Transcript Highlights:

• website saying that they changed it. website saying that they changed it.
• Well, it was never needed to be changed. Well, it was never needed to be changed.
• spices or um another really safe change spices or um another really safe change is<00:52:18.079>
• Your science doesn't change when change.
• heavy logistical burden on menu changes. heavy logistical burden on menu changes.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , and these changes came from either statutory changes or board decisions.
• So do you see things changing dramatically?
• Well, that was the basis for our change, right?
• And when one changes, then PBF changes. Thank you, thank you. Further questions?
• And this requires a change in mindset.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to hear two presentations focused on the state university system: an update from the Board of Governors on performance-based funding and a state university efficiency study from Ben Watkins of the Division of Bond Finance. Chair Harrell emphasized accountability, maintaining Florida’s top-ranked higher education system, and getting the best return on state investment. A quorum was present, with several senators excused and one arriving later in the meeting. Sarah Donaghi outlined changes to the performance-based funding model. She said the current model will be used for 2026-27 funding, with only minor benchmark changes for metrics tied to programs of strategic emphasis, reflecting a statutory review that reduced the list of designated programs from about 800 to about 200. She also described a new “PBF 2.0” framework approved by the Board of Governors for implementation in 2027-28 funding, which will combine excellence and improvement measures, update benchmarks to the SUS 2030 strategic plan, reduce “layups” where many schools score perfect tens, expand the affordability metric to include students without loans, remove SUS transfer students from certain graduation metrics, and create a new transfer-student outcome metric. The board will run the new model alongside the current one before using it for funding, and no funding changes will occur this year. Watkins presented findings from an eight-month efficiency study ordered by executive order. Using audited financial data, student outcome data, and personnel data, he concluded that Florida’s universities provide strong value because of low tuition, rising degree production, and improved job placement and earnings outcomes. He said tuition remains the lowest in the country and that state support has increased, while per-student spending has also risen, driven largely by payroll costs. He argued that universities should operate more like business enterprises, with more granular budgeting, clearer financial reporting, and efficiency metrics such as operating expense per student and cost per degree, and he recommended that such measures be incorporated into performance funding and board oversight. Committee members asked about national comparisons, data transparency, payroll growth, admissions selectivity, and whether legislation should require more detailed institutional reporting. The meeting ended with no public comment and adjournment after Senator Bracey Davis moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:26:37.160> So, 24-hour price change timeline. So, 24-hour price change timeline.
• changing labels per day? changing labels per day?
• There are daily changes, there are weekly changes, right?
• changing prices and if we're changing changing prices and if we're changing individually individually
• changed their prices later in the day. changed their prices later in the day.

Bills: HF3794, HF3408

Keywords: surveillance, price discrimination, wage discrimination, automated decision systems, consumer protections, data privacy, biometrics, consumer protection, price setting, biometric data, retail, privacy, 1183, house

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from March 3, 2026, and then received a presentation from the Minnesota Office of the Attorney General on the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act. Assistant Attorney General Caitlin Miko and Deputy Attorney General Jessica Whitney reviewed the law’s scope, consumer rights, business obligations, and enforcement history. They said the law took effect July 31, 2025, gives Minnesotans rights to access, delete, and opt out of sale, profiling, and targeted advertising, and is enforced by the Attorney General with penalties up to $7,500 per violation. They reported more than 200 complaints in the first six months, many warning letters, and a shift from education to active enforcement now that the initial warning-letter period has expired. Committee members asked about how the universal opt-out works, what happens when companies deny deletion or editing requests, how the office determines willful noncompliance, and whether the law could burden small businesses. The AG’s office said the opt-out can be set through privacy-protective browsers or extensions, companies must respond to consumer requests within 45 days, small businesses are exempt as defined by the SBA, and investigations look for patterns and evidence of willful conduct rather than minor technical violations. The office also said it needs additional funding to fully staff enforcement efforts and noted that it has already issued subpoenas and civil investigative demands. The committee then took up House File 3408, the Stop Grocery Surveillance Price Gouging Act. The author explained that the bill would prohibit retail grocers, physical and online, from setting individualized prices based on consumer information, would limit certain uses of facial recognition and electronic shelf labels, and would preserve narrow exceptions for discounts and loyalty programs. Public testimony followed from the Minnesota Farmers Union in support, arguing that grocery consolidation and surveillance pricing could worsen already high food costs and harm fair competition. The Minnesota Grocers Association opposed the premise that grocery stores use surveillance pricing, said shelf prices are generally uniform and set from a single storewide database, and argued electronic shelf labels are efficient and not nefarious. A technology company representative similarly said ESLs do not use personal data or facial recognition, prices are uniform, and a 2025 study found no meaningful price increases after ESL adoption. The bill was laid over for possible further discussion after the testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• But assumption changes do impact the timing.
• And what does that mean for a change in prices?
• the index, both the changes in prices and also the weights.
• The weights or the price changes are different.
• How does it change over time around here?

Summary: The Pension Funding Council met on October 8 with introductions from council members and staff, then received a detailed presentation from the Office of the State Actuary on long-term economic assumptions and the state pension systems’ financial condition. OSA reported that the combined pension systems are currently 100% funded on a smoothed basis, with open plans above 95% funded, and that legacy Plan 1 systems remain on a path toward full funding under current policy. The actuaries recommended updating assumptions to 3% inflation, 3.5% general salary growth, and a 7.25% investment return, while keeping Plan 1 membership growth at 1%. They also explained asset smoothing, the role of recent strong investment returns, and the expected budget impacts of the recommended changes. Representatives from the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council and the State Investment Board offered supporting perspectives, generally describing the assumptions as reasonable and consistent with their own outlooks. The council also heard an overview of the Long-Term Services and Supports Trust Program (WACares) from DSHS and OSA. Program staff described the program’s social insurance structure, premium collection, benefit eligibility, and upcoming implementation milestones. OSA reported that the program’s first actuarial valuation showed a positive actuarial balance under the base scenario and recommended no change to the current 0.58% premium rate during the program’s early learning phase, noting that future changes would depend on experience and the program’s risk-management framework. OSA also said the recommendation would remain the same regardless of the outcome of the pending ballot measure affecting investment options. During public comment, a representative of the Washington State School Retirees Association urged continued work on Plan 1 funding and related legislation, while the Association of Washington Cities cautioned against increasing pension assumptions in a way that could raise future employer costs and reduce flexibility for current local government services. In action, the council adopted a motion to maintain the current long-term economic assumptions by a 4-2 vote, adopted the recommendation to keep the WACares premium rate at 0.58% by a 6-0 vote, and then elected Katie Chapman as council chair by unanimous vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:56.320> or Does any member wish to change or Does any member wish to change or explain
• <00:12:26.320> or Does any member wish to change or Does any member wish to change or explain
• <00:18:15.600> or Does any member wish to change or Does any member wish to change or explain
• <00:21:31.360> or Does any member wish to change or Does any member wish to change or explain
• So minor technical changes.

Keywords: Convene 00:00:00 Senate Message 00:04:13 Report of Committees 00:06:00 Orders of the Day 00:06:39 HB 4 00:07:32 HB 7 00:10:19 Enrollment 00:12:49 HB 10 00:13:30 HB 58 00:14:31 HB 78 00:18:39 HB 96 00:21:59 Enrollment 00:25:31 HB 134 00:26:01 HB 139 00:28:20 HB 185 00:35:36 HB 213 00:38:16 HB 220 00:40:32 HB 253 00:41:45 HB 265 00:44:55 HB 280 00:47:10 HB 290 00:49:13 Enrollment 00:51:49 HB 355 00:52:25 HB 398 00:54:42 HB 622 00:57:07 HB 424 00:58:24 HB 456 01:01:43 HB 459 01:02:51 HB 470 01:04:54 HB 555 01:10:20 HB 562 01:12:35 HB 576 01:16:37 HB 648 01:18:59 SB 68 01:21:53 SB 226 01:27:40 SB 90 01:30:36 SB 137 01:34:08 SB 136 01:37:08 SB 198 01:41:55 Recess 01:46:14 Reconvene 02:47:31 Orders of the Day 02:48:28 HB 10 02:48:53 HB 67 02:50:01 HB 257 02:51:05 Senate Message 05:52:18 Enrollment 02:53:15 SB 183 02:57:00 SJR 23 03:00:24 SB 251 03:06:24 Announcement 03:24:34 Enrollment 03:25:28 Recess 03:26:50 Reconvene 07:04:07 Enrollment 07:04:12 Senate Message 07:06:54 Appointment of Conference Committees 07:09:38 Orders of the Day 07:10:03 SB 100 07:11:06 Appointment of Conference Committee 07:12:18 HB 778 07:12:37 HB 6 07:15:14 HB 142 07:18:48 HB 144 07:21:27 HB 236 07:24:13 HB 305 07:26:45 HB 651 07:29:16 HB 521 07:31:44 HB 692 07:36:04 HB 491 07:38:33 HB 689 07:40:50 HB 767 07:43:24 HB 627 07:46:33 HB 869 07:49:00 HB 566 07:50:21 Motions, Petitions, and Communications 07:54:31 Introductions 08:07:19 ConC & Rules Report 08:12:28 Floor Amendments 08:13:10 Adjournment 08:16:56, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Why was that change made originally?
• Members voter change their vote.
• Million and some change.
• Change gears a little bit.
• Change votes spreading close.

Bills: HB4420, HB3974, HB3016, HB3062, HB3021, HB3145, HB4128, HB3131, HB3015, HB3472, HB3453, HB1638, HB4126, HB2696, HB2710, HB3552, HB3031, HB3544, HB3521, HB4490, HB4488, HB1746, HJR1069, HB4428, HB4429, HB1170, HB3538, HB4124, HB3904, HB4106, HB2999, HB3982, HJR1077, HB3464, HB2588, HB3462, HB4440, HB3674, HB3345, HJR1067, HB4326, HB4331, HB4337, HB4338, HB4359, HB4392, HB3557, HJR1076, HB4003, HB3495, HB3497, HB3501, HB3505, HB3749, HB3011, HB4336, HB4346, HJR1087, HB3240, HB3647, HB3796, HB3969, HB3972, HB3983, HB3984, HB3989, HB3383, HB3130, HB4358, HB3327, HJR1055, HB3386, HJR1089, HB3087, HB2970, HB3314, HB4129, HB4199

Keywords: reading, intervention, literacy, education, third grade retention, teacher training, funding, Strong Readers Act, tort claims, inmate housing, government immunity, public trust, private prison, emergency legislation, vision screening, binocular vision, kindergarten, elementary education, health, firearm rights

Transcript Highlights:

• The first is Division of Children and Family Services with Evident Change.
• I've got a question on the Evident Change contract. Yes, sir, thank you.
• I've got a question on the Evident Change contract for DCFS.
• If there’s anybody from Evident Change.” “It’s all good.
• So, Evident Change is a nonprofit.

Summary: The committee reviewed three DHS out-of-state service contracts: a $690,000-plus sole-source contract for DCFS with Evident Change for maintenance and operation of the Child Welfare Structured Decision-Making practice hub; a $1.2 million sole-source contract for County Operations with Sifter Solutions to support a SNAP waiver compliance solution; and a $156,000 contract for Developmental Disabilities with Samaritan Integrative Services for psychiatric services at the Southeast Arkansas Human Development Center. The chair and staff explained the contracts and noted that the Evident Change and Sifter contracts were sole-source due to the proprietary nature of the systems or services involved. Most of the discussion focused on the Evident Change contract. Members questioned DCFS about long-term dependence on the vendor, the lack of a competitive bid, the absence of a clear off-ramp, and whether the state was paying more overall as the work was split into multiple contracts. DCFS said the contract before the committee was only for maintenance and operations of a web-based platform used daily for safety assessments and case planning, while a separate Evident Change contract covers case reviews, CQI work, and data management. The vendor said it was continuing to reduce its role and had begun off-ramp discussions, but members remained concerned that the state was too reliant on the vendor. Staff said the contract had to be approved by May 31 or the system could be turned off. The committee also discussed the Sifter Solutions contract, which supports Arkansas’s SNAP waiver pilot by providing a dynamic list of excluded products and a consumer app that scans barcodes and provides nutrition information. DHS said the waiver is intended to improve the nutritional value of SNAP benefits, that the contract is funded with remaining federal SNAP Nutrition Education dollars that would otherwise be returned, and that the University of Pennsylvania will conduct the evaluation at no cost. Members asked about the benefit to Arkansas, whether the app would include nutrition and budgeting information, and whether the state would own the application or need future renewals. DHS said the two-year term was intentionally aligned with the waiver period and that future procurement options could change. After discussion, the committee noted the items as reviewed and adjourned without objections or votes recorded in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• On page two, first change reduces funding for salary and benefit increases.
• You can see that change is made on the online one of page... ...to $2,000, so you can see that change
• But I think all the changes we made, you were aware of.
• I think we want to at least change whether it's $10 million or $7.5 million, or change it so we could
• Chairman, I could change that motion to $7,500,000.

Bills: SB2012

Keywords: transportation, funding, infrastructure, grants, municipal, 908, all

Summary: The Government Operations Division met to continue work on budget and bill amendments. The committee first took up the Attorney General’s budget and reviewed a detailed amendment package that adjusted FTE levels, salary equity funding, funding sources, and several one-time appropriations. Changes included removing some House-added items, adding contingent funding tied to other bills, restoring certain funding sources, increasing the electronic smoking device manufacturer fee, and adding a provision on 24/7 sobriety program fees. Senator Dwyer then offered a further amendment to make the electronic smoking device fee a $2,000 application fee with a $500 annual renewal fee, which passed. The committee then voted 4-1 to adopt the budget as amended and give it a do pass recommendation as amended. The committee next considered House Bill 1143, relating to Great Plains Food Bank funding. After testimony from Amy Cleary on behalf of Great Plains Food Bank, members discussed the organization’s statewide role and the project’s financing, including a planned $30 million facility and existing fundraising. Senator Burkhard moved to restore the appropriation from $5 million to $10 million, and the motion passed 4-1. The committee then voted 4-1 to give the bill a do pass recommendation as amended, with Senator Burkhard designated as carrier. Finally, the committee discussed House Bill 1524, which would fund regional planning councils and authorize 16 FTEs. Members expressed sympathy for the councils’ work but concerns about approving new state-funded positions. No action was taken, and the chair asked to hold the bill over for further review. The committee then recessed, noting remaining budget work and upcoming hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I was appreciative that that got changed from 8 to 10.
• But let's talk about some of the proposals to change it.
• I think these are needed changes.
• I think these are needed changes.
• We hear a lot about changes and not doing too many changes, but also oftentimes in the same sort of presentation

Summary: The committee heard a series of presentations on comprehensive plan updates, permitting reform, special purpose district coordination, and subdivision reform. Pierce County and the City of Redmond described their recent comprehensive plan updates, emphasizing housing production, transit-oriented development, middle housing, preservation of affordable housing, and the need for technical assistance and clearer state guidance. Both jurisdictions said the planning process took years and was complicated by overlapping state requirements, changing legislative mandates, and multiple review authorities. Redmond in particular said mid-course legislative changes forced supplemental environmental review and added significant cost and delay, and both local governments asked for more stability, clearer statutes, and better-aligned timelines. Presenters from the architecture, building official, and development sectors focused on permitting delays and proposed ways to speed housing delivery. Dave Boucher of AIA Washington argued for a provisional construction permit process for projects stamped by licensed professionals, along with mandatory deadlines and fewer stalled review cycles. Tim Woodard of WABO described existing tools such as pre-application meetings and phased approvals, noting they can improve certainty but also require staff time and careful coordination. Representatives from Master Builders and D.R. Horton said permit and subdivision delays add substantial cost to housing, citing studies showing months of delay and tens of thousands of dollars added per home, and urged administrative approvals, concurrent review, self-certification, and limits on repeated review cycles. The committee also reviewed a Commerce-led task force report on integrating special purpose districts into Growth Management Act planning. The task force recommended early invitation and notice to water, sewer, school, port, and other service providers during countywide planning policy and comprehensive plan updates, better coordination on grants and capital projects, updated water system coordination plans, and improved school siting and funding alignment in fast-growing areas. Speakers stressed that the recommendations were intended to be light-touch and focused on better communication rather than major statutory overhaul, while also noting that rural and slow-growing areas should not be burdened with the same requirements as rapidly growing jurisdictions. On subdivision reform, FutureWise and the City of Spokane discussed making more subdivision decisions administrative, preserving vesting, clarifying exemptions, and reducing unnecessary notice and appeal steps. Spokane described local reforms such as smaller minimum lot sizes, unit lot subdivisions, and reduced-process “minor engineering review” for simple plats, while raising concerns about new notice requirements and appeals to city councils for technical plat decisions. Across the hearing, members repeatedly returned to the theme that local governments, builders, and state agencies need clearer, more coordinated rules to reduce delay and uncertainty while still protecting safety and planning goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• . changes. changes.
• We just We just had change happens.
• ought to change it. ought to change it.
• If they want to change.
• And I think we for this change?"

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Rules and Administration Committee met on March 19, 2026, to consider the referral path for Senate File 4139, the sports betting bill, rather than the substance of the proposal. Senator Franzen, the bill’s chief author, asked that the bill be referred first to the Commerce Committee, saying he had discussed the matter with the relevant committee chairs and that Commerce was the best place to address the bill’s consumer protection provisions. He emphasized that any final path to passage would still require the bill to go through State and Local Government as well. Senator Rasmusson objected and argued the bill should go first to State and Local Government, citing Senate jurisdiction rules, which he said assign gambling bills to that committee. He noted that prior sports betting bills had been referred there first and said a predictable referral process is important. Senator Maye Quade, Senator Dibble, Senator Bar, and Senator Jasinski also supported sending the bill to State and Local Government first, arguing that the committee has primary jurisdiction over gambling and that the bill’s consumer protection language does not change that basic referral. Senator Champion and Senator Miller supported the Commerce referral, saying authors may request an initial committee and that the bill’s consumer protection sections fit Commerce jurisdiction. Senator Marty moved to re-refer Senate File 4139 to the Committee on State and Local Government. Before the vote, members continued debating whether the bill’s structure and prior referral history justified Commerce or whether committee jurisdiction rules required State and Local Government first. The transcript ends with the motion pending and no final vote or disposition shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• just just a change in statute and rule. just just a change in statute and rule.
• Quite frankly, it doesn't change what they do. It changes what they're called.
• changes you're making in section one. changes you're making in section one.
• any<01:10:21.920> PA the name change does not change any PA the name change does not change
• change what PAs can or cannot do. change what PAs can or cannot do.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a hearing on Senate Bill 185, which would add timelines to Office of Professional Licensure and Certification (OPLC) investigations. Senator Howard Pearl said the bill was prompted by concerns from the New Hampshire Association of Realtors about delays at the Real Estate Commission, and he explained that the proposal would require OPLC staff to make an initial determination within 30 days and, if misconduct is found, complete an investigation within 60 days. He said the goal is to improve transparency and give consumers and licensees more timely information, while preserving the board’s adjudicatory role. He also noted that the bill had been amended to delay implementation to give OPLC time to work through its backlog. Committee members questioned how the bill would work when an investigation is incomplete and whether the board could send a case back to OPLC without a firm deadline. Pearl said the board would have discretion to continue the investigation or make a final determination, and that the bill was intended to streamline OPLC’s process rather than impose a hard cap on complex cases. OPLC Executive Director Deanna Durus and General Counsel Nicholas Fry then testified that the agency has already changed its procedures under prior legislation, including a facial review of complaints and monthly board review of dismissal memos. They said the bill would substantially alter the current structure, could conflict with existing limitation periods and board duties, and would be difficult to implement without additional staff and funding. Durus said the agency’s backlog is large, that new complaints are being triaged and prioritized, and that some urgent matters are moved ahead based on risk and statutory deadlines. She said OPLC had completed a review of about 500 backlog cases that would now be dismissed under current screening standards, and that those cases are being turned into memos for board review. Board of Medicine public member Nina Gardner testified in favor of the bill but said the backlog is significant and that the agency needs more resources to make the process work effectively. She said the board is seeing progress, but not fast enough, and suggested the bill may not go far enough without additional staffing and funding. No vote was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes. If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes.
• If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes. If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes.
• If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes. If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes.
• If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes. If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes.
• If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes. If not, Senator Chang, I vote yes.

Bills: HCR43, HCR154, HCR165, HCR186, HCR200, HCR202, HCR206

Keywords: pedestrian safety, raised crosswalks, Honolulu, traffic infrastructure, school zone, HCR154, Hele-On, Hele-On Shared Ride Program, County of Hawaii, Hawaii County, Mass Transit Agency, shared ride, paratransit, accessible transportation, ADA, mobility devices, wheelchair accessible, kupuna, seniors, elderly

Summary: The Committee on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs reconvened on April 21 and took up a series of House Concurrent Resolutions, with no public testimony. Members first approved HCR 43, urging raised crosswalks near Ala Wai Elementary at University Avenue, Malkiki Street, and Kamoku Street to improve student safety, and HCR 154, asking Hawaii County to expand the Heleon shared ride program islandwide, including rural and underserved areas. They also passed HCR 165, calling for permanent pickleball nets and court lighting at Kamilo Iki Community Park, and HCR 186, urging the U.S. Department of Defense and Defense Health Agency to extend health care authorization renewals for people affected by the Red Hill water contamination crisis. The committee then approved HCR 200, which urges the Department of Defense to reassess prior CERCLA-related closure decisions in light of evolving PFAS science. Members said the measure was intended to help keep PFAS out of the water system. HCR 202, establishing a legislative task force on Hawaii’s future energy pathways, was amended before passage to expand the task force’s scope to include separation of generation from transmission and distribution, add Senate leadership representation, and include representatives from the Agricultural Development Corporation and the Farm Bureau. Several members supported the amended version with reservations, expressing concern about possible cost impacts from separating generation and distribution. Finally, the committee passed HCR 206 HD1, which requests the Hawaii State Energy Office to convene a working group to study the impacts of large data centers on utilities, ratepayers, natural resources, and climate goals. All measures were adopted by the committee, with HCR 202 passing with amendments and the others passing unamended. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• still going to be continual changes, but it is on.
• But again, if you guys choose to make those changes, we could do that.
• This language today does, but with the changes, it would not.
• With that, there's gonna be some changes, correct?
• Title off, title on, title off basically saying, 'Hey, we're open to changes if you want to change it

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it won't change anything. I question. So it won't change anything.
• It won't change any information and all. It won't change any of<00:03:14.159> that.
• Let me change that motion to of me.
• those last changes. those last changes.
• bills of uh would I consider changing bills of uh would I consider changing one<00:10:09.920>

Bills: SB85, SB263, HB277, HB267, SB288, SB85, SB263, HB277, HB267, SB288

Keywords: vaccination exemption, religious exemption, medical exemption, vaccine mandate, testing requirement, public schools, K-12, students, parents, guardians, higher education, college enrollment, university attendance, public institutions of higher education, immunization, religious tenets, sincerely held belief, school health policy, Alabama, AHSAA physical form

Transcript Highlights:

• We changed it to rules on that page.
• Okay, well let's see if it changes, because I haven't seen the budget myself since it's been changed.
• Now it's climate change.
• And so this definition here of climate change, But while it does include major changes in temperature
• It's always kind of changing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Taken separately, these changes don't say much, but taken together, as I outlined, these changes are
• Neither can be changed with legislation.
• They did not have the liberty to make the changes that they had made.
• We certainly can find that's chump change in the Texas budget.
• The agency specifically made rule changes.

Bills: SB82, SB1807, SB2254, HB119, HB130, HB581, HJR98, SB1988, SB 18, SB 34

Keywords: business liability, concealed carry, handgun policy, premises liability, criminal acts, civil liability, business premises, concealed handgun, property liability, property rights, gun regulations, criminal liability, protective order, confidentiality, personal information, court records, victim protection, charitable raffle, nonprofit, wildlife conservation

Transcript Highlights:

• predict behaviors are and what they could change with plan design.
• So, as with anything, a law change can occur at any point to make that change.
• What this does is allows us to change the mechanics.
• We make this change. The plan continues. We actually expand the benefits.
• There are a lot of things that are changing in our health care system.

Bills: SB2160

Keywords: health insurance, public employees, uniform group insurance, retirement, state employees, 908, all

Summary: The committee resumed work on Senate Bill 2160, which would move the Public Employees Retirement System health plan from grandfathered to non-grandfathered status under the Affordable Care Act. PERS officials Rebecca Frickie and Derek Holbein explained that the bill would allow more flexibility in plan design, including higher deductibles, co-pays, and out-of-pocket maximums, while also adding enhanced preventive benefits. They clarified that ACA “essential health benefits” apply to individual and small-group markets, not to PERS as a large employer, and that the bill’s projected cost increases were based on actuarial estimates and prior bid scenarios from Sanford and Blue Cross Blue Shield. Members debated whether the bill would actually save money or simply shift costs to employees. Supporters argued that non-grandfathered status would create more levers to manage medical inflation and could produce net premium savings through plan redesign, citing prior bid comparisons showing potential reductions of 1% to 8% depending on the option. Opponents, including Representative Schauer and North Dakota United president Nick Archelette, questioned how the state would pay for the estimated $25 million to $30 million in added benefits and warned that employees could face higher out-of-pocket costs amid already strained household budgets. Frickie said the legislature would control funding decisions and that current law requiring the state to pay full family premiums could be changed only by statute. The committee also discussed reserve funding, with members noting that a $4.3 million reserve draw in the bill was intended to cover the final months of the biennium and could be modified. After testimony and discussion, Vice Chair Johnson moved a do-pass recommendation and referral to Appropriations. The motion passed 10-3-1, with Representatives Ostlie, Schatz, and Schauer voting no. Representative Gump agreed to carry the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• The changes do not start until page 10.
• My changes start on page 10.
• And then, I think my next change is on page 12.
• And then, I think my next change is on page 12. change is on page 12, which the original draft allowed
• But if it's not the desire of the division to make any of those changes or recommend any of the changes

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee reviewed four bill drafts for the Rural Health Transformation effort. The first required the presidential physical fitness test in PE classes; members asked about DPI and school support, then moved and approved the draft. The second required physicians to complete one hour of continuing education on nutrition and metabolic health each renewal cycle and included legislative intent encouraging other health boards to consider nutrition-related CE; it was approved after brief discussion. The third bill adopted the Physician Assistant Licensure Compact. Members discussed a separate issue involving occupational therapy compact background checks and whether that fix could be added now or would need to wait until later; the committee also discussed Board of Medicine input and the compact’s workforce benefits. The draft was moved forward to the full committee. The fourth bill expanded pharmacists’ prescriptive authority and therapeutic substitution. Legislative Council explained the draft, and Senator Roars proposed substantial amendments to narrow motion sickness, UTI, diabetes supply, and substitution provisions. Members debated whether to vote on amendments now or wait for the special session public hearing; concerns were raised about transparency, stakeholder input, and avoiding premature action. No amendment vote was taken, and the bill was left for later consideration. The committee then recessed until the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• It makes no changes to the financing.
• change anything about that. change anything about that.
• Anytime they change one of the assumptions, it changes the total outcome.
• Anytime they change one of the assumptions, it changes the total outcome.
• change uh the retirement assumption. change uh the retirement assumption.

Keywords: Finance - Room 216, 2 February, 2026; 3:00 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first heard a bill concerning tax increment financing (TIFs). The sponsor explained that the measure would not change the existing financing structure, but would add an optional arrangement cities could negotiate with developers: a revenue bond guaranteed by taxes generated from the development. The goal was to let developers guarantee the bond and access funds sooner on the front end of a project rather than waiting to see whether tax revenues meet projections. After no questions, the committee adopted a motion that the title was sufficient and reported the bill out do pass as a committee substitute. The next bill, Senate Bill 2873, came from the Department of Revenue and dealt with enforcement of the state’s vape registry law. The sponsor said the bill fills a gap left by prior legislation by creating a statutory forfeiture process for seized products valued at $20,000 or less, including notice, a right to contest, and rules for disposition of forfeited property. The committee then moved the bill title sufficient and do pass, and it was reported out. Senate Bill 2894 addressed local improvement projects funded in 2021 through 2024 that had not been executed or had unspent money remaining. The bill would require return of certain funds after a memorandum of understanding was not signed or after three years with unspent balances, require remittance of unspent interest, allow withholding of some city diversion or state aid road funds for noncompliance, and require periodic status reports to the Legislative Budget Office. The sponsor also offered an amendment giving entities 60 days from the bill’s effective date to request a one-time six-month extension; the amendment and the bill both received favorable votes and were reported out. Senate Bill 2910 would require employers in the PERS system to settle the books if a unit of government or other employer terminates participation. Senate Bill 2911 proposed a new return-to-work option for PERS retirees, shortening the separation period from 90 days to 30 days and allowing certain retirees to return to public employment at up to 80% of the stated salary, with employer-paid retirement contributions and possible health insurance support. The sponsor said the bill would exclude elected officials, K-12 superintendents, and IHL/community college administrators, and he discussed the bill’s expected effect on PERS funding with questions from members about actuarial impact and whether the proposal would affect existing retirement rules. Both bills were discussed but the transcript excerpt does not show final committee action on Senate Bill 2911.

Transcript Highlights:

• If not, what do we need to do to change it?
• And then we're changing the funding, if you choose to change the funding, at the very end.
• I want to make a note here: the measure has changed since 2001.
• Do you want to change the dates for some of the hearings?
• So if that's the case, then do we have to make that change?

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the prior minutes and then shifted to an update from Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith on early childhood education, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. They said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ABC as a large state program with about 23,800 funded slots and roughly $114 million in annual appropriations. Department officials said they are reviewing slot allocations because about 1,000 seats are funded but unfilled, while more than 2,000 families are on waiting lists, and they plan to reduce or reallocate slots from providers that have not filled them over several years. They also said they are examining whether income thresholds, curriculum expectations, daily rates, and summer programming should be updated, and members raised concerns about access, local control, transportation, and whether the program should better align with K-12 choice and school readiness goals. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical data and other information for future discussion. The committee then received a legal presentation from BLR attorney Taylor Lloyd on the constitutional and statutory framework for education adequacy in Arkansas. She reviewed the Dupree and Lake View cases, explaining that the state must maintain a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools, and that adequacy and equity are distinct but related concepts. She emphasized that the General Assembly is responsible for defining adequacy, studying whether the system meets that standard, and reacting to the evidence, while the courts ultimately decide constitutional compliance. Lloyd also explained the current adequacy definition, the role of the matrix as a funding tool rather than a spending mandate, and the distinction between unrestricted foundation funding and restricted categorical funding. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum followed with a historical overview of how Arkansas responded to the court cases and developed the current adequacy process. She traced major legislative actions from the 1980s through the Lake View litigation, including the creation of funding formulas, categorical aid, isolated funding, declining enrollment funding, and the 2003-2004 adequacy study that led to the Continuing Adequacy Evaluation Act and the matrix used to set foundation funding. She also described later changes to the adequacy statute, the financial reporting requirements for districts, and the ongoing use of surveys, stakeholder testimony, and consultant studies in the biennial adequacy process. Members asked questions about whether private or homeschool programs could use public funds for expenses like utilities, whether stakeholders should include those groups, the difference between average daily membership and attendance, and whether school board members are surveyed; staff said those issues would need further research or were outside the scope of the presenters’ role.