Transcript Highlights:

• Just that way we allow everybody to make sure that they have their questions heard.
• the average salary, just to give context to that number?
• The average had been somewhere. Around 11-12 million.
• And again, that's an average. I understand, but if we're going to... Take student A.
• Certainty is that 166 days is the average.

Committee: House Appropriations and Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• News looks at all students with an average.
• It's closer to 12 percent, average. Some over that.
• , aggregated that amount to $60 million.
• , aggregated that amount to $60 million.
• above average will now fall below average.

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Higher Education

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on higher education funding, focusing on how Florida’s university system should be financed and whether a new funding model is needed. University system financial officers and Chancellor Ray Rodriguez discussed major cost drivers, including wages and benefits, utilities, maintenance, financial aid, research, and the effects of geography, institutional mission, and student mix. UF highlighted the cost of research and graduate programs; UCF and FAU pointed to growth, location, and cost of living; FAMU emphasized recruiting top-tier talent while relying on other revenue sources; and UNF noted the challenges of growth and long-term planning. Members also discussed the role of internal controls and audits in addressing excessive spending and questioned whether out-of-state tuition should be adjusted to help offset costs. On revenue sources beyond state appropriations and tuition, the panel described auxiliaries, restricted funds, capital projects, and component units such as foundations and health systems. Several universities noted that some revenues are restricted to specific purposes and cannot be used for general operations. FAMU explained that a large share of its capital project funding reflected active campus construction, while UF said its component-unit revenue is largely tied to UF Health. The Chancellor emphasized that the system’s low tuition and strong state support are central to Florida’s national standing, but also noted that some auxiliary revenues are pledged to debt and must be managed carefully. When discussing the current funding process, witnesses praised Florida’s performance-based funding model for aligning incentives with student success, transparency, and accountability. They also raised concerns about non-recurring appropriations, rising employee benefit costs, unfunded mandates, deferred maintenance, and the difficulty of multi-year planning. Suggestions for improvement included more recurring funding, better coverage of mandated costs, greater flexibility in fee-setting, and possible weighting for mission, geography, and institutional type. The Chancellor said the Board of Governors is considering a “version 3.0” of performance-based funding that would benchmark institutions against peers and Carnegie classifications, but any changes would require legislative action. On out-of-state tuition, most universities said they would prefer local board flexibility, while the Chancellor cautioned that increasing out-of-state enrollment or fees could affect future state support and should be balanced carefully.

Transcript Highlights:

• without a tremendous amount of...
• So instead of four times the state average cost, it could be three times the state average cost.
• So that would bring that threshold down a little bit, allowing more students to... average special ed
• So instead of four times the state average cost, it could be three times the state average cost.
• And I'm going to take an average and I'm going to pay this is my average that I'm going to use to calculate

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then received a lengthy DPI presentation from Stanley Schauer on statewide reading and math assessment data for students with and without disabilities. He explained the assessment systems used over time, the absence of 2019-20 data, and how North Dakota’s standards are set by educators. Members asked about alternate assessments, cohort trends, the apparent drop in proficiency in higher grades, and the new NDA+ assessment. Schauer emphasized that the biggest pattern in the data was the relative stability of students with disabilities, the post-pandemic drop and partial recovery, and the need to focus on reducing the novice category. He also said the state plans to revisit high school standard setting and that future data could be broken out by program, disability category, and schools using science-of-math or other initiatives. Public testimony from special education staff suggested that the flat performance of students with disabilities during COVID likely reflected continued services and intensive supports, and committee members discussed whether the current disparity goal is realistic and whether growth measures would be more useful than simple proficiency buckets. After the presentation, the committee took a short break and then moved into discussion of special education funding models. Chair Richter said members should contact Schauer directly with ideas for additional data views and noted that the committee would continue its work on funding and possible model changes. Brandon Bomback of Grand Forks Public Schools began a presentation arguing that the special education funding formula, especially the weighting factor, should be reconsidered if the committee wants a system that better reflects accountability and student needs. He said his comments were based on the perspective of a larger district and focused on the special education weighting factor rather than other parts of the formula. The remainder of his presentation was not included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• On average, based on the cases that we have, State prison.
• Do I have a— I do have the amount per, if we were to average it across all staff members, all staff members
• 461 hours on average on the books for unused leave.
• And they have sort of an average they know they need to spend every year.
• May Revise comes in and we have a limited amount of time to digest a lot of that.

Transcript Highlights:

• a briefer comment than the one minute we allow at the end.
• So the way the formula works, it's using prior-year average.
• It's a rolling average that includes three total years.
• Across the board, we see, on average, improvements. Okay.
• So it does allow for us to operate much more as a system as well.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held a hearing focused on California Community College budget proposals. Chair Alvarez opened by emphasizing the system’s role in access, transfer, workforce training, and serving more than 2 million students, while also noting persistent challenges in enrollment, persistence, transfer, and graduation. Public commenters and system representatives broadly supported COLA, enrollment growth funding, deferred maintenance, student support block grants, and additional flexibility for districts facing uncertainty. The first major panel covered the student-centered funding formula, COLA, and enrollment growth. The Department of Finance said the Governor proposes a 2.43% COLA ($230.4 million) and 0.5% enrollment growth funding ($30.4 million). The LAO said the COLA was reasonable and recommended funding at least the proposed growth amount, citing uneven enrollment recovery and regional differences. The Chancellor’s Office supported both proposals and asked for additional changes, including using the greater of current-year or three-year average for apportionments and lifting the 10% local enrollment cap, arguing these would better fund growing districts. Members questioned how the formula works, whether SCFF is improving outcomes, and how much additional funding would be needed under different growth scenarios. The committee then reviewed categorical program COLAs, Rising Scholars, career education proposals, IT proposals, and student housing. The Governor proposed a 2.43% COLA for selected categorical programs ($31.9 million). For Rising Scholars, the Governor proposed $30 million ongoing and removal of the cap on participating colleges; the LAO urged waiting for outcome data before doubling funding, while the Chancellor’s Office said the program is serving more students and supports equity for justice-impacted students. On career education, the Governor proposed $50 million for credit for prior learning and $50 million for a career passport; the LAO supported more reporting on credit for prior learning but recommended rejecting the career passport as too undefined, while the Chancellor’s Office supported both. On technology, the Governor proposed $162.5 million for a common cloud data platform and $168 million for a common ERP system; the LAO said both were premature or lacked sufficient planning and recommended rejection, while the Chancellor’s Office argued they would improve real-time data, security, and systemwide efficiency. The committee also heard an update on student housing: the administration said the 2024 shift to a lease-revenue bond model remains in progress for 13 approved projects, with 11 still active, and members asked about withdrawn projects and possible use of any returned funds. No votes were taken, and several items were held open for further discussion and May Revision updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill today, and for hearing us and allowing me to share the information.
• It is, I think, an amount of $25,000 a year. Thank you. Any more questions?
• State law requires DOH to inspect acute care hospitals on average at least every 18 months.
• . during a federal... months, rather than at least every 18 months on average.
• First, it clarifies inspection timelines by removing the term average.

Summary: The House Health Care & Wellness Committee held public hearings on several bills. House Bill 2232 would create a Department of Health-operated time-sensitive emergency data repository covering trauma, cardiac, and stroke events, with quality improvement reporting and support for rural facilities; it drew strong support from emergency physicians, nurses, and the Department of Health, while the Washington State Hospital Association said hospitals support the goal but lack the resources to absorb the added requirements. House Bill 1812, as a proposed substitute, would bar insurers and public plans from imposing anesthesia time limits or related reimbursement caps; the sponsor and anesthesia providers said it protects patient safety and fair payment, and the Washington State Society of Anesthesiologists asked for a clarifying amendment on physical status modifiers. House Bill 2250 would limit hospital charity care to Washington residents, while preserving emergency care access; supporters from rural hospitals and the Washington State Hospital Association said the change would help border hospitals facing rising nonresident charity care, and opponents from legal aid, patient advocacy, and LGBTQ groups warned it would create barriers, chill access for immigrants and other vulnerable patients, and conflict with Washington’s safety-net values. The committee also heard House Bill 2340, which would extend existing substance-use monitoring program protections and stipend eligibility to nursing assistants under the Board of Nursing’s CARES program. The sponsor described it as a simple equity measure, and the Board of Nursing supported it, saying it would improve access and reduce stigma; members asked where the stipend funding comes from, and staff and the board said it is currently general-fund supported at about $25,000 annually. House Bill 2577 would change hospital inspection law by requiring acute care hospital inspections every 18 months rather than on average, allowing some accredited inspections to satisfy the requirement every 36 months, and clarifying fire-protection reinspection standards; the sponsor and Department of Health said it responds to a JLARC audit and provides needed clarity, while DOH said it is still working to catch up from inspection delays caused by the public health emergency. The meeting ended after public testimony on the bills was closed and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• He asked what factors, other than conservatism, would reduce the fiscal 25 amount to the average of the
• Average, higher than average, lower than average? I like the average.
• <01:07:21.359><c> than</c><01:07:21.520><c> average</c> thoughts average higher than average thoughts
• average I like the average lower than average I like the average okay okay okay represent<01:07:28.720
• </c><01:10:14.920><c> then</c> averages okay what are the averages then averages okay what are the averages

Summary: The committee met in a work session on revenue estimates and reviewed updated spreadsheet pages for several tax categories, using prior agreements and new testimony to refine FY 2025-2027 estimates. Early discussion covered insurance tax estimates, where members reviewed a letter from the insurance commissioner saying he was comfortable with the numbers provided; the committee accepted those estimates without opposition. Members also discussed utility property tax, with testimony about recent infrastructure buildout, tariffs, depreciation, and the difficulty of forecasting future growth. After debate over whether to use the average of high and low estimates or lean lower, the committee unanimously adopted the utility property tax numbers. The committee then turned to real estate transfer tax and communications tax. For real estate transfer tax, members cited county input, housing market conditions, interest rates, lumber costs, and uncertainty about future policy; they agreed to use the averages and adopted those estimates unanimously. For communications tax, members noted the decline in landline-based revenue and the shift to data services. After discussion of whether to use the low estimate or the average, the committee settled on the average with a small rounding-down adjustment when the figure ended in .5, and adopted the numbers unanimously. The chair also clarified that these estimates remain subject to change until the final resolution is adopted. The committee next accepted interest and dividends estimates as presented, with members noting the decline in that revenue source and the lack of additional information beyond the department’s analysis. Finally, the committee began discussing tobacco tax revenue, with members noting long-term declines in smoking, offsetting effects from out-of-state sales, and a suggestion to take a slightly conservative approach by reducing the average by 0.5. The transcript cuts off during that discussion, so no final vote on tobacco is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Multiple Listing Service, looking at the average sales price of homes in Albuquerque, the average sales
• Where we could raise the price by 15% above and beyond the average sales price.
• But that's the average they gave us.
• And allow them to afford their mortgage.
• Average on your new home build. So Pulte Homes operates under a couple of different brands.

Committee: House Public School Capital Outlay Oversight Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• Are we doing well, better than average, less than average? That's my first question. Ms.
• :49.760><c> that's</c> average average less than average that's average average less than average that's
• </c> reports out on what the maximum amount reports out on what the maximum amount of<00:50:36.400><c
• It shows the maximum amounts of bonding authorizations that could be enacted and allow the state to remain
• 10 years, and averages out those actual bonding amounts that were passed.

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• The size of these reductions varied, but on average it was a 56% reduction of the original fine amount
• In the 2019-20 fiscal year, you get an amount that's closer to the amount of fines that are imposed.
• You're comparing the amount of the fines initially assessed to the total amount of the fines currently
• , the average fine that Cal OSHA has is... ...violations, the average fine that Cal OSHA is levying per
• for serious violations, the average fine that Cal OSHA has is... ...violations, the average fine that

Summary: The hearing focused on a state audit of Cal/OSHA titled “The Division of Occupational Safety and Health: Process Deficiencies and Staffing Shortages Limit Its Ability to Protect Workers.” Committee leaders and the audit team described serious workplace tragedies, argued that California’s worker protections are not being adequately enforced, and said the audit was prompted by concerns that Cal/OSHA was too often relying on letters instead of inspections, delaying investigations, and closing cases without enough documentation. Members repeatedly emphasized that the issue was not just staffing, but also outdated policies, weak oversight, and inconsistent enforcement. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found a 32% vacancy rate in 2023-24, heavy reliance on hard-copy files, outdated or unclear policies, and inconsistent decision-making in complaints, accidents, citations, and fine reductions. He said Cal/OSHA conducted on-site inspections in only about 20% of complaints, used letter investigations more than 80% of the time, often lacked evidence that hazards were corrected, and sometimes failed to inspect serious injury cases on time. The audit also found weak documentation for fine calculations and settlement reductions, with some penalties reduced substantially without clear explanations. Parks said the agency had accepted the findings and would provide progress updates later in the year. Committee members pressed the auditor on vacancy rates, the use of letter investigations, the low rate of criminal referrals, and whether fines were being reduced too often. Cal/OSHA and DIR officials responded that the vacancy rate had fallen to 12% partly because 66 vacant positions were eliminated in a statewide budget reduction and partly because of hiring; they said 126 people had been hired in the first half of the year. They also said they had hired a policy writer, were updating several policies, were planning periodic internal audits, and were developing a new data management system expected to go live in late 2026 or early 2027. On fines, officials said Title 8 sets base penalties and allows adjustments based on factors like employer size, history, and good faith, with appeals and informal conferences also affecting final amounts. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• On average, we pay about 17% below the state agency average. We are quite a bit below that.
• 8% or 9% below average from all state agencies.
• The average age of an armory in Texas is 55 years old.
• These FTE positions would allow.
• The amount requested would represent a 5% increase, which would be the same amount. that the employees

Committee: House Appropriations - S/C on Articles I, IV, & V

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a large amount of access, or with a three. Very small amount reported a one on that.
• So when we look at the domain average of a 1, 2, or 3, it's a 1.803 is the average score. Like Mr.
• the average score, like Mr.
• The smaller district average was a 1.95, and the large district average was a 1.73.
• Small schools, again, or small districts, again, average 1.83; the large average 1.57.

Summary: The committee met to discuss special education funding and retention, beginning with approval of the prior meeting minutes and then hearing a presentation from North Dakota United on a statewide special education survey and retention rubric. Presenters described how the rubric and survey were developed from special educator input around four domains: paperwork and due process support, workload, student and staff safety, and paraprofessional management. They reported high levels of stress and burnout, including increased workload, difficulty taking prep and lunch time, concerns about mental health, and widespread difficulty filling special education positions. Committee members questioned the survey’s lack of a general-education comparison group, the interpretation of terms like “rarely” and “sometimes,” and whether results could be broken down further by district size, unit, or disability area. The survey results showed the weakest area was workload, with respondents reporting caseloads increasing without corresponding adjustments, little additional support or compensation when workloads rise, and few negotiated-agreement protections. Paperwork and due process also scored poorly, with many teachers saying they rarely receive dedicated time during the duty day, often work outside contract hours without compensation, and take work home on evenings and weekends. Student and staff safety scored somewhat better but still showed gaps in crisis follow-up, notification about violent behavior, protective gear, and leave options after incidents. Paraprofessional management also drew concern, especially low pay, insufficient staffing, limited administrative support, and the burden placed on teachers to supervise and train paras. Several teachers then testified directly about the practical impact of these issues. One special education teacher described the job as combining instruction, legal compliance, and paraprofessional supervision, often requiring work beyond contracted hours and contributing to burnout and turnover. Another testified that special education case managers are effectively doing three full-time jobs and that the paperwork and caseload demands are a major reason people avoid or leave the field. Committee members discussed whether the problems are primarily local or state-level, whether more funding would solve them, and whether changes to the funding formula or weighting for high-cost students might be needed. No formal vote or action was taken beyond a recess and return to order for the next presentation, which continued the discussion of possible special education study objectives and potential policy directions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We allowed you to go over the two minutes. Oh, sorry.
• There's an assumption that you're around this average amount.
• It's an assumption that you're around this average amount.
• for that amount of coverage.
• I will allow. Senator, oh, okay, I will allow the chair to do his job. Thank you.

Committee: Senate Insurance

Summary: The committee first heard SB 1315 by Senator Cabaldon, the “Drive My Car Act,” which was described as a forward-looking bill aimed at ensuring that owners of vehicles with advanced autonomous or software-driven features retain the right to drive their own cars. Cabaldon explained that, after discussions with stakeholders, the bill would likely be redirected out of the insurance space and into transportation to address concerns about mandatory software updates disabling human driving. Members broadly praised the concept as a timely response to emerging technology, and there was no opposition testimony. The committee voted the bill out on a due pass motion to the Transportation Committee, with members voting aye and the bill held on call until all votes were recorded. The committee then took up SB 876, the Disaster Recovery Reform Act, presented by the Insurance Commissioner and supported by the committee chair. The bill was framed as a comprehensive response to wildfire disaster claims problems, especially after the Los Angeles-area fires, and would require more accurate replacement-cost estimates, stronger optional extended replacement-cost coverage, improved building code upgrade coverage, faster claim payments, clearer adjuster communication, pre-disaster emergency response plans, and stronger penalties and restitution for unfair claims handling. Supporters, including United Policyholders, California Environmental Voters, the Los Angeles Mayor’s office, AARP California, and consumer advocates, said the bill would help survivors avoid underinsurance, delays, and repeated trauma in the claims process. Opposition came from several insurance and industry groups, including APCIA, the Personal Insurance Federation of California, the Pacific Association of Domestic Insurance Companies, the Civil Justice Association of California, and the California Building Industry Association. They argued the bill remained too broad, would raise premiums, reduce flexibility, and could worsen availability in an already fragile market, especially because of mandatory coverage expansions and faster payout requirements. Committee members questioned both sides extensively about cost, optional versus mandatory provisions, contents coverage, ALE limits, building code upgrades, and rate-setting timelines. The committee ultimately passed SB 876 as amended to the Judiciary Committee on a due pass motion, with one no vote from Vice Chair Niello and the remaining recorded members voting aye; the bill was held open briefly to add a missing vote before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• of taxes you go to certain things, average teachers pay, administration pay.
• in the statewide 50% of the statewide average of the amount distributed into the student account, and
• So I don't have math, but thanks, Adam does have the percentages that could derive that amount.
• In subsection 1, regarding 50 percent of the statewide average amount...
• In subsection 1, regarding 50 percent of the statewide average amount, so again we're just using the

Bills: HB1329

Committee: Senate Appropriations - Education and Environment Division

Summary: The Education Division met with all members present and first took up House Bill 1329, which would create a transparency database and website for school spending information. Senator Schaible offered Amendment 0204 to turn the bill into a study, citing concerns that the proposal would impose major data-collection burdens on 168 school districts, require new data standards and privacy protections, and likely cost far more than the $500,000 in the bill. Several members supported transparency but agreed the implementation costs and technical feasibility were unclear. The committee adopted the amendment 4-1, then passed HB 1329 as amended on a 5-0 vote, with Senator Shively to carry the bill. The committee then discussed House Bill 1540, the education savings account/voucher bill. Representatives from the Bank of North Dakota and the Department of Public Instruction explained that they had not been consulted on the original drafting and outlined needed administrative changes, including clarifying the Bank as administrator, using a third-party program manager, involving DPI in rulemaking, adding audit and appeal procedures, and adjusting language on eligible purchases and school disqualification. They also said the current timeline was likely too aggressive to launch by the 2026-27 school year and estimated the program would require about 15 months to implement, with a fiscal note now around $5.1 million. Members also discussed policy-related amendments on means testing and application timing. Senator Shively proposed a 300% of poverty-level means test and a sign-up period to reduce costs and limit open-ended enrollment, while Senator Axman proposed a tiered approach that would keep all students technically eligible but phase in funding levels by income, preserving access for students who qualify for other federal supports. DPI said it could not currently disaggregate some data by family income and that the appeal process and procurement timeline still needed work. The committee did not move HB 1540 out that morning and instead recessed to continue discussion later after members had time to review the administrative and fiscal issues separately from the means-testing proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do you have that by the percentage of dollars or, like, the average award amount per institution type
• Do you have that by the percentage of dollars or, like, the average award amount per institution type
• Do you have that by the percentage of dollars or, like, the average award amount per institution type
• And then I was just wondering average award amount by institution. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• And then among for-profit institutions, it was $2,300 for a total average award of $2,900. amount by

Committee: Senate Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Food and rent are up 25% on average, and utilities and gas are up 40% on average.
• Food and rent are up 25% on average, and utilities and gas are up 40% on average.
• Today, California drivers are paying $5.56 on average, while the national average is at $3.84.
• Specific sources in mind to allow this flexibility.
• And the current guidelines allow for that.

Committee: Senate Environmental Quality

Transcript Highlights:

• We have seven topics, just a momentous amount of information.
• The average age in our facilities is just 44 years old.
• The average age in our facilities is just 44 years old.
• The New Start, the average age is—he’s 28.
• that's paid on average among private health insurance.

Transcript Highlights:

• This amount will not be adjusted for inflation over time.
• The average authorized hours per month was 111.
• The average authorized hours per month was 111, a little bit below the statewide average of 117.
• And that's accounting for the higher amount?
• And that's accounting for the higher amount?

Transcript Highlights:

• allow a spouse to use the benefits beyond 10 years.
• Washington State does not allow for that.
• Thank you for allowing me to speak.
• So there would be a difference between the public and private amounts.
• Will we allow the programs to have these over these three years?

Summary: The Workforce Development Committee heard public testimony on several higher education bills. Senate Bill 5954 would expand veteran survivor tuition waiver eligibility to better align state law with federal DEA benefits, allowing eligible children and surviving spouses/domestic partners to use the waiver outside current age and time limits. The sponsor and veteran advocates said the change would help families access earned benefits; no opposition was heard, and the public hearing was closed. The committee then heard Senate Bill 5826, which would require public postsecondary institutions to provide access to medication abortion through student health centers or referrals and web-based information by the 2027-28 academic year. Supporters, including students and reproductive health advocates, said the bill would reduce barriers, travel burdens, and stigma and help students stay enrolled. Opponents, including clergy, Catholic Conference representatives, and other individuals, argued the bill promoted abortion, raised safety and moral concerns, and was outside the mission of colleges. The public hearing was closed after extensive testimony. Senate Bill 5828 would restore and adjust Washington College Grant and College Bound Scholarship awards for students attending private not-for-profit four-year institutions, using the average award at public institutions rather than the reduced formula adopted last session. The sponsor and many students, private college leaders, and business and workforce groups supported the bill as a matter of fairness, access, and student choice, while public university faculty and representatives opposed it, saying state aid should prioritize public institutions and that the bill would deepen funding inequities. The committee also heard Senate Bill 5909, which would require public baccalaureate institutions to review and potentially discontinue low-enrollment degree programs; supporters framed it as a transparency and efficiency measure, while faculty and student representatives opposed it as too blunt and potentially harmful to smaller, specialized, or equity-focused programs. No votes were taken on any of the bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• are allowed to What we what utilities are allowed to recover<00:27:01.760><c> are</c><00:27:02.000><
• Um, not allowed to include in rates.
• Woff, so on average, what do you, you know, we'd like them to be under a year, but on average, they're
• ><c> to</c><00:51:47.760><c> build</c> It allows public utilities to build It allows public utilities
• </c> thermal energy networks by allowing thermal energy networks by allowing utilities<00:52:58.960><

Bills: HF4236 , HF4122 , HF4377

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Keywords: public utility, interim rates, utility rates, rate case, general rate case, Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, PUC, rate increase cap, rate freeze, refunds, customer refunds, ratepayer protection, electric utility, gas utility, regulated utility, ratemaking, return on equity, rate base, test year, rate design