Transcript Highlights:

• . be able to exclude child and dependent care expenses from taxation.
• So this bill does include, for the first time in Arizona, a deduction for child care expense.
• So this bill does include, for the first time in Arizona, a deduction for child care expense.
• We can make a tax deduction for the first time for child care expenses.
• This bill will deepen that gap to keep the rich wealthy at the expense of working people.

Summary: The House convened, approved the journal, recognized the Doctor of the Day, and welcomed several guest groups, including JAG students and students from Heila Ben High School. The chamber then moved into Committee of the Whole to consider HB 2153, the annual tax conformity bill, which was described by supporters as aligning Arizona tax law with recent federal changes and providing relief through no tax on tips and overtime, a larger child tax credit, a new child care expense deduction, and a deduction for certain retirement income. Opponents argued the measure would primarily benefit wealthy individuals and corporations, reduce state revenue, and leave some seniors out because the retirement-income deduction is tied to retirement accounts. Members also discussed the Department of Revenue’s already-issued tax forms and the need for certainty for filers. After extended debate, the Committee of the Whole gave HB 2153 a do pass recommendation by a vote of 31-26, and the House adopted the report and sent the bill to engrossing. The House then took up the Senate mirror bill, SB 1106, substituted for HB 2153, and after floor explanations of vote, passed it 31-27 with 2 not voting. Supporters said the bill would help working families, seniors, and small businesses and prevent filing confusion, while opponents repeated concerns about cost, fairness, and impacts on public services. The bill was transmitted to the Senate. Following the tax vote, members made several announcements, including birthday wishes and a tribute to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., and committee chairs announced upcoming cancellations. The House then recessed and reconvened for first reading and referral of a long list of new bills covering topics such as elections, health care, education, transportation, public safety, taxation, housing, and appropriations. The session ended with a motion to adjourn until the next scheduled meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• The majority is to cover various operating expenses, and $1,500 is for conference and travel.
• This is a $100,000 transfer from operating expenses to professional fees.
• Why don't we just put that in the budget so that it shows up as that expense item?
• It may not be enough if expenses are surging too much.
• But I really do want to circle back to the point on the expense side of things.

Committee: All JBC-PEER REVIEW

Transcript Highlights:

• Minnesotans are now finding out how expensive it is to own a vehicle in Minnesota.
• </c> year old Tesla, not a very expensive year old Tesla, not a very expensive car.<00:01:48.079><c>
• It would be less expensive to just give somebody an Uber or Lyft card and a ride.
• It would be less expensive to just give somebody an Uber or Lyft card and a ride.
• It would be less expensive to just give somebody an Uber or Lyft card and a ride.

Summary: House Republicans held a Transportation Committee press event to promote several bills they said would make driving cheaper and transportation more innovative. The main measures discussed were House File 3526, which would reduce vehicle tab fees; House File 3513, which would legalize automated driverless vehicles with regulatory guardrails; and a bill to consolidate metro-area bus operations and reduce administrative overhead and subsidies. They also said other transportation-related bills, including a school bus stop-arm clarification and a distracted-driving bill, were scheduled for the House floor on Monday. Representative Patti Anderson argued that Minnesota vehicle registration fees have become unaffordable, citing examples of high costs for newer and older vehicles, and said the state should roll fees back to pre-2023/2024 levels. On automated vehicles, Republicans said the bill had been revised after concerns from committee members, MnDOT, and stakeholders, adding a weight limit to avoid autonomous trucking, accessibility provisions for wheelchair users, a U.S.-based support person requirement, a labor/economic/congestion study, and tighter permitting. They said the bill should advance to the next committee and rejected delaying implementation for further study. On transit, Republicans said the metro has too many separate bus systems and that consolidation would save taxpayer money by cutting redundant service and administrative costs. They cited high per-ride subsidies and claimed combined reserve funds and reduced waste could save tens of millions of dollars. In questions, they defended using general-fund dollars for transportation, said the system benefits all residents, and argued that autonomous vehicles and related industries would create new opportunities even if some driving jobs are displaced. No formal votes were taken in the press event, though the speakers said they expected committee action on the automated-vehicle bill and that other bills would move to the floor or other committees.

Transcript Highlights:

• But one of our biggest expenses is what we pay for hospitals across the state.
• just briefly say as we were looking at maternal health and across the board, one of the biggest expenses
• As that's gotten more and more expensive across the country, the federal government decided to allow
• So it's important that we're thought of and known, Sicker and more expensive.
• Because the hospital cost is pretty much the same, even though expenses go up, right?

Committee: All ALC-HOSPITAL, MEDICAID, & DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES STUDY SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The subcommittee met to review Department of Human Services hospital payments in Arkansas Medicaid, with DHS Secretary Janet Mann and Deputy Secretary Misty Eubanks presenting first, followed by Arkansas Hospital Association Executive Vice President Jody Ann Tritt and a brief comment from Arkansas Children’s. DHS outlined the main hospital payment streams: fee-for-service per diem payments, upper payment limit (UPL) supplemental payments, cost settlements, and smaller payments such as graduate medical education and disproportionate share hospital funds. Members asked for plain-language explanations of cost settlements, why per diem rates vary by hospital type, and why UPL applies to private hospitals. DHS said cost settlements and UPL are mechanisms to help offset Medicaid underpayment, with SFY 2025 hospital payments totaling hundreds of millions of dollars and no general revenue used for supplemental payments beyond the state share funded through hospital assessments and related financing structures. Committee members focused heavily on whether Arkansas hospitals are adequately reimbursed and why rural hospitals struggle. Tritt explained that critical access hospitals, rural emergency hospitals, PPS hospitals, and specialty hospitals operate under different federal and state rules, and said lower per diem rates for some facilities help with cash flow and later cost settlement adjustments. She said Arkansas hospitals are under financial strain, citing a negative patient services margin statewide and noting that Medicaid, Medicare, and commercial payers all contribute to the problem. She also said the association had just authorized a statewide survey of hospital finances and costs, which she expected would take about a year to complete. A major theme was commercial insurance reimbursement. Tritt argued Arkansas hospitals are paid far less than hospitals in neighboring states even though premiums are similar, and said administrative burdens, prior authorizations, and denials add to the problem. She said hospitals receive about 52 to 53 cents on the dollar for Medicaid costs without UPL and about 78 cents with UPL, still below cost. Members also discussed Medicare wage index issues, Medicare Advantage, and whether hospitals could use technology or alternative arrangements to improve finances. No votes were taken on the hospital presentation. At the end of the meeting, DHS provided a brief update on Living Choices and assisted living reimbursement. Officials said one assisted living facility, Pillars of the Community in Crossett, had announced closure, with nine waiver clients being transitioned to other settings. DHS said the current cost reporting period was underway and that a new rate study could be ready for review before the end of the fiscal year if reports were submitted on time. Members also asked about the broader waiver plan, and DHS said the next waiver iteration would likely be brought back to the committee in the summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, on SB 2161, rate case expenses, the idea.
• That allowing the municipality to recover rate case expenses without having to provide an opportunity
• Ratepayers tend to settle immediately in order to limit the amount of personal expenses and the expenses
• However, most municipal water districts set rates at a level that only covers expenses.
• He's filing the expense. Yes, sir. All right. OK.

Bills: SB1169 , SB1285 , SB1583 , SB1611 , SB1898 , SB1976 , SB2160 , SB2161 , SB2658 , SB2661 , SB2662 , SB2692 , SB1055 , SB1359 , SB2660

Committee: Senate Water, Agriculture and Rural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Administrative expenses...
• First, looking at the top three most expensive drug classes.
• Step that to the right a little bit, and you could say, well, Drug A is very expensive.
• Drug B is a little more expensive than Drug C, then it would say... ...expensive, Drug B is a little
• Every dollar in, every dollar out, it's taxpayer money, and it's very expensive.

Summary: The Budget Committee met with a quorum and took up several bills. HB 677, relating to state-covered fertility preservation for employees undergoing cancer treatment, was introduced as coverage for egg and sperm preservation for up to three years, with an estimated fiscal impact of about $813,000. After brief questions and no public testimony or amendments, the bill passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then considered CS/HB 59, which would reform Florida’s wrongful incarceration compensation process by extending the filing deadline from 90 days to two years, removing the clean-hands requirement, and allowing exonerees to choose between the state compensation process and a civil lawsuit; it was supported by the City of Flagler Beach and passed unanimously. CS/HB 1313, which recreates the Resilient Florida Trust Fund in the Department of Environmental Protection before its scheduled termination in 2025, also passed unanimously after supportive testimony from advocacy groups. The committee received a lengthy presentation from the Department of Management Services on the State Group Insurance Program and the recent Revenue Estimating Conference. The presentation covered enrollment, revenues and expenditures, rising medical and pharmacy costs, emergency room utilization, GLP-1 drug spending, and options for tighter formulary and utilization management. Members asked about ER cost growth, GLP-1 coverage and copays, PBM oversight and potential conflicts, avoidable ER visits, cancer screening claims, dental and vision costs, specialty drug biosimilars, and possible savings from more restrictive pharmacy models. DMS said it would follow up on several questions and noted ongoing work on cancer coordination, preventive screening, biomarker testing, and a proposed member-facing benefits platform. The committee also heard extensive testimony on HB 301, which would raise sovereign immunity caps from $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident to $1 million and $3 million, align limitations periods with private claims, and allow government entities to settle above the caps without a claims bill. Local governments, school-related entities, and county and city associations opposed the bill, warning of major fiscal impacts, higher insurance costs, and pressure on services; several speakers urged smaller increases or a tiered approach. Proponents, including families affected by catastrophic injury or death, argued the current caps are too low and the claims bill process is inefficient and unfair. After debate, the bill passed on a recorded vote, with some members voting no, and was reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. states any other educational expense states any other educational expense approved<00:03:56.400
• </c> interpretation of qualifying expenses. interpretation of qualifying expenses.
• it is very clearly qualifying expenses?
• </c> um under Roman numeral 2 the expenses um under Roman numeral 2 the expenses are<00:06:46.240><c>
• </c> expense reports should be published. expense reports should be published.

Committee: House Education Policy and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• We're asking for $2 million more to cover salaries and expenses.
• “To what we can, our expenses.
• But the issue with the VA is that while our expenses, whether it be just general expenses, and I think
• everyone here knows that medical expenses are going up even higher than just general expenses, our expenses
• As was alluded to earlier, the expenses are rising at As was alluded to earlier, the expenses are rising

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• And we also created, for the first time, a deduction for child care expenses.
• If you make an expense, I'm purchasing expensive equipment, that decreases the cash flow in that particular
• This one is you have to be only 60 years old, so it would be more expensive.
• Thus, this is the most expensive provision in this bill.
• So if we conform, it would say, hey, you purchase something this year, you get to expense it.

Summary: The joint House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees met to hear identical Arizona tax conformity bills, HB 2153 and SB 1106, which would conform state tax law to the federal Internal Revenue Code as of Jan. 1, 2026, with some provisions applied retroactively to tax year 2025. Staff explained that the bills exclude the federal senior deduction for those 65 and older, the higher state and local tax deduction, and the new car loan interest deduction, while including a $6,000 retirement-income deduction for taxpayers 60 and older, a $6,000 Roth IRA contribution deduction, a higher dependent tax credit, and a deduction for child and dependent care expenses above the federal credit. The JLBC fiscal note estimated a $441.3 million general fund revenue loss in FY 2026, and members discussed that this was roughly the same as full conformity because the bill’s adjustments offset some of the federal changes. Bill sponsors and supporters argued the measure should be enacted early to give taxpayers and tax preparers certainty before filing season, noting that the Department of Revenue had already issued forms assuming conformity and that delay could force amended returns. They said the bill reflects a negotiated package that preserves most of the federal tax relief while tailoring it for Arizona, especially by lowering the senior deduction age to 60 and replacing the auto loan deduction with family-focused provisions such as the higher child credit and child care deduction. The Arizona Society of CPAs and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club supported the bills, emphasizing the need for early conformity and fewer filing complications. Opponents, including Save Our Schools Arizona, the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, Opportunity Arizona, and several individuals, argued the package would reduce state revenue, worsen the structural deficit, and mainly benefit higher-income taxpayers and corporations. Some witnesses criticized the inclusion of federal school-choice-related provisions and warned about uncertainty around future federal guidance, while others said the bill should not move ahead before the budget process. Members also debated whether taxpayers would need to file amended returns if the state later diverged from the Department of Revenue forms, and whether the senior and child care provisions were targeted or equitable. The transcript ends during public testimony, with no final committee vote or action shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• of $225 million, consisting of $6.9 million in personnel services and $218.1 million in operating expense
• Certainly purchasing zero-emission vehicles is more expensive than traditional gas-powered vehicles,
• One is that these expenses are not new.
• I mean, things have just astronomically gotten more expensive.
• I mean, things have just astronomically gotten more expensive.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee heard several Caltrans, CHP, and DMV budget and trailer bill items. On Caltrans fleet replacement, the department requested a one-time $225 million augmentation to replace aging medium- and heavy-duty vehicles and expand zero-emission vehicle infrastructure. LAO said the request was consistent with state policy, but senators criticized the high cost of electric fleet purchases and Caltrans’ delayed zero-emission fleet report; the chair said the report must be delivered within 30 days before the request could be fully considered. Caltrans also presented trailer bill language to replace an originally intended $50 million federal transfer for the High Road Construction Careers Program with $30 million in state Highway Account funds after federal eligibility problems prevented use of the federal dollars. Members questioned the reduction, the delay in implementation, where the remaining funds would go, and whether the program would keep jobs in California and meet labor standards; Caltrans and the Workforce Development Board said the program had prior success and that the state-funds transfer was intended to preserve the original policy goal. The committee then reviewed CHP’s request for a $60 million augmentation for equipment and operating costs, which CHP said was needed because vacancy savings no longer covered rising fuel, vehicle, and other operating costs. CHP argued that recruitment success had reduced vacancies and that costs had risen sharply since 2006, while LAO recommended rejection, citing that the expenses were ongoing, CHP still had vacancies above pre-pandemic levels, and the Motor Vehicle Account faces structural insolvency by 2028-29. Members discussed whether the account can sustain these costs and whether the Legislature should consider broader funding changes. CHP also sought a permanent $885,000 augmentation for seven analyst positions for the Highway Violence Task Force; CHP said freeway shootings had fallen sharply since 2021 and that analysts were essential to solving cases, while LAO noted the request was smaller than prior years but would create an ongoing commitment. Senators generally supported the task force but asked for clearer metrics and reporting, especially because the data categories had changed over time. Finally, the DMV presented the State-to-State verification system and related modernization work under DXP. DMV said State-to-State is required for Real ID compliance and that California must join the system by February 2027, with live testing planned for the summer. Senators focused heavily on privacy and data security, especially the inclusion of Social Security number digits in the system, the role of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, and whether Californians understood their information would be shared in a nationwide database. DMV said the system only shares federally required data, uses encryption, and is designed to de-duplicate records across states, but members pressed for more information on governance, audit authority, and whether the Legislature had explicitly approved the data-sharing approach. The chair asked DMV to follow up with the Attorney General and indicated the committee would continue reviewing the issue.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I have that reputation around many expenses as they relate to campaigns.
• a trip to something that is discreet campaign-related expenses.
• It's a campaign-related child care expense if the expense would not exist but for the camp candidates
• Is that childcare campaign-related expense? >> No, I don't believe it would be.
• So those are examples of when you could use the money for camp expenses. Thank you.

Transcript Highlights:

• Buying into expensive private markets is another.
• Who are too expensive?
• He took some expense upon himself—actual, real expense—and paid money for this.
• That's the most expensive health care.
• Boaz provided Ruth with a meal at his own expense.

Transcript Highlights:

• This care is very hard to find and, if found, very expensive to maintain.
• What does it cost you if somebody ends up in a very expensive residential program?
• somewhere between 40 and 60 hours a week supporting our son, but it does help offset some of our expenses
• Retention incentives include bonuses, travel reimbursement, mileage, and gas cards; payroll expenses,
• Jones into the nursing home where MassHealth will end up covering all of his living expenses.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Health Care Financing

Summary: The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing held a public hearing focused on two broad sets of issues: home- and community-based care, and school-based Medicaid reimbursement. In the morning session, legislators and advocates testified on bills affecting children and disabled enrollees, including proposals to clarify rate-setting for home health and home care services (H. 767/S. 870), allow family members and spouses to be paid caregivers under MassHealth (H. 1394/S. 886 and related bills), extend MassHealth coverage for applied behavior analysis and other therapies beyond age 21 for adults with autism and developmental disabilities (H. 1351/S. 871), and protect medically fragile children by improving access to continuous skilled nursing. In the later portion of the hearing, testimony shifted to a bill to improve MassHealth reimbursement for schools (S. 862), with speakers describing the school mental health crisis and the need to reinvest Medicaid funds directly into school health services. Witnesses on the home care rate-setting bill said current reimbursement methods are opaque and outdated, contributing to workforce shortages, unfilled shifts, long waitlists, and patients remaining in hospitals longer than necessary. Home care providers and trade groups argued the bill would not set rates directly but would require more transparent methodology and fuller consideration of real costs such as wages, benefits, taxes, training, and technology. On caregiver bills, many family members and provider organizations described the financial and emotional strain of caring for disabled or medically fragile relatives, especially when parents, spouses, or guardians are barred from being paid caregivers. They argued the bills would recognize existing unpaid care, help families remain at home, and reduce reliance on more expensive institutional care. Advocates for adult ABA coverage said services remain medically necessary after age 21 and that ending coverage at that age creates an inequitable “cliff” for MassHealth members compared with those with private insurance. For the PACE/community care bill, elder law attorneys and PACE advocates said current MassHealth income rules force some older adults with modestly higher incomes to spend down to $542 per month, making community living unrealistic and pushing people toward nursing homes. They supported changing the eligibility structure to a premium-based approach that would allow more people to remain in the community. On the school Medicaid bill, advocates said schools are providing effective, preventive mental health care, but reimbursement currently flows to municipalities rather than directly back to school health budgets, limiting districts’ ability to hire and retain staff. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee heard testimony and several witnesses requested favorable reports on the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• They are expensive, but worth every penny to the future they are allowing her.
• And in our particular case with this, remember that these are extremely expensive drugs.
• And in our particular case with this, remember that these are extremely expensive drugs.
• That's uncontest. expensive drugs. There are thousands of dollars a month. That's uncontested.
• These are specialty drugs, branded products that are very, very expensive. I'm sorry.

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• We would urge you to conform to the business expensing provisions We would urge you to conform to the
• business expensing provisions that were included at the federal level.
• Current tax law does not say, take that expense wholly because you paid for it this year.
• I would clarify that the expenses that the state had not even kept up with That the expenses of the state
• So it’s a set—even if you were to agree... ...expensing and establishing a depreciation schedule.

Committee: Senate Senate Finance Committee of Reference

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee took up SB 1638, a federal tax conformity bill that updates Arizona’s tax code to the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026 and incorporates several H.R. 1-related changes, including subtractions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, plus changes to the standard deduction and charitable contribution deduction. Committee members and staff discussed two amendments: a chair’s clarifying amendment on retroactivity and foreign dividend language, and a more substantive Epstein amendment that would remove the broader conformity provisions and charitable deduction changes while limiting the standard deduction change to tax year 2025. The committee also discussed whether the bill would align Arizona with Department of Revenue forms and how much of the conformity package affected corporate versus individual taxpayers. Public testimony was split. Supporters, including the Arizona Tax Research Association and the National Federation of Independent Business, argued the bill was needed quickly to reduce filing-season confusion, keep Arizona aligned with DOR’s posted forms, and preserve business expensing provisions that help small businesses invest and hire. Opponents, including the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, argued the bill would significantly reduce state revenue, primarily benefit corporations and higher-income taxpayers, and worsen the state’s budget outlook; they also questioned the value of provisions such as SALT conformity, foreign dividend changes, and the tip/overtime subtractions. Committee members debated the fiscal impact, the policy merits of immediate expensing and conformity, and whether taxpayers would need amended returns if the bill changed after filing season. The committee adopted the chair’s clarifying amendment and rejected the Epstein amendment. It then voted to report SB 1638 as amended with a do-pass recommendation. The bill passed the committee by about 4-3, with members explaining their votes along lines of taxpayer certainty and conformity versus concerns about revenue loss and budget balance.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is not paying for operational expenses.
• IT IS NOT PAYING FOR OPERATIONAL EXPENSES.
• So VAP is a pot of money for operational expenses, and there is a separate pot for capital expenses,
• SO VAP IS A POVERTY OF MONEY FOR OPERATIONAL EXPENSES AND THERE IS A SEPARATE POT FOR CAPITAL EXPENSES
• That is an expensive proposition.

Summary: The Senate opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and an invocation, then approved the prior day’s Journal and moved into motions, resolutions, and budget-related business. Senator Gianaris called up Senate Print 5898A for reconsideration; the Senate voted 59 ayes to restore the bill to the third reading calendar. Several amendments were also received on third-reading bills, and the Finance Committee was called into session while the chamber proceeded with resolutions. The Senate adopted Resolution J.2106 recognizing Second Chance Month and the mental health impacts of incarceration, with Senator Brisport speaking in support and a guest from the community recognized in the chamber. The body also adopted Resolution J.1492 designating May 27, 2026, as Taiwan Heritage Day, with remarks from Senators Sepúlveda, Stavisky, and Liu highlighting Taiwanese contributions to New York and expressing support for Taiwan amid current geopolitical tensions. The Finance Committee then reported several budget bills, including Senate Prints 9003D, 9004D, 9007C, and 9009C, which were moved to third reading. The remainder of the session focused on the supplemental and controversial budget calendars, especially tax and spending provisions. Senators debated the “Protecting Our Wallets” energy rebate, with supporters describing it as a one-time check for eligible taxpayers and critics arguing it was too small and not tied directly to utility bills; the chamber accepted the message of necessity and laid the bills aside. Members also debated extensions and changes to tax provisions affecting corporations, alternative fuel exemptions, Broadway and theatrical production tax credits, charitable deductions for certain 501(c)(3)s, nicotine pouch taxes, a new New York City pied-à-terre tax, and a standardbred horse-racing testing fee. Several senators criticized the budget as raising costs or favoring certain industries, while supporters defended the measures as revenue-raising, affordability, or public-health policies. No final votes on the controversial budget bills are shown in the excerpt beyond procedural rulings, adoption of the resolution calendar, and acceptance of committee reports.

Transcript Highlights:

• That credit ranges from 20% to 35% depending on your income and your expenses.
• Then anything left over in terms of your daycare expenses, you could deduct from your state taxes.
• That credit ranges from 20% to 35% depending on your income and your expenses.
• Then anything left over in terms of your daycare expenses, you could deduct from your state taxes.
• And effectively, how this works is the federal government sets a baseline for your R&D expenses.

Transcript Highlights:

• of housing is the largest expense.
• Everything is making building housing harder and more expensive.
• Labor and building anything stick-built is extremely expensive.
• Obviously, for decades, The underlying dirt is just so expensive.
• We don't want more housing at the expense of affordability.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine how California finances affordable housing and homeownership. Co-chairs opened by describing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for the committee to identify practical recommendations. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Treasurer’s housing finance committees, CalHFA, and Related discussed the layered financing structure used for affordable housing, including federal low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental assistance. Witnesses emphasized that affordable housing projects typically require multiple funding sources and that the system is often slowed by complex applications, overlapping rules, and too many layers of financing. Several speakers noted recent federal changes that expanded the 9% and 4% tax credit programs, including a lower bond-financing threshold for 4% credits, which should allow more projects to move forward. State officials also highlighted ongoing efforts to streamline the system, including the SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency, which is intended to align housing, homelessness, and civil rights functions. CalHFA described its homeownership and multifamily programs, including My Home, Dream For All, Cal Assist Mortgage Fund, and the Mixed Income Program, and said its financing tools help first-time buyers and developers. Related and other housing providers said the state has made real progress through land-use reform, accountability enforcement, and faster tax credit allocation, but argued that funding remains far below need. They called for more state and permanent funding sources, more efficient administration, more support for ADU and modular financing, and better attention to deeper affordability, the “missing middle,” and equity impacts on renters, women, and communities of color. The hearing was informational only; no votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• And Christina, I'm going to expenses.
• </c> allowable expense allowable cost. allowable expense allowable cost.
• </c> eligible and reimburseable expenses eligible and reimburseable expenses primarily.<01:49:30.400>
• </c> Reimbursable expense document, and a discussion of defined, approved outreach expenses.
• </c> loggers um working with their expensive loggers um working with their expensive equipment,<02:36

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• We all know how expensive deferred maintenance is.
• So this would be for everything expense.
• Um, it would be a budgetary expense.
• Um it would be a budgetary<00:26:51.520><c> expense.
• We do not we expect budgetary expense.