Transcript Highlights:

• This bill creates a model to address delays, staffing shortages, and backlogs in local government development
• planning efforts by requiring that local governments treat ag enclave developments as if they were conforming
• of development.
• It undermines local decision-making by prohibiting quasi-judicial review of developments in agricultural
• for developments in those ag enclaves.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum present and heard a series of bills, mostly local claims and growth-management or permitting measures. SB 16, SB 14, and SB 24 were uncontested claims bills providing relief for injuries or damages involving the City of St. Petersburg and Miami-Dade County; each was described as settled or favorably reported by a special master, and each was reported favorably without debate. SB 288, a negotiated bill on rural electric cooperatives, was presented as a clarification to protect co-op authority over generation and power purchases while preserving consumer protections; it drew support from industry stakeholders and was reported favorably. SB 830 created a public-records exemption for certain local administrators and their families’ personal information, citing threats against city managers, and it also passed favorably. The committee also considered several land-use and permitting bills. SB 1138 would create a registry of qualified professionals to conduct pre-application review for plats and development, aiming to reduce delays and backlogs; local government groups raised concerns about preemption and preserving quasi-judicial authority, but the bill passed favorably with one no vote. SB 168 expanded public nuisance law to include gambling houses, increased penalties, and authorized attorney’s fees and foreclosure of unpaid fees; it was reported favorably. SB 686 revised the agricultural enclave statute to create a public-hearing process for certain residential projects in urban service areas, with a sunset date later amended to June 30, 2026; conservation and planning groups raised concerns about local planning authority and public participation, but the bill passed favorably. SB 548, a growth-management and impact-fee cleanup bill, clarified plan-based methodology, extraordinary circumstances, interlocal agreements, and refund procedures for impact fees. Local government and development stakeholders testified that it would improve predictability while preserving flexibility, though some sought further refinement on fee increases and refunds; the bill was amended and then reported favorably. SB 1234 addressed building permits and inspections, including permit validity, small-project exemptions, temporary hurricane protection, standardized permit forms, and expanded use of private providers; county officials objected to reduced oversight, while builders and private-provider advocates supported the measure. After testimony and debate, the bill was reported favorably. At the end of the meeting, Senator Jones requested to be recorded on several votes, and the committee adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislature, voters, the Water Development Board, local governments, and the broader business community
• Program capacity is not just a Water Development Board issue; it's also a local recipient project delivery
• If state and federal dollars are being leveraged through Water Development Board programs, but local
• in decisions involving large-scale developments that can place significant demands on local water supplies
• It's when the discussion begins with the data center developer or operator, how can that local community

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're dedicated staff located throughout the state, working with local partners, FDOT can support local
• for local government partners.
• Now, the technical workshop that will be provided to the local planning development professionals.
• So combining that local government training with the AM tool kit, this will set our local governments
• Develops.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• development. Okay. development. Okay.
• Local match funds for this project are by the IDA, with 15% of local match requirement.
• Crossroads development site in Lebanon. Crossroads development site in Lebanon.
• local funds and federal funds. local funds and federal funds.
• development authority. development authority.

Keywords: The live stream ended prematurely due to a network issue. A full recording will be uploaded as soon as possible, 958, all

Summary: The committee first discussed and approved a new airport-related project involving two 60-by-80 corporate hangars. Members asked about how the project would generate revenue, and staff explained that hangar rent and fuel sales would help repay the costs, with more than half of the funding coming from the FAA. The project was approved by roll call vote. The committee then approved two large capital pool projects: a $1,715,120 roof replacement and skylight project for the Libraries and Archives building in Frankfort, and a $2,105,400 exterior renovation project for several state buildings, including Health and Family Services, the Kentucky History Center, and the State Office Building. After that, the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority presented one loan increase and five grant reallocations. The loan increase was for Springfield’s wastewater treatment plant project, rising by $262,300 to just over $2.88 million because bids came in higher than estimated. Members asked about the delay between approval and bidding, and staff explained the design, environmental review, and state approval process can take one to two years. The committee approved the six action items, and then received informational updates on additional water projects that required no action. The Cabinet for Economic Development next presented one forgivable loan and 11 KPDI/KPDI EDF grant projects. The loan was a $1 million forgivable loan for the Perry County Economic Development Board to acquire the Coalfields Industrial Building, with repayment forgivable if a project creates at least 75 jobs. The grant projects included site-readiness and industrial development work in Pendleton, Elizabethtown/Hardin, McCreary, Floyd, Marion, Fleming, Graves, Eddyville/Lyon, Caldwell, Mercer, and Johnson counties. Members asked how local match percentages are set and were told they are based on county population and updated every two years; staff also explained that beneficiaries usually provide the match and are reimbursed after submitting costs. The committee approved the action items. Finally, the Office of Financial Management presented two new debt issues and three SFCC debt issues. The new debt items were a Kentucky Housing Corporation bond authorization of up to $600 million for single-family mortgage revenue bonds, including a $100 million initial transaction, and a $5.5 million multifamily conduit bond for 98 apartments in Lexington. Informational items covered University of Kentucky refunding bonds and Turnpike Authority refunding bonds, both of which produced savings. The three SFCC debt issues for Campbell, Edmonson, and Perry counties were then approved by roll call vote. The meeting ended with brief discussion of the upcoming calendar and scheduling before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So to as a response to that, we had five local banks and five local housing developers come together.
• local banks and five local had five local banks and five local housing<00:04:26.880> developers
• So there are five local developers, local housing developers, that are also participating in this partnership
• with local decision makers, area development districts, other workforce boards.
• local decision makers, area with local decision makers, area development<00:49:47.920> districts,

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:07 Roll Call 00:00:25 Discussion of Lexington’s Housing Affordability Partnership 00:02:26 Discussion of Northern Kentucky’s Housing Blueprint 00:30:12 Discussion of Religious Institution Land Use 00:57:33 Discussion of Free-Market Solutions to Kentucky’s Housing Crisis 01:04:18 Adjournment 01:26:37, 958, all

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and began informally, with members noting this was the final information-gathering meeting on housing before a November meeting to discuss findings and report back to the LRC. The main presentation focused on the Lexington Affordable Housing Partnership, a public-private effort supported by a $10 million state allocation. Presenters described Fayette County’s housing shortage, citing a gap of more than 22,000 units, rising home prices, and the challenge of assembling land and capital for affordable projects. The partnership explained that five local banks created a $3 million capital investment fund to buy and hold land at no interest, with deed restrictions keeping the site at 80% or below area median income and allowing the banks to seek Community Reinvestment Act credit. The first project is a 12.5-acre former Transylvania University baseball field, planned for about 242 units, including detached homes, townhouses, garden-style apartments, and senior housing. Speakers said the project required extensive neighborhood engagement and zoning/development approvals, but that the planning phase is now largely complete and infrastructure work should begin soon. Financing details included roughly $64 million in additional funding through tax credit equity, market-rate loans, city support, Kentucky Housing Corporation resources, and donations from nonprofit partners. Developers said the multifamily bond applications are due to Kentucky Housing Corporation the next day, and they expect the land purchase to be repaid into the revolving fund once the property is entitled and closed, allowing the original $3 million to be redeployed for future projects. They estimated rental units could be filled within about six months of completion, while for-sale units would come online over 12 to 36 months. In discussion, members asked about regulatory barriers and project timelines. Presenters pointed to rising construction costs tied to new federal and state requirements, and one member highlighted the need to continue reviewing planning and zoning reforms to speed development plan approvals and reduce delays. The group also endorsed a possible statewide $20 million housing fund, a residential infrastructure fund, and efforts to avoid additional regulatory burdens on housing development.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now this proposal aims to reduce local development impact fees on state-funded affordable housing projects
• First, this would prohibit local governments from charging development impact fees on affordable housing
• Secondly, it also incentivizes local governments to voluntarily reduce or waive development impact fees
• And while this could potentially mitigate the cost of development, it would mean that local governments
• It's not a service that we're developing because we're trying to be responsive to the needs of the locals

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• office, always work with the House of Representatives, work with you know the different economic development
• Members of the Senate Local and County Government Committee will meet this afternoon at the call of the

Bills: HB3312, HB3700, HB2981, HB2961, HB3016, HB4478, HB4326, HB3025, HB3710, HB4125, HB2951, HB3082, HB4142, HB4106, HB1752, HB3268, HB4440, HJR1067, SB1144, SB1145, SB1146, SB1147, SB1148, SB1156, SB1157, SB1158, SB1159, SB1161, SB1162, SB1163, SB1164, SB1165, SB1166, SB1149, SB1167, HJR1024, SB1174, SB1175, SB1176, HB3419, HB3748, HB4335, HB3057, HB3279, HB4428, HB3420, HB3040, HB4140, HB1638, HB3298, HB4113, HB1082, HB4301, HB3269, HB3587, HB4226, HB4324, HB4339, HB4342, HB3278, HB3996, HB4236, HB4352

Keywords: firearm safety, public schools, education policy, student safety, gun control, opt-out option, grading system, student assessment, academic integrity, state funding, opinion conduct, open meetings, school boards, transparency, public access, education governance, HB2961, TSgt Marshal Dakota Roberts Gold Star Survivor Act, Gold Star family, Gold Star recipient

Bills: HB3312, HB3700, HB2981, HB2961, HB3016, HB4478, HB4326, HB3025, HB3710, HB4125, HB2951, HB3082, HB4142, HB4106, HB1752, HB3268, HB4440, HJR1067, SB1144, SB1145, SB1146, SB1147, SB1148, SB1156, SB1157, SB1158, SB1159, SB1161, SB1162, SB1163, SB1164, SB1165, SB1166, SB1149, SB1167, HJR1024, SB1174, SB1175, SB1176, HB3419, HB3748, HB4335, HB3057, HB3279, HB4428, HB3420, HB3040, HB4140, HB1638, HB3298, HB4113, HB1082, HB4301, HB3269, HB3587, HB4226, HB4324, HB4339, HB4342, HB3278, HB3996, HB4236, HB4352

Keywords: firearm safety, public schools, education policy, student safety, gun control, opt-out option, grading system, student assessment, academic integrity, state funding, opinion conduct, open meetings, school boards, transparency, public access, education governance, HB2961, TSgt Marshal Dakota Roberts Gold Star Survivor Act, Gold Star family, Gold Star recipient

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, we just need more guard rails on the local level to be able to deal with this development and its
• Um, we just need more guard rails on the local level to be able to deal with this development and its
• , and legally defensible fee when development does not meet the local inclusionary housing requirement
• fee when development does not meet<01:37:03.360> the<01:37:03.679> local<01:37:04.639>
• And when development does not provide housing that the local workforce can afford, communities still

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And around California, affordable housing developers and their partners, and local governments and local
• , and they're important tools for local governments to balance economic development and smart residential
• flexibility so local governments can provide certainty to developers to have long-term opportunities
• At the end of the day, it will be up to local communities and developers themselves should they choose
• At the end of the day, it will be up to local communities and developers themselves should they choose

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For some counties, building locally owned housing complements the work of other developers by filling
• The Washington County Community Development Agency has invested in locally owned housing options for
• The Washington County Community Development Agency has invested in locally owned housing options for
• The Washington County Community Development Agency has invested in locally owned housing options for
• The Washington County Community Development Agency has invested in locally owned housing options for

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• develop that hotel by right.
• or actually developed it or financed it.
• As a former local elected myself, I think I agree with my colleagues that every local government official
• or actually developed it or financed it.
• As a former local elected myself, I think I agree with my colleagues. former local elected myself.

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing-related bills and moved most of them forward. SB 655 (Stern) would establish a state policy that residential units should be able to maintain a safe maximum indoor temperature, with supporters citing extreme heat deaths and the need for statewide guidance. Members raised concerns about the lack of a specific temperature standard and possible impacts on the electric grid, but the bill passed the committee 8-0 as amended to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 634 (Perez), which would bar state and local governments from adopting or enforcing ordinances that punish people or organizations for providing basic survival services to unhoused people. Supporters, including people with lived experience and homelessness advocates, argued that criminalizing food, water, blankets, and outreach prolongs homelessness and harms vulnerable residents; opponents from some cities and counties warned about limits on local control. The bill passed 8-2. SB 772 (Cabaldon) would continue and expand the Infill Infrastructure Grant Program by better supporting walkability, transit, and climate-resilient infrastructure for infill housing; it passed 8-0. The committee also considered SB 838 (Dutraslo/DeRazzo), which would keep the Housing Accountability Act focused on housing by excluding transient lodging from housing streamlining protections. Supporters said some developers have used housing laws to fast-track hotel projects instead of homes, while opponents worried the bill could be too broad and limit mixed-use financing. After discussion about possible clarifying amendments, the bill passed 8-2 to Local Government. Several consent items—SB 484, SB 489, SB 686, and SB 724—also passed unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• included in the definition of local included in the definition of local government.<00:14:35.440
• unless requested by the developer. unless requested by the developer.
• or development they're in?
• or development they're in?
• Um, it's not the local government that's requiring the feature; it would be the developer that's asking

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 2614 was heard with a delete-everything amendment adopted at the outset. The bill, as explained by the authors, would prevent local governments from requiring amenities or common property that effectively force the creation of a homeowners association, while still allowing developers to create HOAs voluntarily when needed. The authors said the language was negotiated with stakeholders, including the League of Minnesota Cities, and was intended to be moved on to the Housing Committee for further discussion. Supportive testimony came from Housing First Minnesota and the Minnesota Homeownership Center. They argued that unnecessary HOA mandates can raise housing costs, reduce homebuyer choice, and shift public infrastructure costs onto homeowners through dues in addition to property taxes. Testifiers cited examples involving single-family developments, a Burnsville case involving a large roof assessment and disputed ACH withdrawal, and the Heritage Park development in Minneapolis, where an HOA was required but later became difficult to dissolve. They said the bill would preserve HOAs where they are genuinely needed, such as townhomes or shared-amenity developments. Members raised questions about the removal of county-specific language in the amendment, the meaning of the bill’s references to services and common property, and whether the bill would still allow neighborhood signs or other developer-requested features. A major point of concern was stormwater ponds and drainage infrastructure: one member argued that prohibiting cities from requiring HOA maintenance of such facilities could shift costs to taxpayers, while the authors responded that the bill was meant to stop cities from mandating discretionary amenities and that maintenance issues had been partly addressed in the amendment. The committee did not take a final vote in the portion provided, but the amendment was adopted and the bill was discussed for referral onward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Importantly, the bill preserves local control.
• I mean, this. in the same development project? No.
• We developed these plans.
• Coming from local government, having served on a local city council in a very tight budgeted city, I
• Because maybe there are other avenues to develop in those areas and get local government out of the way

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda of housing-related bills, beginning with AB 249, which would require youth-specific coordinated entry assessments for homeless services. The author and supporters from Larkin Street Youth Services and the California Coalition for Youth argued that current vulnerability tools are adult-focused and can disadvantage young people; the bill was described as a developmentally appropriate fix to better connect youth to housing and prevention services. There was no opposition, and the bill passed 7-0 to Human Services. Members then heard AB 239 and AB 1206. AB 239 would create a state-led disaster housing task force, a state disaster housing coordinator, and regular legislative reporting to speed recovery after disasters; it passed 7-0 to Emergency Management. AB 1206 would let local agencies pre-approve plans for single-family and small multifamily homes of up to 10 units to reduce permitting delays and costs; the League of California Cities opposed it unless amended, citing local variation and staffing concerns, but the author and supporters said it would preserve local control and help speed housing production. The bill passed 9-0 to Local Government. The committee also took up AB 57, which would reserve at least 10% of California’s home purchase assistance funds for descendants of formerly enslaved people. Supporters framed it as reparative justice and a way to address longstanding racial disparities in homeownership, while Pacific Legal Foundation argued it likely violated constitutional limits on race-based government action and urged a race-neutral approach. After discussion about reparations criteria and the bill’s intent, it passed 6-0 to Judiciary. The consent calendar, including AB 480, AB 726, and AB 1154, was approved 8-0. Later, AB 282 was heard to allow housing providers to prefer applicants who participate in rental assistance programs, such as Housing Choice Vouchers, despite existing source-of-income discrimination law. Supporters said it would help voucher holders find units and improve affordable housing operations; no opposition testified, and the bill passed 6-1 to Judiciary. AB 1229 followed, restructuring the adult reentry grant program to focus on permanent housing for people leaving prison by moving administration to HCD and using regional administrators; supporters emphasized the link between housing stability and reduced recidivism, and the bill passed 7-0 to Public Safety. The committee then approved AB 670, which would let local governments count preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing toward housing element goals and require better demolition reporting, and AB 750, which would strengthen oversight and reporting for homeless shelters after a prior reporting law saw very low compliance. AB 670 passed 8-0 to Local Government, and AB 750 was presented with testimony from a shelter resident describing abuse and lack of accountability in shelters.

Transcript Highlights:

• This development tool allows local governments and property owners to initiate a petition requesting
• Uh this development tool<00:04:18.320> uh<00:04:18.479> allows<00:04:18.959> local
• This simply gives local governments the ability to jump-start the community's development and helps them
• This simply gives local governments the ability to jump-start the community's development and helps them
• This simply gives local governments the ability to jump-start the community's development and helps them

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:05 Roll Call 00:00:12 Discussion of Legislative Measures 00:03:12 Discussion of Housing and Land Use 00:21:58 Discussion of Short Term Rental Policies 01:03:17 Adjournment 01:15:38, 958, all

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from its June 4, 2025 meeting and then heard a series of presentations focused largely on housing and land-use policy. Senator Robbie Mills and Representative Josh Bray discussed two 2025 housing measures: Senate Bill 50, which would create residential infrastructure development districts to help local governments finance infrastructure for new housing developments through special assessments and local debt, and House Bill 7, which would let local governments identify development areas and rebate new property tax revenue to developers as an incentive for housing growth. They said Kentucky faces a statewide housing shortage of roughly 210,000 units, projected to grow if building patterns do not change, and argued that regulatory relief and financing tools are needed to increase supply. Representative Rebecca Rymer presented House Bill 371, which would require local permitting when an industry’s residual waste landfill is located in a different county from the industry itself. She said current law lets such landfills bypass local review, leaving host counties with no say despite road impacts and other local burdens. She said the bill would preserve the existing exemption when the landfill and industry are co-located, and noted support from KLC and KO. Representative Steve Doan also described House Bill 806, a statewide backyard chicken bill that would allow domesticated hens, prohibit roosters, set a minimum of six hens that local governments could not go below, and preserve local authority over setbacks, sanitation, maintenance standards, and egg sales. He said it would override outright local bans but not HOA restrictions, and cited a current Northern Kentucky dispute and ADA litigation as reasons for the proposal. The committee then heard a broader discussion on housing and land use from Charlie Gardner of the Mercatus Center and Nolan Gray of California YIMBY and the Bluegrass Institute. They outlined categories of land-use regulation, described the recent growth of state-level housing reforms nationwide, and cited examples such as ADU legalization, smaller lot sizes, reduced parking minimums, streamlined permitting, and single-stair or other building-code reforms. They argued that housing shortages are a statewide concern, that localities often have incentives to block growth, and that state intervention can reduce costs and uncertainty without compromising health and safety. Members asked about the housing shortage estimate, the effect of red tape on safety and local authority, and how state reforms could be phased in; the presenters said reforms often include lead time, can be targeted to larger jurisdictions, and should focus on reducing time and cost while maintaining basic standards.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're Meeting with Four Corners Economic Development and New Mexico Economic Development to get them
• Our initial investment helped their local counties and local governments... continue those investments
• We need to do it locally, if at all possible. Homegrown, locally, if at all possible.
• And so, again, we're looking at electrical generation via solar development, natural gas development,
• and coal development.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Legislature has taken several recent actions to spur housing development, including requiring local
• Local sources come together to fill that gap to get to 100% to build the development.
• I've accessed state funding as an affordable housing developer, and I've worked in local government where
• local...
• we are fighting the local level of resisting development in their communities?

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• , and legally defensible fee when development does not meet the local inclusionary housing requirement
• fee when development does not meet<01:37:03.360> the<01:37:03.679> local<01:37:04.639>
• And when development does not provide housing that the local workforce can afford, communities still
• <01:37:36.719> Finance<01:37:37.280> Authority,<01:37:38.000> local Development
• Finance Authority, local Development Finance Authority, local housing<01:37:38.800> authorities,

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on HB 1065, a housing bill that would clarify when multifamily and mixed-use housing may be allowed on commercially zoned land, define infrastructure standards, and preserve municipal discretion over where such development can occur. Prime sponsor Representative David Priest said the bill is intended to help address the housing shortage by using already developed commercial areas without overriding local planning. The New Hampshire Municipal Association, through Brody Dees, said it supports the bill and views it as a priority, but noted it is still discussing related language with stakeholders and wants clearer definitions for multifamily development, infrastructure, and adaptive reuse while preserving local control over commercial land use. Testimony was mixed. Ivy Van, a certified planner, opposed the bill because she said the infrastructure language is too restrictive and could exclude properties served by private utilities or septic systems. Chris Freeman, a housing provider, was generally supportive but recommended technical changes, arguing the infrastructure definition may be too broad and that the adaptive reuse language could unintentionally block useful building modifications. He said the bill should be clarified so it does not discourage reuse projects. The committee then moved to discussion of an accessory dwelling unit bill, with Representative Turkot describing changes that would shift some ADU approvals from a matter of right to conditional use or special exception, allow municipalities more control over attached versus detached units, set parking standards tied to single-family dwellings, and adjust size limits. He argued the bill would restore local discretion and prevent ADUs from becoming primarily rental units. Representative Reed pushed back, saying detached ADUs can help meet housing needs and provide opportunities for small landlords, while other members questioned how the bill would affect existing detached structures and breezeways. No votes were taken in the excerpt, and the chair also noted a recess and time limits for later testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• This substitute adds property subject to a development agreement under chapter 212.172 of the Local Government
• Only these developments under development agreements. Uh, there are a few witnesses here.
• Under this bill, local governments may reimburse developers of high-quality offsite built attainable
• However, local governments must be able to enforce zoning standards and development regulations that
• Um, we need to develop the space.

Transcript Highlights:

• These projects are developed at the local level there prioritized by our local communities and then we
• Hope Navigator is available at all. 21 local workforce development boards.
• It called for realigning and consolidating our local workforce development boards streamlining aligning
• We have new governance in place across consolidating local workforce development boards including the
• grades to each local workforce development board and called Careersource Florida to assign and make

Keywords: 999, senate, all