Transcript Highlights:

• And every single one of those was approved with the concurrence of the full commission.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on May 6, 2026, with quorum present and unanimously approved the October 21, 2025 minutes. The Attorney General’s Office then provided its annual refresher on Washington’s Public Records Act and Open Public Meetings Act, emphasizing broad disclosure requirements, records retention, prompt routing of records requests to staff, and OPMA rules for meetings, conference calls, emails, special meetings, and executive sessions. JLARC staff next reviewed 2026 tax preference legislation, noting 20 bills affecting tax preferences. Examples included repeal of the coal sales tax exemption, changes to data center exemptions, new property tax exemptions for renewable energy facilities and land bank authorities, and a broad tax package in Senate Bill 6346 that created credits and deductions, expanded the working families tax credit, and exempted items such as diapers and hygiene products. Staff also presented the 2026 expedited review report covering 64 tax preferences and explained that it is based on prior JLARC reviews and Department of Revenue studies rather than full new reviews. The commission approved unchanged 2026 public testimony questions and then adopted the draft 2027–2036 tax preference review schedule, along with a new rolling 10-year schedule format that will be updated each May. During discussion, Representative Pollitt questioned how preferences are prioritized for full review versus expedited or no review, especially for large preferences without performance statements, and staff explained that legislative mandates, expiration timing, and staff capacity drive the schedule. The commission agreed staff would meet with members to discuss possible future adjustments. The meeting concluded with public and staff recognition of Commissioner Grant Forsyth, who is leaving the commission after 13 years of service. Speakers praised his leadership, consensus-building, and long tenure as both commissioner and chair. The next commission meeting was announced for August 4, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• And every single one of those was approved with the concurrence of the full commission.

Summary: The Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on May 6, 2026, with quorum present and unanimously approved the October 21, 2025 minutes. The Attorney General’s Office then provided its annual open government refresher, covering key points of the Public Records Act and Open Public Meetings Act, including broad disclosure requirements, records retention, response timelines for public records requests, and rules for meetings, special meetings, emergency meetings, and executive sessions. JLARC staff gave a 2026 legislative session update on tax preference bills. They highlighted 20 bills affecting tax preferences, including repeal of the coal-related sales and use tax exemption, changes to data center exemptions, new property tax exemptions for renewable energy facilities and land bank authorities, and a broad tax package in engrossed substitute Senate Bill 6346 that created multiple credits, deductions, and exemptions. Staff also presented the 2026 expedited tax preference review report covering 64 preferences, noting it is based on prior JLARC reviews and Department of Revenue studies and is now available in an interactive searchable format. The commission approved the 2026 public testimony questions without changes and then adopted the 2027–2036 tax preference review schedule, along with a new rolling 10-year schedule that will be updated each May. During discussion, commissioners raised concerns about how preferences are prioritized for full review versus expedited review, especially for older or high-revenue preferences without performance statements, and staff explained that legislative mandates, expiration dates, and workload constraints drive the schedule. The meeting also included a public and staff recognition of Commissioner Grant Forsyth’s 13 years of service and leadership, with remarks praising his collaborative approach and long tenure; the next meeting was set for August 4, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a new contract for professional development for faculty teaching concurrent enrollment classes

Summary: The committee heard a series of appropriation requests and contract reviews across multiple sections. In Section B, members approved temporary appropriations for the Court of Appeals, Commerce/Aeronautics, and Insurance-related payments and refunds. Section C ARPA requests from DHS were approved to return unused federal funds. Section D infrastructure-related appropriations, including wildfire preparedness, broadband BEAD funding, forestry support, recycling, and oil and gas sample preservation, were approved after questions about broadband audit controls and performance safeguards. Section E DHS reallocations were approved, including large transfers within Medical Services from hospital medical to private and public nursing home lines, along with smaller transfers for children and family services, developmental disabilities, and youth services; members asked about the source and purpose of the medical services transfer. Sections F and G were reviewed, covering cash fund requests, federal grants, and miscellaneous grants, including community college storm repairs, corrections commissary and maintenance, 911 enhancements, maternal health, disability determinations, state police equipment, digital newspaper archiving, and CDL data improvements. In Section H, the committee reviewed pay plan appropriations and performance fund transfers tied to the new Class and Comp pay plan. Section I reviewed three methods of finance for UA Little Rock, UAMS, and the University of Arkansas system. In Section J, the committee reviewed discretionary grants, including a $1.4 million HIV services grant and nine tobacco prevention subgrants through UAPB. Members questioned the effectiveness, metrics, and addresses of some tobacco-cessation arts-based grantees, especially Arts Absolutely Inc.; after discussion, Representative Kavanaugh moved to expunge the vote on J2 and refer it back for review at a later ALC meeting, and that motion passed. J3, a Department of Energy and Environment grant for propane safety training and e-waste recycling services, was then reviewed. The committee also reviewed contracts in Section K. K-1 ratified emergency management nuclear planning work performed during a transition between agencies. K-2 construction contracts included architectural and engineering services for corrections, National Park College signage, a Razorback Road parking facility, and UAMS cyclotron installation. K-3 intergovernmental contracts covered health, education, autism waiver, stroke, newborn screening, Medicaid evidence review, and radiation testing services. K-4 out-of-state contracts included staffing, IT, tobacco prevention, audit, marketing, planetarium, recruitment, and janitorial services; Senator Irvin noted one contract appeared to belong in the out-of-state list rather than intergovernmental. K-5 in-state contracts covered staffing, cleaning, re-entry and treatment services, foster care and disability services, hearing officers, asbestos abatement, campus IT support, and janitorial work. The meeting ended after a brief personal update from Senator Irvin about tornado damage in Stone County and thanks to members for their concern, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• speaks to enhancing our health care to prevent illicit drugs from getting into our communities, and concurrently

Bills: HB2416, HB2663, HB2759, HB2806

Keywords: border security, drug trafficking, human smuggling, law enforcement funding, Arizona, public safety, immigration, military leave, national guard, employment rights, paid leave, disaster response, veterans services, education programs, funding, appropriation, Yavapai county, lawful presence, public programs, verification

Summary: The Military Affairs and Border Security Committee approved the February 16, 2026 minutes and then heard several bills. HB 2416 would appropriate $20 million for DPS border support, including equipment, officer positions, and grants to local governments for border-related prosecutions and detention costs. Supporters, including the Arizona Sheriffs Association, said the funds are fully used each year and are largely spent on drug interdiction; opponents argued the bill’s immigration-related language could expand enforcement and that the money should instead go to health care, education, food assistance, or prevention programs. After debate, the committee passed HB 2416 on a 4-3 vote. The committee then considered HB 2806, which would require county recorders, ADOT, and AHCCCS to use the federal SAVE system and report citizenship-verification results to JLBC and the Auditor General. The sponsor was absent, and an ACLU representative testified in opposition, arguing SAVE is not appropriate for voter eligibility checks, could disenfranchise eligible citizens, and would likely cause litigation and administrative confusion. Members raised concerns about necessity, due process, and whether the state already verifies citizenship adequately, but the bill still received a do-pass recommendation on a 4-3 vote. HB 2663, a technical cleanup bill updating military leave language for state and local employees who are National Guard or Reserve members, drew no opposition and passed unanimously. HB 2759 would appropriate $500,000 to the Department of Veterans Services for grants tied to veterans programs at Yavapai County institutions; testimony described it as helping veterans with housing gaps, emergencies, and professional development while they wait for GI Bill payments. Several members questioned why it was limited to Yavapai County and whether private institutions should be included, with some viewing it as a pilot program and others wanting statewide expansion. It passed 4-3, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• position was to start a new program with $3 million, and that was their it failed on a 33 to 26 concurrence

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The meeting focused on resolving a House-Senate disagreement over funding for a new forestry/fire mitigation program. House members explained that their objection was not to the program itself, but to the Senate’s increase from the original $3 million level; they argued the program should start at the lower amount and be expanded later if needed. Senate members responded that the higher amount was based on forest health briefing information showing significant beetle kill, rising fire danger, and the need to act quickly while federal partners and current conditions made treatment work feasible. They cited recent large fire suppression costs and argued the added funding would have a strong return on investment by reducing future suppression expenses. After discussion of possible compromise amounts, including $4 million and then $3.5 million, House members said $3.5 million would be more acceptable to their chamber and suggested supplemental funding could be considered later if the program proved successful. The Senate agreed to the $3.5 million compromise. Members also noted that other amendments in the bill, including repeal of a sunset date and changes intended to speed contracting by removing an attorney general step, were important and appreciated by the House. The committee then took a voice vote on the compromise, and it passed unanimously. Members indicated they would take the agreement back to their respective chambers as part of the conference report and expected the bill to move forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Parks and Recreation plan, all the concurrency standards that you would normally see.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate has passed Senate Bill 1, Senate Bill 2 as amended, Senate Bill 3 as amended, and request the concurrence

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It also implements the new choice of testing in the fall semester, and I move concurrence.

Bills: HB2, HB6, HB18, HB43, HB138, HB180, HB300, HB581, HB647, HB748, HB762, HB1240, HB1393, HB1397, HB1584, HB1734, HB2011, HB2254, HB2286, HB2434, HB2467, HB2468, HB2495, HB2516, HB2518, HB2529, HB2564, HB2712, HB2713, HB2715, HB2765, HB2898, HB3146, HB3161, HB3348, HB3800, HB4044, HB4341, HB4370, HB4384, HB4386, HB4396, HB4490, HB4809, HB5057, HB5323, HB5534, HB5668, SB203, SB317, SB719, SB731, SB801, SB867, SB1071, SB1232, SB1798, SB2082, SB2363, SB2603, SB2607, SB2717, SB2797, SB2841, SB2919, SB3038, SJR5, SB4, SB9, SB21, SB23, SB27, SB34, SB40, SB75, SB213, SB458, SB482, SB493, SB647, SB648, SB840, SB841, SB843, SB912, SB1241, SB1253, SB1350, SB1388, SB1423, SB1535, SB1559, SB1709, SB1789, SB1951, SB2037, SB2143, SB2155, SB2544, SB1, SB17, SB260, SB509, SB1506, SB1637, SB1833, SB2308, HB2525, HJR133, HB1393, HB26, HB388, HB2712, HB1633, HB685, HB2286, HB1606, HB1458, HB1240, HB2791, HB3146, HB1397, HB2061, HB647, HB4738, HB2563, HB128, HB581, HB766, HB2259, HB2358, HB4384, HB748, HB1734, HB5180, HB3806, HB3804, HB3803, HB1522, HB3597, HB1612, HB4224, HB1314, HB1237, HB3126, HB2856, HB3114, HB3505, HB5652, HB2025, HB3395, HB2495, HB18, HB2516, HB2713, HB24, HB519, HB609, HB1592, HB3348, HB120, HB6, HB1533, HB2421, HB2273, HB2464, HB2011, HB5057, HB5084, HB5534, HB5668, HB3424, HB2715, HB2564, HB2765, HB2898, HB3800, HB4396, HB4341, HB43, HB5686, HB2467, HB2468, HB2518, HB4310, HB4386, HB4490, HB180, HB5323, HB2, HB149, HB4945, HB2434, HB2529, HB3161, HB3745, HB4044, HB5155, HB5667, HB4996, HB2697, HB2492, HB2355, HB2282, HB2001, HB1902, HB1866, HB1445, HB1443, HB1306, HB1024, HB908, HB305, HB285, HB449, HB171, HB47, HB3464, HB2637, HB4263, HB5436, HB4429, HB3986, HB3966, HB3510, HB2560, HB2026, HB2688, HB4076, HB5246, HB3487, HB3486, HB4226, HB216, HB742, HB2402, HB143, HB5033, HB4413, HB4042, HB2440, HB4426, HB49, HB4112, HB3233, HB2310, HB5515, HB3627, HB2674, HB322, HB1481, HB126, HB3062, HB3421, HB3180, HB2530, HB2524, HB1916, HB3153, HB5650, HB4894, HB3120, HB1629, HB103, HB3234, HB3680, HB5698, HB3171, HB5693, HB2694, HB5664, HB3732, HB2508, HB2293, HB1991, HB2014, HB5331, HB5247, HB4751, HB4690, HB4668, HB4464, HB4395, HB4063, HB3833, HB3623, HB3214, HB3512, HB3250, HB3016, HB2520, HB2221, HB2213, HB3824, HB2067, HB1732, HB1562, HB700, HB1545, HB252, HB146, HB5596, HB1851, HB3619, HB3071, HB3556, HB851, HB4230, HB5320, HB5651, HB5670, HB5665, HB5437, HB5679, HB5699, HB5661, HB5662, HB5654, HB5672, HB5656, HCR141, HCR118, HCR127, HCR40, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB1749, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2683, SB1319, SB3038, SB3045, SB1538, SB3071, SB3065, SB823, SB3062, SB3074, SB1380, HB6, HB581, HB1393, HB1734, HB2286, HB2467, HB2468, HB2495, HB2529, HB2564, HB2765, HB2898, HB3146, HB3348, HB3800, HB4341, HB4386, HB4490, HB5057, HB5323, HB5534, HB5668, HB2, HB2715, SR530, SR552, SB482, SB493, SB841, SB912, SB1241, SB1350, SB1388, SB1559, SB1951, SB2143, SB2155, HB205, HB220, HB561, HB2078, HB2300, HB2652, HB3335, HB3441, HB4212, HB4879, HB5228, HB5616, HB205, HB220, HB561, HB2078, HB2300, HB2652, HB3335, HB3441, HB4212, HB4879, HB5228, HB5616

Keywords: public education, teacher compensation, certification, funding, school finance, educator rights, education funding, charter schools, staff compensation, state aid, retention allotment, mental health, telehealth, public schools, discipline management, behavioral interventions, rural health, hospital funding, healthcare access, mental health services

Transcript Highlights:

• So I guess I have to go to the chairman of election law and let him make the concurrence.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee took up Senate Bill 74, which requires agencies to report annually on permits that are significantly delayed. An amendment was offered and adopted to replace the bill’s original permit-by-permit reporting with a summary report by category, including counts of permits taking more than 60, 120, or 180 days and general reasons for delay. The amendment also delayed the first report until April 30, 2027, so agencies would report only on future permitting activity rather than reconstructing past files. Members discussed whether delays caused by incomplete applications or requests for additional information should be included in the reporting categories. The sponsor and others said the bill is intended to measure delays after an application is administratively complete, but that reasons such as waiting on applicant-provided engineering data could still be captured under the summary reasons. Several members praised the amendment as a substantial improvement and said it would produce more useful information with less burden on agencies, while one member said they would support the amendment but not the bill because agencies already face budget constraints. The committee first approved the amendment unanimously by show of hands, then voted 7-1 to report Senate Bill 74 ought to pass as amended, with one member opposed and one absent. Afterward, the committee briefly discussed a separate Senate message on House Bill 67, noting that the Senate version had no additional general-fund cost and that any remaining issues would be handled with the election law committee before concurrence.

Transcript Highlights:

• Concurrence takes about 2 seconds, Mr. Chairman. The Senate Finance Committee amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a resolution that...
• Now, we move on to motions or resolutions. Any motions or resolutions? Motions or resolutions.
• Any motions or resolutions? Resolution... got a resolution pointed out.
• President, I have a resolution from Rules. I have a resolution from Rules.
• Resolutions adopted. Mr. President, Senator Waggoner has a resolution for me.

Bills: SJR 18, SCR 5, SCR 13, SCR 25, SB 3, SB 6, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 15, SB 17, SB 18, SB 35, SB 388, SB 412, SB 441, SB 495, SB 666, SB 687, SB 706, SB 740, SB 815, SB 842, SB 917, SB 925, SB 995, SB 1006, SB 1281, SB 1300, SB 1379, SB 1451, SB 1902, SJR 36, SJR 18, SJR 12, SCR 13, SCR 25, SCR 5, SCR 22, SB 565, SB 372, SB 495, SB 842, SB 765, SB 62, SB 19, SB 18, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 706, SB 847, SB 290, SB 11, SB 10, SB 13, SB 412, SB 441, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 917, SB 925, SB 388, SB 1902, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 35, SB 6, SB 815, SB 3, SB 1281, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1451, SB 1061, SB 15, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 17, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 12, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SCR 12, SCR 24, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SJR 18, SB 11, SB 441, SB 10, SB 18, SB 412, SB 495, SR 238, SR 264, SR 266, SR 267, SR 268, SR 270, SR 271, SR 272, SR 278, SB 1169, SB 1169

Keywords: capital gains, taxation, constitutional amendment, state revenue, individual investment, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, in the Senate, a resolution was heard yesterday for cost management plans related to this topic
• attention this morning, a hearing for the Ulta well, which was removed from the agenda pending a resolution
• removed from the agenda pending<01:38:00.560> a<01:38:01.400> uh<01:38:01.639> resolution
• <01:38:02.520> of<01:38:02.679> an pending a uh resolution of an pending a uh resolution
• It has prior concurrence from both Public Safety and Judiciary, so the changes we're going to be making

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• required for any substantive expansion of committee work beyond that contemplated in the study resolution
• This is a big issue in some states and defers final resolution to the courts.
• They are sited by the PSC, but local entities also have kind of concurrent siting authority for conditional

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• required for any substantive expansion of committee work beyond that contemplated in the study resolution
• This is a big issue in some states and defers final resolution to the courts.
• They are sited by the PSC, but local entities also have kind of concurrent siting authority for conditional

Summary: The committee held its first meeting on artificial intelligence and data centers, established a quorum, and heard introductory remarks from Majority Leader Hogue and the chair about the committee’s charge. Members said the goal was to build a factual foundation on AI, hear from experts and stakeholders, and develop practical North Dakota-focused recommendations rather than simply produce a large volume of bills. Legislative Council also reviewed interim committee rules and procedures before the informational presentations began. Staff and NCSL presenters then gave overviews of AI concepts and the state and federal policy landscape. The background memo and presentations covered AI categories and terms, state laws in areas such as consumer protection, algorithmic discrimination, deepfakes, chatbots, children’s safety, health, education, and government use, as well as data center siting and economic impacts. NCSL described a growing number of AI bills introduced and enacted across the states, with comprehensive laws in places like Utah, Colorado, Texas, California, and Illinois, and noted recurring issues around transparency, privacy, liability, and protections for minors. A major focus of the discussion was federal preemption and the tension between state regulation and national AI policy. NCSL said a recent White House executive order and related federal framework seek a light-touch, innovation-friendly national standard, with possible challenges to state laws and possible funding conditions tied to compliance, though no broad federal preemption has yet been enacted. Members asked about Commerce Clause concerns, industry pushback, oversight models, and whether AI policy is bipartisan; presenters said the issue cuts across party lines, with broad agreement on child safety and deepfake restrictions but more disagreement on broader regulatory approaches. No votes or formal actions were taken at the meeting, and the committee recessed briefly for technical issues during the second presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• following entitled bill with an amendment in the passage of which the amendment of the House asks concurrence
• session, that the business of the late session be in order at the present time, that all bills and resolutions
• ordered to a third reading be by this resolution read a third time, all titles be the same as adopted

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So that sometimes there may be concurrent investigations.
• So that sometimes there<00:52:23.600> may<00:52:23.840> be<00:52:24.080> concurrent<
• there may be concurrent investigations. there may be concurrent investigations.

Bills: HF2354, HF3621, HF3429, HF3483

Keywords: medical assistance, fraud prevention, subpoena authority, criminal penalties, consumer protection, fraud, payment withholding, withheld payments, program integrity, public funds, state agency, program participant, credible allegation of fraud, administrative reconsideration, contested case, chapter 14, data practices, confidential data, protected nonpublic data, anti-fraud

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from March 5 by voice vote and welcomed new member Representative Van Binsbergen. It then took up House File 2354, which Chair Liebling moved to re-refer to the Public Safety Finance and Policy Committee. Representative Norris presented the bill as an updated version of the Medical Assistance Protection Act, aimed at strengthening the Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, closing loopholes, equalizing fraud penalties, and increasing penalties for large-scale Medicaid fraud. Attorney General Ellison said the bill would add 18 specialized staff to the unit, moving it from 32 to 50 positions, and argued the federal-state matching structure makes the Attorney General’s office the proper home for the funding because the unit is dedicated to Medicaid fraud work. Nick Wonka, director of the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, explained the bill’s provisions affecting committee jurisdiction: expanded subpoena authority to obtain financial account contents in provider-fraud investigations, conforming legal representation language to preserve the unit’s authority, venue changes to allow charging in counties where parts of the offense occurred, and a restitution change to let courts order restitution for related conduct in the same scheme. He said the subpoena change would speed investigations and align the Attorney General’s authority with other agencies, and that the restitution change would help recover more fraudulently obtained Medicaid funds. No public testimony was offered. Members questioned why the funding should go to the Attorney General’s office rather than the BCA, whether the new records authority was federally required, how the venue language would work across state lines, and whether the added FTEs indicated the fraud problem was larger than expected. Ellison and Wonka responded that the federal grant requires the work to stay within the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, that the unit’s investigators are specialized and work with, but separate from, law enforcement, and that the venue provision applies only within Minnesota while out-of-state matters would be referred to the appropriate authorities. The amendment that had been posted was withdrawn and not offered.

Transcript Highlights:

• Originally, I think it was one, maybe there was three systems you could install it on concurrently, and
• <01:06:25.760> install<01:06:26.000> it<01:06:26.079> on<01:06:26.319> concurrently
• <01:06:27.119> and<01:06:27.359> as could install it on concurrently and as could install
• it on concurrently and as it<01:06:27.760> evolved<01:06:28.640> they<01:06:28.880>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Then moving down, there's a few blank lines until you'll see an appropriation on line 38 for concurrent
• /c><00:07:10.639> line<00:07:10.960> 38<00:07:11.759> for<00:07:12.080> concurrent
• appropriation on line 38 for concurrent appropriation on line 38 for concurrent enrollment<00:07

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 2312 and first adopted the DE1 amendment, after which the amended bill was discussed. Nonpartisan fiscal staff walked through the spreadsheet and explained the bill’s higher education budget changes, including increases for state grants and tribal college assistance, unchanged funding for several existing programs, and reductions or eliminations for items such as state work study, summer academic enrichment, student loan counseling, concurrent enrollment, and the student parent support initiative. Staff also noted transfers to special revenue funds, the cancellation and reappropriation of ALS research funding, and a new licensing/registration revenue item. The committee was told the bill met the committee’s zero target overall, with a net general fund change of zero relative to the February forecast, while also adding some non-general fund expenditures for program licensing and registration. Members asked several questions about the transfers and specific line items, including whether any new special revenue accounts were being created, the foster care wraparound services line, and the treatment of the University of Minnesota and Centric Care partnership. Staff explained that the transfers generally did not create new accounts, that some items were not in the base, and that the U of M/Centric Care partnership was a one-time appropriation in the prior bill but was now being built into the base at a different amount. The University of Minnesota section also included new or continued funding for medical school development, health training restoration, emergency assistance grants, ALS research, and a weather resiliency program, while the Mayo Foundation section eliminated funding for Mayo Medical School and the Mayo family medicine residency program. The policy portion of the DE1 was then introduced. It included a maximum tuition and fee amount for state grants, direct appropriation of emergency assistance grants to Minnesota State, a juvenile justice appropriation for Metropolitan State University, and the ALS research reappropriation to the University of Minnesota. It also contained repealers for unfunded programs, including a delayed repealer for the student parent support initiative. In the higher education policy article, the bill would allow Minnesota State to offer applied doctoral degrees in cybersecurity, make technical changes to hunger-free campus and sexual misconduct procedures, extend pregnant and parenting student protections to private institutions, allow OHE to retain up to 10% of certain competitive grants for administration, consolidate reports, change the state grant formula so negative FAFSA contributions count as zero, and reduce the state grant lifetime credit cap from 180 to 120 credits. The Northstar Promise provisions would limit tuition and fees to resident rates and require MnState, and request the University of Minnesota, to ensure eligible students receive the benefit.

Transcript Highlights:

• available in the next fiscal year, which would be the next school year, because the two run somewhat concurrently
• school year because the two run next school year because the two run somewhat<00:22:46.400> concurrently
• > yes<00:22:47.720> I'm<00:22:47.799> going<00:22:47.919> to somewhat concurrently
• yes I'm going to somewhat concurrently yes I'm going to say<00:22:49.240> I<00:22:49.320>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee work session of the Education Policy and Administration Committee focused on House Bill 131 and House Bill 781, which were described as nearly identical bills addressing student cell phone use in schools. Members noted that HB 781 is an early bill and therefore needed committee action by Wednesday, while HB 131 did not face that deadline. The chair and members discussed the bills’ shared goal of requiring school boards to develop and adopt policies on student personal device use, with debate over whether the state should set minimum standards or leave more to local control. A major topic was funding. One member urged the committee to avoid creating an unfunded mandate and asked for some funding support, while others argued it was too early to commit money and that the committee should first establish the policy framework. The governor’s proposed funding was discussed, including a $1 million figure in the budget and a separate $250,000 amount referenced in the bill, but several members said the money would likely be insufficient to cover all students or pouch systems statewide. The committee also reviewed a handout reflecting proposed budget language that would require school boards to adopt policies on personal device use during the school day, with schoolwide implementation and exceptions for medical disability or language proficiency needs, and a DOE-administered grant program. Members spent considerable time on drafting details, especially deadlines and exceptions. They debated whether the bills should require school boards to “develop,” “adopt,” or also “implement” policies, and whether the effective date of the act should also serve as the deadline for school boards. They also discussed whether exceptions for classroom instructional use should be mandatory or merely encouraged, and whether the bills should explicitly include or exclude charter schools. Additional proposed exceptions included IEPs, 504 plans, English learners, and medical needs such as glucose sensors or insulin pumps, with some members suggesting medical issues be certified by a physician. No final vote or formal action was taken in the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• risen beyond the anticipated regular annual increases due to co-payments by third parties and the concurrent
• risen beyond the anticipated regular annual increases due to co-payments by third parties and the concurrent
• risen beyond the anticipated regular annual increases due to co-payments by third parties and the concurrent
• risen beyond the anticipated regular annual increases due to co-payments by third parties and the concurrent

Keywords: 1191, senate, all