact amount, and the board is leased space in the Robert E. Lee Building. No vote was taken, and the chair moved on to the next agency. The Mississippi Board of Examiners for Social Workers and Marriage and Family Therapists then presented its budget and operational needs. The board described its 10-member structure, three employees, and oversight of about 4,450 social workers and 210 marriage and family therapists. It explained that a prior $50,000 deficit appropriation was approved too late to spend, and asked to include that amount in the current budget for technology upgrades and equipment. The board also requested salary increases, additional travel funds, money for out-of-state compact participation, more contractual funds for database enhancements and digitizing records, and one additional computer. Members questioned the board about its large cash balance, staffing, office location, and the social work compact; the board said it has about $1 million in cash, is in leased space at Old River Place, and needs database changes to support the compact. No action or vote was taken. Finally, the Cosmetology and Barbering Board discussed major licensing and regulatory changes and its budget request. The board said it had already adopted a passing score for the licensure exam, ended the practical exam, extended testing approval periods, removed barriers to temporary work permits, and opened a path for apprenticeships, mobile establishments, and online licensing software. It also described recommendations in SB 2566, including a low-income first-license fee waiver, sanitation warnings, reduced education and instructor-hour requirements, and removal of some display requirements. The board said these changes had already led to new applications and test signups. On the budget side, it said it was withdrawing a prior request for $6,340 for practical-exam contractors because that exam was eliminated, but still sought $120,000 for certified mail, $49,000 for recruitment and retention salaries, and continued flexibility for possible live-streaming requirements under pending legislation. Senators asked whether the practical exam had been eliminated and whether the board could still ensure competency and inspections; the board said skills are still assessed through program completion and theory testing, and it asked to retain inspector positions because it oversees roughly 6,000 to 6,500 licensed shops and salons with only two inspectors.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, we have our grain license fees.
• Thus, we are requesting increased fees.
• So the answer is that the $500 fee would be per location.
• Time to develop a good program that works for farmers. So, we developed a pilot program.
• From there, we moved on with the development of our program.

Transcript Highlights:

• How long will it take to develop it?
• But the fee appears twice as a wholesale fee in section two and again as a retail fee in section three
• versus regulatory license fee tax. versus regulatory license fee tax.
• So if to be 5% local regulatory fee.
• Hopefully that will reduce that fee. Hopefully that will reduce that fee.

Keywords: An issue was found with the live stream of this meeting. This version was uploaded as a complete version and should contain the entirety of the meeting. Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:15 HB 647 Discussion 00:02:00 HB 647 Vote 00:05:47 HB 501 Discussion 00:07:40 HB 501 Vote 00:09:53 HB 502 Discussion 00:11:20 HB 502 Vote 00:14:48 HJR 75 Discussion 00:16:53 HJR 75 Vote 00:17:35 HJR 76 Discussion 00:19:00 HJR 76 Vote 00:19:43 HB 869 Discussion 00:21:22 HB 869 Vote 00:30:00 HB 619 Discussion 00:31:39 HB 619 Vote 00:34:33 HB 356 Discussion 00:36:22 HB 356 Vote 00:40:19 HB 900 Discussion 00:43:17 HB 900 Vote 00:46:21 HB 816 Discussion 00:48:02 HB 816 Vote 00:53:47 HB 9 Discussion 00:55:05 HB 9 Vote 01:18:25 HB 757 Discussion 01:21:04 HB 757 Vote 01:35:55, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• a month fee. a month fee.
• <02:37:46.720> I'm low fee that goes back to them. I'm low fee that goes back to them.
• letting them hover in development limbo. letting them hover in development limbo.
• <04:18:11.520> Or developers, you know what I mean? Or developers, you know what I mean?
• helps to close the gap for developers. helps to close the gap for developers.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:41.040> lacked transformation fund development lacked transformation fund development
• Um they they do not develop uh Medicaid Um they they do not develop uh Medicaid rate<00:24:22.960>
• transparencies and how do we develop transparencies and how do we develop those<00:27:57.560>
• "Well, Myers and Stauffer develops, again, they develop rates based on cost proposals and cost reports
• > managed We have fee-for-service versus managed We have fee-for-service versus managed care<00

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board met on January 12, 2026, to approve the December 10, 2025 minutes and continue finalizing its findings and recommendations. Members reviewed findings on administrative inefficiencies, Medicaid and workforce participation under HR 1, Medicaid budget growth, rural health transformation fund development, and provider tax/state-directed payment changes. The board approved a motion to change “pilot” to “partnership” in the workforce-related recommendation, and also adopted a technical amendment clarifying overlapping HCBS services by removing reference to adult daycare waiver services and revising the language to focus on reducing duplication, simplifying provider contracting, and standardizing processes across programs. A separate technical correction was noted to change “DMS” to “DPH” in the rural health transformation finding, to be handled in the final edits. Several findings drew discussion but no final substantive vote during the meeting. On the rural health transformation fund, Dr. Berg said Kentucky had done well in federal funding and noted limits on what could be shared publicly, while Commissioner Lee said a public website had been created and recommended the department reference be changed to the Department for Public Health. Finding five prompted extended discussion about provider taxes, state-directed payment reductions under HR 1, and whether the board should address the relationship between actuarial studies, MCO payments, and actual provider reimbursement more directly. Senator Meredith and others argued for a broader, more transparent baseline review of rates across provider groups, while Commissioner Lee said CMS will require certain fee schedule comparisons to Medicare beginning July 1, 2026, and that quarterly expenditure reports already go to LRC. The board did not finish resolving finding five during the meeting and agreed to return to it after staff prepared more explicit language. Members also discussed the possibility of an all-payers claims database as a better way to understand what is being paid across payers and services. No final vote on the full findings package was taken in the portion of the meeting provided, but the board did adopt the noted amendments and continued working through the remaining language.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and legally defensible fee when development does not meet the local inclusionary housing requirement
• > not defensible fee when development does not defensible fee when development does not meet<01
• Thank you. putting a $100,000 fee on development in putting a $100,000 fee on development in order<01
• on any development to impose a new fee on any development that<01:42:20.480> does<01:42:20.639
• Adding new fees to market-rate development pushes more projects beyond the margin of feasibility.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:31.680> uh on the research and development uh on the research and development uh credit
• the commercial real estate development the commercial real estate development trade<00:31:44.399
• use their credit card, and the fee that gets charged to the bank, or what fees are you talking about
• about credit card fees.
• Johnson so I think I mentioned ATM fees Johnson so I think I mentioned ATM fees but<01:26:25.320

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 2437, the governor’s proposed tax bill, and first adopted the A25-Z42 amendment to put the bill in the desired shape. Commissioner Paul Marquardt of the Department of Revenue then presented the bill as part of Governor Walz and Lieutenant Governor Flanagan’s budget, describing it as a response to budget pressures that would make the tax system more fair and stable while supporting economic development and jobs. Marquardt walked through the bill’s major provisions. These included sustainable aviation fuel policy, repeal of K-12 education credit assignment, elimination of the political contribution refund, expansion of the research and development credit, short-line railroad infrastructure modernization, changes to the state airport fund levy, replacement of attachments and appearances with distribution systems, a narrow personal property tax exception for low-income housing tenants, reduced aquatic invasive species aid, and a 34% reduction in PILT payments. He then focused on the sales tax article, saying it would lower the statewide rate by 0.75% while expanding the base to selected professional services such as accounting, banking, brokerage, and legal services, with business-to-business transactions exempt. He said the proposal would be effective for sales and purchases after September 30, 2025, and estimated a first-year rate-cut impact of about $99 million versus $215 million from the service expansion, while arguing that most households would see a net tax cut. He also noted other changes such as landlord penalty adjustments, a 30% reduction in sustainable aviation fuel incentive payments, repeal of local government cannabis aid, and repeal of the tax filing modernization account. Public testimony began with Kyle Playford of the Financial Planning Association of Minnesota, who strongly opposed the proposed sales tax on professional services, especially financial planning. He argued that financial planning is an essential service for retirement, investment, and long-term financial security, and said the tax would raise costs for consumers, reduce access for middle-class families, small business owners, and retirees, and put Minnesota firms at a competitive disadvantage. The chair then indicated that additional public testimony would continue before member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there anything that has been developed in the marketplace? I believe.
• We still develop responses to those.
• increase in fee becomes a financial burden on business owners.
• First, it caps the municipal franchise fee. It sets it currently at 2%.
• Let's say that there's a fee because it is an overflowing dumpster.

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 1904, which would classify intentionally released helium balloons as litter and create criminal penalties for balloon releases. The author and supportive witnesses argued that balloon releases harm wildlife, livestock, waterways, and infrastructure, and that the bill would close a loophole in current litter law. Several members questioned whether criminal penalties were appropriate, and the author said he was willing to work toward civil penalties and fines instead. No vote was taken, and HB 1904 was left pending. The committee then took up several pending bills and reported them favorably to the full House, including HB 3249, HB 3866, HB 4112, HB 1768, HB 1499, HB 573, and HB 464. These measures dealt with topics such as TCEQ contested-case procedures, outdoor storage containers, high-level radioactive waste, concrete plant permitting and grants, unannounced concrete batch plant inspections, and a scrap tire grant program. Most were adopted with substitutes and passed on recorded votes, generally with unanimous or near-unanimous support. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 3997, which would create expedited permitting timelines for LNG facilities and related wastewater permits. Industry witnesses said the bill would provide certainty for multibillion-dollar projects without eliminating public participation, while environmental groups opposed parts of the bill that they said could limit contested-case participation and be unrealistic for SOAH timelines. TCEQ staff described the current wastewater permitting process and said some of the bill’s timing provisions could be workable, especially with an expedited fee. The bill was left pending after the author said he would continue working on committee substitute language. The committee also heard HB 1237 on extending the renewal window for expired TCEQ occupational water licenses, and HB 4519, a TERP consolidation bill that would combine several clean transportation grant programs into fewer programs. HB 1237 was left pending without testimony, while HB 4519 drew broad support from environmental and industry witnesses who favored simplifying the program, though some asked for stronger emphasis on particulate matter and hydrogen funding. The committee withdrew the substitute on HB 4519 and left it pending. Finally, HB 5033, which would eliminate the motor vehicle emissions inspection and maintenance program if federal authority changes, drew opposition from environmental and inspection-industry witnesses who warned it would weaken air-quality protections and could remove an important enforcement tool. The author said the bill was intended as a trigger mechanism and would be refined, and HB 5033 was left pending. The committee also heard HB 1227 on municipal solid-waste franchise fees and private-provider access; the author said he would bring a substitute after hearing concerns from cities, and the bill was left pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• fees oh dock fees hb2 which was the dock fees oh dock fees yes<05:03:09.080> so<05:03:09.480>
• is $600 flat fee.
• is $600 flat fee.
• the application fee is $600 flat fee the application fee is $600 flat fee that's<05:09:55.798>
• So those fees are—they send quarterly reports in and pay the fee to the department, and those fees are

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up a House Bill 2 amendment to remove a bail-related section that had already passed in another bill and was now considered duplicative. Members discussed the earlier change to how bail commissioners are reimbursed, concerns that the Judiciary was losing money collecting the fees, and whether the magistrate-related language would still be needed. They noted the bill had already crossed over to the Senate, that the section was obsolete, and that any remaining issue about magistrates’ five-year terms might need to be raised with the Criminal Justice Committee. Amendment 997H, deleting section one, was moved, seconded, and adopted unanimously. The committee then reviewed a package of HB 1 position transfers involving the Department of Environmental Services, Fish and Game, and the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources. Staff explained that several positions were being shuffled to correct position numbers and align permitting functions, including one Fish and Game position moving back to Fish and Game, one DEES position remaining funded after ARPA money ends, and adjustments to hours for permitting and environmental services positions. Members discussed whether the Fish and Game position had been intended to be temporary, but ultimately agreed to accept the first four Environmental Services items and the last two Natural and Cultural Resources items as a package; that motion passed unanimously. They then also accepted sections 2 through 8 of HB 1 with the related amendments and footnote language. The committee next turned to dredge-and-fill fee changes in section 11, where one member objected to a 50% fee increase for seasonal docks, arguing it could discourage permitted work and might apply to repairs that only require notification. Staff said the increase was intended to help cover the cost of additional positions in future biennia, but members decided to hold that section for more information, including how many seasonal dock repair fees are actually collected. Finally, the committee began discussing HB 215 and a proposed tipping-fee/surcharge structure to make a solid waste accounting unit self-funded, with members saying the fee could offset about $2.9 million in general fund costs and support the grant program, but no final action was taken on that item in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a nominal fee really in terms of a.
• We're gonna be utilizing fees received from.
• But we haven't raised our fees in several years.
• of that service with the fees that are coming in.
• out of the bonds we do as an administrative fee.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So on enhances cognitive development.
• <00:14:22.800> of the overall health and development of the overall health and development
• fees including fees for paper fees including fees for paper application<00:32:44.080> copies,
• schedule name to the Kentucky Medicaid audiology fee schedule, including a website link where the fee
• references a newly created 1915i fee references a newly created 1915i fee schedule.<00:43:21.040

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the minutes, and then took up several administrative regulations. The first was an Office of the Attorney General regulation creating an online submission process for an annual certification report to replace prior quarterly notarized certification forms; there were no amendments or questions. The main discussion centered on Personnel Cabinet regulations 101 KAR 2:034, 2:102, 3:015, and 3:045, which include staff-suggested technical amendments and address state employee compensation and leave. The compensation provisions clarify salary and rehiring/demotion rules, increase critical position premiums from one to three, and update weekend premium and ACE award practices. The leave provisions would provide up to six weeks of paid leave per 10-year interval for birth, adoption, foster placement, or a serious health condition, and allow one paid adverse-weather day per year with supervisor approval. Staff explained that annual and sick leave already accrue and roll over, and that the new six-week benefit was intended as an additional enhancement tied to the 10-year and 20-year sick-leave milestones.

Transcript Highlights:

• But putting a fee onto a $50 floating raft, a $50 fee per year onto a $50 floating raft is just nuts
• But putting a fee onto a $50 floating raft, a $50 fee per year onto a $50 floating raft is just nuts
• I would be paying that $50 fee.
• I would be paying that $50 fee.
• <03:38:05.920> There's of you know fee collection. There's of you know fee collection.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Development fees and other construction requirements can make up a significant portion of building cost
• Development fees and other construction requirements can make up a significant portion of building costs
• In many cases, developers are not quite so lucky, especially small-scale developers who are operating
• Using the framework for development impact fee disclosure and transparency developed in AB 1820, as passed
• Using the framework for development impact fee disclosure and transparency developed in AB 1820, as passed

Summary: The committee heard several housing-related bills, beginning with SB 1003, which would create pro-housing enhanced infrastructure financing districts to help local governments fund infrastructure needed for housing developments. The author and supporters argued that infrastructure costs often prevent projects from penciling out, while the chair expressed support and said the bill would be taken up later when quorum was available. SB 1014 followed, proposing new disclosure requirements for local jurisdictions to provide good-faith estimates of on-site and off-site improvements within 30 days of application, with supporters saying it would reduce late surprises and opposition from several cities citing implementation concerns with the 30-day timelines. The committee then took up SB 802, a Sacramento-region bill requiring a joint powers authority to coordinate housing and homelessness services. Senator Ashby and former Mayor Darrell Steinberg argued that Sacramento’s fragmented system has failed for years and that a JPA would improve accountability, coordination, and use of state funds. The bill drew broad support from local officials, service providers, business groups, and advocates, while some county and city representatives registered opposition or neutral concerns about state-mandated local governance. Several committee members said they were persuaded by the need for regional coordination, though some raised concerns about local control; the chair noted the bill would be moved when quorum allowed. The committee also heard SB 1092 and SB 1093, both focused on mobile home park residents after disasters or park sales. SB 1092 would give residents a right of first opportunity to match a sale offer for a park, with supporters saying it protects vulnerable seniors and preserves affordable housing, while park owners and their representatives argued it would devalue property and raise constitutional and financing concerns. SB 1093 would require more transparent communication, access to property, and consideration of rebuilding or closure after a disaster; supporters cited the long uncertainty faced by Palisades residents, while opponents warned about liability, safety, and burdensome review requirements. Members split along similar lines, with some emphasizing property rights and market impacts and others stressing the need to protect residents and preserve scarce affordable housing.

Transcript Highlights:

• special assessments for repairs, outrageous restrictions by boards run amuck, escalating fines and fees
• Boards run a muck escalating<00:02:02.439> fines<00:02:02.759> and<00:02:02.960> fees
• and framework for fines fees and foreclosure<00:03:15.799> while<00:03:16.040> tackling
• <00:07:40.680> and excessive fines unexplained fees and excessive fines unexplained fees and
• an HOA voluntarily; it just cannot be as a condition of approval for new development.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: Legislators unveiled the Master Common Interest Community and Homeowner Association Policy Reform Bill, describing it as a comprehensive package built from a 14-meeting interim work group and public listening sessions. Speakers said the bill is intended to update Minnesota law with clearer standards for governance, open meetings, governing documents, dispute resolution, fines and fees, foreclosure procedures, conflicts of interest, and the roles of municipalities and civil rights protections. They framed the measure as a bipartisan effort aimed at consumer protections, transparency, fairness, and clearer expectations for both homeowners and volunteer board members. Much of the discussion focused on complaints from constituents about excessive fines, unexplained fees, lack of access to financial documents, weak dispute processes, and conflicts of interest involving property managers and contractors. Examples included a small trash-can violation escalating to foreclosure and a roof-repair contract steered to a subsidiary of the property management company. Senators and representatives said the bill would require associations to adopt written fine policies, provide notice and time to cure violations, and create internal dispute-resolution procedures so homeowners are not forced immediately into costly legal fights. A key policy question was Article 3, which would bar cities and municipalities from conditioning approval of new developments on amenities or features that require an HOA, while still allowing voluntary HOAs. Sponsors said this would reduce the number of homeowners pushed into associations and prevent local governments from shifting costs onto residents. They also said the bill is part of a broader package that includes separate measures on registration requirements, attorney general enforcement, an ombudsman office, and a task force to study insurance costs. No formal votes were taken in the transcript. The speakers said the Senate bill was expected to have a housing committee hearing the following week, with additional committee stops likely in state and local government and judiciary, and that House-side negotiations were ongoing. They also said the bill could still be refined as testimony continues and stakeholders raise concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're here to discuss the trailer bill language for the $1 BPA fee.
• of that project down there. that is a fee for service so base fee and and then we always go above it
• and and then we invoice accordingly so it's fee for service.
• The other one is the complaint fee and so the developers are very you know confident in the fee for service
• , timber harvest fees, etc.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The campuses have developed structural deficits across the UC system.
• Yes, for the budget, excluding the pass-throughs and fee-for-service funding.
• The current university policy does not permit differential fees on our campuses.
• Currently, non-resident student fees are handled under our tuition stability plan. Okay.
• So we are until 2032 going to raise those fees up to 5% annually.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance, chaired by Assemblymember Alvarez, held a hearing focused on University of California budget issues. The committee reviewed UC core operations funding, enrollment trends, federal funding threats, Title IX implementation, and basic needs support. Major themes included the end of the Governor’s multi-year UC compact, the state’s fiscal outlook, UC’s enrollment growth, and the potential impacts of federal policy changes on research, health care, and student aid. On core funding, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to continue compact-related support, defer some payments, and authorize a cash-flow loan. The LAO recommended a smaller or no base increase, earmarking some funds for capital renewal, retiring deferrals when possible, avoiding new compact commitments, and funding UC annually rather than through compacts. UC argued that the compact has supported enrollment growth, student services, and operating costs, but said campuses face rising expenses, structural deficits, and limited reserves. Members questioned the effects of deferrals on students and discussed the need to prioritize less harmful reductions if cuts become necessary. The enrollment panel focused on UC’s growth in California resident enrollment and the nonresident replacement plan at Berkeley, UCLA, and UC San Diego. The LAO recommended maintaining the current enrollment target, funding enrollment separately from base increases, pausing the nonresident replacement plan, and holding enrollment flat in 2027-28. UC said it has already met compact enrollment goals, grown California undergraduate enrollment by about 18,800 students, and that further growth depends on ongoing state support. The committee also discussed the cost of enrollment growth, possible differential nonresident tuition, and a reporting request for UC to analyze the nonresident replacement approach; the motion to adopt supplemental reporting language passed. The hearing also covered federal funding risks, with the LAO and UC warning that federal changes could affect research grants, medical center reimbursement, and student financial aid. UC said research cancellations and suspensions are disrupting labs and graduate student support, while federal health policy changes could increase uncompensated care at UC hospitals. In the Title IX update, UC described its systemwide civil rights structure, annual student training, and campus support offices, and members praised the work while asking about ongoing concerns and intersegmental collaboration. The final basic-needs item began with Finance stating the Governor’s budget does not change ongoing support, but the transcript cuts off before further discussion or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• I looked at my own bank in Dilworth, and I looked at its fees and so forth.
• There's no annual fee there.
• of $100 and there is a $10 monthly fee of $100 and there is a $10 monthly fee if<00:29:19.080>
• uh banking loan origination fees uh banking loan origination fees overdraft<00:31:25.279> late
• c> find overdraft late fees management to find overdraft late fees management to find uh<00:31:28.360

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• schedule bill... has had a medical fee schedule bill every year.
• So if you're doing a back surgery, then you know, hey, my fee is about this.
• When is the fee schedule put in place, and what does that look like?
• For beginning formal fee schedule rulemaking.
• He will present this fee schedule to us.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 408 by Senator Myers, a workers’ compensation overhaul creating an all-claims medical database, requiring electronic reporting and billing, and setting up confidentiality, rulemaking, and penalties. Senator Myers said the bill was meant to modernize a paper-based system, speed injured workers back to care and work, reduce disputes through a more predictable fee schedule, address outliers and abuse, and generate reliable data for future fee-schedule decisions. Representative Melarine then offered a large amendment package combining portions of House Bills 780 and 1101 into SB 408, adding preliminary-determination procedures, changes to benefit durations, fraud language, and a deadline for the department to establish a fee schedule if no agreement is reached. Supporters said the package would create a more complete reform; opponents argued the additions were rushed, not germane, and would harm injured workers, especially those without lawyers, by adding technical filing burdens and stricter fraud consequences. After debate, the committee adopted the amendment package, then adopted a follow-up amendment removing the word “potential” from a fines provision and deleting the fraud section, and finally reported SB 408 with amendments on a divided vote. Testimony on SB 408 was sharply split. Proponents, including Alton Ashy and Trey Mustian, argued the bill’s transparency and data-collection provisions were the most important part, that the system needs a modern fee schedule, and that the added reforms would help control costs and speed payment. Opponents, including Shannon Lindsay and another injured-worker advocate, said the original bill was a good compromise but the added provisions changed its character and would disadvantage pro se claimants, remove materiality from fraud law, and reduce benefits for seriously injured workers. Committee members also questioned the timeline for the database and fee schedule, the effect of historical data gaps, and whether the reforms would help employers and injured workers alike. The committee ultimately agreed the bill still contained its core goals of faster care, predictable fees, anti-abuse measures, and modernization. The committee then moved to House Bill 585 by Representative Chasson, a workplace-violence/safety measure for small-box discount retailers. Chasson explained that the bill had been narrowed to require retailers to submit an existing written workforce safety plan, or develop one if they do not already have one, with no penalties attached. The committee adopted a substitute bill incorporating prior amendments. Representative Glorioso noted continuing concerns about civil-liability implications and the duty to protect against third-party criminal acts, but the bill was advanced from committee after the substitute was adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• Proceeds will reimburse various hard and soft costs, including the deferred developer fee for Federal
• That was a net reduction of fees of $104,000.
• There was an addition of $2,708 for an accounting CPA fee.
• That was a net reduction of $150,000 in total fees.
• fee.

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Summary: The State Bond Commission met on May 21 with a quorum present and approved the April 16 minutes. The commission then reviewed and approved a large slate of local government and public authority financing requests, including election propositions for the November ballot, water and sewer infrastructure projects, fire protection and recreation district bonds, school board financing, and several refunding transactions. Most items were found to meet technical requirements and were approved on motions by Speaker DeVillier and seconded by Senator Talbot. Among the more notable items were the East Baton Rouge City-Parish refunding bonds for the Greater Baton Rouge Airport District, the City of Kenner’s retroactive approval request tied to a convention center agreement with GMB Basketball LLC, a Louisiana Housing Corporation financing increase for the Federal City Building 10 affordable housing project, and preliminary approval for the Northwest Louisiana Finance Authority’s Petro Tower redevelopment in Shreveport. The commission also approved financing for Southern University’s Scott’s Bluff student housing project and the Crescent City Schools/Harriet Tubman Charter School project. The Crescent City Schools item prompted questions about how MFP funds are used; staff explained that lease payments would support the bonds and that MFP funds are generally split between educational expenses and facilities-related costs. The commission received six monthly cost-of-issuance reports, which required no action, and a status update on the state debt schedule. It also approved Resolution No. 2 authorizing up to $425 million in general obligation refunding bonds to refund the Series 2016 bonds and tender other outstanding bonds for savings, with pricing tentatively set for June 16 and closing for June 30. During other business, New Orleans City Council President J.P. Morel thanked the commission for its role in helping address the city’s fiscal crisis and for approving a charter amendment election item aimed at strengthening budget oversight. The meeting adjourned after no further business.