Transcript Highlights:

• I should also note lastly.
• So, uh, the bill has a fiscal note of about $2 million which in our way of just having.
• note gonna be?
• I didn't see the final fiscal note.
• I believe our portion was no fiscal impact to us for our agency.

Transcript Highlights:

• Berg, our House fiscal analyst, to take us through the fiscal spreadsheet.
• I will note that on the very last line, line 1472, you'll see negative $2.95 and a positive $2.95 that
• To end on a positive note, I would be remiss in not acknowledging the committee's dedication to supporting
• So the operating increase— I think some fiscal folks here could explain in a little more detail than
• In fiscal years 28 and 29, and the decision to cut the reallocation of the DCYF transition account.

Bills: HF2436

Keywords: child welfare, economic assistance, child care, grant program, video security cameras

Transcript Highlights:

• Accessing notes and the difference that makes to people in affordability.
• We do have the fiscal impact updated FAR; we'll pass that out as well.
• I will offer a cautionary note, however. I am very concerned about this idea.
• Just some cautionary notes, Madam Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
• It's just a technical fix with no fiscal impact, so I urge your support. Thank you.

Transcript Highlights:

• Do we have any idea what, what in the world this fiscal note is?
• fraud prevention, identification, and prosecution, and I know that there are a lot of y'all are very fiscally
• As you have noticed, and Jamie has mentioned, the fiscal note is over $8 million per year.

Bills: SB 596, SB 961, SB 1398, SB 1183, SB 1952

Keywords: DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child protective services, foster care, child welfare, Family Code, conservatorship, managing conservator, parental child safety placement, authorization agreement, temporary authorization order, child abuse, child neglect, placement reporting, court-ordered removal, investigation, family preservation, transparency, public reporting, data reporting

Transcript Highlights:

• So we have, as noted, our Administration.
• So we have, as noted, our Administration.
• So we have, as noted, our Administration.
• was a onetime situation that the fiscal was a onetime situation that the fiscal committee<00:52:
• shows a higher amount in state fiscal shows a higher amount in state fiscal year<00:54:07.640>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Division III work session focused on the Department of Health and Human Services’ Division of Public Health Services budget. Department staff said Public Health has a relatively small budget compared with other DHHS divisions, is supported mostly by federal and other non-General funds, and contains nearly 100 accounting units and more than 50 federal grants. They emphasized that the governor’s budget did not include significant cuts, but that federal funding uncertainty and the winding down of pandemic-era resources were major factors affecting the division. The division also explained that some apparent budget growth reflects reorganizations, including moving the Bureau of Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Recovery and some programs from other DHHS divisions into Public Health. The presentation described Public Health’s mission as serving the entire state through food and water safety, disease surveillance, emergency response, maternal and child health, chronic disease prevention, WIC, community health center support, and public health data collection. Members asked about bird flu, and staff explained that human-health response would involve Public Health’s lab, infectious disease, and emergency preparedness units, while animal-health issues are handled with the Department of Agriculture; they also noted ongoing milk testing requested by FDA and USDA. The division said its organizational structure includes bureaus for Family Health and Nutrition, Infectious Disease Control, Public Health Protection, Emergency Preparedness, Prevention and Wellness, Statistics and Informatics, and Public Health Laboratories, with about a 15% vacancy rate. Committee members questioned whether the division’s budget and staffing had really grown since pre-COVID, and staff responded that full-time authorized staffing is about the same as in 2018, with the increase largely due to federal pandemic funding that has since receded and to program transfers between divisions. They said Public Health’s General Fund share is about $24 million out of roughly $1.1 billion in DHHS General Fund spending, or about 2.2% of the department total. Members also asked about the 3,000-position cap and unfunded positions; staff explained that the cap remains in chapter law through June 30, 2025, that 394 positions were unfunded in the governor’s budget, and that the division expects flexibility to move money from personnel lines and fill unfunded positions to manage changing needs. No votes or formal actions were taken in this portion of the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Second thing he he notes is the Okay.
• I will note that we now do have a quorum.
• I will note that we now do All right.
• I do want to note that the region.
• Thank you, Senator Muhammad, have you requested a fiscal note?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• One grant recipient noted, 'Loans were not an option for me.
• Grant recipients noted that there was uncertainty about whether the grant would continue to be available
• As also noted in your agenda, we at the Student Aid Commission Just grown year over year.
• Demand has been so strong that, as our colleague at Finance noted, our current projections reflected
• The budget includes $150 million Proposition 98 in fiscal year 2025-26 for the new loan repayment for

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance heard an extended discussion on state efforts to recruit, prepare, and retain teachers, with a focus on whether current programs are sustainable and well targeted. Testimony from the Learning Policy Institute, the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, the Department of Education, and the Legislative Analyst’s Office described persistent shortages, especially in special education, math, science, bilingual education, and high-need schools. Speakers emphasized that residency programs, Golden State Teacher Grants, National Board incentives, classified employee pathways, and undergraduate teacher pipelines have helped increase preparation and retention, but many of these efforts rely on one-time funding and lack long-term certainty. Committee members repeatedly raised concerns about the “leaky pipeline,” working conditions, the burden of student debt, and whether the state should simplify and institutionalize support for aspiring teachers rather than rely on a patchwork of grants. The agencies presented data showing continuing shortages and uneven distribution of fully credentialed teachers. CTC reported projected hiring needs of roughly 20,000 to 25,000 teachers annually, with the highest needs in self-contained classrooms, special education, and certain regions of the state. It also noted that emergency permits, waivers, and intern credentials remain high, and that teachers entering through those routes have higher turnover. LPI cited research showing residency-prepared teachers are more effective and more likely to stay, and argued that Golden State Teacher Grants attract candidates who might not otherwise enter teaching and help them complete preparation. CDE stressed that most new demand comes from attrition and urged support for multiple entry points, tuition assistance, and campus-based coursework. Several members also discussed the role of community college pathways, dual credentialing, and support for school leaders as part of retention. The LAO recommended rejecting the educator pipeline proposals under discussion, citing limited evidence of effectiveness and suggesting that any new spending should be more narrowly targeted to the highest-need schools and long-standing shortage subjects. The LAO also said that if the Legislature funds new programs this year, Proposition 98 would be preferable given the state’s fiscal condition. Committee members pushed back on the idea that declining enrollment or layoffs would solve shortages, noting that shortages and layoffs can coexist in different subject areas and regions. The discussion ended with agreement that staff would continue working with agencies on how to make teacher pipeline investments more consistent, coherent, and easier for candidates to navigate. The committee then turned to the Golden State Teacher Grant Program. Finance proposed $50 million in one-time General Fund support to extend the program for one additional year, while the LAO recommended rejecting the proposal because the first CSAC evaluation is not due until later in the year and because the funding would be non-Proposition 98. CSAC supported the extension, saying demand has been strong, over 20,000 aspiring educators have been served since 2021, and the agency had to pause applications after receiving more than 9,200 this year; it also said more than 2,500 candidates had already expressed interest for next year. Members asked how many students the new funding would serve, and CSAC estimated just under 5,000 awards at $10,000 each. The discussion also covered whether the grant could be moved into Proposition 98 and how the one-time nature of the funding affects confidence among prospective teachers.

Transcript Highlights:

• Berg on House Fiscal staff, and I'll have...
• <00:50:36.359> year federal funds in state fiscal year federal funds in state fiscal year
• ssis um and in 20 let me find my notes ssis um and in 20 let me find my notes Here<00:58:22.000>
• are your first notes.
• are your first notes.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to specifically note that communicating these developments and others to the legislature and other
• I would add to your notes that we need to get reimbursement for all of that as well.
• But I think it's important to note that our authority and jurisdiction ends at the state line.
• General Fund Operating Budget for the current fiscal year. about $160 million.
• Transparency and fiscal responsibility.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't understand why it has a fiscal note attached to it, because when I served on the city council
• I've been a realtor for 35 years, so I don't understand why this has a fiscal note attached to it.
• The one note is on Section Five.
• So, after reading Senate Bill 55, I'm concerned that there's no fiscal note attached, and as a former
• 55 I'm concerned that there's no fiscal 55 I'm concerned that there's no fiscal note<02:04:16.559

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Legislative Assistant will note the role.
• Maybe if you send it to Elections, it'll have that time, and you could put a little tiny fiscal note
• A fiscal note has been requested for House Bill 4 with the 2A amendment, and it is in process right now
• The preliminary fiscal note only had, was only completed by the Secretary of State, and that estimate
• <01:25:35.480> note<01:25:35.719> on tiny fiscal note on tiny fiscal note on it<01:

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The Secretary will note the roll. So we are going to go in this order.
• Did we get a fiscal note on how much these different funds would lose? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Representative, no, I didn't do any fiscal note because I presume... Mr. Chair, a representative.
• No, I didn't do any fiscal note because I presume there are plenty other traffic violations that get
• No, I didn't do any fiscal note because I presume there are plenty other traffic violations that get

Bills: SB1010, SB1024, SB1205, SB1232, SB1366, SB1552, SB1624, SCM1002, SCM1006, SCR1004

Keywords: Charlie Kirk, Loop 202, Arizona highways, transportation, renaming, roadable aircraft, registration, vehicle title, license plates, aviation safety, motor vehicle booting, private property, fees, dispute process, regulations, outdoor advertising, military compatibility, zoning, electronic signage, permitting

Summary: The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee heard a series of transportation, traffic enforcement, and memorial bills. SB 1024, dealing with licensing and registration for roadable aircraft, drew a question about where vehicle license tax revenue would go, but with no sponsor present the committee still advanced it on a do pass recommendation by a 3-2 vote. SB 1205, which creates rules for private-property vehicle booting, was supported by industry and sponsor testimony as a consumer-protection framework modeled on towing laws; it passed 5-0 after discussion of time limits, recordkeeping, dispute resolution, and penalties. SB 1366, creating a temporary study committee on public-property towing and impound practices, was presented as a bipartisan, data-gathering measure and passed 5-0. SB 1232, a billboard/outdoor advertising zoning bill tied to military compatibility and ADOT permitting, was described as a technical cleanup measure negotiated with ADOT and local stakeholders; it passed unanimously 6-0. The committee spent the most time on SB 1624, which would cap photo-enforcement civil penalties at $75 and limit the effect of photo-radar violations on licensing and insurance. Supporters argued the bill would simplify enforcement and reduce reliance on cameras, while opponents from insurers and local governments warned it would mask risk, shift costs to other drivers, and reduce revenue for several state funds and local programs. An amendment was adopted to treat excessive speeding caught by photo enforcement as a class 3 misdemeanor and direct $15 of the penalty to the Peace Officer Training Equipment Fund. The amended bill then passed 4-2, with members citing concerns about school zones, revenue impacts, and the role of photo enforcement. The committee also advanced SCR 1004, a voter referral that would let Arizona voters decide whether cities may continue using photo enforcement; it passed 4-2 after testimony that it was a negotiated compromise preserving local control while requiring a future local vote in affected cities. The final items were memorials naming highways. SCM 1002 would rename a portion of State Route 77 the L.F. Quinn Memorial Highway, and SCM 1006 would rename a portion of U.S. Route 70 the PFC Michael A. Nolene Memorial Highway. Both were described as constituent-driven and appropriate under naming procedures, with members noting Quinn’s long-ago death and Nolene’s service as the first Native American to die in the Gulf War. Both memorials passed unanimously 6-0. Earlier in the meeting, SB 1010 and SB 1552 were announced as held, and the committee adjourned after completing the remaining agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just want to look at my notes real quick. The last thing I'll say is it is a business thing.
• I just want to look at my notes real quick. The last thing I'll say is it is a business thing.
• I just want to look at my notes real quick. The last thing I'll say is it is a business thing.
• it's going to have a bud7 million fiscal it's going to have a bud7 million fiscal what<01:24:09.560
• fiscal note because we're $3.75 million fiscal note because we're going<01:24:15.440> to<01:24

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• qualify um this this publication notes qualify um this this publication notes that<00:03:55.239>
• <00:14:16.240> impact<00:14:16.759> fiscal the long-term fiscal impact fiscal the long-term
• fiscal impact fiscal forecast<00:14:18.199> is<00:14:18.360> cloudy<00:14:19.199> but
• One last thing I'll note, Madam Chair and members: there is a revenue impact on this bill.
• financially stable and fiscally financially stable and fiscally responsible<00:45:44.680> typically

Bills: HF2254, HF2302, HF2502, HF2315, HF2475, HF2086

Keywords: HF2254, Minnesota child credit, baby bonus, child tax credit, income tax, individual income tax, tax relief, newborn, birth credit, family tax credit, tax refund, advance payment, Department of Revenue, taxable year, parenting, families with children, child credit, state regulations, families, taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• So, there should be an updated fiscal note that looks at '27, '28, and '29.
• note that looks at 27, 28, and fiscal note that looks at 27, 28, and 29.<01:13:19.840> And<01
• I would leave the question about the fiscal note to the department. >> Okay.
• leave um the question about the fiscal leave um the question about the fiscal note<01:20:41.360>
• <01:28:15.040> note<01:28:15.280> is<01:28:15.440> incomplete the fiscal note

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We are trying to work out the language and the fiscal note; there's some uncertainty about how it's going
• One thing to note on this, I did not specify, is what you're seeing colored here. that is where we typically
• Appropriations, taking money from the ESF, can be made from the fund during certain fiscal conditions
• the delayed enactment date to September 1st, 2027, so that the increased cap kicks in beginning in fiscal
• Senator Perry moves that the bill has a fiscal note. It can't go there. Okay. Senator Schwertner.

Bills: SB868, SB1337, SB1371, SB1377, SB1426, SB1620, SB2064, SB2065, SJR4, SJR 4

Keywords: SB 868, rural volunteer fire department assistance program, volunteer fire department assistance fund, Texas Government Code, wildfire, wildland fire, high-risk wildfire area, fire suppression, rural fire departments, volunteer firefighters, emergency response, public safety, grant allocation, appropriations, disaster preparedness, tax penalties, interest calculation, overpayment, tax law, refund process

Transcript Highlights:

• > the um the the fiscal note implies that the um the the fiscal note implies that the oplc<02:09:
• Yes, and there is a cost reading the details of the fiscal note.
• Yes, and there is a cost reading the details of the fiscal note.
• In the fiscal note, it mentions that OPLC will need to hire interpreters to manage this work.
• > we the fiscal note contemplates that we the fiscal note contemplates that we would<03:38:05.680

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee first took up House Bill 702, which would change how extra or special duty pay for retired police officers is treated for retirement and work-limit purposes. Supporters argued the bill would let retirees work more special-duty hours, helping municipalities fill traffic-detail and similar assignments without added state cost, and said it would not prohibit retirees from working but would simply stop those hours from counting toward the return-to-work threshold. Opponents argued the change would be inconsistent with the retirement system’s 2011 reforms, could increase pension liabilities, and would treat the same compensation differently for active employees and retirees. Members also discussed whether the bill would affect current and future retirees, the role of municipalities, and whether the policy amounted to “policing for profit.” The subcommittee ultimately voted 3-2 to recommend inexpedient to legislate (ITL) on HB 702, sending it to the full committee with that recommendation. The committee then discussed House Bill 581, which would create a Group Three retirement plan for new state employees hired after the bill’s effective date. The chair outlined a housekeeping amendment to delay implementation, moving the effective date to January 1, 2026, and noted a sponsor amendment addressing health insurance group inclusion and medical and surgical benefits so those benefits would not be put at risk for the new group. Testimony and discussion focused on the shift from defined benefit to defined contribution, with supporters citing Michigan examples and arguing the bill would help recruit and retain employees while giving them more flexibility. Opponents said the change could weaken retirement security and increase unfunded liability, though supporters responded that the bill still requires employer contributions toward accrued liability and is intended to keep the state on track to pay off its unfunded liability by 2039. The transcript ends with continued discussion of the bill and no final vote shown on HB 581.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Kupec, I... we did submit a request for a fiscal note.
• /c> request for a fiscal note we don't I request for a fiscal note we don't I don't<01:43:58.920>
• The chair noted that the fiscal note would be received and considered in light of the budget this year
• <01:55:02.199> um<01:55:02.480> I will get a fiscal note back on this um I will get
• a fiscal note back on this um I do<01:55:02.760> think<01:55:02.960> it<01:55:03.119><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I will call the Fiscal Committee to order for Friday, November 21st.
• Could you talk a little bit about, you know, you have the completion date noted here and our budget provision
• I think I had a note on that one. There would be some questions. Okay.
• Is there anything further to come before the fiscal committee on this day?
• the fiscal committee on this day? the fiscal committee on this day? >> No. >> No.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on Friday, November 21st and first approved the October 17th minutes, with one member abstaining because she was not present. The committee then adopted the remainder of the consent calendar after removing two items for separate consideration. On tab four, members discussed item 25282 with the Commissioner of Administrative Services and Public Works staff; the project had been delayed after testing revealed design errors and flaws, and the committee was told the work would restart with test piles the following week and was projected for completion in fall 2027. The item was approved. On tab five, item 25279 concerned a Health and Human Services facility project and a federally required element added late in the process. Commissioners explained that the project had originally been funded at $21 million, later required additional financing, and that the legislature had recently lifted a restriction so non-ARPA funds could be used. They also said the sale of the existing Manchester property would not be needed to complete the build, that a broker RFP was about to be issued, and that any sale would require further approvals. The committee approved the item. The committee then approved item 25280 after a brief exchange about rainy day fund estimates and prior budget assumptions, and approved item 25278 without discussion. Item 25272 drew questions about the consumer advocate’s RFP for outside utility-rate-case assistance; the office said it eliminated proposals focused only on return on equity work after the Eversource decision, selected a Michigan firm for spreadsheet and operating-cost analysis, and noted there were no in-state firms doing this specialized work. The committee approved the item, with one member recorded in opposition. On tab nine, item 25261 concerned a new judicial council budget obligation tied to legislation and public defense staffing needs. The presenter said the request reflected a late-added obligation from the judicial branch, that more requests may still be needed, and that public defense staffing was strained by vacancies and competition from Massachusetts. The committee approved the item. Under informational items, members received an update on 529 plan distributions and on interest and dividends tax refunds, with Revenue Administration saying roughly $21 million more in refunds remained and that the repeal-related refunds were nearly finished. The committee also noted an environmental services item for which questions would be submitted separately. The next meeting was set for December 19th at 11:00 a.m., and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's noted in your updated bill summary. There is a fiscal note.
• Congress of the United States, and then the second part just says, add in my package as a separate side note
• below the line that the governor directed to do, which is the $440 million tax impact in the current fiscal
• So I realized that... ...impact in the current fiscal year that you sit in.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus focused on HB 2153, a tax conformity bill that would align Arizona statute with the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026, including retroactive provisions affecting tax year 2025. Staff explained that the bill excludes three federal provisions from H.R. 1: the additional $6,000 senior deduction, the increase in the state and local tax (SALT) deduction to $40,000, and the deduction for interest on new car loans. It also adds several Arizona-specific provisions, including a $6,000 deduction for certain retirement distributions for taxpayers age 65 or older, a $6,000 deduction for Roth IRA contributions, an increase in the dependent tax credit from $100 to $125, and a deduction for child and dependent care expenses above the federal credit. JLBC’s fiscal note was cited as a negative $441.3 million in year one, declining over the next two years. Chairman Livingston and other Republican members argued the bill was needed immediately because the Department of Revenue had already issued tentative forms assuming full conformity, creating confusion for taxpayers and businesses. They said the state needed a signed law as soon as possible to avoid amended returns, inconsistent filing rules, and uncertainty for small businesses. Livingston emphasized that the bill was intended to protect small businesses from having to keep two sets of books and said he was advising taxpayers not to file until the issue was resolved. Members also discussed the practical impact on small businesses, citing testimony that Arizona has about 700,000 small businesses employing well over a million people. Several exchanges clarified the difference between the governor’s November direction to the Department of Revenue and the bill before the committee. Staff explained that DOR normally assumes “simple conformity” and that the governor’s directive attempted to add “below-the-line” deductions through a worksheet, but that those items still require statutory authorization. Members said the governor’s action was confusing and characterized it as a press release rather than binding law. The committee also discussed the child care provisions, describing them as a federal-style deduction Arizona has not previously adopted and as one of the main new benefits in the bill. The caucus ended without a vote, and members were told the floor would begin at 10 a.m.