Transcript Highlights:

• And then we'll pay for up to half of the performance. fee required for that artist to be there.
• these grants comes from the sale of these music specialty license plates, where $22 out of the $30 fee
• We do... fee-for-service work, we're working with the city of Brownsville, we're working with the small
• agency is largely supported by these users with the funds that come from hunting and fishing license fees
• . voter registration fees, the sporting goods sales tax, and park entrance fees.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, the committee substitute clarifies that the recycling fund will not be requiring any fees, taxes
• It does not impose government mandates, there are no fees on consumers or producers, and this is not
• bill incentivizes increased investment in the recycling infrastructure of Texas without creating a fee
• So we tried to find a workable solution that didn't have any government mandates, didn't have any fees
• The bill would require that the money in the fund be allocated only and spent for specific purposes.

Bills: SB410, SB795, SB2510, SB728, SB2689, HB143, HB143

Keywords: Gulf Coast Protection District, navigation safety, special districts, state governance, Texas legislation, Gulf Coast, flood protection, storm risk management, coastal restoration, natural resources, prescribed burns, self-insurance, fire management, liability protection, rural land management, beverage container recycling, deposit return system, container deposit, bottle bill, recycling refund

Transcript Highlights:

• substitute clarifies that the largest metro health departments may charge an additional 20 percent fee
• I believe there is a rider in the Senate version of the budget that should allocate sufficient FTEs.
• PUC does have at least one method of trying to combat this, and that's through a cap on attorney's fees
• And with this bill in place, we would probably save resources reviewing line-by-line attorney fees.
• We've seen electric rate cases with legal fees in excess of $6 million.

Bills: SB483, SB522, SB783, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1664, SB1762, SB1856, SB1877, SB1977

Keywords: utility, proprietary information, customer data, data protection, electric service, customer information, emergency communication, electric utility, privacy, certification, public accountants, interstate licensing, accounting, regulatory amendment, energy efficiency, construction regulations, building codes, Texas, sustainability, cost-effectiveness

Summary: The Senate Business and Commerce Committee met with a quorum and first took up pending business, voting out several bills. Senate Bills 1697, 1569, 1202 as substituted, 1029, 1364, 1185, 924, 1008 as substituted, 264, 1376, and 1358 as substituted were reported favorably, with some sent to the local and uncontested calendar. The committee also adopted a substitute for SB 1202 and later corrected votes on several measures. SB 924 and SB 1376 drew some opposition, while the rest of the pending bills were reported without dissent or with limited nays. The committee then heard testimony on SB 1856, which would create an annual capacity-cost recovery rider for Entergy Texas customers in the MISO region. The author and Entergy argued the bill would better match rates to actual capacity costs and improve transparency, while the Texas Association of Manufacturers and the Public Utility Commission raised concerns about the short 10-day review period, rider proliferation, and the preference for full rate cases over piecemeal adjustments. The bill was left pending. The committee also heard and left pending SB 522 on CPA reciprocity, SB 1664 requiring TDUs to provide clearer, standalone rate-change disclosures, SB 1877 expanding OPUC’s access to market data, SB 1254 and SB 1255 as TDLR cleanup bills on professional employer organizations and mold assessors, SB 1341 updating manufactured housing rules, SB 1239 on sovereign debt and Texas governing law, and SB 1259 streamlining the surveyor-in-training licensing process. Additional bills discussed included SB 1977, which would cap recoverable legal expenses in electric, water, and sewer rate cases; OPUC and some consumer advocates supported the idea as a way to reduce ratepayer costs, while utility representatives warned it could discourage participation and increase rate shock. The committee also heard SB 1762 clarifying that geothermal energy conservation wells are not battery resources, and SB 783 allowing SECO to proceed with future energy-code rulemaking for state-funded buildings. Both drew supportive testimony from industry and environmental groups. All remaining bills heard during the meeting were left pending, and the committee recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• School districts have spent thousands of dollars in legal fees without attendant transparency about the
• I've spent nearly $600,000 on legal fees. Taxpayers have no idea.
• Unexpectedly, we prevailed, and after the hearing, our legal fees were around $2,000.
• We are now approaching $600,000 in attorney fees.
• I think we're applying fees, and it's approximately $580,000.

Bills: SB205, SB582, SB625, SB1884, SB1903, SB2600, SB2617, SB2751, SB111, SB3061, SB1908

Keywords: fetal development, health curriculum, public schools, middle school health education, grade 7, grade 8, State Board of Education, school health advisory council, Texas Education Code, pregnancy, reproductive health, infertility, birth defects, prenatal development, unborn child, trimester, medically accurate instruction, age-appropriate instruction, drug and alcohol effects, lead exposure

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, we have 11, let's see, 11, a little over 11 million that's allocated over 2 years for safe
• little over 11 million that's allocated little over 11 million that's allocated over<00:29:35.040
• putting them into academic costs, I know that there are now students at the U that are being charged a fee
• The way we allocate these funds associated with ticket purchases goes directly to scholarship seating
• <00:35:26.080> with written, but how they are allocated with written, but how they are allocated

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 4738 was laid over for possible inclusion in the 2026 tax bill. Representative Keeler presented the bill as a funding source for Minnesota’s Safe Harbor program, arguing that trafficking and sexual exploitation are statewide problems and that current shelter and housing resources are insufficient. She and several supporters emphasized that the program serves youth across greater Minnesota, not just the metro, and that state and federal funding pressures make additional support necessary. Testifiers from Place Called Home/Life House, The Link, the City of Minneapolis, and a survivor all described the impact of Safe Harbor and related shelter programs. They cited data on youth served, bed nights, mental health services, and high unmet need, including waitlists and youth turned away because programs are full. Testimony stressed that stable housing and trauma-informed services help survivors recover and move toward education, employment, and family stability. One committee member, Representative Davis, objected to the proposed funding source, saying he would not support taking money from women’s sports scholarships and urging a different source. The bill’s tax mechanism was described as ending the sales tax exemption for preferred seating, suite licenses, and related amenities at athletic and entertainment events. Alec Williams of We Make Minnesota supported the proposal as a fair way to raise revenue from high-end discretionary purchases for a public purpose. Committee discussion also focused on the size of the revenue estimate and the breakdown of the impact, with nonpartisan staff saying roughly 85% would come from suite licenses, 10% from collegiate seating, and 5% from amenities. Representative Smith and others framed the issue as both a tax and moral question, and the chair moved the bill to be laid over.

Transcript Highlights:

• for name, image, and likeness funding through UH athletics, utilizing state general and tuition and fee
• And I just want to point out that their tuition and fee special fund, the university currently has at

Bills: HB1800, HB1860, HB2250, HB472, HB649, HB1391, HB1481, HB1509, HB1511, HB1515, HB1518, HB1541, HB1548, HB1576, HB1618, HB1642, HB1643, HB1661, HB1667, HB1678, HB1682, HB1688, HB1692, HB1707, HB1710, HB1711, HB1713, HB1718, HB1721, HB1728, HB1737, HB1740, HB1741, HB1785, HB1801, HB1802, HB1804, HB1810, HB1815, HB1824, HB1838, HB1839, HB1853, HB1854, HB1864, HB1870, HB1881, HB1888, HB1890, HB1891, HB1894, HB1920, HB1959, HB1960, HB1969, HB1973, HB1974, HB2023, HB2050, HB2078, HB2094, HB2095, HB2104, HB2137, HB2152, HB2158, HB2171, HB2207, HB2218, HB2246, HB2270, HB2271, HB2272, HB2279, HB2282, HB2289, HB2293, HB2297, HB2300, HB2309, HB2310, HB2314, HB2319, HB2329, HB2338, HB2339, HB2344, HB2361, HB2385, HB2395, HB2417, HB2429, HB2443, HB2452, HB2474, HB2475, HB2498, HB2505, HB2547, HB2576

Keywords: supplemental appropriations, state budget, Hawaii budget, biennial budget, capital improvement projects, CIP, general fund, special fund, green fee, special land and development fund, clean energy revolving loan fund, agricultural development revolving fund, community grants, nonprofit grants, Office of Community Services, housing, affordable housing, homelessness, health care, mental health

Bills: HB1800, HB1860, HB2250, HB472, HB649, HB1391, HB1481, HB1509, HB1511, HB1515, HB1518, HB1541, HB1548, HB1576, HB1618, HB1642, HB1643, HB1661, HB1667, HB1678, HB1682, HB1688, HB1692, HB1707, HB1710, HB1711, HB1713, HB1718, HB1721, HB1728, HB1737, HB1740, HB1741, HB1785, HB1801, HB1802, HB1804, HB1810, HB1815, HB1824, HB1838, HB1839, HB1853, HB1854, HB1864, HB1870, HB1881, HB1888, HB1890, HB1891, HB1894, HB1920, HB1959, HB1960, HB1969, HB1973, HB1974, HB2023, HB2050, HB2078, HB2094, HB2095, HB2104, HB2137, HB2152, HB2158, HB2171, HB2207, HB2218, HB2246, HB2270, HB2271, HB2272, HB2279, HB2282, HB2289, HB2293, HB2297, HB2300, HB2309, HB2310, HB2314, HB2319, HB2329, HB2338, HB2339, HB2344, HB2361, HB2385, HB2395, HB2417, HB2429, HB2443, HB2452, HB2474, HB2475, HB2498, HB2505, HB2547, HB2576

Keywords: supplemental appropriations, state budget, Hawaii budget, biennial budget, capital improvement projects, CIP, general fund, special fund, green fee, special land and development fund, clean energy revolving loan fund, agricultural development revolving fund, community grants, nonprofit grants, Office of Community Services, housing, affordable housing, homelessness, health care, mental health

Transcript Highlights:

• And it cannot be used to replace or duplicate funding or change fee schedules.
• c><00:08:56.720> we<00:08:56.880> can't<00:08:57.040> augment<00:08:57.519> fee
• So, we can't augment fee pay for.
• So, we can't augment fee schedules<00:08:58.399> or<00:08:59.440> um<00:08:59.600> or
• something out there that to allocate something out there that you're<00:20:06.640> being<00:20

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:01 Department for Public Health Budget Request 00:01:46 Department for Community Based Services Budget Request 00:31:58 Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics (CCBHC) 00:57:13, 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes, then heard a lengthy presentation from the Department for Public Health on Kentucky’s rural health transformation plan and related budget questions. Commissioner John Langfeld said the state received a $212.9 million federal award, one of the larger awards nationally, and outlined five focus areas: maternal and infant health, integrated EMS/trauma response, behavioral health and substance use disorder, oral health, and chronic disease prevention with an emphasis on obesity and diabetes. He stressed that the effort is intended to be integrated, data-driven, and sustainable, and that the federal funds cannot be used for new construction, clinician salaries, research and development, EHR replacement, or to pay for currently billable services. He also said the program carries accountability requirements and that funds can be clawed back if milestones are not met. Members pressed for clarification on duplication with other budget requests, sustainability after the five-year funding period, and how success would be measured. Langfeld said he was not aware of any duplicate funding with the department’s additional budget requests and said the rural health funds were separate from those requests. He also said the program will be tracked through specific metrics and timelines, using both execution measures and outcome measures such as readmissions, with more rapid-cycle feedback to allow course correction. Representative Fleming raised concerns about possible overlap with navigator funding and asked for more detail on the budget breakdown; Langfeld said a detailed line-item budget had been prepared but was still awaiting final CMS approval before release, and that he would explore sharing more information once restrictions were lifted. The committee then heard from the Kentucky State Public Health Laboratory about a request for a new central lab expansion. The presenter described the current 35-year-old facility as outdated and constrained by aging infrastructure, obsolete equipment, deferred maintenance, and inadequate space, and said the lab performs critical work with no in-state alternative for many services, including newborn screening, select-agent and biosafety level 3 testing, animal necropsy for rabies, genetic sequencing, environmental and food safety testing, and response to emerging infectious diseases. The project is already in design phase C, expected to finish in mid-April, with construction funding sought at roughly $276 million on top of about $35 million already approved for design. Members asked about long-term operating costs, backup arrangements, and whether the current facility would remain in use; the presenter said the current lab would continue to be used by the department while other divisions move into vacated space, and that the lab has mutual-aid agreements with the Southeast Consortium and universities for contingency support. Finally, the Department for Community Based Services began its budget presentation on SNAP and relative caregiver issues. Commissioner Lisa Dennis and budget director Misty Sammons identified the governor’s recommended budget items tied to new federal requirements under HR1, including changes affecting payment error rates. The discussion was just beginning when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have robust fee waivers. We have robust tuition-free access to numerous Californians.
• Of this, $29 million is allocated to MSI, HSI, and PVI-R-R-B-I-related programs.
• Specifically, the changes to the F and J visas and the new H-1B application fees significantly impact
• Delce-Perez, recently issued notices to each of our campuses, allocating a small and moderate portion
• Allocating a small and moderate portion of money to advance service learning and community engagement

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

Transcript Highlights:

• But because it was federally funded, there is no licensing fee.
• But because it was federally funded, there is no licensing fee.
• But because it was federally funded, there is no licensing fee.
• But because it was federally funded, there is no licensing fee.
• Allocate wisely and deliver your system.

Keywords: 00:00:00 - Call to Order/Roll Call 00:02:17 - Approval of June 18, 2025 Minutes 00:02:33 - Introductions and Discussion on Priorities 00:07:27 - Health Data Discussion-KY Health Information Exchange (KHIE) 00:34:02 - Health Data Discussion-Public Health Data 01:19:24 - Health Data Discussion-Other Health Data Platforms 01:42:40 - Consideration of Referred Administrative Regulations (Except 201 KAR 005:010) 01:44:48 - Discussion of Optometry Regulation 201 KAR 005:010 02:25:29 - Hearing on Unified Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant Application for FFY 2026 - 2027 Funds 02:33:40 - Administrative Regulation 201 KAR 005:010 Vote Clarification 02:34:03 - Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Committee on Health Services met to approve the June 18 minutes and hear introductory remarks from new Cabinet Secretary for Health and Family Services Dr. Steven Stack and new Department for Public Health Commissioner Dr. John Langfeld. Both described their backgrounds and emphasized a shared focus on using health data to improve quality, coordination, and outcomes across Kentucky. They highlighted the Kentucky Health Information Exchange (KHI) as a central tool for connecting hospitals, labs, providers, public health systems, Medicaid, and other state and federal data sources, and said the system supports notifications, immunization records, surveillance, and care coordination. They also outlined priorities such as continued investment in KHI, stronger interoperability, privacy protections, and expanded analytic capacity to turn data into action. Committee members then asked about COVID-19 vaccine recommendations and informed consent, particularly for pregnant women and children. Dr. Stack said informed consent should come through a licensed health care provider, that Kentucky did not mandate the COVID vaccine, and that the evidence still supports vaccination for high-risk groups, including pregnant women, citing professional medical guidance. A follow-up exchange focused on concerns about past vaccine policies and the need for patients to receive full information before making decisions. Senator Heron asked how KIPRC/KIPR could be used to address firearm injuries. Dr. Langfeld said the key opportunity is to make data more real-time and usable for day-to-day response, while Dr. Stack said the department would continue its long-standing partnership with KIPRC and noted his view that gun violence is a public health emergency. He added, however, that because firearms are a deeply divided issue, the Department for Public Health’s current role is mainly to make data available for authorized research rather than to take a broader policy role. No votes or formal actions beyond approving the minutes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• on line 7.6, you will see an amendment that allows the Racing Commission to go from the regulatory fee
• In the third paragraph, it states the commission is seeking to increase the fee paid for online wagering
• 00:05:02.880> the commission is seeking to increase the commission is seeking to increase the fee
• c> for<00:05:03.960> online<00:05:04.440> wagering<00:05:04.880> platforms fee
• paid for online wagering platforms fee paid for online wagering platforms to<00:05:06.120> host

Bills: HF2783, HF2603, HF2846, HF2354, HF1836, HF2713, HF1198, HF1389

Keywords: state government finance, biennial budget, appropriations, Minnesota Management and Budget, Healthy Aging Subcabinet, Office of Healthy Aging, older adults, aging policy, long-term care, caregivers, public health, Medicaid fraud, medical assistance fraud, attorney general subpoena power, fraud enforcement, business filing fraud, Secretary of State, deceptive mailings, consumer protection, certified public accountant

Transcript Highlights:

• For our Resources Trust Fund allocations, this is as of June, what we've had to date this biennium: that
• The more we increase that local cost share percentage, the more that's going to be a tax or a user fee
• , sewer fees, city sales tax, and more often we're seeing more creativity with fees as well.
• Stutsman County has already allocated funding for what they believe their share of that study is, so
• DOT has allocations, DOT has state funds.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to review several interim studies and receive updates from the Department of Water Resources. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and welcomed Representative Hansen to the committee. Staff then reported that the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study had both satisfied the presentation requirements in their study directives, with no further required testimony unless members wanted additional information. The department’s main presentation focused on major water projects and agency operations. Reese Haas and staff updated members on the NAWS project, the Southwest Pipeline Project, Devils Lake outlet operations, low-head dam safety work, floodplain management repository implementation, data center water use, and the 2027 Water Development Plan. Members asked detailed questions about NAWS funding sources, remaining project costs, capacity concerns for All Seasons and other users, and whether current construction is being designed for future demand. The department said NAWS remains on track for substantial completion by October, that remaining NAWS funding will come from a mix of federal, state, and local sources, and that current construction is designed for ultimate capacity while some future components will be adjusted for increased demand. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to the department’s cash management, Resources Trust Fund revenues, carryover balances, and the State Water Commission’s cost-share program. The department reported $340.6 million in carryover remaining, explained that much of it is already obligated to long-term projects, and noted that oil price forecasts and stripper-well exemptions will affect future revenues. Members raised concerns about large carryovers, affordability for local sponsors, and whether the state should continue obligating money multiple bienniums ahead. The department said it is working with the commission on a revised prioritization framework, including high/moderate/low project categories and a two-tier pre-construction/construction approach, to better manage obligations and affordability. The committee also reviewed Deloitte’s finalized studies on regional governance/finance and cost-share policy. Deloitte presented options for Southwest, NAWS, and Red River governance, with stakeholders generally favoring keeping NAWS largely as is, using the current Southwest model with improvements, and pursuing a more structured governance option for Red River. On cost share, the department said Deloitte’s recommended package would cover projected needs through the 2030s, but would require policy changes such as lower percentages for some project types, a 25% replacement-project rate with a cap, and possible bonding or delayed reimbursement strategies. No votes were taken on these policy questions, and the chair indicated the committee would continue the discussion at future basin meetings and the September Water Topics meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• For our Resources Trust Fund allocations, as of June, what we've had to date this biennium, that 20.5%
• The more we increase that local cost share percentage, the more that's going to be a tax or a user fee
• , sewer fees, city sales tax, and more often we're seeing more creativity.
• City sales tax, and more often we're seeing more creativity with fees as well.
• DOT has allocations, DOT has state funds.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to receive interim status updates on several water-related studies and Department of Water Resources projects. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and then heard updates on the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study. Staff reported that the committee had already received the testimony contemplated in the study plans, including input from state agencies, local governments, and out-of-state entities, and that any further action would be at the committee’s discretion. The Department of Water Resources then provided project and budget updates on NAWS and the Southwest Pipeline Project. Reese reported NAWS is expected to serve about 81,000 users, with a total projected cost of about $571 million and about $96 million remaining, while the Southwest Pipeline Project is estimated at $1.06 billion total with about $409 million remaining. Members asked about funding sources, capacity needs, and whether current and future construction is being designed for increased demand; department staff said current work is designed for ultimate capacity, but some future components may need redesign based on new requests. The committee also discussed local cost shares, Minot’s role in NAWS funding, and whether the system is adequate for peak demand. A major portion of the meeting focused on the department’s cash management, carryover, and long-term water funding outlook. The department said Resources Trust Fund revenues are tied to oil extraction taxes and are affected by stripper well exemptions and future oil price declines. Members expressed concern about large carryover balances and whether the state is obligating more money than can realistically be spent in a biennium. The department reported about $340.6 million in remaining carryover and said it is trying to reduce that through a two-tier pre-construction/construction process and closer project vetting. The department also summarized the Deloitte studies on regional governance and finance and on cost-share policy. Stakeholders generally favored keeping the current governance structures for NAWS and Southwest with improvements, while Red River stakeholders leaned toward a different option; the department said it will bring an implementation plan back in September. On cost share, Deloitte’s recommendations would reduce some percentages, prioritize projects differently, and use other measures to close a projected long-term funding gap. Members debated affordability, local burden, deferred maintenance, and whether statutory changes may be needed to allow the commission more flexibility in prioritizing and funding projects. No formal votes or final actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first is $800,000 from an existing appropriation for allocating for a statue at the outside of the
• That's the piece that is being allocated from the current authorized appropriation.
• The first is $800,000 from an existing appropriation for allocating for a statue at the outside of the
• That's the piece that is being allocated from the current authorized appropriation.
• Erickson described, as well as other provisions relating to licensing and fee structures for the Board

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, we were continuing to add fee after fee after fee.
• after fee after continuing to add fee after fee after fee.<05:08:26.240> Let<05:08:26.320>
• fee. Let me read. Let me read to you. fee. Let me read. Let me read to you.
• B's qualifying fees. >> Okay.
• is, or they can charge for a flat fee. is, or they can charge for a flat fee.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• parties with time equally allocated parties with time equally allocated between<00:05:42.000>
• The fees imposed on those who utilize the system.
• This bill would increase that amount at long last by doubling their fee to $120.
• This bill would increase that amount at long last by doubling their fee to $120.
• , a fee for freedom.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, January 12, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But there is an amount of square footage that is not contained within those allocations.
• But there is an amount of square footage that is not contained within those allocations.
• Almost 30 districts that are still not being allocated their full square footage.
• Almost 30 districts that are still not being allocated their full square footage.
• And then we know that we're statutorily obligated to pay the lease fees for that school.

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The Select Committee on School Facilities met to satisfy its quarterly statutory requirement and to discuss interim priorities. Staff from LSO reviewed the committee’s duties: monitoring K-12 school facilities statewide, prioritizing needs for the interim, and preparing a budget request due by November 1. They also noted the ongoing litigation related to the Chapter 3, Section 8 exception process and said the committee would move forward with securing a consultant to study that issue, as previously authorized by Management Council. A major topic was school funding formulas, especially how average daily membership (ADM) affects routine and major maintenance funding and how excess square footage is treated. Members revisited an earlier proposal to fund 135% of allowable square footage, which did not advance this session, and discussed whether some schools should instead be funded at a minimum percentage of their actual square footage. Staff explained that some districts have buildings larger than their formula allowance, and that the issue is complicated by older buildings, pools, and other unique facilities. They also noted that recent changes to the major maintenance multiplier increased funding and that some districts are still not fully covered by the formulas. Safety and security funding was another focus. The State Construction Department reported that $10 million was appropriated this year for safety and security upgrades, with some funds expected to go toward vestibules, bollards, and design work, and the rest through a district application process. Officials said the last comprehensive safety assessment was done more than 10 years ago and suggested a new consultant-led study to update priorities, since technology and building conditions have changed. Members also discussed the role of school resource officers and whether the committee should continue leading this work rather than handing it off to the recalibration committee. The committee also examined declining enrollment and excess capacity across the state, citing examples such as Newcastle, Shoshoni, Casper, Campbell County, and Fremont County. Officials said some districts are right-sizing by taking schools offline, while others cannot easily reduce capacity because the buildings are essential to the community. Charter school leasing was raised as a related concern, including the Mills charter school and the fact that the state pays lease costs based on ADM and allowable square footage. No formal votes were taken, but the committee agreed to continue studying these issues, likely including site visits and further data requests during the interim.

Transcript Highlights:

• Very good information on the additional judgeships that we allocated to the legislative process and you're
• governor's office maintains is a very robust website and you can go to that website and plug in Budgie Abra fee

Transcript Highlights:

• In justice administration, the budget includes $5.1 million to enhance fee rates for court-appointed
• Finally, the proposed budget prioritizes court operations with $6.7 million allocated for court reporting

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice met to review its proposed fiscal year 2025-2026 budget, totaling about $7.6 billion. The chair highlighted funding for the Department of Corrections, including health services, food inflation, and prison population growth; the Department of Juvenile Justice for residential beds and higher food/medical costs; FDLE for a law enforcement apprenticeship program and officer wellness services; justice administration for court-appointed attorney rates and VOCA shortfalls; major IT projects; and court operations, including funding for 29 new judges. Members asked about where the new judgeships would go and whether staffing would accompany them, and staff said the judge positions would be listed later in a conforming bill and that associated court staff were included, but not additional state attorney or public defender staffing. Several members also asked whether the budget addressed pay and staffing shortages in state attorneys’ and public defenders’ offices, and staff said those decisions had not yet been finalized. The committee then heard public testimony from several speakers who urged more funding for prison safety, medical care, and oversight. Speakers described personal experiences involving deaths or serious harm in correctional facilities and jails, alleging inadequate medical treatment, excessive force, isolation, and failures to investigate. One speaker said her son died after being beaten and denied timely medical care in a correctional facility; another said her son was not receiving adequate health care at Charlotte Correctional; and another described her brother’s death in the Marion County Jail after repeated tasing and pepper spraying. The committee adopted a motion allowing staff to make technical adjustments and then approved the committee’s budget proposal as a recommendation to the full Senate Appropriations Committee. The committee also took up CS for CS SB 48 on alternative judicial procedures and foreclosure sales. Senator Garcia offered an amendment to standardize judicial sales, increase transparency, limit preferences in bidding, preserve public notice requirements, restrict plaintiff credit bids to the amount of the judgment unless a deposit is posted, and prevent deviations from statutory timelines and procedures from being hidden in court orders. Garcia said the bill was intended to close loopholes and protect homeowners, especially condominium owners, from unfair foreclosure practices. A representative for Auction.com said similar laws have been used in other states and offered to provide data. After debate, the amendment was adopted, and the bill passed the committee favorably on a roll call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have to pay fees to be able to, for an industry, to take responsibility.
• You said the fee's going to follow that directly, or what's the fee going to be?
• So it would be like a license fee.
• You pay a license fee for gaming fish to be able to fund them to regulate them.
• So is it a set fee, or is it based on a percentage of the usage? It's percentage.

Keywords: 1204, all