Transcript Highlights:

• What this means is the payment schedule is built assuming that UAL payments in the future will grow by
• payments as you move further.
• What this means is the payment schedule is built, assuming that UAL payments in the future will grow
• payments as you move further. smaller payments in the near term and larger payments as you move further
• That's how the payments are being calculated.

Committee: House Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• And non-claims can be like value-based payments, right?
• But there are value-based payments for HCBS, too. Is that question about value-based payments?
• Value-based payment is a very important... Value-based payment is a very nice term. Sounds great.
• And if those differences in payments go up substantially, then that hospital is receiving more payments
• That hospital is receiving more payments than, or higher payments than, a benchmark that is set for this

Summary: The Complex Care Committee meeting focused first on a new Diabetes Caucus launched at the Capitol. Rep. Johnson described the caucus as a forum to educate people about type 1 and type 2 diabetes, genetic risk, early testing, pregnancy-related diabetes, and ways Medicaid policy might improve prevention and lower long-term costs. Members agreed the caucus could intersect with care management, and Carolyn Grandell of CHNCT offered to share information about current diabetes-related care management services at a future meeting. The committee then heard a detailed presentation from Alex Rigger of the Office of Health Strategy, who is moving to the Office of Policy and Management. He reviewed Connecticut health care benchmark data, including total health care expenditures, medical spending, and market-by-market trends. He said 2023 to 2024 per-capita spending grew more than 8.5% statewide and 14% in Medicaid, with long-term care accounting for about 46% of Medicaid spending and retail pharmacy also identified as a major cost driver. Members asked about enrollment changes, dual-eligible populations, Medicare Savings Program members, 340B drug pricing, and value-based payment models. Rigger explained that his office tracks alternate payment models and quality benchmarks, but does not separately capture 340B data. Discussion then shifted to Medicare Advantage, dual eligibles, and hospital discharge planning. Members said they want better data on how many Medicaid members are in Medicare Advantage plans and whether those plans shift costs back to Medicaid or affect access to care, especially for complex-care patients. Staff noted DSS does have some Medicare Advantage indicators and that CMS is developing encounter-data rules for states. Kathy Holt and others raised concerns about denials, nursing home stays, and the need to compare Medicaid spending for dual eligibles in Medicare Advantage versus traditional Medicare. The meeting ended with plans for follow-up data sharing, including Alex Rigger’s slides, the diabetes caucus materials, and a future discussion with DSS and other agencies; no formal votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Late payments erode profits.
• </c> interest on late payments. interest on late payments.
• , retainage payment, or final payment made to the contractor.
• 45:41.680><c> made</c> retainage payment, or final payment made retainage payment, or final payment made
• </c> those payments if they request it. those payments if they request it.

Committee: Senate State and Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• So it does not affect your mortgage payment.
• Then they have this balloon payment to pay. And still make their payments. I apologize. I'm sorry.
• They could keep their payment, keep their hope.
• Then they have this balloon payment to pay. And still make their payments. I apologize. I'm sorry.
• So any temporary payment would be in addition to it.

Committee: House House Government, Elections & Indian Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• And you see there, the mid-year payment totaling up, without the OAB payment that's now zero, is the
• $565 million total projected UAL payment.
• The next page is a projection of UAL payments.
• Now, that's just the UAL payment.
• Right, but now that's just the UAL payment.

Summary: The Public Retirement System Actuarial Committee met on Monday, June 22, with a quorum present and approved the prior meeting minutes. There was no public comment. The main item was an actuarial update from Ms. Johnson on LASERS, prompted by House Bill 312 of 2026, which appropriated about $145 million to LASERS and required the committee to revise the projected fiscal year 2027 employer contribution rate to reflect the funds received. Ms. Johnson explained that $87.6 million was applied to the original amortization base, paying it off, and the remaining $57.9 million was applied to the experience account amortization base. As a result, the projected aggregate employer contribution rate for fiscal year 2027 was reduced from 32.51% to 30.05%, a decrease of 2.46%, with the projected employer contribution amount revised to about $738.7 million. She also noted that the original amortization base balance would be zero by June 30, 2026, while the experience account amortization base would continue to be paid down over time. Committee members asked about the longer-term impact of the changes, including a question about projected savings in 2036. Ms. Johnson said the later-year savings would depend on future actuarial experience and investment performance, but the projected UAL payment in that year would be lower under the revised schedule. The committee then moved to adopt the revised projected fiscal year 2027 LASERS contribution rate of 30.05% by plan, the motion was seconded, and it passed without opposition. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> this program only makes payments this program only makes payments to<00:03:34.560><c> companies<
• ><c> that</c> rata payments or partial payments, that rata payments or partial payments, that sort<00
• </c> get a payment they were hoping to get. get a payment they were hoping to get.
• </c><00:10:22.880><c> and</c><00:10:23.000><c> then</c> make payments and then make payments and then
• I mean, or is it payments weren't made?

Transcript Highlights:

• The fees are typically incurred when customers make just-in-time payments.
• , and then there's a cost to the business to that entity to process the payments.
• My other question was the just-in-time payment.
• Could you educate me on what a just-in-time payment is?
• I don't know that it costs $30 to process an electronic payment.

Committee: Senate Commerce and Tourism

Transcript Highlights:

• payments?
• to claw back previous payments from January and December.
• It's okay if they miss a payment.
• payment systems. would you apply this previous experience to improve the payment processing systems
• And improper payments is a part of this as well.

Committee: Senate Finance Committee

Keywords: Social Security, Medicaid, Frank Bisignano, Elon Musk, benefit processing, office closures, public testimony, administration policies, health care, vulnerable populations

Summary: The committee meeting focused heavily on the nomination of Frank Bisignano as the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, with intense discussions around the current state of Social Security and its management under the current administration. Members voiced significant concerns regarding potential changes to Social Security and Medicaid, specifically addressing issues such as office closures, delays in benefit processing, and the perceived policies from Elon Musk's association with the administration. Public testimonies highlighted fears that these changes would severely impact the accessibility of benefits for seniors and vulnerable individuals, resulting in a chaotic environment at the SSA. Members expressed a unified opposition to the notion of dismantling these critical programs, emphasizing the long-term implications on their constituents' well-being.

Transcript Highlights:

• our ability to make these payments more quickly.
• payments that I’m talking about.
• You shared some examples on increasing the payments and then the payment lag, but can you share a little
• Would that be the same for the increases in payment? In terms of how are we increasing the payment?
• Yeah, how are you increasing the payment?

Summary: The subcommittee heard a lengthy Department of Health Care Services presentation on the governor’s Medi-Cal budget, including a $229.1 billion total-funds proposal, projected Medi-Cal enrollment declines as redeterminations continue, and several major cost drivers such as managed care growth, Medicare-related costs, pharmacy spending, and changes tied to federal policy. Members focused heavily on the elimination of Prop. 56 dental supplemental payments beginning July 1, 2026, questioning the likely impact on provider participation and utilization. DHCS said it is completing the required rate reduction/access analysis for CMS, has been holding stakeholder meetings and issuing provider bulletins, but could not yet quantify the real-world effect. The committee also discussed a $50 million savings proposal tied to new hospice utilization management authority and asked about possible effects on emergency dental care and provider participation. The hearing then moved through the November 2025 family health estimate and several county and program administration issues, including CCS, GHPP, and Every Woman Counts. DHCS said family health costs are rising despite slight caseload declines because of higher utilization and medical costs, and members raised concerns about CCS website accessibility, county administrative funding, and the transition of youth aging out of CCS. The department said most CCS beneficiaries are also on Medi-Cal, that counties have long raised funding concerns, and that it had clarified use of maintenance-and-operations dollars to address some county workload issues. Members also asked about Every Woman Counts potentially seeing higher demand as Medi-Cal changes take effect; DHCS said that is possible and that the program has multiple funding sources including General Fund. A major portion of the hearing focused on provider taxes and federal changes under H.R. 1, especially the Medi-Cal managed care organization tax and the hospital quality assurance fee. DHCS explained that H.R. 1 restricts new or increased health care-related taxes, phases down allowable tax levels over time, and tightens “generally redistributive” rules, which could sharply reduce the state’s ability to use the MCO tax for Medi-Cal financing. Members asked whether the Legislature could amend Prop. 35 or whether voters would need to act; DHCS said a three-fourths legislative amendment may be possible if it aligns with the measure’s purpose, but the department is still evaluating options. The committee also discussed hospital financing, with DHCS describing recent increases in state-directed payments and the effect of H.R. 1 in capping those payments at Medicare levels, and the LAO noting the tradeoff between preserving provider taxes and maintaining Medi-Cal funding. The subcommittee also reviewed a series of DHCS budget change proposals and trailer bill items, including managed care final-rule implementation, managed care operations, a hospital value strategy, a one-year extension of skilled nursing facility financing, long-term care payment transparency, and interoperability/prior authorization requirements. Members repeatedly questioned the use of limited-term versus permanent positions, the overlap among proposals, and the timing of new financing reforms. DHCS said the SNF extension would preserve current workforce standards, sanctions, growth limits, and the SNF quality assurance fee while the department develops a broader 2027-28 redesign. No votes were taken; items were repeatedly held open for later action. Covered California then presented on the expiration of the federal enhanced premium tax credit and the resulting affordability crisis. The agency said Californians will lose about $2.5 billion in premium assistance for 2026, average premiums could nearly double for many enrollees, and as many as 400,000 people could eventually leave marketplace coverage. Open enrollment ended with 1.9 million sign-ups, down 3% from the prior year, with especially steep declines among middle-income consumers and increased movement into bronze plans. Covered California said the state’s $190 million affordability subsidy is helping lower-income enrollees retain coverage, but cannot fully replace the lost federal assistance. Members also asked about the Health Care Affordability Reserve Fund, repayment of loans from that fund, the status of federal review of California’s essential health benefits benchmark, and implementation of the new gender-affirming care benefit under AB 144.

Transcript Highlights:

• payments that I'm talking about.
• You shared some examples on increasing the payments and then the payment lag.
• You shared some examples on increasing the payments and then the payment lag.
• That would be the same for the increases in payment? In terms of how are we increasing the payment?
• Yeah, how are you increasing the payment?

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, modernizing payments.
• Um, modernizing payments.
• Um modernizing payments. We've had side. Um modernizing payments.
• </c> rules around those payment stable coins. rules around those payment stable coins.
• They can use it for payments. They don't care what the payments are done for.

Summary: The commission met to review stable tokens, real-world asset tokenization, and blockchain-based trust, approved the agenda and December 12 minutes, and heard a presentation from Anchorage Digital after postponing a planned Bitco presentation because of its IPO quiet period. Anchorage’s Melinda Delos, Joe Mioli, and Kevin Wasaki introduced the firm, describing it as a global digital assets platform and the first crypto-native institution in the U.S. to receive a federal banking charter. They said their approach emphasizes security, regulated custody and trading services, and responsible innovation for institutional clients, banks, states, and sovereigns. The presentation focused on post-Genius Act momentum in the stablecoin market. Anchorage said the law provided regulatory clarity and helped spur activity with major clients, including Athena, Tether, and Western Union. The speakers highlighted Western Union’s planned stablecoin as especially significant because it reflects adoption by a long-established traditional payments company, and they said the project illustrates how stablecoins can support programmable, real-time, interoperable payments. They also noted that Anchorage is providing issuance infrastructure for the Western Union project. The commission and presenters also discussed government uses of tokenized assets, including reserve legislation, digital assets for tax collection and fees, and a Marshall Islands initiative to use a tokenized sovereign bond for direct citizen payments. In response to a question, Anchorage said it would follow up on which states are using digital assets for revenue collection, mentioning Louisiana and Pennsylvania as examples. The banking discussion centered on remittances, instant payments, and interbank settlement, with Anchorage arguing that stablecoins can reduce settlement time, fees, and foreign exchange risk while improving traceability and auditability.

Transcript Highlights:

• The city of Jericho was granted a payment agreement less than 10% allowed by the law.
• The city made the following payments totaling over $2,600. This is a repeat finding.
• , and then once they receive those payments, they transfer and sign off on those receipts or payments
• doing that monthly check register to make sure we're able to verify all those payments.
• Invoices and timesheets were not properly approved prior to payment.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES

Summary: The committee approved the February 12 minutes and then received updates on delinquent municipal water and sewer reports, noting substantial progress in bringing cities back into compliance. Several items were deferred at the request of local officials, including Fargo’s municipal accounting code report, Jericho’s misuse of street funds matter, Biggers, Holly Grove, Gilmore, and several private water and sewer reports lacking proper responses. The committee also filed a number of reports with no questions or with resolved findings. A lengthy portion of the meeting focused on repeat audit findings and management responses. The City of Strong’s mayor described corrective steps on undeposited funds, improper use of solid waste funds, unsupported spending, IRS payroll tax issues, accounting controls, restricted fund transfers, and budget overruns; the committee commended the city’s efforts and filed the report. Calhoun County’s report, involving improper county spending for an appreciation banquet and altered receipts in the collector’s office, was also filed after discussion about educating local officials on constitutional spending limits. Other reports filed included Salem, Briarcliffe, Compton Water Association, and Montgomery County Regional Public Water Authority, while several private water reports were deferred or referred to prosecutors and the Attorney General. The committee reviewed a major regional solid waste management districts report, with significant findings for Pulaski County and Faulkner County involving unapproved payroll items, missing documentation, vehicle and cell phone use, lack of competitive bids, and weak internal controls; Benton County had fewer issues, and several districts had no findings. On motion, the Pulaski County report was deferred so district representatives could answer questions. The committee also heard from Nevada County, where unauthorized withdrawals and interlocal landfill agreement problems were discussed; the county judge said the issues were being corrected, and the report was filed. Later, the committee heard from the City of Grubbs about long-standing IRS debt and from Cross County Rural Water System about overdue audit posting and water quality problems; both witnesses described corrective efforts and ongoing funding or infrastructure projects, and the committee filed the reports after extensive discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• office overpayments, or duplicate invoice payments.
• They approve the payments.
• Most vendors are paid under net 30 payment terms.
• We also have vendors who have ACH payments.
• payment into two.

Summary: The committee met to receive a detailed financial operations presentation from the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agency, with staff walking members through funding sources, budgeting, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and grants management. Sabrina Walker explained VR’s blended funding structure, including federal grants, state appropriations, program income, and interagency contracts, and emphasized that state funds are essential to meeting the federal match and maintenance-of-effort requirements. Members asked repeatedly about transparency, audit controls, and the risk that state cuts could reduce federal drawdowns; staff responded that all reports reconcile back to the SCEIS accounting system, are subject to state audits and internal reviews, and that even modest state reductions could significantly reduce total available funding. The committee also discussed pre-employment transition services for students with disabilities, with staff confirming services are offered through school districts, charters, and private schools, and that contracts are monitored for performance and compliance. The presentation then shifted to budgeting and internal controls. Walker described a zero-based departmental budgeting process, monthly monitoring reports, contingency reserves for unexpected expenses, and a formal annual cycle that culminates in board approval. Members asked about facilities tracking, culture, and how the agency maintains accountability; staff said facilities staff inspect buildings and equipment, supervisors justify line-item requests, and the process has become smoother over time as departments learned the system. Cynthia Johnson followed with an accounts receivable overview, describing invoicing, receipting, aging, customer verification, year-end reporting, and the use of cross-training, shared email inboxes, and spreadsheets as checks and balances. She also explained work training center billing, interdepartmental transfers, and the revolving fund used to issue consumer checks more quickly than standard vendor payments. Olivia Perez presented accounts payable operations, including invoice processing through SCEIS and OnBase, the three-way match, travel reimbursements, revolving fund checks, State Treasury Office interactions, and handling of reversals, rejections, and levy notices. She reported that AP processed 67,723 SCEIS payments, 13,670 case management system invoices, 3,379 travel reimbursements, and 15,693 revolving fund checks in fiscal year 2025, with only 70 payment rejections. The final portion of the meeting covered Grants and Funds Management, where Walker explained federal reporting, drawdowns, payroll allocation, asset tracking, lease and IT contract reviews, cost allocation, and closing packages. She noted upcoming system changes such as S/4HANA, Workiva, and SC Pro, but said the agency is receiving training and feedback opportunities. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the presentation portion beyond approval of the prior minutes and a brief recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• In any event, a payment stable coin or token must be used or designed to be used for payments.
• In any event, a payment stable coin or token must be used or designed to be used for payments.
• </c><00:18:54.720><c> Um</c> it to be a payment stable token. Um it to be a payment stable token.
• </c> with the payment. with the payment.
• They're a payment mechanism, a payment structure.

Summary: The commission met on November 12 and first approved the September 17 and October 15 draft minutes unanimously after brief discussion. Members also identified themselves for the record, including a new member from Bumpsk Bank, a staff attorney from the Secretary of State’s Bureau of Securities Regulation, a prior crypto commission participant, and a uniform law commissioner involved in tokenization projects. The main presentation was by UNH law professor Seth Orinberg, who discussed the federal GENIUS Act and the pending Clarity Act and how they affect New Hampshire’s options in the digital asset space. He described the GENIUS Act as governing payment stablecoins/stable tokens, defining them as blockchain-based assets used primarily for payments, redeemable for a fixed amount of national currency, and required to maintain stable value. He said the law creates three possible state roles: hosting federally qualified issuers, becoming a state qualifier for issuers up to a $10 billion threshold, or exploring state-backed issuance as a sovereign. He noted that the state-qualification path would require conforming legislation, examination capacity, and coordination with Treasury, while the sovereign-issuer theory is legally uncertain and may become a test case. Orinberg also outlined the core compliance framework he said applies to covered issuers: 100% reserve backing in high-quality liquid assets, monthly public reserve reporting, no yield or interest-like rewards, segregation of reserve assets, immediate redemption at face value, and anti-money-laundering/know-your-customer obligations. He then turned to the Clarity Act, describing it as a broader market-structure bill that would create categories such as digital asset, digital commodity, digital security, and ancillary asset, with self-certification procedures for issuers. He said the two federal laws together would separate payments from investments, preempt inconsistent state standards for covered payment stablecoins, and likely reshape the boundaries of state authority over digital assets.

Transcript Highlights:

• This allows a permanent withholding of payment to entities who have a credible allegation of fraud.
• This allows a permanent withholding of payment to entities who have a credible allegation of fraud.
• Thank you. of payment to entities who have a of payment to entities who have a credible<00:04:07.000>
• </c> other agencies to also withhold payment other agencies to also withhold payment when<00:04:19.720
• ><c> for</c><00:05:02.880><c> credible</c> withholding of payment for credible withholding of payment

Transcript Highlights:

• toward TRS liabilities began in payments toward TRS liabilities began in 2016<00:05:04.320><c> with<
• </c><00:05:14.400><c> for</c> budget Cycles projected payments for budget Cycles projected payments for
• are projected to continue to payments are projected to continue to increase<00:05:34.039><c> more</c
• beyond the expected two billion in annual payments for unfunded liability.
• c><00:16:20.399><c> payments</c><00:16:20.959><c> for</c><00:16:21.240><c> unfunded</c> in annual payments

Summary: The Senate State and Local Government Committee met and first took up Senate Bill 193, described as a simple measure to restore a wallet card for jailers to carry when outside the jail. The chair noted the fiscal impact was essentially zero, there were no questions, and the committee voted to pass the bill 9-0. The committee then heard Senate Bill 9, a proposal focused on the Teachers’ Retirement System (TRS). The sponsor argued TRS remains underfunded despite large state contributions, cited rising unfunded liability and negative cash flow, and said the bill is intended to standardize and limit what sick leave, personal leave, and annual leave can count toward retirement calculations. The bill would generally cap TRS retirement credit at 10 sick days and 2 personal days per year, prevent annual leave from being rolled into sick leave, require more uniform reporting and oversight from participating districts and agencies, and shift costs to districts that offer benefits beyond TRS limits. The sponsor also said the bill would add 30 maternity leave days, allow voluntary supplemental contributions for Tier Four teachers, and include a floor amendment directing the state auditor to audit TRS and report on agency leave policies. During the presentation, the sponsor emphasized fairness, transparency, and accountability, and used a hypothetical high-salary administrator to illustrate how leave payouts can increase retirement benefits and create additional unfunded liability. Senator Mills thanked the sponsor and said members had been working to understand the issue, but no committee action on Senate Bill 9 was completed in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to our second meeting of the Special Legislative Commission to study the future of payments and
• I've worked on payments policy for about 20 years, most of those as a staffer for U.S.
• efficient payments for consumers and businesses.
• Today, the payments industry is not simply a financial service.
• These are high-quality jobs that spread across the industries, not just in payments.

Summary: The commission met to continue studying credit card payments, interchange fees, fraud, chargebacks, and the impact of card processing costs on small businesses, especially restaurants and retailers. Members heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, restaurant owners, payment-industry representatives, and an airline trade group. Supporters of reform argued that swipe fees are a major and rising expense, that businesses are paying fees on sales tax and tips that are merely pass-through amounts, and that merchants have little negotiating power. Several restaurant and retail witnesses described thin margins, higher costs for card-not-present transactions, and chargebacks that they said usually favor cardholders and leave merchants absorbing losses and fees. Witnesses from the Cooperative Credit Union Association cautioned that state-level interchange regulation could reduce revenue used for fraud prevention, compliance, and member services, and could lead to higher rates or reduced access. Retail and restaurant representatives countered that fees have risen sharply, that statements are difficult to decipher, and that rewards programs and card-network pricing are subsidized by merchants and ultimately by all consumers. The Massachusetts Restaurant Association and independent operators urged legislation to bar fees on tax and tip portions of transactions and to allow businesses to pass along card fees if they choose, saying this would improve transparency and fairness and help keep small restaurants open. Other testimony came from the National Restaurant Association, which supported interchange reform and said modern point-of-sale systems can already separate tax and tip amounts, and from a payments-industry group that emphasized the broader economic benefits of digital payments and warned against state-by-state rules. Airlines for America opposed changes that could undermine airline credit card rewards programs. Commission members asked detailed questions about fee structures, card types, chargebacks, POS systems, and whether consumers paying cash are also affected. No votes or formal actions were taken at the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've worked on payments policy for about 20 years, most of those as a staffer for U.S.
• Today, the payments industry is not simply a financial service.
• These are high-quality jobs that spread across industries, not just in payments.
• There is a value to digital payments, as was pointed out by the representative PWC.
• But all of these payment options, whether it's...

Summary: The commission met to hear testimony on the future of credit card payments and swipe fees, with a focus on impacts to small businesses, especially restaurants and retailers. Members and witnesses discussed interchange fees, processing fees, chargebacks, fraud risk, rewards programs, and the growing use of card-not-present and digital wallet transactions. Several witnesses urged the commission to support legislation that would prohibit fees on the tax and tip portions of transactions and allow businesses to pass credit card fees on to customers if they choose, while others warned that state regulation of interchange could reduce fraud protections and harm consumer rewards programs. Small business owners and trade groups described rising costs and thin margins, saying card fees are now among their largest expenses and are often charged on money that is merely passing through the business, such as sales tax and gratuities. Restaurant representatives said the current system shifts fraud and chargeback losses onto merchants, with little ability to negotiate rates or recover disputed funds, and argued that transparency and fee relief would help keep independent businesses open. Retailers gave similar testimony, citing rising swipe fees, complex statements, and the burden of online and phone transactions. A representative from the airline industry opposed interchange reform, arguing that airline credit card rewards are popular with consumers and support travel and jobs in Massachusetts. Credit union representatives cautioned that state-level interchange limits could weaken fraud prevention and force higher rates or reduced services, while the National Restaurant Association and a payments-policy attorney countered that banks and networks already operate under fee caps in other contexts and that interchange rates are fixed rather than competitive. Commission members asked questions about how chargebacks work, how fees are broken down, whether businesses can negotiate with processors or POS providers, and how consumer behavior has shifted toward cards, online ordering, and delivery since the pandemic. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's why that payment.
• So those payments are well above.
• For grandfathered payments...
• the Medicare payment rate.
• However, each year, CMS adjusts Medicare payment rates, so the new upper payment limit will grow over

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, the law says monthly, but this committee can approve alternative payments.
• It will reflect those payments. Thank you, ma'am. Okay.
• Who approved the payment is what I...
• The receipt books in which these payments were recorded could not be located.
• The receipt books in which these payments were recorded could not be located.

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES

Summary: The committee first approved a motion by voice vote, then received updates on delinquent private water and sewer reports. For the 2012 reports, staff said five additional 2024 reports had been received since the December meeting, bringing the total to 17 with escrow funds released and 26 still escrowed. For the 2023 delinquent reports, two more had come in, leaving five outstanding; both reports were filed without objection. The committee then focused on Act 709 repayment issues for the town of Daisy. Audit staff said Daisy had made unauthorized payments to a nonprofit and had used restricted street funds for fire-related expenses, and that the town had not yet adopted the required repayment ordinance. Mayor Lisa Cogburn said the council had not approved repayment because members disputed the amount, though she said the town had funds to pay. After discussion about the audit calculations and statutory repayment requirements, the committee adopted a motion requiring 10% repayment of the street fund under the statute and providing that failure to comply would result in withholding turnback funds. The Daisy report was then filed. The committee reviewed numerous additional audit findings from cities, counties, and water departments. Several local officials appeared and described corrective steps, including reconciliation work in Harrison and Carroll County, revenue-code corrections in Izard County, monthly bond-pending reviews in Alexander, fixed-asset documentation and receipt procedures in the town of 56, and bookkeeping/receipt improvements in Ozan and Lee County. Some matters were deferred, including several private water and sewer reports and Green Forest, while others were filed. Reports involving more serious issues were referred to the prosecuting attorney and Attorney General, including Bull Shoals, Lone Oak County, Beaver, Central City, Gravette, Ralston Water Department, Thornton Waterworks, and others. The committee also filed 19 reports with resolved findings and 53 reports with no findings, and adjourned with the next meeting set for February 12, 2026.