Transcript Highlights:

• It's just a change on page four. Uh, basically an add to line 11.
• Uh basically an ad to line on page four.
• And then on line 16 of page two, there is number four there that describes the portable benefit account
• Then our next four lines is TRP.
• four lines is TRP. four lines is TRP.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• line four, the state Um so starting on line four, the state grant<00:02:08.000> program<00:02
• On line 33, the Senate accepts the Act.
• On line 34, the Senate accepts program.
• menstrual products access as a separate line item rider.
• This on line 57, the Senate back.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Turning to page Page four, beginning on line 198, there are costs included and tracked on the spreadsheet
• Line four line 411 contains the MA.
• Line four line 411 contains the balance<00:10:12.720> of<00:10:12.880> the<00:10:13.040
• Line 779 is the MDH operating adjustment. The next four lines are all no-cost items.
• The next uh, four lines are adjustment.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These are requests four and six in our LAR.
• We were the blue line compared to the orange line for similarly credentialed employees in our peer agencies
• On page 16, you can just see the gap that's opening up between those green lines, the light green line
• , and the dark green line.
• Turning to page four, Rider Highlights.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• /c> other pink card Oh, four four Yeah, I do other pink card Oh, four four Yeah, I do have<00:13:37.680
• <01:20:08.520> four, if you see on line four, if you see on line four, uh<01:20:10.160>
• So, line 22 and line 20 1.
• Under fees, pet vendors, where it says line 20, four, four, four, 23... Sorry.
• <03:52:23.040> 20 where it says line 20 where it says line 20 four four four 23.<03:52:26.520

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We looked at four.
• We looked at four.
• Overhead and underground lines.
• Or any four-mil or thicker bags that are provided by retail establishments, and that extra four-cent
• going to move to the four-mil bag?

Summary: The committee held a work session on state environmental policy act (SEPA) implementation and carryout bags. Ecology staff Diane Buterak described the Clean Energy Programmatic Environmental Impact Statements (PEISs) completed for utility-scale solar, onshore wind, and green hydrogen, plus a new PEIS underway for sustainable aviation fuel. She explained that PEISs provide broad planning-level analysis to help developers and agencies avoid or mitigate impacts, but do not replace project-level review. Members asked about permitting timelines, greenhouse gas emissions from different hydrogen production methods, water use, agricultural land conversion, battery fire risk, and tribal consultation. Buterak said the PEISs identify potentially significant impacts and mitigation measures, including fire response planning, early tribal outreach, and agrovoltaics as an option for solar projects. EFSEC’s Amy Hofkimer then presented the transmission-facility programmatic EIS required by SB 5165 for 230 kV and higher transmission projects. She said the statewide review covers new lines and certain upgrades/modifications, analyzes impacts to water, cultural and tribal resources, habitat, and other areas, and uses general measures, design considerations, avoidance criteria, and sensitivity maps to guide siting and corridor planning. She said the final document would be issued in early October. Questions focused on reconductoring, tribal lands, scenic areas, and whether the review could affect existing lines crossing tribal lands. A Grant County planning director, Jim Anderson Cook, said Ecology’s PEIS would help with cumulative impacts for clustered solar projects, but noted tight local review timelines and the need for strong pre-application coordination, especially on cultural resource studies and decommissioning plans. Yakama Nation attorney Shona Leverett argued SEPA is only an assessment tool and said tribes face barriers from short comment periods, limited confidential tribal input, weak cumulative impact analysis, and challenges in the FSEC process; she urged better upfront developer diligence and more effective tribal coordination. Puget Sound Energy’s Sarah Leverett said the utility needs efficient and predictable permitting to meet clean energy mandates while maintaining reliable service and aging infrastructure. She described the scale of needed clean energy and transmission buildout, including a 10-year process for the Energize Eastside transmission rebuild, and said more consistent SEPA and PEIS processes could help. Members asked about future generation sources, reliability, and hydropower as a firming resource; she said PSE is pursuing an “all of the above” approach and would welcome more firm, dispatchable clean energy options. The committee then shifted to carryout bags. Staff Jacob Lipson and Tracy Taylor reviewed Washington’s bag law, its preemption of local ordinances, the current 8-cent charge, the scheduled increase to 12 cents, and the 2025 change delaying the 4-mil thickness requirement until 2028 while adding a temporary 4-cent penalty for thicker bags. Ecology’s Peter Lyon said the agency emphasizes education and complaint-based enforcement, has received 872 reports, and has not yet imposed any fines. Commerce’s Kirk Esmond summarized a WSU study finding fewer plastic bags distributed but more plastic by weight, and said Commerce and Ecology support keeping the 2.25-mil standard and not allowing thinner single-use bags again. Retail industry testimony from Brandon Housekeeper said grocers comply with the law but oppose the added 4-cent penalty and thicker-bag requirement, citing higher costs and confusion in the policy changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Which line is it in? It's on, um, line four on page three. Uh, deposit in a bank defined in...
• It's on um Is it good,<00:09:08.480> I<00:09:08.760> Line<00:09:09.120> four<00:
• <00:09:11.080> Uh good, I Line four on page three. Uh good, I Line four on page three.
• on line 11. on line 11.
• 20, you're going to change it from line 20, you're going to change it from four<01:05:51.880> to<

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And also, um, although if the best interest of the child’s crossed out on line four, it’s added in line
• And also, um, although if the best interest of the child’s crossed out on line four, it’s added in line
• And also, um, although if the best interest of the child’s crossed out on line four, it’s added in line
• And also, um, although if the best interest of the child’s crossed out on line four, it’s added in line
• Although if the best interest of the child is crossed out on line four, it’s added in line eight, so

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that's four scenarios.
• that's four scenarios.
• And again, short-line trains are the opposite of the unit trains. By using short-line trains.
• So improvements along the Watco line, as with Scenario 5, improvements on the UP line that runs along
• So again, the theme, though, is short-line: how much can short-line improvements do to help the transportation

Summary: The committee first heard an update on the Joint Transportation Committee study of transportation impacts if the Lower Snake River dams were removed. WSDOT and Jacobs described the study’s phases, including current work on geology, infrastructure risk, and a total logistics cost model. They explained that the study is examining how freight now moved by barge—especially wheat, fertilizer, and wood—could shift to rail and roads, and they outlined several scenarios ranging from no-dam future conditions to new unit-train terminals, short-line rail options, and a combined “many solutions” scenario. Members asked about irrigation, impacts in Idaho and Oregon, port capacity, emissions, competition, EV trucks, and whether the model could estimate transportation effects if grain volumes decline. The presenters said the study assumes current production levels continue, does not model irrigation changes or broader farm-economics impacts, but does account for transloading costs and can estimate transportation impacts under different volume assumptions. WSU’s independent review team said the model has improved substantially but still needed refinement, especially in routing, road data, and spatial detail, and that stakeholder engagement had been strong though delayed by model development. No votes were taken. The committee then received a presentation on the alternative sidewalk funding study. Staff and consultants said the study is exploring ways local governments could sustainably fund sidewalk maintenance, repair, and new construction, using a statewide survey, interviews, national research, and case studies in eight jurisdictions. They noted sidewalks are important for pedestrian safety and connectivity, but there is no dedicated funding source in Washington, and existing grants and local revenue tools are highly competitive or limited. The consultants highlighted sidewalk fees or utility-style charges as the most promising option to study, while a parcel tax was largely set aside because of state property-tax uniformity concerns. Members asked whether the study would duplicate existing funding or add to current taxes, and how a sidewalk fee would be collected; the consultants said the goal is to expand local options, not mandate adoption, and that fees would likely be billed through utilities rather than property taxes. A preliminary draft report is due December 15, with a final report due in mid-June. Next, staff gave a brief update on the ocean-going vessels study, which is examining shore power and emissions rules for vessels at berth. The presenter explained that federal Clean Air Act rules and California waiver authority create legal limits on how far Washington can go if it wants to adopt similar standards, and that deviations from California’s approach can increase litigation risk. The report will summarize stakeholder outreach and will be presented in draft form at the next JTC meeting. Finally, county engineers from Chelan and Douglas counties began a presentation on county transportation challenges, with the association’s director emphasizing collaboration with state agencies and local partners on issues such as fish passage barriers and infrastructure needs. The county presentation was only beginning when the transcript ended, and no committee action or votes were recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• Line<00:09:46.000> 1.9<00:09:46.959> through Line 1.9 through Line 1.9 through 1.19<00:
• Line writers.
• Line 3.15 until line 3.23 show further...
• Then, moving to page four, the lines of the amendment from 4.2 to 4.4 show additional Revisor recommendations
• Then, moving to page four, the lines of the amendment from 4.2 to 4.4 show additional Revisor recommendations

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm first in line.
• I believe there were four, weren't there? There were four.
• 1 cash line of credit.
• line items that we have listed.
• Similar line items.

Summary: The committee met for an informational hearing focused largely on the state capital outlay process and House Bill 2. Roger Husser and Matt Baker of the Division of Administration/Facility Planning and Control described how the office prepares and administers the capital outlay bill, said the bill has grown substantially over five years, and argued that recent changes in culture, staffing, project management, cash-flow analysis, and use of third-party support have more than doubled project expenditures and improved delivery. Members asked about the use and cost of third-party project managers, delegation of smaller projects to agencies, hiring difficulties, and whether the changes represented better interpretation of existing law versus statutory changes. Husser said some statutes were amended, some internal customs were removed, and the office would provide a list of those changes. He also explained that the office is trying to move away from overly rigid practices and toward faster project completion while still following public-bid and oversight rules. A major portion of the discussion centered on the size and structure of the capital outlay bill, especially the gap between Priority 1 cash capacity and the much larger Priority 5 backlog. Husser said the current annual Priority 1 limit is tied to construction inflation and is about $574 million, with additional surplus funds also available, but that the bill contains far more Priority 5 funding than can realistically move in a five-year plan. He and members discussed dormant projects, scope creep, legacy projects that have sat in the bill for years, and the problem of false expectations for non-state entities. Proposed solutions included limiting Priority 5 to five times Priority 1, requiring annual re-endorsement by members, setting district or project caps for non-state projects, requiring time limits and reporting for grant-like non-state projects, placing matches in escrow, requiring design readiness before submission, and consolidating the many existing reporting requirements into one clearer report. Members also discussed bundling multiple projects under one agency project, which the House had begun piloting for LSU, UL Lafayette, Southern, and DOTD, and which Husser said could improve flexibility, reduce overappropriation, and better reflect actual spending. Baker then explained cash-flow management and the commitment process, saying FPC now analyzes projects annually to estimate what can actually be spent in the next fiscal year and uses commitments to allow projects to proceed when future-year funding is expected. He said overappropriations can result from poor cash-flow estimates, delays, dormant projects, or projects coming in under budget, and that the office is already reworking cash-flow assumptions and reappropriating savings where possible. Members also raised concerns about change orders and low bids; staff said project managers review change orders closely, require concurrence on non-state projects, and sometimes reduce scope to keep projects within budget. After FPC’s presentation, the committee heard the beginning of Louisiana Economic Development’s capital outlay discussion, where LED explained that its projects generally fall into three categories, including the Economic Development Awards Program and Site Readiness Program, both used to support targeted economic development and job creation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Four or five different places.
• Amendment one is: replace line 93 on page four with the following: files containing obscene material
• Amendment one is replace line 93<00:20:03.440> on<00:20:03.600> page<00:20:03.840> four
• line 325 through 331 on Line 27 replace line 325 through 331 on page<00:24:56.640> 12<00:24:56.960
• line 343 through 344 on Line 32, replace line 343 through 344 on page<00:25:13.039> 13<00:25:

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• line item transfers, we do have to make sure that we're accounting for them on the right line, whether
• instead of the grants line.
• So that $750,000 just went from the behavioral health clinic institution line to the operating line.
• We did transfer out $7.5 million from the operating line to the grants medical assistance line, because
• Unfortunately, our kind of line or white line goes through it, but you can really see the interstate

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the March 18 minutes, and then received a series of updates on health-related projects and Department of Health and Human Services budget matters. Representatives from CHI St. Alexius in Bismarck and Williston, and Altru in Grand Forks, reported progress on behavioral health expansion projects, including demolition and construction milestones, updated timelines, funding status, staffing plans, and barriers such as an unbudgeted air handler replacement in Williston. Members asked about original completion dates, use of telehealth, recruitment of psychiatrists and other staff, and whether the new beds might reduce the need for patients to travel to Jamestown State Hospital. The projects were described as on track overall, with completion expected in 2027 for the larger builds and earlier openings for some phases in Williston. The committee then heard from HHS leadership on technical line-item transfers and the Salaries and Wages Block Grant. Donna Ockland explained that recent transfers were administrative corrections to place spending in the proper budget lines and did not involve new spending, and she reviewed FTE counts and vacancies across the department. Questions focused on behavioral health staffing changes and the use of consultants in the Rural Health Transformation Program. Pat Rainer outlined the rural health program’s first-year grants and priorities, including workforce retention, rural rotations and housing, community wellness initiatives, behavioral health promotion, safety net services, hospital equipment, suicide prevention training, technology, and EMS support. He said North Dakota’s plan was drawing positive national attention, but the department still needed to obligate roughly $199 million by September and was working with CMS on timing and compliance. The committee also received an update on certified community behavioral health clinics from Elena Zeller. She said North Dakota had been accepted as a demonstration state, with certification efforts underway in Williston, North Central, Fargo, and Dickinson. Members asked about care coordination, service growth, staffing, and whether certification would expand to all clinics; the department said it was still collecting baseline data and evaluating impacts before making future recommendations. Finally, Rebecca Askins reviewed SNAP payment error rates, explaining that the 2025 rate was finalized at 9.89 percent and that the department is working on training, system changes, and quality assurance steps to get below 6 percent. Members pressed on the causes of monthly variability, the performance of the SPACES system, and accountability for ongoing errors, and the department said it expects improvement over the next 6 to 12 months.

Transcript Highlights:

• and they're moving these boundary lines and they're moving these boundary lines and<00:02:23.959
• Polk County gave him the setback and gave him a map of all his property lines, which were in line with
• his property lines which were in line his property lines which were in line with<00:04:13.239>
• <00:10:49.279> is that's done that moves these lines is that's done that moves these lines
• > bounding<00:24:11.440> lines<00:24:11.960> the the pre-establish bounding lines

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard Senate File 59, authored by Senator Green, which would require counties to locate and restore original public land survey monuments and related boundary markers. Green argued that newer GIS/GPS-based surveys have sometimes shifted long-established property lines, creating disputes for landowners, counties, and state agencies. He described examples involving his own property and constituents, including a case where a neighbor allegedly lost access to a well and septic system after a new survey and another where a landowner was told he was farming school trust land based on a newer plat reference. Testimony in support came from Allan Roger Olen, who said a newer survey changed his family’s property lines and created a dispute over land, a building permit, and ownership of well and septic systems. Senator Green also said county plat books are not legally binding and that the bill is intended to force counties to find original monuments before more disputes arise. Committee members raised concerns from the Association of Minnesota Counties about the bill’s timeline, funding, and requirement that counties employ a land surveyor. Green responded that counties had already been told to hire surveyors in some disputes, acknowledged the funding concerns, and said he would look for funding sources while emphasizing protection of property rights. A committee member who teaches surveying explained that adverse possession is a real legal doctrine in Minnesota and noted that restoring all monuments would cost far more than the $10 million already appropriated, estimating the total need at about $300 million. Phil Reigns of the Minnesota Society of Professional Surveyors testified that the Public Land Survey System underlies Minnesota’s land tenure system, that the original monuments were set mostly between 1850 and 1908, and that surveyors aim to restore them as accurately as possible using historical records and modern tools. He said the work is expensive because many counties lack staff surveyors and must hire consultants. Members discussed whether the bill would create boundary conflicts or authorize counties to alter lines, and Green said his intent was to restore original monuments and avoid litigation. Co-Chair Lang moved that Senate File 59, as amended, be recommended to pass and re-referred to the Committee on Judiciary. The motion prevailed on a voice vote. Afterward, the committee began receiving an overview from the Minnesota Council on Latino Affairs.

Transcript Highlights:

• line 37 on page 2.
• And so they have 13 commissioners: four Democrats, four Republicans, and five unaffiliated.
• And so they have 13 commissioners, four Democrats, four Republicans, and five unaffiliated.
• And I think five unaffiliated. four Democrats, four Republicans, and five unaffiliated.
• Chair, four score and seven years ago... Four score and seven years ago—that's a joke, I hope.

Bills: SB1003, SB1060, SB1134, SB1275, SB1327, SB1429, SB1618, SB1634, SB1654, SB1803, SCR1002, SCR1005, SCR1023, SCR1027

Keywords: election, canvass, certification, ballot tabulation, write-in candidates, registration, voting procedures, voter registration, temporary absence, absentee voting, residency, military voters, overseas voters, election law, Arizona Revised Statutes, political signs, campaign materials, public safety, municipal regulation, veterans

Summary: The committee first heard a lengthy presentation and discussion focused on Arizona State University’s foreign research ties, especially collaborations and funding connected to China and Chinese military-affiliated institutions. The presenter argued that ASU and the Arizona Board of Regents had not been transparent about foreign gifts, contracts, and research partnerships, citing federal reporting forms, the Wolf Amendment, export-control concerns, and alleged links to dual-use technologies such as quantum systems, AI, robotics, microelectronics, and biosecurity. A witness from American Global Strategies testified in support, saying the bill would help protect U.S. research security and national security by imposing state-level guardrails on sensitive collaborations. After questions, the committee considered a strike-everything amendment to SB 1060 that would bar public universities from entering into or continuing certain loans, gifts, contracts, research partnerships, or sponsored projects involving the PRC, the CCP, and listed Chinese military-linked universities, require ABOR review and approval, and impose reporting and budget penalties. The amendment was withdrawn, and the committee instead took up SB 1327, which directs ABOR to require university research security policies and to report annually on those policies and on foreign contributions over $250,000; SB 1327 received a 4-2 do-pass recommendation, with Del Santos, Hernandez, and Márquez voting no and Kolodin, Powell, Keshel, and Gillette voting yes. The committee then heard SB 1803, a veterans bill regulating unrecognized persons who assist with VA disability claims. The sponsor and industry witnesses said the bill would protect veterans from bad actors by requiring disclosures, capping fees, banning certain practices, and filing service agreements with the Attorney General, while opponents argued it could restrict consumer choice, resemble a price ceiling, and still allow non-attorneys to engage in the unauthorized practice of law. After extensive debate over contingent fees, legal ethics, and whether the bill was too favorable to one company, the committee continued the hearing with additional testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so look at that line for line, you know, it's going to be line, uh, on page four, right?
• Um, so look at that line for line, you know, it's going to be line, uh, on page four, right?
• Um, so look at that line for line, you know, it's going to be line, uh, on page four, right?
• Um, so look at that line for line, you know, it's going to be line, uh, on page four, right?
• Um, so look at that line for line, you know, it's going to be line, uh, on page four, right?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Page two, lines 14 and 15. Page four, line 13. Thank you. Senator Barlow. Thank you, Mr.
• inserts language on page four, line 13. inserts language on page four, line 13.
• <00:52:58.640> Page<00:52:58.880> four,<00:52:59.040> line<00:52:59.360>
• Page four, line 13 and Let me see, yep.
• Page four, line 13 and basically<00:53:01.240> clarifies<00:53:02.080> that<00:53:02.680

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• language in line 5.15. language in line 5.15.
• guardian after parent on line 15.27. guardian after parent on line 15.27.
• parent on line 17.11. parent on line 17.11.
• four, beginning on line<00:16:02.040> 18.3,<00:16:03.000> establishes<00:16:03.560>
• We made a mistake, and the vote was seven ayes and four noes, four nays.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We've got people waiting in line.
• Yeah, it's the lines. Were you a line? Yes, sir. Green line? That's good. I appreciate you.
• The graph on page three, the gray line, shows that The graph on page three, the gray line, shows the
• And the beds are like four, four people through the room.
• So we will be moving on to page four. The adult methodology. So we will be moving on to page four.

Bills: SB 1

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

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee heard a presentation from the Legislative Budget Board on the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Article 5 budget. LBB recommended $3.7 billion in all funds for 2026-27, a 5.2 percent decrease from the base, while FTEs would rise by 856.7. Major items included funding for driver license services, DPS facilities, troopers and recruit schools, crime labs, vehicle and aircraft operations, border security, and rider changes. The committee also reviewed DPS exceptional items not included in the recommendation, including additional staffing, technology, and facility requests. Members focused heavily on driver license operations, criticizing long wait times, call abandonment, and repeated staffing increases without clear process improvements. LBB said the agency’s call-answer rate was about 9 percent in fiscal 2024, with average hold times around 34 minutes, later reduced to roughly 22-25 minutes. Senators questioned whether more FTEs alone would solve the problem and urged a broader efficiency study and better use of technology. DPS officials said they were pursuing process changes, including appointment-system upgrades, online pre-population of forms, and remote issuance options, while noting that Real ID requirements and population growth continue to drive demand. DPS leadership then outlined the agency’s priorities: completion of the Williamson County training academy, recruitment and retention of troopers, capital needs for vehicles and aircraft, and expanded responsibilities at the Capitol complex and the Alamo. Officials said the new trooper funding would help address staffing shortages, public safety, and border operations, and that overtime and deployment patterns had been adjusted to reduce burnout and improve flexibility. They also discussed Operation Lone Star, saying DPS spending is largely overtime, travel, and fuel, and that the agency continues to coordinate with federal partners while awaiting clarity on possible federal reimbursement for border security costs. Senators also raised concerns about oilfield theft, cartel activity, high-speed pursuits, bilingual pay, and the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame and Museum, and DPS said it would follow up on some of those issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that red line is your original legislative forecast. The blue line is our actual revenue.
• replacement line improvements.
• We have a raw water line that we obtained from the ABM line, which would be the OPA site by Cavalier,
• We have a raw water line that we obtained from the ABM line, which would be the OPA site by Cavalier,
• How much of that actually occurs on the southern line? How much occurs on the northern line?

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to review several interim studies and receive updates from the Department of Water Resources. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and welcomed Representative Hansen to the committee. Staff then reported that the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study had both satisfied the presentation requirements in their study directives, with no further required testimony unless members wanted additional information. The department’s main presentation focused on major water projects and agency operations. Reese Haas and staff updated members on the NAWS project, the Southwest Pipeline Project, Devils Lake outlet operations, low-head dam safety work, floodplain management repository implementation, data center water use, and the 2027 Water Development Plan. Members asked detailed questions about NAWS funding sources, remaining project costs, capacity concerns for All Seasons and other users, and whether current construction is being designed for future demand. The department said NAWS remains on track for substantial completion by October, that remaining NAWS funding will come from a mix of federal, state, and local sources, and that current construction is designed for ultimate capacity while some future components will be adjusted for increased demand. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to the department’s cash management, Resources Trust Fund revenues, carryover balances, and the State Water Commission’s cost-share program. The department reported $340.6 million in carryover remaining, explained that much of it is already obligated to long-term projects, and noted that oil price forecasts and stripper-well exemptions will affect future revenues. Members raised concerns about large carryovers, affordability for local sponsors, and whether the state should continue obligating money multiple bienniums ahead. The department said it is working with the commission on a revised prioritization framework, including high/moderate/low project categories and a two-tier pre-construction/construction approach, to better manage obligations and affordability. The committee also reviewed Deloitte’s finalized studies on regional governance/finance and cost-share policy. Deloitte presented options for Southwest, NAWS, and Red River governance, with stakeholders generally favoring keeping NAWS largely as is, using the current Southwest model with improvements, and pursuing a more structured governance option for Red River. On cost share, the department said Deloitte’s recommended package would cover projected needs through the 2030s, but would require policy changes such as lower percentages for some project types, a 25% replacement-project rate with a cap, and possible bonding or delayed reimbursement strategies. No votes were taken on these policy questions, and the chair indicated the committee would continue the discussion at future basin meetings and the September Water Topics meeting.