Transcript Highlights:

• I will turn you to page five because, again, the Water Trust Board's primary activity is to evaluate
• Those are the full set of criteria that the projects are evaluated against by project type.
• team evaluates these things.
• So they are really the engines behind this evaluation process.
• Water Trust Board, not the evaluation team, and they'll do face presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• As part of the biennial budget process, committee members will be evaluating each line-item recipient
• I just wanted to emphasize we at Volunteers of America believe in outside evaluation, and that's why
• when you saw that breakdown of funds, there was a large line item for external evaluation.
• >> They're part of our evaluation team on that.<01:24:03.040> Yes.
• Do you, in any of these grants and benefits, collect data to evaluate how successful they are?

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:07 Chair Comments 00:00:36 Approval of Minutes 00:04:01 Volunteers of America 00:04:21 Soil and Water Conservation/Energy and Environment Cabinet 00:14:52 Kentucky Office of Drug Control Policy/Justice & Public Safety Cabinet 00:21:05 Kentucky Department of Agriculture 00:26:01 Early Childhood Advisory Council 00:45:18, 958, all

Summary: The Tobacco Settlement Agreement Fund Oversight Committee met to review how tobacco settlement dollars are being used and to press recipients for detailed information on total funding, administrative versus program spending, and measurable outcomes. The chair emphasized that the committee was not there for general program overviews, but to assess return on investment and whether each program should continue to receive tobacco settlement support. The committee approved the minutes from its December 22, 2025 meeting and then heard presentations from several agencies and organizations. Volunteers of America Mid-States described its southeastern Kentucky restorative justice program, which uses an evidence-based New Zealand model for juvenile cases in nine counties. The group reported tobacco settlement funding of $516,000 in FY24 and $233,500 in FY25, representing about 17% and then about 5% of the program budget, respectively. It said the funding helped expand the program from 13 cases in 2021 to 180 youth served, and cited an independent evaluation showing recidivism of 24.5% compared with 40.4% in AOC data, along with a cost of a little under $20 per day versus detention and other placements. Some members questioned whether the program fit the tobacco settlement funding categories and suggested it might be better supported through other justice-related funding sources. The Energy and Environment Cabinet’s Division of Conservation explained that tobacco funds support $1 million in direct aid to conservation districts and $2 million in cost-share projects for farmers, with 5% of the cost-share appropriation allowed for administration, or about $100,000 in FY26. Officials said the direct-aid line was moved into tobacco funding in 2019, reducing money available for farmer cost-share, and described a multi-year project approval and reallocation process. Senator Webb asked for a more specific breakdown of the $850,000 direct-aid amount, and the cabinet said it would provide that information. The Kentucky Office of Drug Control Policy reported that in FY24 it expended just under $30 million across tobacco funds, general funds, restricted funds, and a one-time federal grant, with less than 2% used for administration. Officials said most tobacco settlement money goes to Kentucky ASAP local boards in all 120 counties, supporting prevention, treatment, and some law enforcement work. The Department of Agriculture then began its presentation, describing strategic investments, loan programs, county funding, administrative costs, and a reported return of about $2.30 for every dollar spent, but the transcript cuts off before that presentation was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• that and uh neutral case evaluation that and uh neutral case evaluation which<01:59:30.880> I'm
• /c><01:59:36.400> we're neutral case evaluation typically we're neutral case evaluation typically
• And we lot more neutral case evaluation.
• <02:00:41.119> is that's when neutral case evaluation is that's when neutral case evaluation
• So I neutral case evaluations? Yeah.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Children and Family Law Committee met on April 15, 2025, and opened a hearing on Senate Bill 269, which would remove references to “bride and groom” and replace them with “applicants” in the Vital Records Act. The bill was described by the sponsor’s designee as a housekeeping update requested by the Secretary of State to modernize and standardize the language in light of same-sex marriage and to make the statute gender-neutral. Members asked whether the change would affect the substance of marriage law, marriage ceremonies, age and residence requirements, or open the door to polygamy; the response was that it would not change the law, would still apply to two adults, and would not supersede New Hampshire’s ban on polygamy. Some members noted the bill had passed the Senate unanimously and 18-0, while others questioned whether the change was necessary given existing forms and statutes, and whether it could create confusion with other laws such as alimony or divorce paperwork. The discussion became lengthy and somewhat informal, with members debating whether the terminology update was merely clerical or whether it should be postponed for more information from the Secretary of State’s office. Several members expressed frustration that no representative from that office was present. One member, speaking as a family law attorney, argued the bill was redundant because similar information already appears on vital statistics forms and could potentially create unintended issues; others countered that the Legislature should keep statutes consistent with current law and modern terminology. The committee also briefly discussed how marriage certificates and licenses are labeled and how same-sex couples are designated under current law. After a Republican caucus break, the chair called for a nonbinding thumb vote on whether to postpone the bill. The committee voted to come back to the bill later, and the hearing on SB 269 was closed and postponed to a later executive session date. The chair then shifted to other committee business, including preparations for a later discussion with Chief Administrative Justice Ellen Kristo and a family court subcommittee exercise, but no further action was taken on SB 269 during this segment.

Transcript Highlights:

• remaining concerns with the grantee and somehow just clean up the language so we just stay in the evaluation
• I think that's the basis of evaluating. I think that's the basis of your<00:08:16.000> bill.
• /c><00:08:29.000> stay<00:08:29.200> in<00:08:29.320> the<00:08:29.400> evaluation
• <00:08:30.160> of<00:08:30.240> the so we just stay in the evaluation of the so we
• just stay in the evaluation of the grant grant grant and<00:08:31.560> not<00:08:31.840> get

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• the outcome. 2031 that will evaluate the outcomes of JR-25, and that might be able to provide a little
• By way of background, the 2022 Legislature directed JLARC to evaluate how L&I investigates and enforces
• and decided upon by the Requiring substantial actions such as legislative actions will be evaluated
• As a point of comment, I think that's something that we need to evaluate if we are going to consider
• The preference asked JLARC to evaluate the net impact of the tax preference on state tax revenue.

Summary: The committee met on July 15, 2026, but initially lacked a quorum, so it could not adopt prior minutes. Chair Jerry Pollett welcomed new member Senator Victoria Hunt and new JLARC staff, and noted national recognition for recent JLARC reports. The meeting then moved into a series of preliminary audit presentations and an agency strategic management update, with committee members asking questions after each item. JLARC presented a preliminary audit of DCYF’s Juvenile Rehabilitation programs. Staff concluded that crowding, staffing shortages, weak risk assessments, and inconsistent programming combine to create unsafe conditions. The report found that most youth are housed in two large secure facilities operating near or above capacity, incidents rise as population rises, 47% of frontline staff leave within a year, current assessment tools are not valid for the population, and program access depends more on facility than individual need. JLARC made one recommendation to the legislature to address crowding and seven to DCYF, including improving retention, training, incident response procedures, validated assessments, program alignment, and data quality. DCYF Secretary Ross Hunter said the agency agreed overcrowding is a serious problem, described ongoing efforts to improve staffing and safety, and said a detailed response would be provided later. Committee members raised concerns about education access, retaliation against staff or youth who participated in the audit, and whether JR-25 has helped or worsened conditions. JLARC then presented a preliminary audit of Labor and Industries’ enforcement of farm worker labor laws. The audit found that L&I generally meets inspection timelines for health and safety complaints, but not for wage and hour or retaliation complaints, where delays are driven largely by time before assignment to an investigator. Staff said complaint volume exceeds capacity, though the agency has added staff, created screening processes, and reorganized workloads, and 2026 legislation now allows prioritization of complaints and broader investigations. JLARC recommended that L&I report back in December 2026 and December 2027 on backlog reduction and implementation of the new law. An L&I representative said the agency is hiring additional staff and will provide a formal response later. The committee also received a JLARC overview and Department of Health strategic management plan update on hospital data reporting, inspections, complaints, and adverse event reporting. DOH reported measurable progress on inspection compliance, new staffing and licensing systems, translated complaint forms, and plans for future work on language access, adverse event reporting, and financial data dashboards. After lunch, JLARC began its 2026 tax preference performance reviews. The first review covered the Main Street tax credit, which JLARC said has helped increase the number of Main Street communities and businesses, with positive growth near designated districts; JLARC recommended continuing the preference and improving business-count data. The second review covered the equitable access to credit program, which JLARC said appears to support underserved communities by funding loans through CDFIs; JLARC recommended continuing the preference beyond its 2027 expiration. The committee began questions on the program mechanics and the role of the Community Reinvestment Act, and the presentation was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• gun violence, Minnesota lacks a centralized mechanism to marshal information, align resources, and evaluate
• So, timely, transparent data can help us identify the trends and evaluate whether prevention strategies
• <00:24:18.960> trends<00:24:19.760> and<00:24:20.159> eval<00:24:20.880> evaluate
• identify the trends and eval evaluate identify the trends and eval evaluate whether<00:24:22.240
• Closing evaluated or that it didn't it wasn't evaluated or that it didn't it wasn't prevalent<00:58:26.880

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3668, authored by Chair Beerman, which would create a state Office of Gun Violence Prevention. Beerman and several supporters framed gun violence as a public health crisis, arguing the office would improve research, coordination, data collection, and evidence-based prevention. Supporters cited firearm deaths among children and adults, the trauma experienced by survivors and families, and Minnesota’s need for a centralized structure to guide policy and prevention efforts. Testifying in support were representatives of the Minnesota Medical Association, Protect Minnesota, a parent affected by the Annunciation school shooting, family physicians, an OB-GYN, and a pediatric emergency physician. They described gun violence as a daily clinical and community reality, pointed to rising firearm deaths and injuries, and said Minnesota should apply the same public health approach used for motor vehicle safety, tobacco, and other crises. Several witnesses emphasized the impact on children, suicide prevention, maternal health, and the need for Minnesota-specific research and coordinated responses. Opposition came from the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, which argued the bill would create a taxpayer-funded bureaucracy that could be used to advance gun control policy and treat lawful firearm ownership as a public health problem. The group said the state should focus instead on enforcement, prosecution, and victim services. Vice Chair Nidau offered an A2 amendment to move the office from the Department of Health to the Department of Public Safety, citing data-sharing and accountability, but withdrew it after discussion with Chair Beerman. The hearing ended with additional member discussion, including concerns about existing violence-prevention spending and whether school safety investments would be a better use of funds; no final vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Anyway, you're already self-evaluating yourself.
• TEA will dictate teacher evaluation.
• I've had the privilege of evaluating over 1,300 students.
• Each of my evaluations requires a minimum of 8 to 10 hours of direct evaluation and a warm welcome. one-on-one
• Evaluation is. consuming and thus expensive.

Bills: HB2, HB2

Keywords: public education, teacher compensation, certification, funding, school finance, educator rights, education funding, charter schools, staff compensation, state aid, retention allotment, disaster preparedness, emergency management, flooding, mass fatality, mass casualty, fatality tracking, body recovery, autopsy, justice of the peace

Transcript Highlights:

• I serve as the division director for our policy and program evaluation team.
• I serve as the division director for our policy and program evaluation team.
• Because this is the first program evaluation LC has done, right?
• And so what they're learning is how do we evaluate programs when we pass laws?
• Any comments by interested persons regarding the program evaluation?

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Human Services Committee met in interim session and first approved the previous meeting minutes before receiving a series of presentations on homelessness and housing stability. Jennifer Henderson of the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency updated members on the new Interagency Council on Homelessness, describing its executive-order mandate to review resources, gather input from stakeholders, identify gaps, and develop recommendations. She said the council’s first work is building a statewide program matrix of existing homeless services and funding sources, with attention to youth, tribal communities, and other vulnerable populations. Members raised concerns about youth homelessness, homeless veterans, and how the council will stay focused on a practical framework rather than getting lost in details. The committee also discussed possible connections to the rural health transformation grant and agreed to continue the topic later in the spring. Beth Olson of Presentation Partners in Housing described the organization’s housing-first model in Cass County and Clay County, including homeless prevention/diversion, housing navigation, and Cooper House, a 42-unit permanent supportive housing building in Fargo. She said the organization focuses on people with long-term and chronic homelessness, many with mental health, addiction, health, domestic violence, and Indigenous identity-related barriers, and reported strong outcomes: 85 of 86 people housed in 2025, 91% still housed after one year, and major reductions in emergency room use, ambulance rides, jail stays, detox days, and shelter use. She also explained that state funding has grown from a small share of the budget to about $1.1 million in state-connected funding for fiscal 2026, largely through contracts tied to supportive services. Members asked about vouchers, rent contributions at Cooper House, length of stay, and whether similar projects could be expanded elsewhere. Andrea Olson of the Community Action Partnership of North Dakota outlined statewide homeless and housing-related services delivered through six community action agencies in all 53 counties. She explained the Community Services Block Grant structure, said housing was identified as the top need in the most recent statewide needs assessment, and described programs including Supportive Services for Veteran Families, North Dakota Homeless Grant services, and Home ARP supportive services. She emphasized that the end of North Dakota Rent Help has increased pressure on the system, that the current $2 million annual homeless grant is far smaller than prior rent-help assistance, and that community action is using case management and financial assistance to move households toward self-sufficiency. Members asked about funding formulas, rural service delivery, and coordination with Presentation Partners to avoid duplication. YouthWorks then began a presentation on youth homelessness, describing services for ages 12 to 24, the special needs of youth and former foster youth, and the organization’s use of federal and state funds to support transitional housing, emergency shelter, maternity housing, and diversion services.

Transcript Highlights:

• > commerce benefit evaluation process, commerce benefit evaluation process, commerce determines
• <00:05:15.600> uh or complexity of the evaluation. uh or complexity of the evaluation. uh
• > by<00:18:33.679> the the evaluation conducted by the the evaluation conducted by the
• as these mandates are being evaluated. as these mandates are being evaluated.
• followed follow the process to evaluate followed follow the process to evaluate the<01:30:32.239

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We are program evaluators with the Legislative Finance Committee, and we are here to present our evaluation
• This evaluation aims to provide a status update of the program's implementation of quality provisions
• The University of New Mexico (UNM) is embarking on an evaluation of the NM Grown Program as we speak.
• One thing we can all agree on is that program evaluation is important.
• UNM, like I said, is starting an evaluation on this topic.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I hope to get that actual evaluation in front of you guys very soon.
• Um, it's a follow-up on an evaluation we did a pre-K that was nationally published, um, in journals.
• I think that the bottom line is it's important to constantly evaluate these programs to see where we
• Um, and, and how often do you affect, I mean, um, how often do you evaluate their effectiveness?
• Um, so When we look at early childhood, there is a lot of different ways we evaluate it.

Transcript Highlights:

• letter grade system is a tool for CareerSource Florida and our network and other stakeholders to evaluate
• Prior to the development of this letter grade system, local boards were only evaluated for performance
• This evaluates how many people no longer need benefits like SNAP or TANF because we have helped This
• evaluates how many people no longer need benefits like SNAP or TANF because we have helped them find
• Representative Kendall. of commerce to evaluate.

Summary: The subcommittee met to receive an informational presentation from CareerSource Florida President and CEO Adrian Johnson, joined by Anthony Gagliano of CareerSource Suncoast, on the structure, funding, and services of Florida’s workforce development system. Johnson explained that CareerSource serves job seekers and businesses through 21 local workforce development boards and nearly 100 career centers, using federal and state funding streams such as WIOA, Wagner-Peyser, SNAP Employment and Training, and TANF. She described services including case management, training, wraparound supports, job matching, rapid response for layoffs and disasters, and business services such as recruitment, customized training, and on-the-job training. She also highlighted the REACH Act’s role in consolidating local boards from 24 to 21, creating the Master Credential List and Credential Review Committee, and implementing performance-based letter grades for local boards. Members asked detailed questions about funding formulas, letter grade metrics, apprenticeships, youth services, small business access, and the demand occupation list. Johnson said federal allocations are driven largely by unemployment and poverty formulas, which has reduced Florida’s WIOA funding by about $27 million over four years because of the state’s low unemployment rate. She explained the letter grades measure outcomes such as increased earnings, reduced public assistance, employment and training outcomes, work-based learning, business engagement, and service to individuals in certain programs, and said the system is being reviewed for possible changes, including removing extra credit and adjusting weights. On youth services, she said Florida has a waiver allowing a 50/50 split between in-school and out-of-school youth funding, and that local partnerships drive outreach. On the demand occupation list, she said it is based on state labor market data and projections, but local boards can submit evidence of local demand when data does not reflect conditions in their area. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on apprenticeships and workforce training grants. Johnson and Gagliano described apprenticeship navigators funded by the $7.75 million apprenticeship expansion allocation, which help employers navigate registration and expand apprenticeships into nontraditional fields such as IT, health care, education, and hospitality. Gagliano gave examples from CareerSource Suncoast and said navigators helped employers move faster through registration and develop programs with local education providers. Johnson also discussed Incumbent Worker Training Grants and Quick Response Training Grants, noting recent awards of nearly $3 million to 69 businesses and $6.5 million to 24 businesses, respectively, and said these programs are targeted toward high-skill, high-wage occupations and priority industries. The meeting ended with no votes or formal action; the chair thanked the presenters, invited follow-up questions, and adjourned the meeting without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• so you know in part of this evaluation so you know in part of this evaluation uh<00:26:36.960>
• This evaluation is ongoing, and the purpose of it is to evaluate each of the mechanisms that we have.
• This evaluation is ongoing, and the purpose of it is to evaluate each of the mechanisms that we have.
• This evaluation is ongoing and the purpose of it is to evaluate each of the mechanisms we have.
• evaluate a rebasic. evaluate a rebasic. Okay.<01:16:17.360> Right.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational briefing on the Public Utilities Commission’s performance-based regulation (PBR) framework and the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs’ whistleblower complaint process. Chair Jared Kohole opened the meeting, noted it was informational only with no public testimony, and explained that members would hear presentations and then have an opportunity for questions. The committee heard first from Ulupono Initiative, which provided background on why utilities are regulated, how Hawaii’s cost-of-service model and rate cases work, and why PBR was adopted to shift utility incentives away from a capital-investment bias and toward performance, efficiency, cost control, and policy goals such as renewable energy and reliability. Ulupono described Hawaii’s PBR structure as a five-year multi-year rate plan with annual revenue adjustments, a customer dividend, a Z factor for extraordinary exogenous events, and an exceptional project recovery mechanism for large projects. It also outlined performance incentive mechanisms tied to renewable portfolio standard progress, interconnection speed, reliability, and shared savings. The presentation said the current docket is evaluating a possible hybrid approach that would combine forward-looking forecasting with historical results, and Ulupono advocated for stronger incentives, arguing the current rewards are too small relative to utility revenues and should be more meaningful to better align utility behavior with legislative intent. The PUC then presented its own overview, emphasizing that the PBR docket is open and active and that the briefing was limited to the record to avoid ex parte concerns. The commission described the development of PBR in Hawaii through multiple phases beginning in 2018: an initial collaborative phase to set goals, a formal contested-case phase that produced the initial framework, later phases adding scorecards, reported metrics, and additional performance incentive mechanisms, and subsequent refinements including sunset of some mechanisms and adjustments after the August 2023 Maui wildfires. The PUC said the framework is intended to be customer-centric, administratively efficient, and protective of utility financial integrity, and that current work includes evaluating how to balance forward-looking and historical test-year approaches within the rebasing process. No votes or formal actions were taken at the briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it would direct the division to evaluate and pursue an expanded agreement from the state with the
• And it would direct the division to evaluate and pursue an expanded agreement from the state with the
• We are evaluating what does it mean to have due process rights in digital identity?
• So we are evaluating really comprehensively... ...to warrants.
• We are evaluating it from individuals will be in control.

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• How can our approach be evaluated holistically?
• But who would be evaluating whether there is any redundancy? Would it be the community college?
• This item is described as an evaluation, as research.
• We need to ensure that any evaluation can actually lead to changes. Thanks. Thank you so much.
• How would this evaluation help implement that?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Every year where proposals were received and evaluated. OK, thank you, sir.
• The first CSAC evaluation is in December of this year.
• Any insights or anything that you can share at this time on the evaluation?
• What are the assessment or evaluation requirements for the program?
• What would the LAO recommend in terms of an evaluation for a program like this?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Public participation is included as part of the council's evaluation process, including a public meeting
• is a, whatever type of transaction that comes before them or acquisition or addition, they are evaluating
• And so that is, The panel that's evaluating and making the recommendation to the governor and the cabinet
• is a, whatever type of transaction that comes before them or acquisition or addition, they are evaluating
• This ensures that evaluation and communication efforts about PFAS and other chemical risks are up to

Summary: The committee first received a Department of Environmental Protection presentation on Florida Forever and the sale or exchange of conservation lands. DEP described Florida Forever as the state’s main conservation land acquisition program, funded in recent years at high levels, and said most acquisitions since 2019 have been within the Florida Wildlife Corridor. The presentation also explained the legal process for disposing of conservation lands: requests are reviewed by the Acquisitions and Restoration Council, then the governor and cabinet decide whether land is no longer needed for conservation or whether an exchange provides a net conservation benefit. Senator Smith asked several questions about recent land-swap proposals, public notice, political influence, and whether any transactions had bypassed the usual sequence; DEP said applications can be withdrawn before ARC review, notice is posted seven days in advance, and the council and cabinet are the decision-makers. Senator Harrington asked about the difference between Florida Forever land sales and water management district surplus lands, and DEP said the reported 2.3 acres sold referred only to Florida Forever-funded projects. The committee then heard presentations from the Department of Health and DEP on PFAS and PFOA. DOH outlined what PFAS are, their common uses, possible health impacts, and ways Floridians can reduce exposure, including water filtration and avoiding certain products. DOH said it conducts well investigations, health consultations, fish consumption advisories, and monitoring in coordination with DEP and FWC. DEP followed with a more technical overview of PFAS regulation and cleanup, explaining federal testing and drinking-water standards, Florida’s provisional cleanup levels, and the state’s response at contaminated sites, including bottled water and filtration for affected residents. Senators asked about testing requirements for public systems and private wells, disposal of used filters, and how federal rulemaking and litigation could affect Florida’s standards; DEP said public systems are required to test under EPA monitoring rules, private wells are not directly required to test, and Florida may adopt its own standards if federal action does not occur by the statutory deadline. Finally, the committee took up SB 150, which would designate the flamingo as the state bird and the scrub jay as the state songbird. The sponsor argued the bill better reflects Florida’s identity and conservation values, noting the flamingo’s iconic status and the scrub jay’s status as a Florida-only species. Members asked lighthearted questions about mockingbirds, flamingo color, and feeding costs, and an appearance card was filed in support by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. The committee debated the bill briefly and then passed SB 150 favorably by roll call vote, with all members present voting yes except Senator DiCeglie, who was excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• Evaluate the community supervision recommendations made by HHSC to the courts for those found not guilty
• Serious offenders must face accountability, and sentencing frameworks must be evaluated to ensure they
• must face accountability and sentencing frameworks must be evaluated to ensure they prioritize community
• So it's a licensed clinician, but I also want to point out that is a certified forensic evaluator.
• So it's a licensed clinician, but I also want to point out that is a certified forensic evaluator.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• on the road when they evaluated it.
• on the road when they evaluated it.
• So the evaluators are those the district engineers that are going out and evaluating, or who are those
• The evaluator doesn't know what the score is.
• As Jennifer re-evaluated and looked at.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee approved the October 15 minutes and observed a moment of silence for the victims of the UPS Worldport plane crash. The main presentation was from Transportation Cabinet Commissioner Bobby Joe Lewis on the Local Assistance Road Program/County Priority Projects Program (LAARP/CPP), which was implemented under House Bill 546 and now requires rehabilitation projects to restore roads to original condition, cap funding at $500,000 per project, use a new scoring matrix, include a local match, and submit one photograph per 300 feet of project length. He reported that the 2026-2027 cycle ran from June 1 to October 1 and drew 1,215 project applications from 107 counties and 106 cities, with total submitted project costs of about $121.1 million and about $102.3 million requested after local match. He also said 30% of submissions scored 10s and 22% scored 9s, and that the list of requests and required photos had been submitted to the General Assembly and LRC. Members asked about how scores change over time, whether roads can move from lower scores to 10s, and whether the new process gives a better picture of local needs. Lewis said scores can change based on weather and road conditions, but the new system provides more information and a more standardized evaluation than before. Several members raised concerns about the volume and size of required photographs, suggesting drone footage or video as an alternative; Lewis said the photo requirement has caused confusion and large file uploads, and he was open to considering easier ways to document conditions. Members also discussed continuity in scoring across districts, and Lewis explained that district staff appointed by chief district engineers use a handbook and scoring matrix, with the scores entered into a computer system so evaluators do not see the final score while scoring. The committee also discussed funding levels and carry-forward balances for the program. Lewis said the program began with $20 million authorized in HR92, noted underruns from completed projects, and reported a carry-forward amount that had grown to $355,432.42 available for reauthorization as of October 13. In response to questions, he said the current process concentrates applications into a short window, with 63% of applications arriving in the last few days and 417 on October 1, which created a heavy workload but was completed on time. The meeting then moved to multimodal funding priorities, with Jennifer Kersner of Kentuckians for Better Transportation introducing herself and offering condolences for the UPS aviation incident before beginning her remarks.

Transcript Highlights:

• mentioned Eric completed, they evaluated mentioned Eric completed, they evaluated both<00:57:34.559
• > dirt<00:57:53.280> deterrent Eric evaluated these two dirt deterrent Eric evaluated these
• <01:10:15.679> the components, but also uh evaluate the components, but also uh evaluate the
• reports and closeout evaluations reports and closeout evaluations for<01:41:34.560> monitoring
• the evaluations were completed. the evaluations were completed.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council met on May 27, 2026, approved the January 7 minutes and the day’s agenda, and reported no conflicts of interest. The executive director gave staff updates, including introductions of new staff member Cara Castanza and DNR liaison Jason Co., both of whom were welcomed by the council. Members were also informed about three minor easement/conveyance matters in the packet, including a small Bowser easement impact with about $1,600 returned to the Outdoor Heritage Fund, a Minnesota Land Trust easement request involving a DNR trout stream easement, and an access easement revision in Itasca County. The council also noted several upcoming dedication events and a June field tour in southeast Minnesota beginning in Winona on June 16, with visits to Whitewater WMA, bluff prairie and stream sites, and a river segment if a boat is secured. A major agenda item was a legislative session recap on the Outdoor Heritage Fund portion of Senate File 2077, the omnibus Outdoor Heritage Fund, Legacy, and Lands bill. Staff reported that all council recommendations were incorporated into the bill, which passed both chambers on May 17 and was expected to be signed by the governor. The fiscal year 2027 Outdoor Heritage Fund recommendations covered 53 programs totaling about $188.9 million, with the February forecast increasing the appropriation slightly so the final total was about $191.16 million; eligible programs were proportionately increased. Staff also highlighted a few changes made during the legislative process, including adjustments to the Roso Lake rehabilitation phase three project, the conservation partners legacy grant language, and statutory provisions affecting the council. The recap also covered policy changes in the bill: a public member term limit of eight years, with a short vacancy exception and transition rules for current members; a revised executive director hiring process allowing the Legislative Coordinating Commission to provide support while preserving the council’s final hiring authority and permitting closed meetings for candidate discussions; and an extension of the Upper Mississippi River invasive carp deterrent design deadline to June 30, 2027. Members discussed the Roso Lake amendment at length, with Senator Lang and Representative Burkel explaining that the added delay and injunction-related language were intended to address local concerns and preserve the council’s process while litigation proceeds. The meeting ended without any additional formal action beyond receiving the updates and discussion.