Transcript Highlights:

• We've done a lot of conversations around federally supported programs and all that are A lot of conversations
• around federally supported programs and all the requirements and the reimbursement rates and how does
• Some of these programs that are federal programs may have, say, income verification requirements in order
• And the second question is for these folks that are in federal programs that qualified for federal pre-K
• , and don't, That qualified for federal program and didn't pre-K, federal pre-K, and don't qualify, in

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what are those federal community.
• That's a great program. It's a phenomenal program. No one could get mad at farm to school.
• It's a phenomenal program, and we did have a contract with the federal government for $17 million just
• <00:07:46.160> intervention, know, absent of federal intervention, know, absent of federal
• in gaps that were created by the federal in gaps that were created by the federal government.<00

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• partnership program or a federally declared natural disaster within the last 5 years.
• The program was originally program.
• <00:49:15.359> is<00:49:15.680> federally million uh if the program is federally million
• uh if the program is federally impacted<00:49:17.359> uh<00:49:17.440> and<00:49:17.760
• <00:49:29.599> natural program or a federally declared natural program or a federally declared

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We use them to fund programs like Medicaid expansion or the granted Advantage program.
• We use them to fund programs like Medicaid expansion or the granted Advantage program.
• patient lives at 200% of the federal patient lives at 200% of the federal poty<01:17:31.960>
• fund this critical program under this model<01:52:22.560> federal<01:52:22.880> state<
• The insurers right now are familiar with the non-federal share of the Medicaid expansion program, which

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Significant cuts in federal programs will require three things: you either raise taxes, or you cut federal
• > programs Significant cuts in federal programs Significant cuts in federal programs will<00:36
• This bill updates the scope of the department's adult education program to align with the federal Adult
• This bill updates the scope of the department's adult education program to align with the federal Adult
• What I can say about the threats of federal funding is that these programs have traditionally relied

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1783, which would expand public-private partnership options for charter school facilities. The Department of Education offered comments, the Charter School Commission and SFA supported the bill, and Hawaii Technology Academy, Hawaii Kids, Hawaii Children’s Action Network, HGA, Aloha Project, and several individuals testified in support, while UPW opposed it. Supporters said charter schools need faster and more flexible ways to address severe facility shortages and high costs, and SFA described the bill as a pilot model that could leverage developer partnerships and state contributions, citing Maryland as an example. Members asked whether the bill was limited to charter schools; DOE said the language could be read to include other public school facilities, but if focused only on charter schools, DOE was less concerned. The Charter School Commission also described an existing public-private preschool model through Parkway Village Preschool and PACTED. The committee then took up HB 1778, which would establish a CIP database for school facilities. SFA supported the bill, saying it would create a more disciplined, transparent basis for funding decisions by documenting facility condition, needed repairs, classification, and timing. DOE initially said it rested on its comments, then responded to questions by saying it already maintains deferred maintenance lists, uses systems such as Maximo, CPT, GIS, and finance software, and sends legislators project-status letters twice a year. DOE said it is working on improving its outward-facing dashboard and integrating its systems, but questioned whether the bill would add value beyond existing tools. Members emphasized the need for a publicly accessible, real-time transparency tool, while DOE said it was still evaluating its current systems and was not yet seeking funding for a new IT program. For HB 2344, creating an Independent Public School Realignment and Closure Commission, DOE said it wants to remain part of any consolidation process to keep students and education central, while SFA said the bill is timely and framed it as a restructuring response to changing conditions and possible federal funding cuts. SFA compared the proposal to the federal BRAC process for military base closures and said Hawaii has the same enrollment as in 1961 but many more schools, arguing that the state needs a more deliberate approach to school closures and land reuse. The Attorney General’s office raised technical concerns about several sections, including unclear references to administrative support, a governor-approval sequence, a possible conflict with existing statutes governing closed-school disposition, and a missing section number. Testimony on HB 2345, which would establish a geographic CIP district, began with DOE in opposition; DOE said the bill would duplicate existing work, add confusion by creating two agencies doing the same thing, and spend money inefficiently because district project coordinators and project lists already exist.

Transcript Highlights:

• Administration of federal programs and of course are very important work of overseeing.
• Those programs are funded beyond the 3.5 billion except for the local. The PLHA program.
• We urge funding for the state LIHTC program which efficiently leverages federal funding to build affordable
• Center Enhancement Program.
• . program also.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we now know, given the data, which programs work and which programs don't work.
• So, and I saw, you know, the programs. I worked in those programs, and I saw...
• The programs I worked in, and I saw a lot of money being put into programs that didn't help that many
• How large is this program?
• Well, my dad came here through the Bracero program. Yeah. program?

Summary: The Assembly Human Services Committee met with quorum established after beginning as a subcommittee. The committee heard AB 790, which would require jurisdictions receiving state homelessness funds to develop systems specifically supporting women and children, especially single mothers and survivors of domestic violence. Supporters said current homelessness programs overlook this population; the bill was amended and passed unanimously on a 7-0 vote. The committee also heard ACA 4, the Housing Opportunities Made Equal Act, which would dedicate a minimum share of the state general fund to affordable housing and homelessness programs. Supporters argued more stable funding is needed to address the housing crisis, while opponents questioned whether more spending would help; the measure passed 5-2 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Members then heard AB 349, which would index the infant supplement for parenting foster youth to inflation. The author and sponsor described the needs of pregnant and parenting teens in foster care and rising costs for diapers and formula; the bill passed 6-0 to Appropriations. AB 779, which expands a domestic violence consultant pilot in child welfare offices statewide, also passed 6-0 after testimony that it would help keep families together safely and improve trauma-informed responses. AB 1335, which would remove a private CARF accreditation requirement for regional center employment programs and rely on state oversight instead, drew support from disability service providers but opposition from the chair over concerns about weakening quality checks; it failed on a 2-2 vote and reconsideration was denied. The committee also considered AB 1066, a bill to bar state-funded immigration legal services for people unlawfully present in the country who have certain serious felony convictions. Supporters framed it as a public-safety and fiscal-responsibility measure, while opponents said it would restrict due process and align California with mass-deportation policies. The bill failed on a 2-2 vote. Two bills, AB 277 and AB 318, were pulled by the author and not heard. After final roll calls on absent members, the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, so the Centers of Excellence Program has been a great program that the Judicial Council sponsors
• So can you explain this program to us?
• What happens in the federal courts and what the federal government, who they decide to deport and prosecute
• The difference, though, with this and the federal program is this is a very specific, directed type of
• He is a prosecutor and is a person who's wanting the program, our program, to be present in his county

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee convened for its first hearing of the 89th regular session, confirmed a quorum, adopted committee rules by a 15-0 vote, and began review of Senate Bill 1, the state budget for fiscal years 2026-27. Chair Huffman outlined the committee’s organization, introduced staff, and described the budget as conservative and focused on one-time investments. She highlighted major SB 1 priorities including property tax relief, full funding for public education formulas, teacher pay, school safety, border security, Medicaid growth, dementia research, energy and water infrastructure, transportation, wildfire suppression, and other capital and public safety needs. Comptroller Glenn Hager presented the biennial revenue estimate, saying the state has $194.6 billion available for general-purpose spending in 2026-27, with a projected $23.8 billion ending balance from the current biennium. He cautioned that revenue growth is returning to more normal levels and that lawmakers should avoid committing short-term surpluses to ongoing expenses. He also explained that the Economic Stabilization Fund is projected to hit its constitutional cap, meaning an estimated $5.6 billion in severance tax and related revenue would remain in general revenue in the upcoming biennium rather than flow into the fund. Senators discussed whether to raise or rename the fund and the implications of keeping more severance-tax revenue in general revenue. The Legislative Budget Board then gave an overview of SB 1 and the budget’s major funding changes. LBB staff explained that the bill is essentially flat at $332.9 billion in all funds, but includes large method-of-finance shifts and major property tax relief. They detailed how prior property tax relief enacted in the 88th Legislature grew from an estimated $18 billion to $22.7 billion because of higher property values and hold-harmless provisions, and said SB 1 continues that relief with a total of $51 billion in ongoing and new property tax support. Members asked extensive questions about the automatic growth in school tax compression, the constitutional homestead exemption, COVID-era federal funding, Medicaid assumptions, and the sunset of the non-homestead circuit breaker. No additional votes or final budget actions were taken beyond adoption of the committee rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• federal law. federal law.
• creating a new program? creating a new program?
• How do you ensure a new program program program when<01:14:40.280> we<01:14:40.400> can't
• Further, program.
• agents, federal law that federal agents, federal law enforcement<01:36:54.480> agents,<01:36:55.280

Bills: HF4477

Keywords: Minnesota business recovery loan program, small business loan, zero-interest loan, forgivable loan, business recovery, economic development, small business emergency loan account, Minnesota Initiative Foundations, nonprofit lenders, greater Minnesota, Twin Cities metro, seven-county metropolitan area, immigration enforcement, business interruption, revenue loss, job preservation, business stabilization, state appropriation, forward fund, loan forgiveness

Transcript Highlights:

• in On many vital programs.
• Federal policy changes. Mr.
• If the federal policy shifts, New Mexico would follow the federal policy after that date.
• Again, those that are within the purview of federal law would go to the federal standard.
• As usual with this program.

Transcript Highlights:

• federal federal actions. actions. actions.
• <00:03:54.560> funds pilot projects grant program funds pilot projects grant program funds
• These were federal grants.
• These were federal grants.
• the medical assistance and CCAP program. the medical assistance and CCAP program.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That was a federal program designed to get money into businesses that had been closed down by the pandemic
• Do we have any comparative data of similar programs, whether they're federal or from other states, to
• that was also funded by the NMFA, Collateral Support Participation, which was a federally funded program
• And then from that particular funding, we created the Capital Access Program, which is a federally funded
• And then lastly, the federal program, the Energy Efficiency Revolving Loan Fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• program. kids that are in their program program. kids that are in their program that<00:15:32.959
• Uh, you know, I hesitate to reference Feeding Our Future, but that was a federal program.
• federal government.
• program.
• Um, and so we was a federal program.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So starting with an overview, Medicaid is a federal program to which states partner with the federal
• Some see program what which is what we now call the last several iterations of our managed care program
• The LTC program also uses he this information to inform us of the quality of the program, but they are
• So lots we have the dental program. Again, he does is So lots we have the dental program.
• program components, a data-driven goals for the programs and reporting for the plans.

Transcript Highlights:

• at the federal level.
• There's actually federal statute describing these funding instruments: the Federal Grant and Cooperative
• A cooperative agreement is used when the federal agency will be... federal agency will be substantially
• The governor is running the program. The governor is running the program.
• And we've talked about the grant programs in our webinar and in the programs in our webinar and in the

Keywords: Public Health and Welfare - Room 216, 4 June, 2026; 2:30 PM, 925, all

Transcript Highlights:

• when program integrity violations occur. programs with recent advancements in programs with recent advancements
• <00:20:27.679> when<00:20:27.880> program actors from public programs when program
• /c> federal learning from the federal federal learning from the federal government<00:40:15.400> I
• I'm noticing your comment earlier about federal programs and state programs.
• You know, Feeding Our Future was a federal program where state employees identified a concern and went

Bills: HF1470, HF1310, HF1837

Keywords: opioids, substance use, addiction recovery, mental health, state cabinet, HF1310, Office of Cannabis Management, cannabis, marijuana, tribal consultation, government-to-government relationship, Minnesota tribes, Tribal governments, state government, consultation, rulemaking, Indian affairs, cannabis regulation, tribal sovereignty, state-tribal relations

Transcript Highlights:

• Program for New Mexico.
• federally funded Head Start program, because you can do that from birth to five years old, that you
• can have that program.
• program also?
• Assistant (CNA) programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal legislation mentions the first-look program, but does not define what it is.
• up in the federal bill.
• The DBE program kicks in only on federally funded projects.
• The DBE program kicks in only on federally funded projects.
• That kicks in the DBE program, which is defunct, but that's only on federal dollars.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, with the federal landscape, the way it's looking.
• The biggest hit has been to our training programs.
• And of course, there are no federal excise taxes.
• cessation programs.
• And on all the other programs, Anthony, the new PAC programs, I don't see much in terms of evaluation

Transcript Highlights:

• There's some discussion that the federal program may change their requirements and may basically modify
• <00:53:53.400> program<00:53:54.400> may discussion that the federal program may discussion
• that the federal program may change<00:53:55.680> their<00:53:55.920> requirements<00:
• We don't have a separate CHIP program, but we are able to claim federal match on certain children at
• There are some cases where we would be able to claim CHIP federal match, but not a separate CHIP program

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first recessed briefly, then took up HB 570, the prescription drug affordability board (PDAB). The chair and several members discussed the House amendment to repeal the board, which removed the fiscal note. The main concern raised was that the PDAB had not yet produced a clear business case showing value for the taxpayer investment, despite several years of work and four annual reports. Supporters of the repeal said the board’s recent report was largely redundant and that the board should either demonstrate a strong return on investment or be shut down; others cautioned against discarding the program too quickly and urged more time to refine the mission and legislative language. No vote was taken, and the committee appeared to agree to retain the bill for further work, with the possibility of revisiting it in a formal executive session on Tuesday. Members also shifted into discussion of HB 2, beginning with Section 85 on opioid abatement trust fund dollars for shelter programs. Department of Health and Human Services officials explained that the provision would provide $10 million from the opioid abatement trust fund, replacing general funds in the governor’s budget, while also noting an additional $2.5 million prioritized needs request for shelter care that was already fully funded. Committee members asked about shelter bed capacity, job placement efforts, and the remaining balance in the opioid fund; DHHS said there are 934 contracted beds and that case management includes help with housing and employment. Officials also said the current proposed budget includes another $1 million later in HB 2 from the opioid fund. The committee then began discussion of Sections 86 through 87, which would preserve the department’s ability to transfer funds between personnel lines. DHHS said the provision is operationally critical and that losing it would make it extremely difficult to manage the department, though it would not have a direct fiscal impact. The next item introduced was Section 88, extending a suspension related to eligibility for services until July 1, 2027; DHHS indicated that if the suspension were not continued, it would likely increase expenditures for Community Mental Health Centers and potentially others. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.