Transcript Highlights:

• That's hard to measure based on how much it will be utilized or not.
• that it addresses the 72-hour limitation on the confinement of a status offender who has violated a valid
• House Bill number 140 by Representative Mooney, relating to public utilities, specifically sewer systems

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I do think that it is a fair and valid point as to whether or not families and these communities could
• In my view, by the IOUs, the investor-owned utilities, we believe that this local fund and the local
• That more affordable just based on the savings that they generate from the U.S. utility bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• description doesn't match the registration, and then they would decide at that point, this is not a valid
• The registration, and then they would decide at that point, this is not a valid violation.
• This is not a valid violation, so therefore we are not going to issue a summons.

Keywords: House Committee Room B, General Assembly Building, 976, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The witness explained that the intent was to have only those with full, valid licensure be able to receive
• The witness responded that the intent was to have only those with full, valid licensure receive the grant
• Their understanding of the intent was that only those with full, valid licensure should be able to receive

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a valid one, and I would just concede that your concerns are valid.
• Comments in the Higher Education analysis showed valid concerns.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee met in a special hearing and took up SB 638 by Senator Padilla, a workforce development bill aimed at creating a coordinating entity called the Middle Class Pipeline Project. The bill would streamline interagency education and workforce programs, improve career technical education and career pathways, and direct resources toward high-unemployment, low-income regions through changes to the CTE incentive grant program. Supporters, including the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, the California Edge Coalition, National University, Long Beach City College, and United Ways of California, argued that California needs a statewide coordinating body to reduce silos, improve access to high-quality jobs, and better align education with labor market needs. Committee members focused heavily on whether the proposed entity would duplicate existing bodies such as the California Workforce Development Board and other education/workforce agencies, and whether its broad duties could be carried out with the $1.5 million budget allocation. The author said the bill is intended to move an operational coordinating entity into broader tri-party negotiations with legislative leadership and the Governor, and that the final structure and staffing would depend on those talks. Some members supported the concept but raised concerns about scope, duplication, and whether the bill should be delayed or audited; one member opposed it as too broad and underfunded. The committee ultimately voted to pass SB 638 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a courtesy vote. The roll call showed five ayes and three noes, with one member not voting, and the chair later allowed additional members to add on, including an additional aye from Assemblymember Haney. The hearing then adjourned with the chair noting that further conversations would continue on the coordinating entity and its responsibilities.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think Representative Burch has a valid point. how ITA funds are allocated.
• I think Representative Burch has a valid point. Representative Burch has a valid point.
• Representative Burch has a valid point. Representative Burch has a valid point.
• Representative Tur: Um yeah, I think those are valid points, and, you know, I would add that during the
• Representative Tur: Um yeah, I think those are valid points, and, you know, I would add that during the

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee began by explaining that the meeting was a work session and that votes would only be taken where there was clear consensus. CACR 6, the proposed constitutional amendment on a “right to compute,” was discussed first but not acted on because the prime sponsor was absent. Members raised concerns about whether the issue belonged in the constitution and what the amendment would mean in practice, and the chair recessed the matter for a future meeting. HB 74, concerning the definition of “citizen” for the right-to-know law and disclosure of preliminary drafts circulated to a quorum or majority of a public body, drew little support. Members noted the Senate’s prior rejection of a related bill and agreed the proposal was unlikely to advance. A motion to ITL the bill passed unanimously by roll call, 15-0, and the bill was placed on the consent calendar. HB 232, dealing with rights of conscience for medical professionals, was also recessed. Members said they had not yet seen the amendment, which was described as narrowing the bill to abortion-related issues and limiting penalties. Several members said they could not judge the bill without the amendment and expected disagreement, so the chair recessed it. HB 253, on interest-bearing pooled trust accounts maintained by lawyers, was discussed at length; the chair said the bill did not address the underlying IOLTA issue and would likely create conflict with the bar and judiciary. Members cited existing Supreme Court procedures and suggested the bill was unnecessary. A straw vote showed support for interim study and ITL, and the committee ultimately voted 15-0 to place HB 253 on consent. HB 293, aimed at preventing minors from accessing obscene material on internet-connected devices, prompted substantial debate. Members generally supported the goal but objected to the bill’s private right of action, its focus on manufacturers rather than content providers or internet platforms, uncertainty about the filtering technology required, and concerns about defining obscenity on a national rather than community basis. The committee discussed forming a subcommittee to work on the bill further, and members volunteered to serve, indicating the issue would be revisited rather than voted on immediately.

Transcript Highlights:

• While our sheriff currently utilizes an app system that local residents and or visitors can utilize to
• We utilize our websites, and we do utilize Code Red for imminent or level one threats.
• And it wasn't being utilized just because, hey, we're not letting you in.
• So that's their call, but I think you make a valid point.
• There are many military events that have utilized this.

Summary: The joint Senate and House disaster preparedness and flooding hearing opened with quorum calls, prayer, testimony time limits, and remarks from legislative leaders emphasizing decorum, respect, and the goal of learning from the July 4 flood to prevent future loss of life. Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick and Speaker Dustin Burrows said the special session and hearings were intended to hear directly from local officials and residents, and that the state would pursue immediate and longer-term legislation and continue working beyond the current session. The committee then heard invited testimony from Kerr County, Kerrville, Kendall County, Real County, and the Upper Guadalupe River Authority, followed by member questions. Kerr County Judge Rob Kelly, Sheriff Larry Leitha, and emergency management coordinator William B. Thomas described the flood as a sudden, unprecedented event that overwhelmed local systems before many officials or residents understood the danger. They said the county received multiple National Weather Service and IPAWS alerts, but the rain fell in remote upstream areas with limited gauges, and the flood rose too quickly for normal response. They detailed the emergency response, including dispatchers handling heavy call volumes, deputies and volunteer firefighters conducting rescues, and state and federal partners assisting. County officials said 108 people died, including 37 children, and two remained missing. They called for better real-time flood detection, stronger rural emergency management resources, improved broadband and cell coverage, and more funding for swift-water rescue and warning systems. Kerrville Mayor Joe Herring and City Manager Dalton Rice said the city had floodplain rules, emergency plans, and prior preparedness efforts, but the event exposed gaps in communications and regional warning capacity. They urged the Legislature to fund a flood warning system, whether sirens, automated alerts, or a hybrid, and asked for support for predictive weather modeling, broadband expansion, a hazard mitigation fund, and disaster recovery resources. The Upper Guadalupe River Authority said it had long funded gauges and pursued flood-warning and mitigation projects, including a new software-based flood prediction system and possible retention dams, and planned to dedicate reserve funds to feasibility studies and infrastructure improvements. Kendall County Judge Shane Stolarczyk said his county’s emergency action plan and early alerts helped prevent deaths there, and he recommended easier access to alerting tools, a river-wide warning system, simpler grant applications, and regional coordination. Real County Judge Bella Rubio said rural counties face major challenges because of limited cell service, broadband, staffing, and funding, especially for camps and visitors along the Frio and Nueces rivers, and argued that reliable alert systems should be treated as a necessity, not a luxury. Members asked about the timeline of the flood, low-water crossings, communications failures, sirens, bridges, and funding, and several witnesses said the key lessons were better communications, better warning systems, and more investment in rural flood mitigation and emergency response.

Transcript Highlights:

• They’re struggling to feed their kids, facing sky-high utility bills.
• And I want to further validate with facts that the growing AAPI populations throughout Texas deserve
• and therefore critique them so that when we provide testimony to you, it's testimony that has some validity
• It's testimony that has some validity. I thank you for your consideration.

Summary: The Senate Special Committee on Congressional Redistricting met virtually for its West Texas regional hearing, established a quorum, and explained that the hearing was part of a series of statewide information-gathering sessions before any map was filed. The chair outlined the Zoom procedures, the two-minute testimony limit, and the availability of written comments through the committee’s public portal. Senators also discussed the logistics and transparency of the process, including the expectation that any proposed map or amendment would be made public once filed and that additional hearings would follow. Senator Blanco, whose district includes West Texas and the border region, said the area’s communities of interest should be kept together and warned against repeating the loss of representation that followed the last redistricting cycle. Senators Alvarado, Hinojosa, Miles, and others debated the value of virtual hearings versus in-person hearings, the number of people who had testified, and whether the committee could subpoena witnesses after the regional hearings ended. The chair said he was awaiting legal guidance and would consider a subpoena motion at a formal meeting the next day. A lengthy exchange also occurred over the tone of public testimony and the chair’s view that some comments directed at Republicans and the president had been offensive or historically inaccurate. Invited witnesses and public commenters largely opposed mid-decade redistricting and argued that any new map should reflect population growth, especially among Latino and other minority communities, and comply with the Voting Rights Act. Nina Perales of MALDEF said the hearings were not meaningful without a draft map and testified that Texas has a long history of discriminatory redistricting; senators questioned her about litigation, DOJ’s July 7 letter, and the 2021 congressional map. Tania Chavez Camacho, Luis Figueroa, and several El Paso residents emphasized that maps should preserve communities of interest, avoid cracking and packing, and be transparent and participatory. A smaller number of witnesses supported redistricting, including one El Paso resident who said the current districting leaves the area underrepresented and another who argued that some communities want to return to a map closer to the earlier District 16 configuration. Several witnesses also criticized the DOJ letter as inconsistent with the state’s position that the 2021 maps were drawn race-blind, while others said the current process was too rushed and lacked sufficient public input.

Transcript Highlights:

• But just to be clear, and I get it, you're not an attorney, but to be clear, you're resting the validity
• Because I think Senator Smith makes a very valid point that if this does not, if this vague type of language
• delegating to the Commissioner of Agriculture in this bill are powers that the governor regularly utilizes
• than anything, I want to thank everyone for taking the time to discuss their points, those things valid

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum, prayer, and the Pledge of Allegiance, then read an amended joint proclamation expanding the special session call to include financial penalties for government officials, criminal penalties for offenses committed by illegal aliens, and programs and appropriations to support law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. No committee reports, governor’s messages, or House messages were on the desk before the chamber moved to the special order calendar. The main item was Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2B, the immigration bill, along with a late-filed strike-all amendment by Senator Gruters. Gruters said the amendment aligned terminology with federal law, increased penalties for crimes by unauthorized aliens, added transnational crime organizations to gang definitions, required stronger participation in the federal 287(g) program, created financial penalties for noncompliance, offered a $1,000 bonus for officers assisting ICE in large operations, directed more information-sharing with federal agencies, and barred DHSMV from issuing licenses or IDs to unauthorized aliens. He framed the bill as supporting President Trump’s immigration agenda and focusing on criminal illegal aliens rather than street-level enforcement. A long question-and-answer period followed, with Senators Polsky, Pizzo, Smith, Jones, Roscoe, Berman, and others pressing the sponsor on scope, legality, costs, and implementation. Questions focused on whether the bill would require participation beyond jails and detention centers, whether schools or churches could be affected, liability and immunity for local agencies, the size and purpose of the proposed appropriations, and the impact on undocumented students receiving in-state tuition waivers. Gruters and Senator Fine said the 287(g) provisions were intended to apply to jails and detention facilities, that green-card holders and lawful residents would not be affected, and that the tuition waiver repeal would end discounted tuition for students in the country illegally while not affecting their ability to attend. Fine also defended the mandatory death penalty provision for certain capital offenses committed by illegal immigrants, acknowledging it would likely be challenged in court but arguing the bill was designed to test and advance the policy. No final vote or other action on the bill is reflected in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• utilities utilities um<05:25:02.400> that<05:25:02.558> would<05:25:02.840> produce
• What's the justification for the utility tax property exemption?
• Not really to answer that last question, utilities are different.
• It's what the SWEPT rate was back in 2001, and it stayed at $6.60 per thousand for utilities.
• It hasn't been part of this excess SWEPT because utilities don't have to pay the SWEPT tax; they are

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on HB 563, which would revise the education funding formula for pupils receiving special education services by replacing the current single special education amount with three differentiated categories. Representative Rick Ladd, the prime sponsor, said the bill largely tracks a House-passed version from the prior session with minor figure adjustments, and explained that the proposal uses projected FY26 amounts for three categories based on time in general education versus more intensive placements. He also noted that the bill does not address catastrophic aid directly, but that special education aid, CAT aid, and proration all remain issues for later work sessions. Ladd and supporters argued that weighted categories better reflect actual costs and are more sustainable than treating all IEPs the same. Representative Margaret Drye said the approach was one of the best ideas from the education funding subcommittee and urged the committee to support differentiated aid. Representative Ames asked how the category amounts were derived, and Ladd said Category A follows the FY26 base, Category B is a higher weight, and Category C is a still higher weight for more intensive services, though he acknowledged the exact multipliers were developed earlier and could be revisited. He also said the committee would continue discussing whether the weights are appropriate and how they interact with CAT aid. Testimony from Bonnie Dunham strongly opposed the bill. She argued that funding based on placement rather than actual service need would create incentives to move students into more restrictive settings, could stigmatize children with labels such as "Category C," and would undermine the least restrictive environment requirements under federal special education law. She described her son’s experience in inclusive settings as beneficial and said the bill would have penalized the district for serving him there. In response to questions, she said schools and parents should base funding on the child’s actual needs and costs, not on placement, and urged the committee to recommend the bill inexpedient to legislate.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're watching it go by, and other people are utilizing it, and we have a great opportunity to utilize
• And it's taking advantage of how to utilize that surface water because I think that was what the study
• Our role in Century Code is that the research we conduct ultimately must be important to the utilization
• So if you are a really smart farmer with a big idea, or you are an... ...utilization.
• We're able to provide the match funding necessary for them to utilize that funding to the best of their

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're watching it go by, and other people are utilizing it, and we have a great opportunity to utilize
• And it's taking advantage of how to utilize that surface water, because I think that was what the study
• Our role in Century Code is that the research we conduct ultimately must be important to the utilization
• So if you are a really smart farmer with a big idea, or you are an... ...utilization.
• We're able to provide the match funding necessary for them to utilize that funding to the best of their

Summary: The committee met in Fargo and approved the minutes from the March 31 meeting before hearing a series of informational presentations focused on North Dakota agriculture, water, and research. NDSU President David Cook opened with remarks about NDSU’s land-grant mission, emphasizing statewide service through research, teaching, and extension, and highlighting examples such as the Lilac Agriculture startup and the university’s role in applying research to real-world problems. He said he intends to spend time listening across the state to better understand local needs. The committee then received a detailed presentation on a state irrigation and drainage study from Tom Bodine on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring. The study projected significant potential for expanded irrigation acreage, especially in counties such as McLean, Williams, Sargent, Burleigh, Mountrail, McKenzie, McIntosh, Dunn, and Bottineau, and estimated major economic gains from irrigation, including higher farm returns and support for value-added agriculture. Members discussed water permits, surface water versus aquifers, infrastructure, drought resilience, and the role of legal drains in improving productivity and generating economic activity. The presenters also noted that the full report is available online. Dr. Greg Lardy followed with NDSU’s required interim report, outlining the university’s agricultural research and extension system, including the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, seven research-extension centers, and the economic importance of agriculture to the state. He highlighted recent research impacts such as new crop varieties, potato breeding successes, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, weather-network tools, and 4-H programming. He also described NDSU’s budget priorities: restoring the governor’s proposed 10% cuts, additional operating support, and deferred maintenance funding. Committee members asked about the new agricultural field lab, storage sheds, and NDSU’s partnership with Grand Farm. The committee also heard from the North Dakota Water Resources Research Institute and a professor presenting water-related research, including data center cooling, water reuse, smart irrigation, and a feasibility study on co-locating data centers with greenhouse and aquaculture production. Members asked about water use, ownership, and whether the concepts were operational or still speculative. Finally, North Dakota AgTech presented its NSF-funded innovation engine work, describing startup commercialization, on-farm trials, workforce development, and partnerships with NDSU, UND, tribal colleges, and other land-grant institutions. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the prior meeting minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was hoping that we were making a dent by either eliminating buildings that were no longer utilized,
• ...and look at the actual utilization of space and, based on the change in what's happening in higher
• There's components of that that include that space utilization.
• And it was utilized 15 years ago or so to come up with weights attaching for the different programs to
• It's still something that's there, and utilizing it for how you group the different programs together

Summary: The committee met to discuss higher education funding and capital building policy. Members first heard an update from NDUS Deputy Commissioner Lisa Johnson on low-producing academic programs. She described a proposed board policy using a five-year rolling window and thresholds of fewer than 10 undergraduate graduates or fewer than 5 graduate graduates, with programs flagged for three consecutive review periods going to the board. Possible outcomes would include continuation, continuation with modifications, inactivation, or termination. Members asked about how the review would account for program costs, service to other students, workforce demand, and the difference between inactivation and termination. Johnson said the board would consider broader factors and that campuses already do detailed program analysis. Several members also asked about cost savings and staffing impacts from program terminations, and Johnson said the board would try to provide more information later. The committee then received a report on the Capital Building Fund from Jamie Wilkie. He reviewed the program’s history, matching requirements, and recent uses, noting that about $334 million in state and matching dollars has been invested overall, with most going to deferred maintenance and extraordinary repairs. Members discussed whether the program is reducing deferred maintenance and requested updated systemwide data on deferred maintenance and campus space utilization. Wilkie said the board is considering a new study to update deferred maintenance figures, which are based on information more than 12 years old. He also reported that several institutions have used current biennium funds for projects such as residence hall renovations, health sciences housing, generators, and building repairs. Later, the committee began a detailed walkthrough of a draft bill that would replace the current higher education funding formula with an FTE-based model and also revise the capital building fund structure. The draft would use fall enrollment FTEs, add completion incentives for degrees in in-demand fields, and create a separate research funding component for UND and NDSU tied to doctoral completions and external research expenditures. Members raised concerns about the use of older data in the formula, the treatment of waivers, the weighting of professional and health sciences programs, and the use of CIP codes to define CTE and education incentives. The bill draft would also combine capital building fund tiers, broaden eligible uses for deferred maintenance and legislatively authorized projects, change matching requirements, repeal the old formula chapter and the capital pool, and transfer funds from the Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund into the capital building fund. No final votes were taken during the portion provided; the meeting was primarily discussion and review.

Transcript Highlights:

• I do want to ask about the utilization of the $60 million for the previous year and what that went to
• And there is no reporting requirement on what the utilization of the funds was, correct?
• That may be important too, but that truly the utilization of the resources is to maintain programs.
• That was the formula that was utilized last year. And is that the Finance?
• We have other physical therapy-type programs or occupational therapy programs that utilize those spaces

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the California Community Colleges budget proposal, including Proposition 98 funding, a 2.41% COLA for apportionments, enrollment growth funding, repayment of an apportionment deferral, and one-time investments for a student support block grant and deferred maintenance. The Department of Finance described the Governor’s package as providing significant new resources, while the LAO recommended prioritizing COLA and enrollment growth within available funds but raised concerns about some smaller proposals, including making the Healthy School Food Pathways Program ongoing and adding more funding for credit for prior learning before outcomes are known. The Chancellor’s Office supported the COLA, enrollment growth, and one-time investments, and said current projections suggest enrollment growth closer to 3%, with about $85 million to $90 million in ongoing costs if fully funded. Members focused heavily on enrollment growth, the 10% district cap, and whether the state should continue funding growth in the current year and budget year. The Chancellor’s Office said some districts, especially in the Inland Empire and Central Valley, are growing rapidly and that about seven districts are above the cap, with roughly 1,563 FTES and about $30 million in ongoing costs tied to that issue. Members also discussed hold-harmless districts and whether declining campuses should be required to produce turnaround or right-sizing plans. The Chancellor’s Office said districts are already having local conversations and that state funding provides time to adjust, but no formal plan requirement was proposed. The committee then took up common course numbering, where the Chancellor’s Office said all 115 community colleges have implemented the first phase and more than 550,000 students enrolled in the first six commonly numbered courses. The office argued that CCN improves clarity but does not yet guarantee that credits will transfer with full value across UC and CSU, because articulation is still handled campus by campus and can require more than 3,500 separate reviews. Members expressed concern that students can still be forced to retake courses such as calculus or ethnic studies even when they have the same common number, and urged the systems to develop a stronger statewide articulation mechanism tied to outcomes and transparency. The item was left open. Finally, the committee heard the Governor’s proposal to make Calbright College’s funding ongoing at $53.1 million. The LAO recommended instead transitioning Calbright to the student-centered funding formula, with one-time bridge funding in the meantime, arguing the Governor’s proposal lacks a clear enrollment-based rationale and performance expectations. Calbright’s leadership defended the college’s competency-based, flexible model for adult learners, citing more than 6,800 students served, over 2,200 certificates awarded, and wage gains for graduates; they said enrollment is expected to grow from about 7,000 students now to roughly 8,000 to 9,000 next year and around 10,000 over the next couple of years. Members pressed for clearer enrollment and funding data before deciding how Calbright should be funded going forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just want to ground us in the language that the SMHS is sometimes utilized synonymously with the MD
• So I just want to share that as you discuss the MD program being pulled out, I think that is a valid
• We've got a lot of talent, a lot of people here in North Dakota that we could utilize.
• We've got a lot of talent, a lot of people here in North Dakota that we could utilize.
• But is there a unique set that can be utilized for that with a formula specifically tied to those two

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Higher Education Funding Committee met to discuss possible changes to North Dakota’s higher education funding formula, with a particular focus on separating the UND School of Medicine and Health Sciences MD program from the general formula. Dr. Jenkins outlined several options for the MD program, including a fixed-funding model, a hybrid model, or keeping it in the formula, and emphasized the need to preserve strong support for medical education while making future funding clearer. He also discussed efforts to increase the share of North Dakota students in the MD program through ND85, expanded recruiting, early acceptance pathways, MCAT prep, a four-plus-one program, and the Primary Care Accelerated Track, along with future cost pressures such as AI licensing and residency growth. The committee then reviewed a simplified funding model from the University System Office that would base funding more heavily on student FTE, credentials awarded, and a few incentive factors such as small institution and research adjustments. Members questioned the use of placeholder numbers, the lack of a clear methodology for the small institution and research factors, and whether the model would adequately account for differences among institutions, high-cost programs, and graduate education. Several members raised concerns that arbitrary factors would be hard to defend politically and could distort funding or create competition between schools, while others said the exercise was useful as a starting point for discussion. Alex presented a second alternative that kept the current SIP-code structure but increased CTE weighting, added a progressive economic size factor, and separated out the MD program. His model also added an on-campus face-to-face headcount component and a credentials component, with the intent of rewarding in-person enrollment and completions. Members questioned the use of headcount instead of FTE, how hybrid, online, dual-credit, and off-campus students would be treated, and why face-to-face enrollment was weighted more heavily than completion. No formal votes or final actions were taken; the committee instead continued discussion and asked members to provide direction on which elements, if any, should be developed further.

Transcript Highlights:

• around supplementing, not supplanting, which will make it nearly impossible for public schools to utilize
• It is clearly going to be able to be utilized by the wealthy, people with access, people with networks
• who are also wealthy, and will be able to be utilized for students here in Arizona who are...
• Lewis: ...and will be able to be utilized for students here in Arizona who are already receiving a voucher
• chairman's prerogative, and I know we've got a lot of going back and forth here, but I think it's a valid

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:

• I actually don't know if there's a utility of calling it out, but would you have...
• I don't know if there's a utility of calling it out, but would you agree that your pretrial detention
• So I'm trying to understand, right now driving without a valid license is a misdemeanor crime.
• So are we sure we're allowed to create a state crime by utilizing federal law? Thank you, Mr.
• We're not utilizing federal law. We're making a state crime for something.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee took up SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. Gruters described the measure as a broad crackdown on illegal immigration that would replace a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, create a $250 million grant program for local law enforcement, fund additional Department of Agriculture interdiction staff and facilities, expand pretrial detention for certain unauthorized immigrants, increase criminal penalties, require more cooperation with ICE, and eliminate in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students. He and supporters framed the bill as a way to support law enforcement, deter illegal immigration, and align Florida with federal enforcement efforts. Committee questioning focused heavily on the bill’s education, detention, and enforcement provisions. Senators pressed Gruters and Fine on why the bill did not address employer sanctions or E-Verify, whether the tuition changes would affect students who had grown up in Florida, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, and whether the bill would create practical burdens for prosecutors, jails, and local officials. Gruters said he was open to working on E-Verify in regular session but not to amending this bill, and Fine argued the tuition repeal would apply to undocumented students who had qualified under existing law. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified in support, saying ICE bed capacity was still insufficient and that county jails needed more resources to honor detainers. Mark Schlachman of FSU Law offered historical context, noting prior state-federal cooperation efforts and warning of unintended consequences, while several public witnesses opposed the bill as unconstitutional, costly, and harmful to immigrant families and the economy. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, Florida Policy Institute, AFL-CIO, and immigrant advocacy groups argued the bill would invite litigation, encourage racial profiling, harm the workforce and higher education, and punish law-abiding immigrants and their families. They emphasized that immigration is a federal matter, that K-12 education must be provided regardless of status, and that removing in-state tuition would reduce access to college and hurt Florida’s economy. Some speakers urged the committee to grandfather current students if the tuition waiver is repealed. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote reflected in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so you can imagine our response when we hear that a little over 6,000 slots were not utilized.
• Those include changes to who can claim the standard utility allowance, changes to the ABOD time limit
• Standard utility allowance. Standard utility allowance.
• After reviewing program data, we did find that BAPS had been utilized less than we anticipated, and that
• Families are forced into impossible tradeoffs: food, rent, utilities, or diapers.

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:

• SMUD is the nation's sixth-largest community-owned electric utility.
• This is the most ambitious goal of any large utility in the United States.
• As a community-owned electric utility, we put community safety first.
• Mike Robeson here on behalf of the California Municipal Utilities Association in support.
• So the Public Utilities Commission handed down a procurement order for a gigawatt of new geothermal.

Summary: The committee heard several climate, environmental, and housing bills. AB 1425, dealing with pit dewatering near the San Joaquin River Parkway, drew extensive testimony. The author and supporters argued the bill was needed to protect the river, groundwater, floodplain conditions, tribal and cultural resources, and public access from a proposed mining project near the river. Opponents, including Cemex, labor representatives, and industry groups, said the bill would bypass the CEQA process before it was complete, threaten jobs, and create uncertainty for an existing operation. Members questioned both sides about hydrology, blasting, dewatering, and the adequacy of the ongoing environmental review. The bill was moved, but several members expressed concern about preempting CEQA and some did not vote or voted no. AB 881, which would allow California to move forward with carbon capture and sequestration pipelines, was presented as a way to advance state climate goals and capture federal funding. Supporters, including SMUD, labor, and industry groups, said the bill would help deploy carbon capture safely and preserve jobs. Environmental justice opponents supported stronger safety direction and warned that CO2 pipelines pose serious risks and that the state should not move ahead without clearer standards. The bill received a due-pass recommendation to Appropriations. AB 1207, on the cap-and-trade allowance price ceiling and the social cost of carbon, was presented as a science-based update to California’s climate policy. The author and EDF said the bill would keep the program aligned with current economic and climate data and protect it from federal political interference. It received broad support and a due-pass recommendation. AB 1106, creating a coordinated network of air quality incident response centers, was also approved after testimony about wildfire smoke, toxic emissions, and the need for better real-time monitoring during disasters. AB 28, the Landfill Fire Safety Act, focused on the Chiquita Canyon landfill fire and related health impacts in Castaic and Val Verde; residents described serious illnesses and contamination concerns, while landfill and county representatives warned about costs and asked for more study. The committee nonetheless advanced the bill with a due-pass recommendation. The committee also heard AB 357, which would speed Coastal Commission review of student and faculty housing projects, with supporters citing student homelessness and opponents urging caution but acknowledging the need for more housing; the bill was presented and discussed, with the committee emphasizing the need to balance housing production and coastal oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• revenue shortfalls. to mitigate unforeseen revenue per fiscal year in general revenue from the gas utility
• We currently do not have online filing capabilities for the gas utility annual reports. approximately
• project will provide a more user-friendly and efficient online filing system that enables the gap utility
• We'll move on to page 15. or 549 can sometimes be utilized in emergency situations.
• Lastly, the legislation created the Water Utilities Technical Assistance Program, or WTAP, which assists

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