Transcript Highlights:

• It wouldn't stall, but we're going to spend it anyway.
• My intent is however you spend it, to get it to the rural area.
• And it's up to the school board to determine how to spend that money.
• Then for SIF, as I mentioned, we spend cash on hand.
• It came from how to spend Legacy Fund was the original idea for this.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee opened with roll call and a review of special-session procedure: bills would be heard in filing order, with related school-lunch bills grouped together, and any bill advancing would require a motion, second, and majority vote to be introduced. Members also discussed that the committee was functioning much like a delayed-bills committee, with final referral to either Appropriations or Policy depending on the bill’s fiscal impact. The first major proposal was Senator Schibley’s bill to create a narrow, statewide Bank of North Dakota bridge-loan program for struggling nonprofit medical facilities, prompted by Jacobson Memorial Hospital’s financial crisis. He argued the hospital and surrounding EMS services could close without short-term help, while committee members questioned the added language, the population cap, the $10 million fund with $5 million per applicant limit, and whether the program could open the door to future requests. Representative Headland then presented two cleanup bills from the prior property-tax session: one to fix notice and tax-certification issues for local taxing districts, and another to correct how the primary residence credit is applied so taxpayers receive the full benefit rather than counties retaining part of the reimbursement. Members asked about township hearing timing, the estimated $10–15 million annual impact, and whether the credit issue could be fixed retroactively; Headland said the bill was intended to correct the problem going forward. Three school-lunch bills drew extensive discussion. Representative Vetter proposed a small administrative appropriation to add an FTE to help eligible families enroll in the existing free/reduced lunch program, saying the goal was to ensure needy children are signed up and that the state should not subsidize meals for wealthy families. Representative Nathe offered a broader bill mirroring the pending initiated measure but placing the program in statute instead of the Constitution, moving implementation up a year, and funding it with a one-time $65 million from the strategic investment fund; he said this would preserve legislative flexibility and avoid constitutional entrenchment. Representative Dressler proposed raising the state-funded eligibility threshold from 225% to 300% of poverty, arguing it would expand access while still preserving federal reimbursements and encouraging better enrollment systems. Members debated costs, future budget pressure, whether the bills set a precedent for responding to ballot measures, and whether the program should include breakfast and other operational details. Other proposals included Senator Powers’ bill to create a hyperbaric oxygen board and support rural access to hyperbaric chambers for wounds, concussions, PTSD, and other conditions; Representative Tolman’s reporting-requirements bill to force new or expanded programs to justify purpose, alternatives, evaluation methods, and full implementation costs; Representative Frelich’s bill addressing the ongoing redistricting litigation and what happens if the Supreme Court or lower courts alter the current map; and a bill requested by the Public Service Commission and ITD for FERC litigation support and ADA website/document compliance. The committee also heard a rural-health eligibility bill from Representative Twait aimed at steering federal rural health dollars toward rural providers, with questions focused on whether the mileage limits would exclude some communities. One Holocaust education item was deferred until the sponsor could be located.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this huge, huge packet, huge money billion-dollar spending package, this is for us to review.
• So, if General Services doesn't spend all the money... What happens to that money, Mr. Chair?
• I'm curious, in all of this spending, is our Secretary of State going to fix those problems with this
• I think there needs to be more of that involved. in spending that money.
• the money. ...different appropriation to be able to spend the money.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So just base spending for that.
• So just development funds new spending.
• And looking base spending for for that.
• :24:25.679> 50<00:24:26.000> million spending to create the 50 million spending to create
• Um there's an increase of spending<00:29:40.399> of spending of spending of 1,357,000<00:29:42.320

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In column M for 26-27, it's new spending from the general fund of $13.45 million.
• And on line Q, net new spending of $1 million from the general fund in 28-29.
• in the 2829 bianium from the spending in the 2829 bianium from the general<00:12:39.279> fund
• u there is additional one-time spending u there is additional one-time spending uh<00:12:54.720>
• And on line Q, net new spending million.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, to get to this spend for Medicaid behavioral health services, we do look at our claims, our claims
• So in order to get to the spend for behavioral health, we looked at both Medicaid claims and encounter
• on Behavioral year the total spend on Behavioral Health<00:10:07.360> Services<00:10:07.760><
• is sorted by the largest amount in 2024, so you can see some of the trend in behavioral health spend
• You have the total spend by MCO. Is this last year’s number for Anthem?

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Health and Family Services held its first meeting and received an overview from the Department for Medicaid Services on Medicaid’s behavioral health and substance use disorder services. Commissioner Lisa Lee and CFO Steve Beal said Kentucky Medicaid serves about 1.4 million members, including over half of Kentucky children, with 485,000 expansion members, more than 69,000 enrolled providers, and total fiscal year 2024 expenditures of $18.5 billion. They said Kentucky covers a broad range of behavioral health services, and behavioral health provider enrollment has grown from a little over 4,500 in 2019 to nearly 8,000 in 2024. They also described how Medicaid spending and utilization are tracked through claims and encounter data, with most members served through managed care organizations. Members focused on sharp increases in certain behavioral health billing codes, especially peer-to-peer services, and asked about reimbursement, utilization review, and whether the growth reflected increased need or expanded coverage. DMS said the rise was partly tied to combining facility and nonfacility behavioral health fee schedules in 2023, choosing the higher reimbursement rate to avoid cuts, and that the department has seen an uptick in peer-to-peer services. In response to concerns about overutilization, DMS said it mailed a letter to behavioral health providers, is considering limits and prior authorizations for some services, and plans to create a standardized monthly behavioral health report to monitor trends consistently and identify when controls may be needed. Lawmakers also asked whether the provider network is sufficient and whether access is adequate, especially for children. DMS said provider enrollment has expanded because behavioral health services were added to Medicaid in 2014 and because demand increased after COVID, but acknowledged studies showing children have less access than adults and said that would be an area of focus. The department said managed care organizations are required to ensure access to needed services and that current trends indicate access is available, though one member disagreed and said workforce shortages remain a major concern. Another member asked about non-emergency medical transportation spending, and DMS explained that it is handled through a capitated arrangement administered by the Transportation Cabinet rather than directly by the managed care organizations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, you can spend your free time reading through the crosstabs and all of the specific questions,
• “Okay, but importantly, we want to spend the vast majority of this time now thinking about all of those
• Because that gives you an entire interim to spend orienting and onboarding and training new members.
• a lot of time and effort informally... ...done because right now you are spending a lot of time and
• Chair, that he would explain to new legislators that they are going to spend the money, so they need

Summary: The Legislative Arrangements and Procedure Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior minutes, and then took up several follow-up items related to legislative security, public records, and the impacts of term limits. The Secretary of State’s office presented draft language to make legislators’ and candidates’ residential addresses confidential in public records, with discussion of who would be covered, how the protection would work, and whether it should expire when a candidate’s term ends. Members raised concerns about unintended consequences, transparency, and whether the public should still be able to see enough information to evaluate residency requirements. Rather than act immediately, the committee set the draft aside for a future meeting and asked for an amendment reflecting the Secretary of State’s suggested changes. The committee also reviewed a security best-practices memo and NCSL materials on capitol security. The memo encouraged legislators to be aware of their surroundings, avoid real-time vacation posting, vary routines, report threats, and follow security alerts. Members discussed a recent incident and the need to improve alert distribution and update contact information so legislators and staff receive notices consistently. The Secretary of State and committee members noted that the alert system may need refinement, including a separate legislative notification channel. The bulk of the meeting was devoted to Garrity Consulting’s final report on how to mitigate the effects of legislative term limits. The consultants summarized interviews, surveys, and focus groups with legislators, the public, and stakeholders, identifying major themes such as loss of institutional knowledge, leadership turnover, staffing pressures, and the need for stronger onboarding and training. Recommendations included considering annual sessions or shifting biennial sessions to even-numbered years, restructuring organizational session, making interim committees more consistent with regular committees, adding office hours, formalizing mentorship and leadership succession planning, expanding staff and professional development resources, creating public-facing educational tools, and improving communication and virtual testimony options. Members generally appreciated the report and its phased implementation roadmap, while also debating the practicality of some recommendations and the tension between making service more demanding and keeping the legislature accessible to new candidates.

Transcript Highlights:

• And now it was coming back to our municipalities because people didn't stop spending money; they just
• started spending it in different locations, right?
• So we are spending $2.71 for every dollar that we collect.
• So I'm going to be spending almost $3.30 for every dollar of sales tax that I collect.
• There's 89, almost 90 districts that have a capacity to spend, right, but don't have the levy.

Bills: HB2143, HB2273, HB2290, HB2373, HB2784, HB2794, HB4037

Keywords: public safety, retirement system, investments, trust fund, board of trustees, financial report, income tax rebate, Pinal County, taxpayer eligibility, state revenue, financial assistance, transaction privilege tax, business location, tangible personal property, shared vehicle, sourcing, income tax, veterans, donations, tax refunds

Transcript Highlights:

• Within all constitutional and statutory spending limits and meets the needs of our rapidly growing state
• more than we have. ...investing wisely for the future, living within our constitutional spending limits
• You don't build a budget this big under the constitutional spending.
• That's what we spend. I had 85% in the original bill.
• Spending limitations on conference committee jurisdiction to House Bill 5246.

Bills: SB27, SB1494, SB2121, SB2373, SB2431, SB1, SB8, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB30, SB37, SB260, SB268, SB331, SB379, SB441, SB447, SB457, SB568, SB650, SB763, SB1405, SB1506, SB1540, SB1566, SB1610, SB1637, SB1660, SB2018, SB2024, SB2217, SB2308, SB2337, SB2601, SB2753, SB2878, SB2900, SB2972, SB3059, HB4, HB40, HB46, HB119, HB145, HB300, HB493, HB705, HB1545, HB2011, HB2017, HB2067, HB2516, HB2885, HB2963, HB2974, HB3071, HB3372, HB3556, HB3595, HB3642, HB3909, HB5138, HB5246, 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, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2683, SB1319, SB3045, SB3071, HB796, HB1523, HB5294, HB748, HB3395, HB180, HB3171, HB146, HB5596, HB5694, HB1135, HB3225, HB186, HB1449, HB3793, HB112, HB104, HB3336, HB3520, HB3320, HB5663, HB2399, HB111, HB3483, HB4580, HB3748, HB632, HB4730, HB5690, HB5689, HB3385, HB4359, HB5381, HB123, HB5606, HB1057, HB3664, HCR141, HCR40, HCR59, SR634, SR687, SR703, SR709, SR715, SB1494, SB2121, SB2373, SB2431, HB46, SB1, SB8, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB37, SB260, SB331, SB379, SB441, SB447, SB457, SB568, SB763, SB1405, SB1540, SB1566, SB2018, SB2308, SB2337, SB2878, SB3059, HB705, HB2017, HB2067, HB3071, HB3372, HB3556, HB3595, HB3909, HB5246

Keywords: elections, local governance, political subdivisions, general elections, Texas Election Code, data brokers, personal data, regulation, business entities, consumer protection, financial exploitation, artificial intelligence, phishing, legal liability, criminal offense, civil penalty, foreign language, study abroad, higher education, language credit

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of them will fall on the revenue side, some will fall on the spending side.
• So depending fall on the spending side.
• um combination of primarily spending um combination of primarily spending reductions<00:37:23.839
• We do this better than any other state, and we spend more money.
• <00:40:03.760> more than anybody and we still spend more than anybody and we still spend more

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, this bill caps charter school funding at 9% of district spending, instead of allowing up
• For the per-pupil facilities component and the state responsible for any above-foundation spending.
• Lewis, we had an opportunity to spend some time together over the last couple of years.
• the foundation, sort of base rate, that is funded by the state, but then in communities where they spend
• And so we spend a lot of time with professional development, but in truth, we work a longer school day

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education held a lengthy hearing on a large slate of bills focused primarily on charter school policy and vocational technical education. Committee members opened with ground rules for testimony, including a two-minute limit, written testimony acceptance, and a live-streamed format. The committee then heard testimony on bills to expand collective bargaining rights in Horace Mann and Innovation Schools, reform charter school funding and reimbursement, allow enrollment preferences for high-need students in charter lotteries, and require BESE to consider district impacts when approving new or expanded charters. Several witnesses, including union leaders, parents, educators, and legislators, argued that charter growth has strained district budgets and that funding formulas should be reworked to better protect public schools; charter advocates and alumni countered that charter schools serve high-need students well and should not be penalized for their success. A major portion of the hearing focused on vocational technical education bills, including proposals to expand access and capacity, create a large grant program, and increase MSBA reimbursement rates for vocational school construction. Supporters described long waitlists, strong labor-market demand, and the higher cost of building and maintaining vocational schools, while municipal officials emphasized the tax burden on local communities. The committee also heard testimony on charter school reimbursement bills that would extend the state’s reimbursement schedule, with witnesses from districts such as Boston, Worcester, Fall River, and New Bedford describing large net losses to charter tuition and arguing for longer reimbursement periods and structural reform. The committee took no final votes during the hearing. In one instance, the chair said a bill would be held open until a missing senator could testify. Members asked several detailed questions about charter admissions lotteries, special education placements, funding formulas, and the practical effects of proposed charter caps and reimbursement changes. The hearing remained informational, with witnesses and committee members presenting sharply different views on whether the bills would improve equity and opportunity or harm existing public school systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• , spend, spend, and then they went, "Oh, wow, we spent too much.
• We really need to dial down and really look at our own pocketbook and then look at our spending.
• We'd say, "Oh my gosh, I'm spending way too much. I've got to rein this in a little bit."
• We'd say, "Oh my gosh, I'm spending way too much. I've got to rein this in a little bit."
• So, let's watch our pocketbook, watch our spending, and get that fraud under control.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• However, their spending is a mandatory expense reimbursement.
• Um, it just gets it to their level of spending that they are projected to spend. Okay.
• that they [clears throat] are spending that they [clears throat] are projected<00:19:47.679> to
• c><00:19:47.919> spend.
• projected to spend. projected to spend.

Keywords: Call to Order: 00;15 Approval of Minutes: 01:22 Update on Generator replacement: 01:52 Update on Sheriff Fees: 13:28 Adjournment: 25:22, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its fourth budget subreview session focused on personnel, public retirements, and finance. Members approved the minutes from the prior meeting and then heard from Finance Cabinet staff on two main items: a $7.5 million request related to generator systems and a sheriff’s fees budget request. The generator request was described as a preventive, life-cycle replacement and capacity-enhancement effort for 26 generators serving Frankfort-area state buildings, intended to protect continuity of government and expand beyond basic emergency power to support continuity of services. Members asked detailed questions about how many generators would be replaced, the cost per unit, the scope of the study, and whether the work could be phased. Staff said the $7.5 million would cover a full evaluation and any resulting engineering/replacement work, but the exact number of replacements was not yet known. They estimated the initial study would cost about $500,000 to $750,000, would take six to nine months once funded, and would produce building-by-building recommendations. Staff also said typical generator life cycles vary widely, often around 15 to 20 years but sometimes longer depending on run hours and usage. The committee then reviewed sheriff’s fees, with the Division of Local Government explaining that the state reimburses counties for several statutory sheriff-related costs, especially court security, which accounts for more than 90% of the claims. Staff said the current budget base is about $20 million, while actual spending has been running above $23 million, leading to a $3.5 million growth request to align the base with projected spending and reduce the need for non-general fund expenditure (NGE) adjustments. Members asked about claim volume, county participation, reimbursement controls, and whether the request reflected growth or underfunding; staff said all 120 counties submit claims, volumes have been fairly steady, and reimbursements are governed by statute and signed monthly certifications. No votes were taken on the requests, and the meeting adjourned after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and the total spending for the division is $319.7 million in fiscal year 2026-27 and $320.7 million
• , and the total spending for the division is $319.7 million in fiscal year 2026-27 and $320.7 million
• and the total general fund spending and the total spending<00:08:01.039> for<00:08:01.520>
• the<00:08:02.000> division<00:08:02.400> is<00:08:03.240> 319.7 spending for
• the division is 319.7 spending for the division is 319.7 million<00:08:05.280> in<00:08:05.520

Bills: HF2446, HF2563, HF2444

Keywords: agriculture finance, broadband development, Department of Agriculture, Board of Animal Health, Agricultural Utilization Research Institute, Office of Broadband Development, food safety, food handler license, cottage food, home processed food, livestock dealer, meat packing company, milk marketer, milk marketing license, grain buyer, grain storage, beginning farmer, emerging farmer, farm down payment assistance, livestock investment grant

Transcript Highlights:

• So electronic visit verification, which you spend a lot of time talking about.
• But we can—I'd love to spend more time to talk with you about your specific question.
• And also, are you aware that providers are having to spend money on another system?
• to spend additional monies on a system to track or complement your the I-Connect system?
• Cybersecurity spending must be evaluated through a lens of measurable impact, not just cost.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a lengthy presentation on the Agency for Persons with Disabilities’ I-Connect system, based on an ILAB assessment of the platform’s performance and requirements. ILAB said the system provides useful centralized records, reporting, compliance support, and audit trails, but users described it as cumbersome, outdated, and inefficient, with excessive manual entry, weak navigation, limited notifications, no mobile app, poor printing/export options, and performance issues. ILAB also said the original 2013-era requirements were too high-level and that only a portion of the requirements could be verified, with some features de-scoped or never implemented. Their recommendations included better integration with electronic health record systems, improved performance monitoring, electronic signatures, OCR, and more modern export and verification tools. Public testimony from providers and advocates echoed those concerns. A support coordination provider said the system is nicknamed “I Disconnect,” described problems with EVV/GPS sign-ins, lengthy support plans, lack of a phone app, and possible HIPAA concerns. Another advocate said the system should have preserved family access to records and criticized the need for providers to use workarounds and additional software. APD staff said the agency has spent about $19.7 million through FY 2023-24, has regular build updates under the current contract with WellSky, and uses an internal help desk and vendor ticketing process to triage bugs versus enhancement requests. They said some issues are handled case-by-case, critical tickets have SLAs, and the agency is working on interoperability and other requested improvements. Members questioned whether the system should be fixed or replaced, whether the original contract and SaaS arrangement were sufficient, and whether the state received value for the money spent. APD said the system went live in phases and that all functionality was in place by June 2024, while ILAB and members noted significant technical debt and unresolved gaps. The committee also discussed record retention, provider access to records after a consumer changes providers, and whether federal funding or compliance could be affected. The meeting ended with broader budget remarks emphasizing completion over expansion, stronger upfront planning for technology projects, and more accountability before funding new systems or major enhancements.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we spend more here, we have to spend less there, right?
• <00:06:31.680> more every other decision if we spend more every other decision if we spend
• to be cognizant of the overall spending to be cognizant of the overall spending in<00:08:19.639>
• the the sort of total amount of spending the the sort of total amount of spending in<00:08:24.960
• banum and if you look at their spending banum and if you look at their spending over<00:15:17.040

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee met to review Division One of a very large budget package, with the chair explaining that the budget was being analyzed in three divisions over multiple days. Members first discussed procedure, including when amendments and line-item votes would be taken, and agreed to proceed with the division’s presentation before questions. Representative Maguire then outlined the division’s approach as a series of tradeoffs to close a large budget gap, emphasizing cuts, some revenue changes, and a focus on overall spending levels as well as individual reductions. The presentation covered a wide range of agencies and policy areas. Major proposed changes included cuts or eliminations to several boards and commissions viewed as costly or duplicative, such as the Housing Appeals Board, Board of Tax and Land Appeals, Human Rights Commission, Commission on Aging, Office of the Child Advocate, and the Personnel Appeals Board, with some functions consolidated into other boards. The division also proposed back-of-the-budget cuts to the Information Technology Department, Judicial Branch, Justice Department, Retirement System, Corrections, and Environmental Services, along with fee increases in several areas. Other notable items included ending marketing for Paid Family Leave, reducing job advertising and tourism promotion, defunding the Arts Council, moving liquor enforcement functions out of the Liquor Commission, and shifting some funds such as the College Savings Commission money to Division Two. Several members questioned specific cuts, especially the elimination of the Council on Aging, the reduction in regional planning commission grants, and the large cut to tourism advertising. Maguire defended the choices as necessary budget tradeoffs, arguing that some programs duplicated work done elsewhere, that regional planning grants were not among the most essential items, and that tourism promotion was a form of spending he viewed skeptically. He also explained that the public defender’s budget was partially restored after a credible claim of a governor’s budget error, and that the committee would continue refining corrections-related cuts because the House was only halfway through the budget process and further changes could still occur in the Senate and conference committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• They’re spending more time trying to figure out how to work together to pay for stuff than they actually
• We spend a lot of time trying to figure out this financial integration, but we actually have a potential
• Elon Musk blew up in five hours, not because of the ASWA work, but because of the spending that was in
• There's no money to train anybody because they're spending all the money on just paying the employees
• I know I'm spending a lot of time thinking and listening to a lot of people and reading about it.

Summary: The committee met to hear consultants Mason Bishop and Cameron Christie discuss Arkansas’s “one door/no wrong door” workforce and social services modernization effort. Bishop argued that the current system is fragmented across multiple agencies, offices, and portals, making it hard for job seekers and employers to access services efficiently. He said the goal is to create a more integrated system that promotes upward mobility, longer labor force attachment, better employer access to talent, greater efficiency, and faster adaptation to changes such as AI and other economic disruptions. Bishop repeatedly pointed to Utah as a model, describing how that state combined workforce and public assistance functions into a single agency, used statewide cost allocation to blend funding streams, and improved customer service and outcomes after reform. He said Arkansas should consider integrating governance, service delivery, and financing, including possible waivers, a statewide cost allocation plan, and a benefits-cliff pilot. He also said Arkansas’s current local workforce board structure creates duplication and weak coordination, and that Launch is a useful tool but not a full service-delivery system. Committee members asked how the proposal would work in practice, including whether TANF could be used to cross-train DHS workers, how federal waivers might be obtained, how local boards would be affected, and how disabled clients would be handled. Bishop said TANF should be treated as part of a workforce strategy, that federal pilot authority for workforce reform nearly passed but did not, and that waivers are now the practical path. He also said Arkansas could either merge functions more fully or at minimum co-locate workforce staff in DHS offices statewide. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with plans to continue the discussion in August, including a focus on case management and whether the state is managing programs or people.

Transcript Highlights:

• We collaborate with the American Lung Cancer Screening Initiative in outreach and spend many weekends
• Budget spending on suppression has risen 89%. Home insurance premiums have risen 25%.
• PG&E spends about $2 billion a year trimming trees on other property owners' lands.
• We spend about $2 billion a year trimming trees on other property owners' lands.
• We're asking them to spend thousands of dollars on home retrofits.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• My community wants to spend 60,000 on the septic.
• My community wants to spend 60,000 on the septic.
• So they spend 60,000 and then they still got to make a loan for another 40,000 to convert the septic
• My community wants to spend 60,000 on the septic.
• My community wants to spend 60,000 on the septic.

Bills: HB1618

Keywords: cesspool conversion, cesspool replacement, wastewater, sewer connection, sewerage systems, septic system, pollution control, water pollution control revolving fund, Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, HGIA, low-interest loans, forgivable loans, homeowner financing, environmental infrastructure, public health, wastewater treatment, low- and moderate-income households, revolving loan fund, Department of Health, memorandum of agreement

Summary: The committees held a joint hearing on HB 1618 HD1, which would create and fund a cesspool conversion revolving loan fund administered by the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority to help homeowners upgrade, convert, or connect cesspools. Testimony was overwhelmingly in support from state agencies and advocacy groups, with witnesses emphasizing that cost is the main barrier to cesspool conversion and that recent Kona flooding underscored the public health and pollution risks of cesspools. One testifier suggested the fund should actively pursue outside funding sources, and another urged an effective date that would allow counties to contribute sooner. A member raised concerns about whether loans would be affordable and whether other financing tools, such as tax credits, should also be considered; another member opposed the bill as not adequately addressing district-level sewer and septic issues. The committees ultimately recommended passage with amendments, including changing the effective date to July 1, 2050, and the motion was adopted. The joint Judiciary and Ways and Means committees then considered HB 2592 on the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority. The chair outlined amendments to clarify that the authority would assume property and liability associated with transferred assets, preserve existing liability rules, transfer conditional use permits if not already transferred, allow lease extensions before transfer, and set reversion triggers if the authority fails to adopt a management plan by June 30, 2028, or administrative rules by December 31, 2029. Members asked about preserving the public trust and whether the amendments would keep the Board of Land and Natural Resources’ role intact; the chair confirmed the fee and board role would remain unchanged. The committees voted to pass the bill with amendments, and the recommendation was adopted. The committees also took up HB 2033, making further amendments to clarify the definition of state, delay certain effective dates, allow rental and U-Drive lessors to avoid liability by identifying renters, delete one section, and add administrative hearing language and bus-camera clarifications. HB 1888 was amended to expand protections for educational workers to include sports officials, define sports official, make intentional bodily harm a felony with enhanced penalties for repeat offenses, and authorize the attorney general to assist with restraining orders. Both measures were recommended for passage with amendments and adopted. Later, several bills were moved with little or no discussion: HB 1515, HB 1713, HB 1718, HB 2022, and HB 2385 were recommended for passage unamended; HB 2375 was deferred; and HB 1741 was amended to reflect Honolulu’s concerns, narrow study requirements, add exemptions and a delayed implementation date, and was recommended for passage with amendments. The committees adopted the recommendations on these measures, with some members noting reservations or prior opposition on certain bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, it's just really the percentage of spend more than the actual increase of this fee revenue.
• You did say that you were intending to spend $1 million on a system of modernization.
• The system of modernization that you intend to spend $21 million dollars on? What is that exactly?
• How much are we spending to invest in RealID in our contract with AMMHA?
• The mobile wallet that you were talking about, how much are you planning to spend on that?

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• BUDGET AND SPEND PROJECT IN CONCLUDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SAVINGS AND STRATEGIES THAT WE'VE DEPLOYED FOR
• I DON'T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME ON THIS SLIDE BUT I WANT TO GET TO THE BUDGET CONVERSATION BUT WE
• MOVING ON TO BUDGET, SO I'M GOING TO START WITH 2024, 2025 BUDGET AND SPEND.
• CHAIR YOU ASKED BRIAN TO ENSURE YOU THAT WE WERE GOING TO SPEND THE APPROPRIATION FOR THAT FISCAL YEAR
• AGAIN, WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT SHARPENING OUR PENCIL, REALLY LOOKING FOR HOW WE CAN BRING THE SPEND ON