Transcript Highlights:

• . change. change.
• Because the answer does not change.
• Because the answer does not change.
• this, you said, "When we change this, you said, "When we change something<00:15:19.080> in
• We're not changing the meaning.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took Senate File 3210 off the table and then adopted an amendment from Representative Nadeau that added the word “reasonable” and a statutory reference clarifying who qualifies as a person with a disability. The bill, as amended, was then given third reading. The measure is described as relating to human rights and disability accommodations as protection from discrimination. Representative Hicks, the bill’s author, said the proposal is intended to send a clear message that discrimination against people with disabilities is unlawful and that entities must engage in a good-faith process to identify reasonable accommodations. Supporters, including Representatives Finke, Feist, and Luetkemeyer, argued the bill reinforces existing law, reflects the interactive process already used in practice, and helps protect access in employment, public accommodations, schools, and other settings. Hicks also responded to questions from Representative Joy by describing the process as a simple conversation to meet a person’s needs. Representative Niska opposed the bill, arguing that it is unclear whether it changes the meaning of other provisions in the Minnesota Human Rights Act beyond employment and that it could create ambiguity and more litigation for businesses, schools, and public entities. He said the legislature should be explicit if it intends to change those provisions and warned the bill could invite lawsuits rather than provide clarity. Representative Loegering-Nicolai responded that the bill would change the practice of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights and that referencing the interactive process in public policy would provide a lens for assessing whether accommodations were handled in good faith. No final vote on passage was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The committee substitute has three changes.
• Sorry, I didn't change my name.
• has emerged to justify these changes.
• And no recent changes. ...meaning they just issued their 2026 vaccine schedule with no recent changes
• It's just, I mean, we all know that we make laws, and if something changes, we can change them either

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the reason for the changes is that this is a big bill.
• Um, the reason for the changes is that this is a big bill.
• Um, the reason for the changes is that this is a big bill.
• Um, the reason for the changes is that this is a big bill.
• Um, the reason for the changes is that this is a big bill.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:36:56.920> are these two proposed rule changes are these two proposed rule changes are
• <00:37:04.200> be<00:37:04.359> entered<00:37:04.720> into changes change 27 and
• <00:38:09.480> number respect to proposed rule change number respect to proposed rule change
• <00:43:14.119> will through the session this change will through the session this change will
• <01:07:58.480> that no impactful substantive changes that no impactful substantive changes

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House convened, completed roll call with 48 members present and three excused, deferred reading of the journal, and received Senate communications noting adoption of House Concurrent Resolutions Nos. 1 and 2. The chamber also recognized several visiting groups and guests, including Congresswoman Jill Tuda, Chamber of Commerce Hawaii participants and students, Okinawan visitors, Farrington High School students, James Campbell High School students, and Waiau High School students, many of whom were introduced in connection with Chamber Week activities and educational presentations. The main business was unfinished business on House Resolutions 6 and 7, which adopted the House rules for the 33rd Legislature, including rules for the Committee on Standards of Conduct. Members generally supported the rules package as a transparency and modernization update, citing earlier public access to testimony, a public list of Speaker appointees, changes to conference committee eligibility, telework for staff, social media guidance, and a public list of bills introduced by request. Several members raised reservations or opposition, focusing on concerns about staff involvement in approving written remarks, budget information timing, the Vice Speaker’s role, social media/free speech issues, and whether some changes reduced public access or conflicted with constitutional open-meeting requirements. No vote on the rules package is recorded in the excerpt. The debate ended with multiple members yielding time and the discussion continuing on the merits of the proposed rule changes, especially the balance between transparency, internal House procedure, and public participation.

Transcript Highlights:

• If the numbers were changed by the appropriators, that $7,000 is what would change.
• Did we change two?
• So then it changes us too, right?
• Any changes? Any of Becky?
• make that change.

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review how North Dakota might identify and address low-producing academic programs and to discuss draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the NDUS explained that the State Board of Higher Education is already developing a system-wide policy, using models from other states such as Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Connecticut. She described how low-producing programs are typically flagged by multi-year enrollment or completion thresholds, then reviewed for workforce demand, mission fit, cost, accreditation, and regional need before any action is taken. Committee members asked about what counts as a program, how costs are analyzed, whether certificates are included, how exemptions work for mission-critical or high-demand fields, and whether the board or legislature should set the rules. Johnson said the board is the appropriate body to lead the process, but legislators could use funding leverage if they wanted to encourage action; the chair asked the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal uses fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder undergraduate rate of $7,000 per FTE and a graduate/professional rate of $10,500, plus incentives for completions in in-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council walked through the projected funding effects, noting that the model would increase funding for NDSU and reduce it for UND in the current biennium, with different results in the next biennium as enrollment changes are recognized. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the definition of in-demand programs, the treatment of research funding, and the exclusion of state-appropriated dollars from the external grants calculation. The chair emphasized that the numbers were illustrative and that appropriators would set the actual dollar amounts later. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. That model uses fall census FTE without a weighted economic factor, applies a higher undergraduate rate, and adds completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other completions. Members noted that the formula would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and discussed whether the nine institutions should be treated more uniformly or split into smaller groups because of their different missions and sizes. Committee members and staff repeatedly stressed that the formulas are still being refined and that some institutions would likely need hold-harmless adjustments or other transition measures. The meeting ended with the chair directing the committee to continue the discussion later and to expect further work on both the low-producing program policy and the funding formulas.

Transcript Highlights:

• make<00:54:30.960> similar changes that all make similar changes that all make similar
• combined<01:06:15.359> polling changes related to combined polling changes related to
• And this is a conforming change to some changes that were made in law over the last couple of years.
• ><01:22:00.239> changes<01:22:00.560> that conforming change to some changes that conforming
• change to some changes that were<01:22:00.960> made<01:22:01.120> in<01:22:01.360>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• this or you should change that.
• this or you should change that.
• this or you should change that.
• this or you should change that.
• this or you should change that.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 313 and, on motion by Representative Perez, voted to retain the bill because members felt it needed further work and was not ready for final action. The motion passed 18-0, and no further action was taken on the bill. House Bill 391, an anti-SLAPP measure, was then discussed; supporters said it addressed a real problem and should move forward, while opponents raised concerns that it was too broad, could affect criminal cases, and might create procedural complications. The committee voted 18-0 to retain HB 391 as well, and it was placed on consent. The committee next considered House Bill 462, establishing a cause of action for unwarranted video imaging of residential properties. Representative McFarland moved OTP, saying the bill raised First Amendment and property-rights concerns. The motion passed 18-0, and the bill was also placed on consent. The committee then turned to House Bill 509, which would require reporting on forfeitures. Supporters argued the information was useful for future legislation, while opponents said the reporting would be costly, duplicative, and potentially split data across fiscal years. The committee voted 11-7 to recommend OTP, with a minority of members opposed. House Bill 520, authorizing Department of Education hearing officers to issue subpoenas, drew the most extended debate. Supporters argued DOE needed the same tools other agencies have, while opponents said DOE already had access to needed information, the Attorney General could handle subpoenas, and the bill would create an unbalanced process and raise due process and student-record concerns. Representative Tur offered Amendment 0842H to shift subpoena power from DOE hearing officers to the Attorney General; after debate, the amendment failed 10-8. The transcript cuts off as the committee begins the roll call on the underlying bill after rejecting the amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:57.400> that established here we must change that established here we must change that
• —to make changes to these plans.
• <00:26:32.240> to to be more cautious with changes to to be more cautious with changes to
• this may require employers to change this may require employers to change other<00:47:59.839>
• we won't be able to touch them change we won't be able to touch them change them<01:20:24.080>

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee’s first official meeting was framed as an informational session, with the chair saying no legislation would be acted on and that testimony would focus on what is working and not working for businesses and workers in Minnesota. The stated topics included earned sick and safe time, paid family and medical leave, labor shortages, and broader business climate concerns. The chair also noted the absence of DFL members and invited questions to be held until the end so testifiers could present fully. Lauren Shodor of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce argued that Minnesota’s business climate has worsened because of high taxes, rising costs, regulation, and new workplace mandates. She cited chamber survey and research findings saying more businesses are considering leaving the state, that Minnesota companies are investing more in other states than vice versa, and that the state lags national growth rates. She said employers are especially concerned about earned sick and safe time and the upcoming paid family and medical leave program, which the chamber believes add compliance burdens and costs, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses. Matt Hilgart of the Association of Minnesota Counties said the new leave laws affect county budgets and operations because labor is the main county cost and services are often state-mandated. He said the programs were imposed outside the collective bargaining process and can duplicate existing county benefits, increase costs, and create staffing and service challenges. He asked for changes including clearer premium-sharing language, exclusion of elected officials and short-term election workers from paid leave requirements, better exemption and private-plan rules, coordination requirements for intermittent leave, and more clarity for essential employees during weather emergencies. Owen Worth of the League of Minnesota Cities said cities are facing similar implementation problems, with overlapping leave policies and concerns about stacking state and federal leave rules, and he indicated the league would support changes to reduce administrative and budget pressures on cities.

Transcript Highlights:

• The North Dakota program has changed, has evolved over time.
• So the draft language does not change the deadline.
• but I didn't go over those changes.
• The vesting for public safety plan members would also change.
• And, of course, no retroactive change for the vesting.

Summary: The Employee Benefits Committee met to approve prior minutes, hear presentations on state employee health insurance, compensation, leave, and related policy issues, and then recess for lunch. PERS reviewed the history and structure of the state health plan, noting the long-standing state-paid family coverage, cost-control measures, wellness incentives, the current grandfathered PPO and high-deductible options, and the effects of recent benefit mandates such as insulin caps, prosthetic coverage, medication management, prescription copay changes, and ambulance balance-billing limits. Committee members questioned the fiscal impact of adding benefits and the possible cost of moving to a non-grandfathered plan, while PERS and HRMS emphasized that health insurance remains the top-ranked employee benefit and that any major plan changes should be considered carefully. HRMS also presented compensation comparisons showing state pay generally below private-market benchmarks, discussed targeted market equity adjustments, identified ongoing recruitment and retention concerns in fields like nursing, IT, engineering, and attorneys, and reviewed leave policies, tuition reimbursement, and family leave comparisons with neighboring states. Job Service provided labor market data showing low unemployment, high labor force participation, and wage growth that still trails some neighboring markets, and OMB explained that prevailing wage requirements apply to federally funded projects under Davis-Bacon, not to ordinary state contracts. After lunch, the committee took up the required process for health insurance mandate bills and adopted an amendment to Joint Rule 211. The amendment clarified that the deadline for submitting mandate measures is intended to allow time for all required reports, including both the cost-benefit analysis and any Employee Benefits Committee actuarial report, while leaving the existing deadline unchanged. The amendment was adopted on a roll call vote, with several members voting yes and a few no votes recorded. The committee then moved into its jurisdiction review of bill drafts, beginning with a bill that would automatically renew pre-tax dental and vision elections; members debated whether it had any actuarial or administrative impact on PERS or the state, and the chair explained that the committee’s role was only to decide whether further analysis was needed before later testimony and recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are not changing the germaneness precedent.
• You know, we're making it very difficult to make any changes.
• So, statute in statute, though, it can be changed at a whim.
• a beat on this and then instead of pushing this forward to the people to make a change to change something
• , it's going to be very difficult for the people to change.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• changes, the change of eliminating the increase in the deduction for state and local taxation.
• just change to whatever the federal change was.
• just change to whatever the federal change was.
• not just the department changing a form.
• And so the impacts of changing, the changes that are incorporated here will actually cause extra work

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The joint House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees met to hear identical conformity bills, HB 2153 and SB 1106, which would align Arizona tax law with the federal Internal Revenue Code as of Jan. 1, 2026, including some retroactive provisions for tax year 2025. Staff explained that the bills would exclude three federal provisions: the higher federal SALT deduction, the new senior deduction as written in H.R. 1, and the deduction for interest on new car loans. They would instead include a $6,000 retirement-income deduction for taxpayers age 60 and older, a $6,000 Roth IRA contribution deduction, a higher dependent tax credit, and a deduction for child and dependent care expenses above the federal credit. JLBC estimated the package would reduce general fund income tax revenue by about $441.3 million in FY 2026. Members also discussed that the Department of Revenue’s forms had been issued assuming full conformity, and staff and supporters argued the bills were needed quickly to avoid confusion and amended returns during filing season. Committee members and sponsors largely framed the bills as tax relief and a way to provide certainty for taxpayers and preparers. Supporters said the package would help families, seniors, and workers, and noted that the Arizona version was negotiated to keep the overall tax relief roughly comparable to full conformity while shifting benefits away from the SALT deduction and toward child credits, retirement income, and child care. The sponsors also criticized the governor’s executive action and urged prompt passage so taxpayers would know how to file. Opponents argued the bills would reduce state revenue, worsen the budget outlook, and disproportionately benefit higher-income taxpayers and corporations. Several witnesses and members also raised concerns about the child care deduction, the retirement-income deduction, and the business expensing provisions, while supporters responded that the bill was designed to help working families and encourage saving and investment. Public testimony was mixed. The Arizona Society of Certified Public Accountants and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club supported the bills, emphasizing early conformity, filing certainty, and reduced confusion for taxpayers and software providers. Opponents included Save Our Schools Arizona, the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, Opportunity Arizona, and several individuals, who argued the package would deepen budget problems and favor the wealthy. One witness objected to a federal school-choice-related provision she said was being tied to the bill, though committee members said the measure before them was a tax conformity bill and not a school finance bill. The hearing included extended debate over the fiscal impact, the governor’s prior requests for some of the same tax changes, and whether taxpayers would need to file amended returns if the legislature later changed course. The transcript ends during testimony from NFIB, with no final committee vote or action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• What is at risk if nothing changes?
• And so we really like to not make those changes.
• change, but a change in the terms, which would be related to spec.
• If we didn't make a change.
• Engines, as Chief Shulam mentioned, engine changes, mission changes.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on the rising cost and long delivery times for fire apparatus and related equipment, with opening remarks stressing that aging fleets, supply chain problems, and delayed replacements are affecting emergency readiness across California. Cal OES and Cal Fire described statewide procurement challenges, including higher prices, multi-year delivery timelines, two-year encumbrance limits, and the strain on mutual aid when engines remain in service beyond their intended replacement cycles. Cal Fire said it operates 537 engines, with 300 meeting replacement criteria and 243 at least 16 years old, and explained the difference between mandatory contracts and one-time acquisitions. The Department of General Services said vendors have cited labor costs, chassis pricing, and the need for longer production timelines, while also noting that statewide contracts can include nominal price increases but not open-ended price hikes. Local fire chiefs from Santa Barbara County, Los Angeles County, Napa, and Fullerton testified that apparatus prices have risen sharply while delivery times have stretched from under a year to three to five years or more. They described specific examples of engines and ladder trucks costing far more than prior purchases and arriving years later, forcing departments to keep older reserve apparatus in service, spend more on maintenance, and defer other budget priorities. Several witnesses said industry consolidation has reduced competition and contributed to delays and price increases, with Los Angeles County and Fullerton noting they have pursued antitrust complaints and litigation against major manufacturers. Napa also described proprietary parts and software limiting in-house repairs, and Santa Barbara County said a vendor’s unfulfilled delivery promise caused the department to lose its place in line. Members asked about possible solutions, including whether the state should consider manufacturing apparatus itself, whether procurement rules or prototype requirements could be streamlined, whether DGS staffing or contract processes could be accelerated, and whether more stable long-term purchasing commitments would help manufacturers plan production. Witnesses said safety-driven specification changes are necessary but can add time, and that the main bottlenecks are industry capacity, consolidation, and vendor performance. The vice chair raised concerns about how grant funding windows and local matching requirements are affected by multi-year delays, especially for small and rural departments that rely on grants and on used apparatus passed down from larger agencies. No votes were taken; the hearing concluded with committee members indicating interest in possible legislative, regulatory, and antitrust follow-up.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, we would accept your change to paragraph three, and that particular change in paragraph four.
• ,<01:06:56.000> but number of teachers hasn't changed, but number of teachers hasn't changed
• administration and how's that changing administration and how's that changing over<01:08:45.640>
• It's it's a change I'm okay with it.
• there would be three changes. there would be three changes.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The conference committee first discussed HB 1099, which creates a committee to study private business providing special education services and local school district reimbursement. Members explained that the issue is broader than special education alone, involving residential placements, foster care, court-ordered placements, and questions about which entity pays for education and care costs when students are placed in residential facilities. The House proposed an amendment to expand the study to include students placed in residential facilities by school districts as well as those placed through episodes of treatment or court order, and members agreed the existing commission would not resolve the issue before its July 1, 2026 expiration. Representative Coker raised concern about the phrase “but not limited to,” but members said the broader language was needed to capture placements beyond the existing statutory categories. The committee then agreed to accede to the Senate version of HB 1099 with a committee amendment, and the House voted unanimously to adopt amendment 2026-1845H. The bill was placed on the consent calendar, and the meeting adjourned. The transcript also includes a separate conference committee discussion on HB 1807, concerning mandatory reporting to voters. The main dispute was how to present administrator compensation: the House favored total administrative cost, while the Senate initially preferred average administrator salary. Members debated whether voters would be better informed by totals or averages, and whether the bill should define “administrator” more clearly by reference to DOE rules. The committee reached a tentative compromise to add both an average administrator salary graph and a total administrator cost graph, define administrators by reference to ED 501.02(B), scale the graph more precisely, and list the top 10 highest-paid administrators plus any employee earning over $100,000. Both chambers then gave unanimous support to the revised approach, with the understanding that the draft would be finalized and signed later.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's also several terminology changes within the rule, as well as changing all of the titles of positions
• There's also several terminology changes within the rule, as well as changing all of the titles of positions
• So, I mean, but what does that change? What are we trying to accomplish with that change?
• know, so I'm going to ask, we make some changes like under K, I think it's on the— ...make some changes
• So instead of having to bring back an entire policy change, this allows us to change our procedure and

Summary: The Joint Committee on Aging, Children and Youth approved the February 11 minutes and then reviewed a DCFS policy manual update from Director Tiffany Wright. Wright said the changes move internal procedures out of administrative rule into DCFS’s internal procedure manual under an executive order, while also updating terminology, conforming to enacted laws, revising foster family continuing education hours, and removing obsolete requirements. Members asked whether the changes would alter practice; Wright said they were mainly terminology and process-location changes, intended to make the department more efficient and flexible. The committee then accepted the rule review without objection. Wright next presented DCFS quarterly performance data for the third quarter of FY 2026. She reported 8,610 hotline reports accepted, 6,919 assigned to DCFS, 22% of investigations found true, neglect as the most common substantiated allegation, and continued staffing shortages in some counties affecting timeliness. She also reported 3,420 foster care cases, 1,788 in-home cases involving 4,568 children, 72% monthly home-visit compliance, 36% permanency within 12 months, 4.5% re-entry into foster care, and 156 children available for adoption. Members asked about neglect trends, sexual abuse/exploitation data, behavior-related removals, staffing recruitment and retention, training improvements, and whether ACE-style testing should be considered for children; Wright said DCFS is expanding recruitment, retention, and training efforts and was open to further discussion on education-related assessments. The committee also received DCFS’s biannual overturned investigations report, covering July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, which tracks hotline calls, accepted reports, true findings, appeals, and overturned findings by county. A member asked for comparison to the prior year’s report. Major Jeff Drew then presented the Crimes Against Children Division annual report, saying the hotline received 67,987 calls in 2025, 37,986 were accepted for investigation, and CACD handled 6,539 cases with a 28% substantiation rate. Members asked about hotline operator training, qualifications, salary, and whether Arkansas compares with other states; Drew said operators receive a four-week training that includes law, policy, scenarios, recorded calls, live-call monitoring, and evidence-chain/decision-making instruction. Finally, Elizabeth Pooley of the Children’s Advocacy Centers of Arkansas reported that the statewide network of 29 CACs and 64 multidisciplinary teams served 13,568 children and families in 2025, up about 3,000 from the prior year, and hosted 259 trainings for professionals. She said funding comes from a mix of state, federal, and community sources, with state funding set at roughly $70,000 to $75,000 per center and not based on caseload. Members asked about funding stability and standards of care; Pooley said CACs follow national standards and Arkansas is developing state best practices. The meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first is Division of Children and Family Services with Evident Change.
• The first is Division of Children and Family Services with Evident Change.
• I've got a question on the Evident Change contract for DCFS.
• Heather Maitner from Evident Change, a program director, introduced herself.
• One, this is all associated with the SNAP changes, the waiver.

Summary: The committee reviewed three DHS 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 Assessment tools; a $1.2 million contract with Sifter Solutions for a SNAP waiver compliance solution and related app; and a $156,000 contract with Samaritan Integrative Services for psychiatric services at the Southeast Arkansas Human Development Center. Staff said the Evident Change contract was needed to keep daily safety risk assessments, case planning, and reunification tools functioning, and that the vendor’s proprietary system made it sole source. Members questioned DHS about reliance on the vendor, the lack of an off-ramp, whether the state was paying more or less annually, and why the contracts were not aligned on the same cycle. DHS and the vendor said the new Evident Change contract was limited to maintenance and operations, that no additional services or employees were being added, and that the broader CQI/review contract would come up separately later. For the SNAP waiver contract, DHS explained that the waiver is intended to exclude certain unhealthy foods from SNAP purchases to improve nutritional value, and that Sifter Solutions would provide a dynamic list for retailers and an app for clients to check products by barcode. DHS said the contract is sole source because it is tied to the waiver implementation and because the vendor can provide the needed dynamic list and education features. Staff said the contract would be funded with remaining federal SNAP Nutrition Education dollars that would otherwise revert to the federal government, and that the University of Pennsylvania would conduct the evaluation at no cost. Members asked about the public benefit, future renewals, and whether the state would own the application; DHS said the two-year term was designed to match the waiver period and allow time to reassess future procurement options. Members also asked about the nutrition education component, and DHS said it is developing videos with a nutritionist on preparing budget-friendly healthy meals and plans to link them to the app and website. After discussion, no objections were raised, and the items were reported as reviewed. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• was versus another change.
• that baseline if no changes were made. that baseline if no changes were made.
• Well, prior to that change, it was $8,000, and they introduced that change gradually.
• change the >> We don't change We don't change the weeks.<01:18:06.000> Just<01:18:06.560
• change the weeks. change the weeks.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They had technical changes.
• He said Lakeville changed very few permits, Victoria changed valuations 100% of the time, and Shakopee
• He said Lakeville changed very few permits, Victoria changed valuations 100% of the time, and Shakopee
• He said Lakeville changed very few permits, Victoria changed valuations 100% of the time, and Shakopee
• Texas did change.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Labor Committee heard Senate File 560, a bill to require the Commissioner of Labor and Industry to establish a cost-per-square-foot valuation for residential building permits. Senator Dornink said the measure is intended to make permit fees more fair, reasonable, transparent, and predictable, and to reduce housing costs by limiting large differences in permit fees between municipalities. He said the bill would be sent to the Housing Committee without recommendation, and members discussed but did not act on a related amendment that would have shifted plan review and inspection fees to hourly and trip-based charges and made fee information publicly available. Testimony from Housing First Minnesota supported the bill’s goal, arguing that Minnesota’s housing shortage and high new-home prices make it important to reduce inefficiencies in the permitting system. The witness said permit valuations are often increased by cities, leading to higher costs for homebuyers, and cited examples of large fee differences between municipalities and claims of overcollection. He said some other states, including Texas and Wisconsin communities, use square-footage-based approaches. A League of Minnesota Cities representative opposed the amendment language and cautioned that trip charges and hourly billing would make fees less certain, could raise costs, and would be especially burdensome in Greater Minnesota; he said current valuation-based fees better reflect the actual cost and complexity of service and can be appealed if disputed. A representative of the Association of Minnesota Building Officials also raised concerns about the amendment, saying building departments provide consultations, inspections, plan review, and other services beyond a single trip, and that trip charges would not fit a responsive fee-for-service model. He said the current valuation system helps cover the full range of permitting work, though he acknowledged that a consistent square-foot valuation standard could improve transparency and reduce disputes over project value. Committee members asked about other states’ approaches and the scope of the bill, and the discussion emphasized that the proposal applies to one- and two-family dwellings.

Transcript Highlights:

• was main changes that they made here was that<00:22:40.960> they<00:22:41.440> changed
• What is changing here? Because that's already allowed. So is it like a technical change or what?
• anyone wish to change their vote? anyone wish to change their vote?
• wish to change their vote, explain their wish to change their vote, explain their vote?
• wish to change their vote? wish to change their vote?

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Monday, April 13, 2026, 960, senate, all

Summary: The Senate convened on the final day of session, heard an invocation, recognized guests and pages, and outlined a tentative plan for multiple sessions and breaks through the day. The chamber then took up several messages between the Senate and House, including a refusal to concur in House amendments to Senate Bill 311 on the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future and the appointment of conferees, as well as a House message on House Bill 9007 establishing a conference committee on third-degree assault. The Senate also considered a series of second-reader bills. House Bill 6, requiring MHEC to collect data on pregnant and parenting students, was amended to exempt Maryland Global Campus and limit certain provisions to public senior higher education institutions and community colleges before being ordered to third reading. House Bill 182, concerning replacement of faithless electors, was amended to conform with Senate Bill 237 and then passed. House Bill 575, creating excused absences for student civic engagement, drew the most discussion; senators asked about the definition of civic engagement, county discretion, and whether students could use the bill for repeated protests. The floor leader explained that county boards would retain discretion and that the bill would not require weekly absences. The bill’s two amendments were adopted and it was sent to third reading. Additional measures passed with little or no opposition. House Bill 640 revised boards, commissions, and reporting requirements; House Bill 1335 required an independent study of IT and cybersecurity staffing and pay; House Bill 587 created a work group to review transportation procurement procedures; House Bill 854 established a nonpublic special education school renovation program; and House Bill 898 adjusted economic development provisions, including VLT proceeds and film tax credit language, after questions about the general fund impact. The Senate also advanced House Bill 1247 on Prince George’s County tax increment financing for an immersive entertainment venue, with amendments making it an emergency bill and addressing zoning and outdoor advertising issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have comments on the largest of these changes.
• Those include changes to who can claim the standard utility allowance, changes to the ABOD time limit
• , and changes impacting non-citizen eligibility.
• Help me understand what drove that change. What exactly, why did it change like that? Yeah.
• I'm just glad you're not last for a change.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major topic was child care and early education, where the Department of Social Services and Department of Finance outlined proposed changes to absorb federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue reductions, shift some funding between child care programs, end funding for prospective pay implementation now that the federal requirement has been rescinded, adjust the alternative payment administration structure, and fund child care infrastructure grants and a Low-Income Investment Fund contract closeout. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the budget makes progress on the structural deficit but recommended maintaining the administration’s solution level, making reserve deposits, and avoiding new ongoing commitments; it also raised concerns about shifting reductions to the California Alternative Payment Program and about the proposed administrative-rate change. Committee members strongly criticized the proposed loss of child care slots and said they would oppose eliminating those slots, while also expressing support for child care as essential infrastructure. The committee then reviewed California State Preschool Program proposals. Finance and CDE described reductions to the preschool COLA from 2.41% to 2.01%, removal of prospective pay funding, and increases for the QRIS block grant, audit support, and rate reform implementation. Trailer bill language would codify age-based rate categories, inclusion-rate documentation, family fee collection rules, portability, and excused absences. CDE supported the QRIS increase and some attendance and family-fee changes, but warned that aligning three- and four-year-old rates could reduce support for three-year-olds and that the budget does not fully cover enrollment growth. Members also questioned whether the preschool and child care slot reductions should be reallocated rather than terminated, and the administration said the reductions were intended to reflect current utilization and avoid harm to currently enrolled families. The hearing then moved to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS said the May Revision includes a one-time CalFood augmentation, funding to cover federal SNAP administrative cost-share pressures, and additional staffing and technical assistance to implement HR 1 changes, including the able-bodied adults without dependents time limit and new non-citizen eligibility rules. The department estimated HR 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people, with roughly 806,000 adults potentially subject to the time limit and about 34,000 non-citizens expected to lose eligibility once fully implemented. Members pressed for stronger harm mitigation, including a $98 million backfill to protect families from losing food benefits, and raised concerns about county workload and the “chilling effect” on immigrant participation. The final portion of the transcript began the IHSS presentation, noting a revised budget of $33.7 billion total funds and $12.8 billion General Fund, with proposed reductions tied to Medi-Cal asset-limit changes and other federal conformity items.

Transcript Highlights:

• 2.10 uh and that's because of changing 2.10 uh and that's because of changing the<00:16:39.959><
• in this section um and it was changed in this section um and it was changed here<00:16:56.240>
• <00:28:05.440> we're my opinion due to climate change we're my opinion due to climate change
• The rest of the changes there, if you'll look through it time and time again, are the definition change
• again are the um definition uh or change again are the um definition uh or change the<00:52:57.400

Keywords: 1187, senate, all