Transcript Highlights:

• But we do have a process in law now.
• We have our public have this process.
• Um I think someone uh process of this.
• that process? that process?
• So, um, you know, we have this process and the process is kind of set up so that we here in this political

Bills: HF3521, HF1807, HF1270, HF2070, HF3136

Keywords: hospital moratorium, hospital construction, bed capacity, hospital expansion, health care facilities, hospital licensing, safety-net hospital, level I trauma center, Ramsey County, Minnesota health law, hospital beds, new hospital exception, certificate of need, inpatient capacity, emergency care, trauma services, health system regulation, state moratorium, hospital modernization, health infrastructure

Transcript Highlights:

• There's two bills that we've added since 2001 that followed under that PERS pilot mandate process.
• There may also be statutory reports required through the Employee Benefits Committee process.
• You're talking about the entire process, the entire seven and a half to line 9? Correct, yes.
• But the insurance department was essentially removed from the process.
• the actuarial report or at any time during the process.

Summary: The Employee Benefits Committee met to approve prior minutes, hear presentations on state employee health insurance, compensation, leave, and related policy issues, and then recess for lunch. PERS reviewed the history and structure of the state health plan, noting the long-standing state-paid family coverage, cost-control measures, wellness incentives, the current grandfathered PPO and high-deductible options, and the effects of recent benefit mandates such as insulin caps, prosthetic coverage, medication management, prescription copay changes, and ambulance balance-billing limits. Committee members questioned the fiscal impact of adding benefits and the possible cost of moving to a non-grandfathered plan, while PERS and HRMS emphasized that health insurance remains the top-ranked employee benefit and that any major plan changes should be considered carefully. HRMS also presented compensation comparisons showing state pay generally below private-market benchmarks, discussed targeted market equity adjustments, identified ongoing recruitment and retention concerns in fields like nursing, IT, engineering, and attorneys, and reviewed leave policies, tuition reimbursement, and family leave comparisons with neighboring states. Job Service provided labor market data showing low unemployment, high labor force participation, and wage growth that still trails some neighboring markets, and OMB explained that prevailing wage requirements apply to federally funded projects under Davis-Bacon, not to ordinary state contracts. After lunch, the committee took up the required process for health insurance mandate bills and adopted an amendment to Joint Rule 211. The amendment clarified that the deadline for submitting mandate measures is intended to allow time for all required reports, including both the cost-benefit analysis and any Employee Benefits Committee actuarial report, while leaving the existing deadline unchanged. The amendment was adopted on a roll call vote, with several members voting yes and a few no votes recorded. The committee then moved into its jurisdiction review of bill drafts, beginning with a bill that would automatically renew pre-tax dental and vision elections; members debated whether it had any actuarial or administrative impact on PERS or the state, and the chair explained that the committee’s role was only to decide whether further analysis was needed before later testimony and recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cities were really opposed to the RENA process at all, the idea that there's a deficit of market-rate
• Our amendments are actually requiring cities to be part of the same regional planning process that's
• I look forward to this bill as it moves forward in the process.
• And so I'm just kind of curious, what is the thought process on the fiduciary part?
• process as to why this came forward.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard SB 866, which would require jurisdictions that do not receive HAP homelessness grants to include homelessness data, strategies, and regional coordination in their housing elements. The author and supporters said the bill would close a gap in planning by requiring more jurisdictions to collect and report data and outline homelessness reduction efforts. Opposition from the League of California Cities and several cities argued the bill would impose duplicative reporting, require data cities cannot control, and burden small jurisdictions without added resources; members discussed possible amendments, including thresholds for very small cities. No final vote was taken on SB 866 during the excerpt. The committee then heard SB 967, which would allow qualifying interim housing units to count toward a jurisdiction’s RHNA obligations for acutely low-income housing, with safeguards against double counting. Supporters said interim housing is a faster, cheaper way to get people indoors and should be incentivized because many Californians remain unsheltered; opponents argued the bill would blur the line between temporary shelter and permanent housing and could reduce pressure to build deeply affordable permanent units. Members debated the policy tradeoff, with some supporting the bill as a practical response to street homelessness and others objecting to counting temporary units toward housing targets. The committee ultimately voted to pass SB 967 to the Senate Appropriations Committee, with the bill kept on call for absent members. The committee also considered SCR 131, a resolution urging a coordinated state effort to end unsheltered homelessness and prioritize a broader set of interventions, including interim housing, permanent supportive housing, and prevention. Supporters framed the resolution as a call to action in response to the scale and human cost of unsheltered homelessness, while one member abstained over concerns that the language could be read as endorsing funding without clear metrics or accountability. The resolution was moved and kept on call. Finally, the committee heard SB 1238 on homeowners association management, which would increase disclosures, transparency, and accountability for HOA managers and boards, including proposed changes to reserve use and inspection reporting. Supporters said the bill would protect homeowners and improve financial clarity, while opposition from community managers objected to a proposed fiduciary duty to individual homeowners and raised concerns about litigation and insurance costs; members discussed those issues and indicated the bill would continue to be worked on in Judiciary.

Transcript Highlights:

• Like I said, it was a really long process. It took a long, long time.
• But it's, it's, that's how I'm processing it.
• She's going to talk to us about the 2026 adequacy study process. Good afternoon.
• So this is if we want to make a change in the process, yeah, or what's included in the matrix.
• What's the process? Go ahead, well...

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the prior minutes and then shifted to an update from Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith on early childhood education, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. They said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ABC as a large state program with about 23,800 funded slots and roughly $114 million in annual appropriations. Department officials said they are reviewing slot allocations because about 1,000 seats are funded but unfilled, while more than 2,000 families are on waiting lists, and they plan to reduce or reallocate slots from providers that have not filled them over several years. They also said they are examining whether income thresholds, curriculum expectations, daily rates, and summer programming should be updated, and members raised concerns about access, local control, transportation, and whether the program should better align with K-12 choice and school readiness goals. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical data and other information for future discussion. The committee then received a legal presentation from BLR attorney Taylor Lloyd on the constitutional and statutory framework for education adequacy in Arkansas. She reviewed the Dupree and Lake View cases, explaining that the state must maintain a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools, and that adequacy and equity are distinct but related concepts. She emphasized that the General Assembly is responsible for defining adequacy, studying whether the system meets that standard, and reacting to the evidence, while the courts ultimately decide constitutional compliance. Lloyd also explained the current adequacy definition, the role of the matrix as a funding tool rather than a spending mandate, and the distinction between unrestricted foundation funding and restricted categorical funding. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum followed with a historical overview of how Arkansas responded to the court cases and developed the current adequacy process. She traced major legislative actions from the 1980s through the Lake View litigation, including the creation of funding formulas, categorical aid, isolated funding, declining enrollment funding, and the 2003-2004 adequacy study that led to the Continuing Adequacy Evaluation Act and the matrix used to set foundation funding. She also described later changes to the adequacy statute, the financial reporting requirements for districts, and the ongoing use of surveys, stakeholder testimony, and consultant studies in the biennial adequacy process. Members asked questions about whether private or homeschool programs could use public funds for expenses like utilities, whether stakeholders should include those groups, the difference between average daily membership and attendance, and whether school board members are surveyed; staff said those issues would need further research or were outside the scope of the presenters’ role.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have processed every bit of work that has been sent to the House.
• So, they were all vetted through the process.
• My point is that we through the process.
• <00:25:35.760> those night getting ready to process those night getting ready to process those
• Then we have to process the public.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It creates a similar reporting process for these other terminals, requiring merchants to report skimmers
• It delays the process, but also places directors in difficult positions with both the courts and the
• By requiring prompt... ...due process and prevent misuse.
• This collaborative process has created recommendations that will This collaborative process has created
• This bill does not alter the existing discovery process mandated under the Michael Morton Act.

Bills: SB330, SB663, SB1020, SB1152, SB1164, SB1896, SB2111, SB2196, SB2383, SB2581, SB2797, SB2798, SB2371

Keywords: county funding, prosecutors' offices, elections, law enforcement, local government, community supervision, budget approval, corrections department, strategic plan, judicial oversight, SB 1020, Texas, personal bond office, pretrial release, electronic monitoring, GPS monitoring, global positioning system, bond conditions, probation, parole

Summary: The committee heard several criminal justice bills, with testimony largely focused on public safety, court procedures, and local criminal justice administration. SB 2371 would expand mandatory skimmer-reporting requirements from gas pumps to ATMs, point-of-sale systems, and virtual currency kiosks, with the Texas Financial Crimes Intelligence Center saying centralized reporting would improve investigations, preserve evidence, and help identify organized criminal groups. SB 2581 would repeal a special law governing commissary funds in certain large counties; the sponsor and the Sheriff’s Association said it would restore parity with other counties while keeping spending subject to audit and inmate-benefit limits. Both bills were laid out and left pending after testimony, with no public witnesses opposing them at the hearing. The committee also heard SB 330, which would require voter approval before counties over a certain size reduce prosecutor funding, similar to an existing law for law enforcement budgets. Supporters argued prosecutors are essential to public safety and need stable funding, while an opponent from the Texas Civil Rights Project said the bill would restrict local budget flexibility and impose costly elections. SB 663 would remove district judges’ approval role for community supervision and corrections department budgets, replacing it with judge review after TDCJ-CJAD approval; probation officials said the change would reduce delays and confusion without reducing judicial oversight. SB 1020 would require more immediate sharing of ankle-monitor violation information and clarify that such records are not judicial work product; the Harris County DA’s office and Crime Stoppers supported it, citing inconsistent local practices and delays that can hinder prosecutions. The committee then took up SB 1164 on emergency detention and court-ordered mental health services. The bill, from the Texas Judicial Commission on Mental Health, would update emergency detention forms, clarify officer duties, allow filings in the county where a person is apprehended or located, and add a factor related to a person’s inability to recognize symptoms or appreciate treatment risks. Supporters included family members, law enforcement, and mental health and judicial witnesses who described cases where earlier intervention might have prevented tragedy; opponents warned the broader language could be misused and emphasized due process and the need for dangerousness to remain the standard. SB 2111 on indigent defense would expand access to counsel at first hearings, strengthen managed assigned counsel programs, create internships and fellowships, and adjust other defense-related procedures; the Texas Indigent Defense Commission and county defense program leaders supported it, while the committee substitute removed some provisions to reduce fiscal impact. Finally, SB 2383 would let recently retired DPS officers return to work in limited roles to help address staffing shortages, and SB 2797 would create reciprocal discovery requirements for criminal cases; prosecutors and some committee members said it would reduce trial surprise and improve truth-seeking, while others questioned whether the bill fully matched the state’s disclosure obligations and whether it could burden defense rights. Several bills were left pending after testimony, and the committee established a quorum later in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• WE FOCUSED ON PROCESSES AND ACTIVITIES DURING OCTOBER 22 THROUGH JANUARY 24 MOSTLY WITH SELECTED ACTIONS
• WHEN YOU SHOWED UP WHERE THERE SOP AND PROCESSES IN PLACE OR WAS THIS A BLANK SLATE. >> THERE WERE PROCESSES
• FEMA DOESN'T MAKE THIS PROCESS EASY TO WORK, BUT THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO CAN HELP.
• IT SEEMS IN THIS PROCESS THERE ARE TIMELINES THAT TAKE A WHILE.
• WE NEED TO FIND WAYS TO MAKE THE SYSTEM AND PROCESS WORK BECAUSE ULTIMATELY IT IS ABOUT THE TRUST.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I appreciate your time and your attention to our collective bringing process. Thank you, Gina.
• process.
• Then the legislative process is basically, under all of the statutes, an up-or-down vote.
• Any questions about that process? Those class and comp packages. Any questions about that process?
• They have a different bargaining process.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Employment Relations met for work sessions on supplemental bargaining for Washington Public Employees Association (WPEA) agreements in general government and higher education, followed by an overview of the collective bargaining process. OFM staff explained that bargaining for the 2025-27 biennium began in 2024, reached tentative agreements, was not ratified in time for the October 1 deadline, resumed, and ultimately produced ratified agreements in August 2025 that were submitted for financial feasibility review under RCW 41.80.010. Staff outlined the tentative agreements’ costs and covered employee counts, including roughly 2,500 FTEs in general government and 2,100 in higher education, with estimated 2025-27 total fund costs of about $22.25 million and $13.5 million respectively. Staff then gave a broader briefing on how state collective bargaining works, including the bargaining calendar, the role of class and compensation review, the June revenue forecast, interest arbitration, and the October 1 submission deadline. They described the groups OFM bargains for, including general government, higher education, health care coalitions, and certain non-state provider groups such as adult family home providers, child care providers, and language access providers. In response to a question from Senator King, staff said the legislature requires bargaining for those non-state provider groups and has also provided interest arbitration for them. Staff also discussed bargaining priorities such as general wage increases, targeted classification adjustments, recruitment and retention, low-wage worker increases, and maintaining the health care premium split. In executive session, the committee voted to keep the current co-chairs, Senator Robinson and Representative Couture, through 2026. Members also voted to recognize that the committee met twice in 2025 and to set the 2026 meeting schedule at two meetings. The motions passed without opposition, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is kind of an ongoing process. We're not expecting any major developments this interim.
• But yeah, it will be, I think, a long process of testing to see how it works.
• The LEAP committee holds a meeting to advance the budget format change process.
• Per usual, the validation process is not complete.
• If the members have any questions about the process, I can answer those.

Summary: The LEAP committee met on June 18, 2025, with introductions from members and staff, then received a clean audit report from the State Auditor covering 2020–2024. The audit reviewed accounts payable, general disbursements, theft-sensitive assets, and data backup/recovery, and found no findings. Staff also outlined the interim work plan, including a full rewrite of the capital budget application (Build Sum), updates to the transportation bond model and operating budget tools, website improvements, and continued research into secure, responsible AI use. Members asked about AI safeguards, keyword search improvements, and making the website more user-friendly, especially on mobile devices. The committee approved the July 8, 2024 minutes after a quorum was reached. It then considered and unanimously approved several budget format changes: the Department of Corrections moved chemical dependency and sex offender treatment into its health care program and renamed Program 700 from “Offender Change” to “Reentry Services”; the Department of Revenue moved the AMP program into its tax analysis and technology support program; and the Department of Transportation changed a toll program title and added new sub-programs for State Route 509 and State Route 167 toll operations to reflect new facilities and more accurate reporting. Kevin Feltis also provided staffing updates, noting the retirements of longtime LEAP staff, the hiring of three new associate consultants in October 2024, and an upcoming December 2025 retirement for Sherry Randage after decades of state service. The new staff members briefly introduced themselves and expressed enthusiasm for their work. The meeting ended with thanks to members and staff and adjournment after the committee completed its business.

Transcript Highlights:

• For each nominee, this will be the process.
• Please tell us about your vetting and interview process.
• Oh, I'm sorry, I don't know the process.
• So can you tell us about the vetting and interview process?
• He has a respect for the process.

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met with four members present and approved the prior minutes without objection. Chair Jay Kaufman outlined the committee’s role in reviewing executive nominations and explained the hearing process for three nominees: Mary Foote for the Office of Economic Opportunity, Debbie Johnston for the Department of Health Services, and Chuck Bassett. Foote did not appear for her hearing, and members discussed her absence and alleged omissions in her disclosure materials, including prior service with Planned Parenthood-related organizations. The committee then moved to reject her nomination, and the motion passed 3-2, recommending that the full Senate reject Mary Foote. Debbie Johnston, nominee to lead the Department of Health Services, appeared and gave an opening statement describing her Arizona background, prior Senate staff work, and more than 20 years with the Arizona Hospital and Health Care Association. She said her priorities at ADHS include rebuilding trust in public health licensing, improving stakeholder engagement, standardizing rulemaking communication, addressing alleged religious discrimination and retaliation concerns in licensing, and using technology and AI to improve efficiency. In questioning, senators pressed her on her management style, conflict-of-interest safeguards given her prior industry role, enforcement priorities, budget pressures, behavioral health and assisted living oversight, and the department’s response to COVID-19. Johnston said she would follow statutes, recuse herself from enforcement matters involving former contacts, and resign if directed to carry out an unlawful policy. She also said the department does not regulate therapy itself, only facilities, and that it would rely on legal counsel regarding the governor’s conversion-therapy executive order and related federal civil-rights allegations. Several senators focused on public health trust and the department’s pandemic response, with Johnston acknowledging concerns about closures, data collection, and communication during COVID-19 while saying she would review past after-action materials and be better prepared in the future. Public testimony from stakeholders in aging services and health care strongly supported her confirmation, praising her accessibility, responsiveness, and collaborative approach. After testimony, the vice chair moved to recommend Johnston’s confirmation to the full Senate. The roll call was underway when the transcript ended, with several members voting aye and one member expressing reservations about her not reviewing the pandemic after-action report before another crisis occurs.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's appellate process, correct. What is the venue provision? Appellate process.
• There's appellate process, correct. What is the venue provision?
• Respectfully, the state systems have a process: there is an intake process when people are hired, and
• Again, speeding up the process. So delays result in operational costs.
• Like right now, what is the appeal process?

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so there's two approval processes: there's a pre-approval and post-approval.
• What's the process to form a TIA?
• And this bill essentially simplifies that process.
• I think that that would absolutely be an improvement in the process.
• Senator Epstein: I appreciate very much the process this bill is taking this year.

Bills: HB2091, HB2140, HB2320, HB2384, HB2398, HB2502, HB2780, HB2918, HB2939, HB2950, HB2999, HB4020, HB4026, HB4029

Keywords: insurance, financial surveillance, regulations, assessments, Arizona Revised Statutes, investment, state treasurer, gold bullion, treasury management, financial regulations, school districts, bonds, financial advisors, elections, municipal advisors, cost of borrowing, lease agreements, school property, tax exemptions, impact aid revenue bonds

Transcript Highlights:

• A democracy names something as a commemoration through process.
• A democracy names something as a commemoration through process.
• or address the appeals process.
• process, before... ...he or she can access the benefits.
• Putting them through this process is not fair. It's not needed, first of all.

Summary: The House opened with prayer, a moment of silence for the Reverend Jesse Jackson and Joseph Di Alessandro, the Pledge of Allegiance, and announcements confirming a quorum. Members also adopted the special order report and recognized several guests in the gallery, including former Speaker Dan Webster and law enforcement and civic visitors. The chamber then moved through a long special-order calendar of bills, mostly on third reading, with several measures passing unanimously or by wide margins. Among the bills considered were measures on civil procedure and estates, including C.S. HB 1407 on commencement of civil actions, HB 895 on trustee settlement and discharge, C.S. HB 1337 on estates, HB 131 on curators of estates, and C.S. HB 351 on concurrent legislative jurisdiction over military installations. The House also passed C.S. HB 441 on conservation lands, which would lengthen notice and increase transparency for land swaps involving conservation property, and C.S. CS HB 919 on commercial service airports, which created a statutory definition for major airports and preempted local naming authority for several airports. HB 919 drew extensive debate over the proposed naming of Palm Beach International Airport after President Donald J. Trump, with amendments to delay or alter the naming failing before the bill passed. Other bills approved included HB 409 requiring K-12 schools to observe Veterans Day, CS HB 461 allowing certain students to volunteer at polling places for community service hours, CS HB 1115 creating grants for genetic counseling education, HB 569 revising forensic client services, CS HB 505 regulating virtual currency kiosks to address fraud, and HB 271 on foreign and alien bail bond insurers. The House also passed HB 191 on re-employment assistance eligibility verification after extended questioning about its effects on benefits, appeals, and suitable work standards. One bill, CS HB 243 on electric bicycles, was temporarily postponed, and CS HB 1073 on school districts was also postponed.

Transcript Highlights:

• For those new to the legislative process, it is a process.
• And for those new to the legislative process, it is a process, and everything isn't just determined here
• This is a standard process that happens within the department.
• So this allows a process for a district... Thank you.
• I have a lot of... ...internal process.

Bills: HB2, SB204, SB241, HB34

Keywords: general appropriation, budget, Medicaid, education funding, public safety, higher education, research funding, federal funding, New Mexico, appropriation, University of New Mexico, New Mexico State University, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, child care, child care assistance, child care subsidy, early childhood education, early childhood care, daycare, preschool

Transcript Highlights:

• And we’ve been working on some of the parts of the process that cause time to be taken, and so what it
• We had an all-day training on some of the policy changes we’re making to make the eligibility process
• <00:26:13.919> and to break the eligibility process and to break the eligibility process and
• we're asking people to provide process we're asking people to provide proofs<00:27:10.240> of
• The department processes the nomination and then officially appoints that health officer into the role

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met on December 19, 2025, approved the draft minutes from the November 21 regular meeting, and received a DHS commissioners update. Patricia Tilly reported on the state’s rural health transformation application, saying CMS had provided only one question and positive feedback, that the final federal award amount was still pending, and that DHS was preparing an accept-and-expend item for fiscal review using an up-to amount. She also said the new Hampstead YDC facility remains on track, with substantive construction expected by late summer 2026 and move-in likely in early January 2027. In response to questions, she confirmed the playground/outdoor activity area had been in the original design and was added when funding became available. Henry Litman, Medicaid director, discussed the Senate Bill 248 study committee report on palliative and hospice care. He explained the distinction between palliative care, which can be provided while a patient still seeks curative treatment, and hospice care, which involves electing not to pursue curative services. He said the committee’s work pointed to a need for better education for providers and the public, and described ongoing conversations with the Foundation for Healthy Communities and Home Health and Hospice about developing materials and possibly addressing how palliative services are bundled. He also said the study committee itself did not generate future legislation, though members could pursue it separately. Litman then answered questions about Medicaid eligibility and long-term services and supports, including delays in processing, the backlog from pandemic-era redeterminations, and efforts to speed reviews. He said the department is using temporary staffing funded in part by last session’s legislation, working with the New Hampshire Healthcare Association, counties, and UNH Law to streamline policy and training, and relying more on electronic asset verification while still guarding against improper asset transfers. He emphasized the goal of balancing faster access to benefits with compliance and fraud prevention. Robert Rodler followed with the annual tuition waiver update for children in foster care or guardianship. He reported 82 applicants and 65 waivers granted, including 35 for USNH schools and 30 for the community college system, and noted a correction would be issued for inaccurate continuing/new student figures in the report. Senator Gray said he intends to pursue a separate budget appropriation for these tuition waiver costs in the future so the funding would be clearly identified and easier to track. No additional votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is It's a very involved process. This is It's a very involved process.
• That's the thought process. Okay.
• process to do that. Um, now how do we process to do that.
• So this is it's an ongoing process. process. process.
• I really appreciate your thought process I really appreciate your thought process in<00:37:57.960

Keywords: 00:05 Call to Order and Roll Call 01:55 Bridge Improvement Program 18:56 County Priority Projects Program 38:10 Transportation Alternative Program 51:47 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for the first interim meeting of the 2025 Budget Review Committee on Transportation and heard from Bobby Jo Lewis, commissioner of Rural and Municipal Aid at the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. She reviewed the new County City Bridge Improvement Program, created in the 2024 regular session, reporting that phases one and two are complete, 45 bridges have been funded so far, and about $18.45 million has been authorized. She said roughly $6.549 million remains for phase three in the current fiscal year, with about $26.445 million in bridge applications still pending. For fiscal year 2026, the program will again have $25 million and will use four application phases. She also described a training resource, Local Bridges 101, and said a new executive advisor, Greg Meredith, has been brought in to help with the bridge program. Members asked how rollover applications would be handled, whether they would be re-evaluated with new applications, how the program would account for bridge longevity and load posting, and how isolated communities would be prioritized. Lewis said applicants not funded in FY25 would be contacted and could choose to roll their applications into FY26, and all applications would be evaluated together at the end of each phase. She said preservation projects are assessed for how much they extend a bridge’s life, and isolated community access bridges or closed bridges with no detour access receive priority. She also said the department aims for equitable distribution across regions and plans to produce a map showing where funds have been awarded. Lewis then turned to the County Priority Projects Program and the Local Assistance Road Program established in House Bill 546 and related resolutions. She said the application cycle opened June 1 and closes October 1, with 106 memoranda of agreement being prepared for awards in House Joint Resolution 46. She described updated application and reporting forms, a scoring matrix, and a County City Pavement Evaluation Manual used to rate projects based on preservation of assets, average daily traffic, recent improvements, safety, cost, and district priority. She said projects must be rehabilitation projects designed to restore the original condition of the road, cannot exceed $500,000, and must use local match percentages tied to the economic development grant program formula. She also reported on funding status for prior road projects, including completed, partially completed, pending, and underrun amounts that may be reauthorized. Committee members asked about photo documentation, online access to project materials, how to measure whether projects truly restore roads to original condition, and what happens when project costs exceed estimates. Lewis said the department is still working on how best to store and share the large volume of photos, and that projects are certified through district offices and local sign-off after completion. She said overages are the responsibility of the applicant because the state does not have additional money beyond the awarded amount. No formal votes were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• THIS WILL HELP REALIGN THE PROCESS FOR PEOPLE DOING FIRE SPRINKLER WORK AND IT GIVES MORE CLARITY AS
• WE THINK IT WILL HELP PROMOTE EFFICIENCY AND PREDICTABILITY IN THE PERMITTING PROCESS, REDUCES DELAYS
• IT WOULD WEAKEN THE ABILITY OF GOVERNMENTS TO PROTECT ASSETS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROCESS AND IT
• THE NEIGHBORS COME OUT AND UNDER THE CURRENT ENCLAVE PROCESS IS THE SAME PROCESS.
• I DON'T THINK THEY'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS FOR THIS BILL FOR WEEKS OR MONTHS.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The process being several months, maybe a year long.
• There are 900 of those. 665, appeals to the local grievance process. 424, special education due process
• The statute basically says, have a grievance process and nothing else.
• And that is probably in the process of getting fixed.
• The third iteration of this nine year process.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:15:18.639> to inclusive, and expert-led process to inclusive, and expert-led process to
• this structured and open process this structured and open process provides<00:15:30.959> the<
• <00:53:45.119> to a school board to adopt a process to a school board to adopt a process to
• Section 17 is the review process.
• Section 19 is makes the processes.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, uh, process for out-of-state programs.
• Um, uh, process for or a whole thing?
• <00:43:23.760> it completely different process, but it completely different process, but it
• The process being handled properly?
• Do the people that are doing the process have enough training and understanding to handle the process

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met for its third discussion on special education aid under retained bill 742, with the chair noting that no action would be taken at the meeting. The chair reviewed prior hearings on Medicaid and local special education funding shortfalls, saying the committee was trying to understand why districts are facing proration of special education aid and how to reduce unfunded costs. He raised a series of questions for the Department of Education about the Nessus system, eligibility and ineligibility, invoices and vouchers, audit procedures, reimbursement rates, out-of-state placements, and who enters data at the district level. Rebecca Fdet, director of special education services at the Department of Education, explained that Nessus is the statewide special education information system and that every child in special education must be entered into it. She said most districts use it to develop IEPs and track services, while six districts use it only as a data reporting tool. She described which fields are required, how the system connects IEP development to the financial section, and how districts submit invoices when seeking special education aid, court-ordered placement payments, or episode-of-treatment placements. She said the department reviews invoices against the IEP, pays only for allowable services, and uses a cap that notifies districts when they reach the annual limit. Members asked about who submits the information, how districts decide when to seek aid, and how costs are calculated for individual or group services. Fdet said the district, usually an administrative assistant in the SAU office, submits the documentation electronically, and districts decide when to track students for aid based on their own circumstances. She said reimbursement is based on actual costs tied to the IEP, with group services split among students, and that the department does not generally set rates for local services. The only rate-setting she described was for approved private special education providers, which submit annual cost spreadsheets for tuition rates. She also said out-of-state providers must be approved by their own state, and the department checks licensure and certification through monitoring and investigations if concerns arise. The department also described its monitoring process, called Program Approval and General Supervision Monitoring, or PAGS. Fdet said districts are reviewed on a six-year cycle, with more intensive review for districts needing assistance or intervention and fewer file requests for districts meeting requirements. She said the department can review up to 65 data points on an IEP and that districts must submit special education aid paperwork by July 31, with superintendent verification due by August 15. The meeting ended with continued questions about procurement, audit procedures, and how the department handles out-of-district and out-of-state placements.