Transcript Highlights:

• Through a HUD-funded youth homelessness system improvement program, we are working with government and
• Through a HUD-funded youth homelessness system improvement program, we are working with government and
• <01:14:02.719> State<01:14:03.080> Gia program using the funding of State Gia program
• <01:19:13.920> or fund the existing IHS imha program or fund the existing IHS imha program
• Do you still have funding to keep this program going? No.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Human Services and Homelessness met on February 6, 2025, and heard testimony on several measures. HB 44, which would appropriate funds to the Department of Human Services to work with community-based organizations on social services needs, drew broad support from nonprofit providers and coalitions that said contracts and reimbursement rates have not kept pace with the actual cost of services, leaving agencies unable to retain staff or meet demand. DHS said it supported the bill’s intent but asked for clarification because the language was broad and did not specify which organizations or how funds should be allocated. Committee members and the bill’s introducer discussed how to make the measure more specific and equitable, including whether to set a percentage increase, use a baseline date, and direct DHS to distribute funds among different program areas; the True Cost Coalition and DHS agreed to follow up in writing with proposed language and a funding number. The committee then heard HB 1349, which would authorize Medicaid/CHIP coverage for income-qualified pregnant persons and children regardless of immigration status. Supporters, including the Legal Clinic, Aloha Care, and the Hawaiʻi Coalition for Immigrant Rights, said the bill would improve prenatal and child health, reduce the chilling effect of immigration enforcement on care-seeking, and help prevent premature or underweight births by ensuring earlier access to providers. DHS provided comments and the committee asked where the measure would fit in the budget; the department identified the relevant budget code. Written testimony in support came from multiple advocacy and health organizations and dozens of individuals. Finally, the committee heard HB 613, which would appropriate funds to DHS for emergency shelter and services for unaccompanied homeless youth. The Office of the Public Defender, the Statewide Office of Homelessness and Housing Solutions, the Office of Youth Services, Rise, the Hawaiʻi State LGBTQ+ Commission, and others supported the bill, emphasizing youth homelessness, the need for coordinated shelter and outreach, and the high share of LGBTQ+ youth among homeless minors. OYS asked that the committee consider funding its existing Safe Spaces pilot rather than creating a new program, while DHS said it supported the intent but wanted clarification because multiple department programs could be implicated. No votes were taken during the hearing; the chair instead requested follow-up language and funding information for HB 44 and continued the measures for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• I obviously believe in the program, but the idea of taxing money from the Education Trust Fund, I hope
• I just talked about, the ETC and the EFA programs, and retains up to 10% of the funds used in these
• How do we know if our taxpayer dollars are being used to fund programs in other states?
• of the funds uh used in these programs of the funds uh used in these programs including<01:10:07.239
• > states used to fund programs in other states used to fund programs in other states why<01:12:34.760

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a public hearing on HB 402, a bill dealing with whether Education Freedom Account (EFA) payments should be described in state law as not constituting taxable income. The bill sponsor argued that the current statute is misleading because New Hampshire should not imply a federal tax result, and said the bill would remove that language and could also be amended to clarify that families should consult tax advisors. He emphasized that the measure was not intended to impose a state tax on EFAs, but to avoid giving inaccurate advice about possible federal tax liability. Testimony was divided. A retired representative and a tax preparer both opposed the bill, saying EFA payments are already treated consistently with IRS rules and that the bill would create confusion, administrative burden, and possible tax consequences for low- and moderate-income families. They argued the bill is a solution in search of a problem and warned that requiring 1099s could add costs for the scholarship organization and recipients. A tax attorney supported the bill’s repeal of the state language, saying New Hampshire should not put tax advice into statute and that the current wording is inaccurate because federal law, not state law, controls taxability. He cited IRS Section 117 and Publication 970, explaining that only some scholarship-like payments are tax-free and that many EFA-eligible expenses may not qualify for federal exemption. Members asked questions about what would be misleading, whether the bill was trying to tax EFAs, and the cost of issuing 1099s. The sponsor and witnesses repeatedly said the bill was not a state tax on voucher payments, but a clarification about federal tax treatment. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• On page 3, we are funded by an allocation from the Severance Tax Permanent Fund.
• What we do is when we receive additional funding, and we've been receiving additional funding funding
• We have a Ventana Fund. We started a relationship with Ventana Fund in 2019.
• Hexagon Housing Fund is a proposed spinoff from Ventana Fund.
• And, you know, just anecdotally, one of the, Programs that got started with a loan from the Loan Fund

Transcript Highlights:

• money to fund the Healthy School Meals for All program.
• fund to the preschool programs cash fund in connection with making and reducing an appropriation.
• A new fee How is this program funded?
• Going to be half a billion dollars to fund this program.
• The sacrosanct funds, the sacrosanct programs.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, and approved the journal from April 10, 2026. After a brief opening that included the Pledge of Allegiance and roll call, the chamber moved into third reading. The first item was House Bill 1348, concerning use of money from the broadband infrastructure cash fund, which passed on final passage. The House then took up a series of bills dealing largely with education funding and program changes, including House Bills 1349 through 1358, covering prevention services in early childhood, school food programs, Healthy School Meals for All funding, Colorado reading and social studies assessment changes, repeal or phase-out of several teacher and school-related programs, and the Colorado Academic Accelerator Grant Program. Most of these measures were adopted, with some receiving notable no votes but still passing. The chamber also considered House Bill 1359, which would credit money from removal of natural resources on public school lands to the state public school fund, and House Bill 1360, concerning the affordable housing financing fund. HB 1360 drew extended debate. Supporters argued it was consistent with Prop. 123 and TABOR-related funding rules, while opponents said it would divert money from the general fund, exceed what voters authorized, and create a precedent for using reserve-like funds to cover budget shortfalls. Despite the opposition, HB 1360 passed after a member changed a vote from yes to no. The House then adopted House Bills 1361 and 1362, repealing the pay for success contracts program and the Decarbonization Tax Credits Administration Cash Fund, respectively. The final major item was House Bill 1363, which temporarily reduces the general fund reserve. This bill prompted the strongest opposition, with members arguing that the state was using a rainy day fund to cover self-inflicted budget problems, relying on future money, and failing to address underlying spending growth. Supporters of the bill said the reserve reduction was necessary to balance the budget and reflected difficult choices by the Joint Budget Committee. The bill nonetheless passed, and the House completed action on the listed third-reading calendar items.

Transcript Highlights:

• I wanted to take a few moments to acknowledge the line funding program because this is something that
• nursing programs.
• Very important program.
• The board's number one funding priority continues to be performance-based funding.
• So performance-based funding—you'll see on the slide there are two buckets of funding.

Summary: The committee heard a presentation on the State University System’s new strategic plan, SUS 30, from Emily Sykes and later the system’s legislative budget request from Sarah Denagie. The strategic plan centers on five priorities: One SUS collaboration, elevating student success, operational excellence, world-class talent, and innovative research and economic development. Testimony highlighted Florida’s continued status as the nation’s top higher education system, record rankings, improved four-year graduation rates, higher median graduate wages, strong licensure pass rates, and expanded focus on research commercialization and workforce alignment. Senators asked about programs of strategic emphasis, mental health and teacher workforce needs, use of the My Florida Future wage data tool, support for first-generation and Pell students, and the role of liberal arts degrees. The system said it would provide follow-up information, including the full strategic-emphasis list and a report on campus safety best practices after a recent summit following the FSU shooting. The committee also received an update on line funding for nursing and health care partnerships. Officials said the $6 million appropriation was fully subscribed through 24 proposals from all 10 nursing programs, supporting scholarships, faculty recruitment, internships, simulation, and expanded nursing capacity. They reported more than 1,900 new nursing graduates, over 200 new student slots, more than 300 scholarships, and a 92% NCLEX pass rate. Senators asked about expanding eligibility for the program, and staff indicated that would be examined this year. For the legislative budget request, the Board of Governors asked for $634.5 million total, including $295 million to maintain the institutional performance-based funding base, $400 million for the state investment portion of performance-based funding, $125 million for preeminence funding, $100 million for faculty recruitment and retention, $6.4 million for UF/IFAS extension workload, and $3.1 million for state fire marshal inspections. The chair noted that resources are limited and that difficult budget decisions will be required. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• care program to provide funding to health plans to provide coverage for gender-affirming care services
• For Inland Empire Utilities Agency, I want to support the water storage investment program funding and
• The emergency regulatory process to implement the funding programs.
• We'd like to thank the legislature and the governor for including AB 617 program funding.
• We'd like to thank the legislature and the governor for including AB617 program funding.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on the September budget package, which included SB 105 and a series of trailer bills covering health, human services, education, resources, child care, transportation, labor, public safety, housing, revenue, background checks, collective bargaining, and a special election. The Department of Finance described the package as largely technical and clarifying, but also responsive to state and federal changes, especially H.R. 1. Key items included roughly $3.3 billion in Proposition 4 climate and environmental spending, $540 million in discretionary greenhouse gas reduction funds, and major responses to H.R. 1 such as CalFresh error-rate mitigation, food bank support, and Medicaid-related changes. Other notable provisions included vaccine policy flexibility, an Abortion Access Fund, a gender-affirming care program, community college basic-needs and aid changes, CEQA and coastal permit exemptions tied to the 2028 Olympics, invasive mussel prevention funding, a civic media program, labor and pension-related provisions, and special election administration changes. Members raised questions and concerns about several parts of the package. There was support for climate, water, transit, offshore wind, food security, and health investments, but also significant criticism of the lack of cleanup language for SB 131 and its advanced manufacturing exemptions, with multiple members saying promised fixes had not materialized and expressing concerns about tribal consultation, labor standards, and environmental protections. Members also questioned the scale and timing of some Proposition 4 allocations, including fairground upgrades, regional conveyance, and a UC Davis alternative protein research center. The Department of Finance said some programs would roll out over time and that certain funding levels reflected current implementation capacity. The hearing also featured discussion of Bay Area transit financing, with Finance saying SB 105 directs the department and CalSTA to examine loan or other financing options rather than immediately providing loans. Members and public commenters also discussed the state’s response to H.R. 1, with advocates supporting food bank, health care, and immunization provisions while warning of ongoing harm to immigrants, foster youth, and other vulnerable groups. Public testimony broadly supported the health, food, water, offshore wind, and golden mussel provisions, while many speakers echoed legislative concerns about SB 131 and urged cleanup action in the next session. No votes were taken because the hearing was informational only, though the chair noted votes on the bills were expected later that night or the next morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• is the flagship of our The CSBG program is the flagship of our federally<00:12:05.519> funded<
• 00:12:06.000> programs<00:12:06.399> that<00:12:06.639> helps federally funded programs
• Piper stated, we can cover costs that do not yet have funding or program support.
• programs and funding now more than ever. programs and funding now more than ever.
• resources, build partnerships, and fill critical gaps in program funding.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: A joint informational briefing of the House Committee on Labor and the Senate Committee on Labor and Technology was held on August 19, 2025, to hear testimony on the Office of Community Services’ proposed Community Services Block Grant state plan for federal fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Ray Domingo of OCS explained that the plan is intended to maintain federal CSBG funding and focuses on compliance monitoring, coordination among community action agencies and state agencies, and strengthening partnerships. He also reviewed the program structure, noting that Hawaii’s four CAAs serve low-income residents, that the state must pass through at least 90% of the grant to CAAs, and that Hawaii received about $3.8 million in FFY 2025, with allocations to HCAP, Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council, Kauai Economic Opportunity, and Maui Economic Opportunity. He said statewide CAAs reported serving 40,980 individuals in FFY 2024. Representatives from each CAA testified in support of the plan and described how CSBG functions as flexible “glue” funding that supports overhead, fills gaps, and helps leverage other public and private resources. HCAP’s Robert Piper said the grant helps sustain its broad service network, including Head Start, job training, weatherization, shelter, food assistance, and energy programs, and emphasized its tripartite board structure and annual service to about 20,000 people. Hawaii County’s Chad Hosigal highlighted support for senior farmers market coupons, Meals on Wheels, and transportation services. Kauai Economic Opportunity’s Mabel Fujiuchi said the agency fully supports the plan and described CSBG as nucleus funding that helps support shelter, Meals on Wheels, weatherization, mediation, and other services, including assistance for homeless families and special needs items such as dentures and hearing aids. Maui Economic Opportunity’s Gay Sabonga described CSBG’s role in disaster response after the 2023 wildfires, including shelter transitions, document recovery, housing and utility assistance, bridge grants for small businesses, youth prevention programs, and employment services. Committee members asked about the stability of future federal funding, the frequency of federal assessments, and how satisfaction scores in the state plan were measured. OCS said federal funding information has been mixed and uncertain, that communication with federal partners has been limited and informal, and that the federal assessment website appears outdated; staff said assessments are done every two years. On the satisfaction metric, OCS said the score was 92 out of 100 and believed it reflected participant responses, though they offered to follow up with more detail. No votes or formal actions were taken at the informational briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• fund program U be that the new special fund program U be uh<01:36:13.199> do<01:36:14.199>
• Can we afford another program to be added to our existing programs that we still have to fund?
• c> this funding program I'm supporting this funding program I'm supporting this because<01:46:36.400
• Who is funding these programs?
• c> special funding program according to sb1 special funding program according to sb1 434<01:56:23.599

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Health heard testimony on several bills. On SB 1441, which would repeal the transfer of the Oahu Regional Health Care System from HHSC to the Department of Health, the Department of Health said it strongly supports the measure and requested clarifying amendments. HHSC/Oahu Region also supported the bill and said it had no objection to the department’s amendments. In response to questions, witnesses said the agencies have been working on an MOU to support transfers of long-term care patients to Leahi, with the current goal being about 10 to 15 patients, but transfers would occur only as space and staffing allow; one patient was reportedly being admitted at the time, and the process was described as slow and case-by-case. The committee then heard SB 1443 on payment rates for state hospital patients and related Department of Health services. The hospital administrator said the bill would allow rates above Medicaid for community or foster-home placements if patients cannot be placed at Leahi or elsewhere, and would set Medicaid-level reimbursement for outside medical services used by state hospital patients. He said at least one provider was interested in offering services at that rate and that the population involved is largely non-ambulatory long-term care patients. Members asked about availability and training, and the witness said special training could be provided. SB 1322, a broad mental health bill, drew mixed testimony. The Department of Law Enforcement supported giving crisis-intervention-trained officers more discretion to transport people to medical care instead of arresting them. The Attorney General supported the bill but recommended revisions to emergency-transport language and restoring liability protections. HHSC and Queens Hospital supported the overall goal but sought amendments to preserve the mental health emergency worker role in decision-making and to avoid negative impacts on emergency departments. The Disability Rights Center and ACLU opposed parts of the bill, arguing that it weakens due process, reduces protections in involuntary treatment and transport, and should retain a three-person treatment panel rather than reduce it to one. A Queens representative said the current program works well and reported that more than 90% of MH1 cases once went to hospitals, but that figure has dropped to about 60-70%, with about 20% now diverted to community settings or the behavioral health crisis center. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The third objective was to identify funding and grants obtained by the program and determine if funds
• The third objective was to identify funding and grants obtained by the program and determine if funds
• Stanley, as a sponsored research program, a sponsored program meaning external funding.
• As a sponsored research program, a sponsored program meaning external funding, these funds that were
• This program, again, was treated internally as a sponsored program with the external funds from Pulaski

Summary: The committee first adopted prior minutes and then heard several standing committee audit reports. The executive committee report noted audit and special reports scheduled for the month, one outstanding committee-requested report, and a request to gather information on a possible special report for February. The city/county/local report covered delinquent private water and sewer audits, including reinstatement of turn-back funds for 17 entities, 59 of 64 delinquent 2023 entities filing reports, and action on the town of Daisy requiring repayment of misused street funds. The education report filed three higher education audit reports and deferred one Northwest Arkansas Community College report. The state agencies report filed four reports and deferred audits of the Department of Human Services and the Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism for more information on corrective actions. The committee then received a special audit review of the Charles W. Donaldson Scholars Academy at UA Little Rock. Auditors said the program received $10 million in desegregation funding and a $50,000 grant, awarded $1.87 million in scholarships to 379 students, and saw 116 students graduate. The review found many scholarship eligibility exceptions, including awards above the maximum and to students who did not meet GPA, enrollment-hour, or full-time requirements, and numerous disbursement documentation and authorization problems. Committee members sharply questioned the program’s oversight, the role of former staff, the use of funds for travel and cultural activities, and whether any improper spending should be referred for criminal review. UALR representatives said the program was overseen as a sponsored program, that some controls were later strengthened, and that Philander Smith only verified enrollment rather than eligibility. The committee voted to table the report until the next meeting and asked staff to gather the federal court order and additional information. Finally, the committee reviewed the annual report on matters referred to prosecutors and the Attorney General for 2024. Staff said 164 matters were referred, with 28 criminal charges filed, 39 still under review, 3 dismissed, 5 pending in court, and 96 not charged; convictions in 20 cases led to fines, restitution, audit costs, and some bond trust fund payments. Prosecutor representatives explained that many referrals do not become criminal cases because of intent, timing, or other legal limits, and said they generally seek restitution even when charges are not filed. Members asked for more standardized reporting, including whether restitution was recovered and why cases were not prosecuted, and discussed possible training and a checklist for future reports. The committee then voted to file the report and adjourned, with the next meeting set for February 12-13.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our Healthy Foods program had 132 applications for funding, and the need well exceeded the capacity of
• the program, which is why we're asking for an additional $2 million for the Healthy Food Financing Fund
• Like, you're asking us for additional funding through the LITA and JTIP and those programs.
• Like, you're asking us for additional funding through the Lita and J-TIP and those programs.
• appropriations—I did not see funding requests for that program.

Summary: The committee first recognized Mark Roper of the Economic Development Department for his long service and retirement, with members and the secretary praising his work on economic development across the state. Secretary Rob Black then presented EDD’s budget and special appropriation requests, describing strong recent job and income growth and outlining the department’s strategy around science and technology, site readiness, workforce development, foreign direct investment, and rural/community programs. He highlighted wins in advanced energy, quantum, space and defense, and biosciences, and asked for funding for quantum/DARPA matching funds, additional site readiness work, LIDA closing funds, JTIP training support, New Mexico Partnership, and healthy foods and other community programs. Members asked detailed questions about the quantum proposal, site readiness, the new mapping tool for industrial sites, workforce participation, trade missions, foreign investment, tariffs, water and produced water, tribal site evaluation, and public engagement on major projects. Black said the quantum request was intended to match federal dollars and build a workforce pipeline, that the site-readiness software would be a set enterprise license, and that the department was working with tribes and local partners on future site evaluations. He also said tariffs have created uncertainty but New Mexico’s infrastructure and foreign trade zones could help attract manufacturing, and he acknowledged concerns about transparency and community input while noting that some projects, such as Pacific Fusion, had gone through extensive public processes. The committee also discussed specific projects and funding balances, including Mantis Space’s move to Albuquerque, the status of Virgin Galactic’s spaceport lease, and the current LIDA fund balance and encumbrances. Black and Deputy Secretary Isaac Romero said the department was trying to use State Investment Council-backed venture funds to attract companies and that the new investments were already producing deals and jobs. Members generally supported the department’s direction but pressed for more targeted expertise, faster deployment, and stronger community involvement in future economic development decisions. Later, Secretary de Blassie of the Department of Health presented the department’s budget request and progress report. He said DOH had improved revenue cycle management, reduced old Medicaid-pending cases, increased census at facilities, improved budget and contract timeliness, and responded effectively to the measles outbreak. The department requested additional base funding for epidemiology and response, the DOH helpline, the Vital Records Virtual Vault, state labs, and the veterans home, along with special requests for respiratory vaccinations and marketing and lab equipment replacement. He also noted progress on MOUD and the medical psilocybin program, and said the department was not seeking to launch new programs given the limited time left in the administration.

Transcript Highlights:

• AS WELL AS THE USE OF LINE AND PIPELINE FUNDING AND THE NURSING STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM.
• THE TOTAL FUNDING ALLOCATION IS OVER $32 MILLION FOR CAREER SOURCE FLORIDA INCLUDING ALL THOSE FUNDING
• THE LAST BOX IS LOCAL FUNDING.
• AND THIS COULD BE COUNTY FUNDS OR MUNICIPAL FUNDS, COMMUNITY PARTNERS SO YOU HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE
• STREAM AND THIS IS OUR MOST BROAD FUNDING PROGRAM AND IT INCLUDES SOMEBODY WHO CAN GO ON TO THE EMPLOYEE

Transcript Highlights:

• models for the MD program funding that would move that out of the funding formula and yet keep it funded
• And then when funding, we have new programs coming down the pike, we would come and justify a funding
• We will talk about the MD program if we're discussing funding for the MD program.
• And we felt like the fixed funding model for the MD program, keeping it well funded at current or the
• New program. So I want to give an example of new program funding and just bring in some.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Higher Education Funding Committee met to discuss possible changes to North Dakota’s higher education funding formula, with a particular focus on separating the UND School of Medicine and Health Sciences MD program from the general formula. Dr. Jenkins outlined several options for the MD program, including a fixed-funding model, a hybrid model, or keeping it in the formula, and emphasized the need to preserve strong support for medical education while making future funding clearer. He also discussed efforts to increase the share of North Dakota students in the MD program through ND85, expanded recruiting, early acceptance pathways, MCAT prep, a four-plus-one program, and the Primary Care Accelerated Track, along with future cost pressures such as AI licensing and residency growth. The committee then reviewed a simplified funding model from the University System Office that would base funding more heavily on student FTE, credentials awarded, and a few incentive factors such as small institution and research adjustments. Members questioned the use of placeholder numbers, the lack of a clear methodology for the small institution and research factors, and whether the model would adequately account for differences among institutions, high-cost programs, and graduate education. Several members raised concerns that arbitrary factors would be hard to defend politically and could distort funding or create competition between schools, while others said the exercise was useful as a starting point for discussion. Alex presented a second alternative that kept the current SIP-code structure but increased CTE weighting, added a progressive economic size factor, and separated out the MD program. His model also added an on-campus face-to-face headcount component and a credentials component, with the intent of rewarding in-person enrollment and completions. Members questioned the use of headcount instead of FTE, how hybrid, online, dual-credit, and off-campus students would be treated, and why face-to-face enrollment was weighted more heavily than completion. No formal votes or final actions were taken; the committee instead continued discussion and asked members to provide direction on which elements, if any, should be developed further.

Transcript Highlights:

• The new program builds upon the successes of the limited-term General Funded program, the Clean California
• We're going to be in a situation of having to cut existing programs and existing funding.
• And Active Transportation Program funding is one of the main ways we can solve this crisis. to speak.
• And active transportation program funding is one of the main ways we can solve this crisis.
• Active transportation program funding is one of the main ways we can solve this crisis.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on transportation agency budget proposals and did not take any votes. The first major discussion focused on the Motor Vehicle Account shortfall and a proposed one-time $166 million transfer from the Air Pollution Control Fund and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to offset California Air Resources Board mobile source costs. Department of Finance and the LAO described the account’s long-running structural deficit, driven largely by employee compensation growth and REAL ID-related workload, while members criticized the use of Proposition 4, GGRF, and other one-time or redirected funds as backfills and urged a longer-term solution that addresses both revenues and expenditures. The committee then heard Caltrans’ request for $25 million in General Fund support to create a Clean California Community Cleanup and Employment Pathway Grant Program. Caltrans said the program would build on the prior Clean California effort by funding local litter and graffiti cleanup, community engagement, and workforce pathways for vulnerable populations. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing that local litter abatement is not a core state responsibility and that one-time funding is unlikely to solve persistent local cleanup needs. Several members echoed those concerns, while public commenters split between support for the cleanup/employment model and calls to instead restore funding to the Active Transportation Program and transit operations. The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency requested that California administratively recognize Tahoe’s federally designated population figure for state formula-based transportation funding, which would raise the population count used in formulas from 40,000 to 145,000. The agency said the change would not request new money but would better align state formulas with federal law and support a shared regional funding framework; members appeared generally supportive, though they noted the need to phase in the change to reduce impacts on other regions. The final presentation was on High-Speed Rail. The LAO reviewed the authority’s project update report, noting that it did not fully meet statutory requirements and that key details are still pending in a supplemental report expected later in the summer. The LAO said the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment still shows an estimated roughly $7 billion funding gap, with no specific plan to close it, and highlighted risks from federal review, inflation, and uncertain GGRF revenues. High-Speed Rail Authority staff said they are conducting a bottom-up review of scope, schedule, ridership, and costs, expect to provide updated information by late summer, and are exploring public-private partnerships and other financing strategies. Members stressed that no further funding commitments should be made until the updated analysis is available.

Transcript Highlights:

• Equalized levies mean that it's a revenue program funded by some mix of state aid and local property
• They'll always get, like, the per-pupil funding from the formula, but certain programs they might come
• so not including revenues in the nutrition fund, the community service fund, the debt service fund, you
• fund revenues a<00:43:17.400> program<00:43:18.200> first<00:43:18.440> enacted
• whole education program that's funded in whole education program that's funded in whole or<01:44

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We looked closely at the programs that have been funded with those dollars, and you can see a $4.2 million
• with the ARPA funds. with the ARPA funds.
• program.
• The majority of the programs program.
• community support program. community support program.

Keywords: Appropriations - Room 210; 29 January, 2026: 8:00 AM, 925, all

Summary: The Department of Mental Health presented its FY27 budget request and described its statewide responsibilities, including more than 600 grants totaling about $140 million, 11 community mental health centers, and state-operated programs for mental health, substance use, and intellectual/developmental disabilities. The request included $291.2 million in general funds, about $33.4 million above the current year, plus spending authority tied to ID regional programs and the IDD waiver. Major components included funding to enroll 250 additional people in the IDD home- and community-based waiver, a projected waiver rate increase, and added support for state-operated 24/7 programs facing staffing and operational shortfalls. The agency also asked to continue selected ARPA-funded services before those dollars expire, including 988 call center support, peer respite sites, court liaison positions, intensive community services for children and youth, and adolescent offender programs. Other requests covered salary adjustments and longevity increases for hard-to-fill positions, electronic health record support, IT security upgrades, a Jackson County crisis stabilization unit expansion from 8 to 16 beds, capital needs such as generator and boiler/chiller replacements, inflation-related increases for community mental health center grants, and restoration of general funds under a Joint Legislative Budget Committee recommendation. Officials emphasized that community-based care now accounts for 58% of funding and that the goal is to keep people out of institutions unless they need the highest level of care. Committee members asked about ARPA balances, forensic referrals, Jackson County’s request, and county support for community mental health centers. The department said about $25 million in ARPA funds remained and should be spent by September 30, with some delays due to reimbursement revisions. On forensic services, officials reported the new 81-bed maximum-security unit at State Hospital has cut the wait list roughly in half, but admission orders are up 51%, and some referrals may be unnecessary or used to delay proceedings. Members also discussed county contributions to community mental health centers, which the department said total about $9–10 million statewide, with most counties now meeting their obligations and only a few using small in-kind contributions.

Transcript Highlights:

• But there are certain funding streams that are encumbered and can only go to certain programs.
• , but there are certain funding streams that are encumbered that can only go to certain programs.
• these funds.
• As part of this cohort, applicants were asked to specify whether they would be funding programs to address
• 36 programs. ...is implementing new or expanding programs to include Proposition 36 programs.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee met to hear new audit requests and receive a status update from the State Auditor. The auditor reported 10 JALAC audits in progress, noted that all 2025-approved audits are underway, said the first 2026 audit is focused on DMV license revocations, and described several statutory and high-risk audits already in progress. The committee also approved a consent calendar of four audit requests: UC library resources, law enforcement information sharing, EDD unemployment insurance claims, and Housing and Community Development housing development monitoring. The committee then considered Assembly Member DeMaio’s audit request on SANDAG road project management. DeMaio argued the audit was needed to examine whether transportation funds, including voter-approved and restricted revenues, were used for allowable purposes and whether past management failures warranted outside review. SANDAG’s CEO and CFO said the agency already undergoes extensive oversight and audits, that funds are tracked by multiple “colors of money,” and that internal controls have improved. Several members questioned whether the issues were already addressed in public records or existing audits, and the request failed on a roll call vote. Next, Senator Valadares presented an audit of the Board of State and Community Corrections’ Proposition 47 grant administration, arguing that more transparency is needed on outcomes, recidivism data, and oversight of grantees. The BSCC said it already has oversight mechanisms, that the State Controller conducts biennial audits, and that program data shows positive outcomes. The committee approved the audit unanimously. Senator Cortese then presented an audit of CalHR’s dental benefits procurement and Delta Dental contract, citing long-standing benefit caps, provider network concerns, and retiree out-of-pocket costs. CalHR said its network remains strong, that it recently completed an RFP adding MetLife as a second carrier starting in 2027, and that contracts include performance guarantees. Members from both parties expressed concern about access and competition, and the audit was approved unanimously. The committee then completed add-on votes on the consent calendar and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Manufactured Home Community Redevelopment Program, or MHCR, and the Co North Loan Fund.
• <00:41:50.280> These<00:41:50.520> programs<00:41:51.000> are North Loan Fund
• These programs are North Loan Fund.
• prevention and assistance program prevention and assistance program funding. funding. funding.
• Programs across the state serving the most vulnerable Minnesotans face tremendous funding uncertainty

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The conference committee on the housing omnibus bill began with member introductions and a staff walk-through comparing House and Senate provisions. House Research staff reviewed major policy differences affecting Minnesota Housing Finance Agency operations, including limits on how much the agency may retain from state appropriations for administrative costs, new reporting requirements, restrictions on transfers between appropriated accounts, and House-only language requiring annual expenditure of investment income from state appropriations. Senate provisions were also summarized, including tighter rules on when appropriations may be placed into Housing Development Fund bookkeeping accounts, updated operating-cost reporting, and Senate-only changes to how investment earnings may be used. Staff also described shared and differing provisions on program-money transfers, a lived-experience earnings exemption, and a long list of Senate-only policy changes, including manufactured home park tenant protections, low-income housing tax credit and bond-related changes, a task force on housing taxes and fees, and repealers affecting Housing Development Fund authority and certain older programs. Fiscal staff then reviewed the budget impacts. The House side included one-time appropriations for workforce housing development, family homeless prevention and assistance, a Minnesota Nice Home Share pilot, and homebuyer education, along with debt service for $100 million in housing infrastructure bonds and transfers/cancellations that produced a net zero general fund impact across the budget window. The Senate side noted a fiscal note for the housing taxes and fees task force and a smaller housing infrastructure bond authorization, with corresponding debt service costs and a total Senate budget-window impact of about $1 million in general fund debt service. After the staff presentations, the committee moved to public testimony. Commissioner Jennifer Ho of Minnesota Housing said the bill’s housing infrastructure bonds and continued support for family homeless prevention were important, and she supported the lived-experience earnings exemption, while noting concerns about the interest-earnings provisions. Testifiers from Greater Minnesota groups praised the workforce housing investments and Senate updates to the state housing tax credit and infrastructure grant program, though they suggested changes to the geographic distribution language. HOME Line urged funding for statewide tenant hotline services, citing rising demand and asking for $1 million if additional money becomes available. The Minnesota Consortium of Community Developers supported the bill’s investments and emphasized the need to pair housing development with supportive services. Housing First Minnesota praised housing infrastructure bonds and other investments but criticized the omission of the Minnesota Starter Homes Act. The Minnesota Multi Housing Association began testimony opposing certain rent-control-related provisions in the House bill. No votes or final actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• administration of assistance programs administration of assistance programs funding<03:07:08.000
• money to fund the Healthy School Meals for All Program.
• But this program, I'm in general fund.
• c> has tax cash fund program because it has tax cash fund program because it has been<05:41:07.960
• programs in the state um that we fund programs in the state um that we fund that<06:30:27.200>

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the journal, and received several committee reports. The Finance Committee reported Senate Bills 155, 49, and 116 with amendments and favorable referral to Appropriations, and House Bill 1188 favorably to Appropriations. The Business, Labor, and Technology Committee reported House Bill 1110 with amendments and a favorable recommendation to the Committee of the Whole, placed on the Consent Calendar, and also recommended confirmation of several appointments, including members of the State Plumbing Board, State Electrical Board, and Workers’ Compensation Cost Containment Board. The chamber then proceeded out of order for personal privileges and a resolution honoring Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., including recognition of visiting members and students participating in its Capitol Day. The Senate next took up House Joint Resolution 1027 concerning remembrance of the Holocaust. The resolution emphasized the history of the Holocaust, rising anti-Semitic incidents, the importance of Holocaust and genocide education, and the need to confront hate and otherization. Senators Weissman and Ball spoke in support, stressing the dangers of hateful rhetoric, the need for vigilance and compassion, and the importance of learning from history. HJR 1027 passed unanimously by roll call, 35-0, and the roll call was listed as co-sponsors. Announcements followed recognizing the Sikh community’s Vaisakhi observance and a langar lunch at the Capitol, along with a proclamation for Sikh Awareness Appreciation Month. There were also notices about a Republican caucus, a Legal Services Committee meeting on Senate Bill 2683 and a litigation update, and a brief personal privilege remark about tax day and agriculture. The Senate then recessed until 10:30 a.m., later raised the call, and moved into special orders for second reading of a large group of House bills on the Consent Calendar.

Transcript Highlights:

• This program is both a federal program, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and also our state-funded
• last fiscal year, we could continue the program through the use of that funding, so we'll be able to
• the federal ledger onto state-funded programs and campus operating budgets.
• costs from the federal ledger onto state-funded programs and campus operating budgets.
• Those are some good examples of discretionary programs funded in the budget.

Summary: The committee held a work session focused first on juvenile rehabilitation system capacity. DCYF officials said the juvenile rehabilitation population is older, includes more adult-sentenced youth, and has longer lengths of stay, especially for “post-25” youth who must remain in secure facilities and cannot go to community beds. They described overcrowding at Green Hill School, placement limits at Echo Glen and Harbor Heights, staffing turnover, mental health acuity, and the need for more medium-security and specialized mental health beds. DCYF said it is pursuing a Parkland facility proposal, a staffing model decision package, and a broader feasibility study and master plan update. No votes were taken; members were asked to follow up with questions later. The committee then heard on behavioral health system capacity from the Behavioral Health Administration and the Health Care Authority. DSHS described growth in forensic and civil bed need, expansion at Olympic Heritage, Maple Lane, and Brockman, and construction of a new 350-bed forensic hospital at Western State expected to open in 2028. HCA reported progress on long-term civil commitment beds, intensive behavioral health treatment facilities, PACT teams, and intensive residential treatment teams, saying the community-based system is being expanded to support step-down care and reduce hospital reliance. Members asked about whether capacity is right-sized, the difference between facility types, and federal match eligibility for services. A federal funding update followed, covering the effects of H.R. 1 and H.R. 5371 on SNAP, Medicaid, marketplace coverage, long-term services and supports, K-12, higher education, and hemp regulation. OFM and agency staff said H.R. 1 adds work requirements, changes non-citizen eligibility, increases state administrative and benefit costs, reduces Medicaid and marketplace subsidies for some groups, tightens redeterminations, and may significantly affect provider payments and state-directed payments. H.R. 5371 extended federal funding through January 30, 2026 and included some agency appropriations and other provisions, including changes affecting hemp producers. Members asked about SNAP error rates and special enrollment periods. Finally, budget coordinator Mary Monroe gave a 2026 supplemental budget preview. She reviewed the state’s near general fund outlook, noting revenue declines since the enacted budget, the effect of reversions, and a preliminary maintenance-level outlook showing a projected increase in NGFO spending over the four-year period. She said the supplemental will reflect updated caseload and cost forecasts and mandatory impacts from H.R. 1, but not policy proposals. No actions or votes were taken during the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• program in order to return that funding to 540,000 electric utility customer bills.
• program in order to return that funding to 540,000 electric utility customer bills. roof<00:17:15.679
• oversubscribed renewable energy fund oversubscribed renewable energy fund program<00:18:40.960><
• um in order to return that program um in order to return that funding<00:18:44.480> uh<00:18:
• It is intended to work, and you're going to break the design of the program by emptying out this fund

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 224, which would redirect most money from New Hampshire’s renewable energy fund back to electric ratepayers. The bill sponsor argued the measure would lower energy costs, noting recent utility rate increases and estimating annual savings of roughly $2.5 million to $7.3 million for ratepayers. Supporters said the fund has accumulated money that should be returned to customers rather than used for subsidies, and they emphasized that the state has already rebated similar funds from RGGI for years. Opponents, including Rep. Kat McGee, argued the renewable energy fund is a successful, nonlapsing dedicated fund that supports local clean-energy projects, energy resilience, emissions reductions, and private investment. McGee said the fiscal note overstated the benefit of rebates and understated the loss of investment, claiming the average annual rebate would amount to less than $10 per customer while the program has helped leverage significant private dollars and nearly 10,000 projects. She urged the committee to reject the bill as a poor deal for the state and ratepayers. Committee members questioned the fiscal note, the size of the rebate, whether the bill would set a precedent for other dedicated funds, and whether the program’s incentives amount to picking winners and losers. The Department of Energy testified neutrally, explaining how the renewable energy fund works, including renewable energy credits, alternative compliance payments, and the fund’s use for renewable energy initiatives. No vote was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.