Transcript Highlights:

• There are provisions in this to make those payments out of the general fund.
• Minnesota incentive payments as well as Minnesota incentive payments as well as the<00:14:02.199><c>
• </c><00:15:36.319><c> to</c> 2023 there was the the big payment to 2023 there was the the big payment
• We need to make sure that those payments continue.
• Those payments need to continue.

Committee: House Energy Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• performance audit follow-up report identified the lack of board approval on some additional duty payments
• then DES approves those payments.
• At this time, we expanded our scope and pulled all 126 payments for that provider and identified that
• information into its benefit system, and then DES approves those payments.
• Did they have... ...of the federal compliance audit is simply to look at payments.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative Audit Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 744 was a critical step forward by establishing payment parity for telehealth services.
• , Medi-Cal payment, payment parity, and other supportive policies, such as those surrounding broadband
• National data in Medicare, which has more payment restrictions than Medi-Cal, also shows that telehealth
• Telehealth payment parity or reimbursement requirements like those added by AB 744 Telehealth payment
• These bills have led the nation in expanding access to care, first through payment parity.

Committee: House Health

Transcript Highlights:

• 30.279><c> the</c> years so the typical payment on the years so the typical payment on the median<00:
• </c><00:31:44.240><c> monthly</c> uh 900 a month in extra payment monthly uh 900 a month in extra payment
• </c> is an all-in all-included pii payment is an all-in all-included pii payment principal<00:32:02.279
• That’s only part of the payment, the other payment part, or the second TNI that you referenced.
• But more supply can help bring down the P&I part of the payment.

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• And so, like procurement payments.
• Regarding invoices, under the current law, a subcontractor may pursue payment or payment remedies, but
• But the payment process is opaque, and subcontractors are often left in the dark as to when payments
• House File 1234, as prompt or payment.
• </c> county for payment. county for payment.

Bills: HF1234 , HF3528 , HF3672 , HF3679 , HF3680 , HF1944

Committee: House State Government Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So in the first bullet point here, we talk about a down payment assistance loan.
• We administer a number of down payment assistance programs. Homeownership.
• We are providing down payment assistance. And so part of our mission is to... Assistance.
• And extending the term doesn't really change the realities of whatever that payment is.
• And the payment is a function of the high cost of housing right now.

Bills: HB2273 , SB5188 , HB2353 , HB2420 , HB2470

Committee: House Capital Budget

Keywords: embodied carbon, building materials, sustainability, construction, environment, broadband, infrastructure, loan assistance, economic development, technology access, HB 2353, predesign thresholds, capital construction, capital budget, major capital projects, Office of Financial Management, OFM, Washington state, state agencies, infrastructure planning

Transcript Highlights:

• So in the first bullet point here, we talk about a down payment assistance loan.
• We administer a number of down payment assistance programs. Homeownership.
• We are providing down payment assistance. And so part of our mission is to Assistance.
• And extending the term doesn't really change the realities of whatever that payment is.
• And the payment is a function of the high cost of housing right now.

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee held public hearings on several bills. On Substitute House Bill 2236, staff explained changes to the Washington State Housing Finance Commission’s authority, including allowing direct mortgage loans for multifamily housing, clarifying it is not a retail mortgage lender, extending bond counsel terms, removing a notice requirement before bond issuance, and repealing outdated statutory provisions. Representative Zahn and commission staff said the bill modernizes the agency and would help finance affordable housing without using state general funds. Testimony was generally supportive, with questions focused on higher interest rates, down payment assistance, and equity for borrowers of color; the commission said it works with banks, administers programs such as Covenant Home Ownership, and aims to support both homebuyers and developers. The chair then closed the hearing on SHB 2236. The committee next heard House Bill 2273 on reducing embodied carbon emissions in buildings and building materials. Staff described requirements for the State Building Code Council to adopt phased embodied-carbon standards for large projects, with reporting, a public database, and Commerce educational resources; the fiscal note showed operating and capital costs. Representative Duerr said the bill responds to rising energy demand and could help lower building costs while supporting innovation, including Washington wood products. Supportive testimony came from environmental justice advocates and an architect, who said embodied carbon reductions are already feasible and often cost-neutral. Opponents, including the Washington Aggregate and Concrete Association and Washington Citizens Against Unfair Taxes, argued the bill could raise costs, create sourcing and delay problems, and should not exempt schools. The hearing on HB 2273 was then closed. The committee also heard Senate Bill 5188, which would let the Public Works Board issue loans for broadband infrastructure repair and replacement. Staff said the bill expands the existing broadband service expansion program to cover repair and replacement of middle-mile and last-mile infrastructure, with Commerce fiscal impacts noted. The Association of Washington Cities testified with concerns that the bill could signal further use of the Public Works Assistance Account, which has already seen sweeps and could affect future water, sewer, wastewater, and solid waste funding. A question from Representative Dye raised whether the program should instead be tied to the Curb Board; staff and the witness agreed to continue that discussion. The hearing was then closed. In executive session, the committee took up House Bill 2353, House Bill 2420, and House Bill 2470. HB 2353, which raises the predesign threshold for capital construction projects from $10 million to $15 million and indexes it to inflation, was reported out of committee 18-0 with one excused. The committee then adopted and reported out the proposed substitute for HB 2420, which increases the small works roster contract limit and changes the effective date to January 1, 2027, also by an 18-0 vote with one excused. Staff also briefed members on a proposed substitute for HB 2470 concerning school construction assistance for on-base schools, but no vote was taken in the transcript. The chair announced another hearing and executive session for Friday and asked members to submit amendments by the next morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first finding, using data analytics, identified a duplicate payment of almost $3,700.
• Using data analytics, we identified a duplicate payment of almost $3,700, issued to a vendor providing
• The duplicate payment was issued within a day of the original payment in April 2024.
• After notifying the vendor, the agency received and deposited recoupment of the duplicate payment in
• The first finding, in our review of 35 career service payments, we noted one payment made by the Division

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-STATE AGENCIES

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes from the prior meeting. It then heard audit reports from Tom Bullington, including two reports with findings and three without findings, which were filed without objection. The Department of Public Safety FY24 audit had two findings: a duplicate vendor payment of nearly $3,700 that was later recouped, and a $2.5 million collateral shortfall tied to bank-held cash funds because securities were not properly pledged in the State Police’s name. Agency representatives from Arkansas State Police and the Department of Public Safety answered questions, and members discussed how collateralization works for deposits above FDIC coverage. The committee next reviewed the Department of Transformation and Shared Services FY24 audit, which contained five findings. These included an $800 career service overpayment caused by a rehire data entry error, delayed deactivation and inventory issues for assets including stolen cameras, a double count of more than $940,000 in year-end cash records, $10.3 million in health claims that should have been recorded as fiscal year 2024 payables, and repeated deficiencies in vehicle mileage logs. Agency officials explained that the stolen cameras were recovered through restitution, that inventory reviews are being expanded, and that the vehicle log problems are expected to be addressed through a statewide electronic GPS/telematics system. Members asked about the scope of audit testing, asset tracking, vehicle oversight, and whether the new vehicle system would allow monitoring of use, fuel purchases, geofencing, and possible sharing of vehicles across agencies. Shared Administrative Services said it would administer the statewide system, with departments retaining operational responsibility and access controls. After discussion, the committee filed the report without objection and adjourned, noting the next meeting would be held June 4.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're also proposing a growth factor on the maintenance payment that would be associated with the community
• corrections performance growth payment.
• It's a 2011 realignment payment.
• Those funding so that there's kind of a growth over time because the payments currently they haven't
• And this won't change at a statewide level, this won't change the payment a whole lot, but it could have

Transcript Highlights:

• Communities receive two payments.
• The amendment would nearly double the one-time 40R incentive payment and would raise the bonus payment
• in 40R density bonus payments for those two projects.
• have increased density payments to $1.2 million and the per-unit construction payment to $2.2 million
• Modernizing incentive payments that do not go to developers.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Housing

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing held a hybrid hearing on zoning, Chapter 40B, and related housing bills. Much of the testimony focused on the “Yes in My Backyard” bill (H. 1572/S. 962), which would expand by-right development of missing middle housing, reduce barriers such as minimum lot sizes and parking mandates, and support duplexes, triplexes, and other small-scale housing. Supporters included housing advocates, developers, local officials, and municipal leaders from places like Cambridge, Salem, and Braintree, who argued that state action is needed because local zoning often blocks needed housing and that the bill would help create more affordable, neighborhood-compatible homes. Several witnesses also backed a companion “Yes in God’s Backyard” bill (H. 2347), which would allow faith-based institutions to build housing on their property by right, with testimony emphasizing the potential for new units, added municipal tax revenue, and partnerships between religious organizations and housing developers. The committee also heard testimony on Senate Bill 1021 to modernize Chapter 40R incentives. Senator Pavel Payano and others said the program’s payments have not kept pace with inflation since 2004 and should be increased to better encourage smart-growth zoning near transit and town centers. Another major topic was H. 2298 on site plan review, which would codify and standardize the process in state law. Rep. Kristin Kassner and witnesses from MAPC and NAIOP said current site plan review practices vary widely across the state, creating confusion, delays, and litigation, while a uniform framework would give municipalities clearer tools to review by-right projects without undermining local oversight. The hearing also included testimony on Chapter 40B reform, including S. 1005 and H. 1537. One witness supported further review of 40B and stronger regional planning, while another backed a proposal to allow certain pre-2010 40B condominium owners to sell at market value under a framework that would recapture some of the subsidy benefits. Committee members asked several questions about local zoning changes, housing goals by county, and how the proposed bills would affect communities. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chairs indicated that written testimony would be welcomed for technical details and additional comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's 89% of child support payments on pass-through child support, not overall child support orders.
• Yeah, this is a certain—so child support is a payment from one parent to the other parent, right?
• And it is overwhelmingly a payment from a higher earning parent to a lower income family, right?
• So payments are supposed to go through the state case registry no matter what, right?
• Ultimately, these are court-ordered payments that have to be paid.

Committee: House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• If you don't make your bank payment, the bank will come in and foreclose on you, and they'll take the
• Many, most of the collectors, the counties allow for payments so they can make payments throughout the
• And so what I get to do is, I get those payments, I make those payments, I get to use those payments
• I get those payments, I make those payments, I get to use those payments as a deduction on the S-corp
• That's how I get... ...that I have from those payments.

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• We all know about the payments to state governments.
• Now, the hospitals just got their first quarterly payment.
• a year of those increased payments.
• You know, they haven't even had a full year's payment.
• Specific grant guidelines govern the type of grant and the method of payment.

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• We also enable payment of caregiver transportation so that we don't...
• So our fees and the payment structure and the payment mechanism that we utilize for providers is done
• And so it's a different payment structure, is what I would say to that.
• It's a different payment structure, is what I would say to that.
• We may end up with a different payment rate for different providers.

Summary: The Health and Human Services Committee received an overview of Florida’s intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) managed care pilot, created by legislation in 2023 to test whether a managed care model could integrate Medicaid medical services with iBudget waiver home- and community-based services for adults in pre-enrollment categories. AHCA explained the existing system, the pilot’s scope in Regions D and I, and the rollout timeline, including federal approval, contract execution with Florida Community Care, and the October 2024 go-live. Officials reported that, as of early February, 370 individuals had been sent for onboarding and 168 more were in queue, with about $35.8 million of the appropriation remaining. APD also clarified the difference between the pre-enrollment categories and the waiver waitlist, and noted that crisis cases can be enrolled more quickly depending on eligibility and funding. Florida Community Care described the pilot as a comprehensive managed care model offering medical, long-term care, and iBudget services, plus enhanced benefits such as bed-hold days, caregiver transportation, and help with legal guardianship costs. The plan said it uses one care coordinator, a 1:18 coordinator ratio, a face-to-face assessment within five days of enrollment, and 180 days of continuity of care for existing providers. The company emphasized that it is recruiting providers by offering higher rates than some iBudget rates, lower administrative burden, and network adequacy incentives, while APD said it continues to monitor provider supply and demand and recruit across service types and regions. Members repeatedly questioned whether the pilot’s costs, provider rates, and service levels were truly comparable to the iBudget system, and AHCA and APD said it was too early to draw firm conclusions because claims data are still lagging. Committee members also raised concerns about communication, enrollment delays, provider shortages, and whether the pilot could scale statewide. APD said it has used letters, phone calls, texts, emails, and community meetings to reach eligible individuals, and that some delays stem from required assessments, Medicaid eligibility checks, and level-of-care determinations. Several members asked for more detailed comparisons of costs and provider reimbursement between the pilot and iBudget, and APD said it would provide additional data. Public testimony at the end was strongly critical of managed care, with a participant and his mother describing poor service, transportation failures, and loss of control under prior managed care arrangements, and urging the committee not to expand such a model without safeguards. No votes or formal committee action were taken before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• The motion was granted and hearing and payment are recommended.
• Hearing and payment are recommended. Mr.
• Hearing and payment motion was granted. Hearing and payment are<00:21:15.880><c> recommended.
• </c> property claim and re-offering payment property claim and re-offering payment for<00:35:53.640><
• Is tablet to deny payment of the tablet.

Summary: The Joint House and Senate Subcommittee on Claims convened on April 30, first without quorum and then with quorum, at which point the committee corrected and approved the prior minutes. Members then reviewed several claims held over for informational purposes, including injury claims for Fraser, Larson, Schmidt, Stuart, and Washington, and property claims for Lidberg, Robecky, and Young, with no action taken on those items. The committee dismissed a claim by Ms. Prevally seeking reimbursement for funds liquidated from irrevocable trusts after hearing that the matter had already been litigated in court and that subcommittee rules bar claims for public assistance compensation. The panel then approved two exoneration claims: James Jovan Davis, whose murder conviction was vacated after postconviction proceedings and who settled for $250,000, and Clayton Douglas Groves, whose sexual-conduct convictions were vacated after evidence of prior false accusations was admitted and who settled for $350,000. Testimony from counsel for both claimants emphasized wrongful conviction, the length of incarceration, and negotiated settlement amounts, with members asking about the basis for the compensation and attorney-fee allocations. The final exoneration claim, Marvin Haynes, was also approved. The committee heard that Haynes was convicted as a teenager, later exonerated after new evidence showed false evidence and suggestive eyewitness identification, and that the state and claimant had reached a $4.5 million settlement. The committee then turned to Department of Corrections injury claims, denying Arnold Baker’s claim for lack of evidence of a compensable permanent injury, and approving Mark Carroll’s claim for a $4,570.40 award after he suffered a compensable ankle fracture while working. In property claims, the committee discussed Anthony Edwards’s claim for food, a JPay tablet, and shoes. After testimony from Department of Corrections counsel about property inventory procedures and the lack of a current replacement tablet program, members agreed to compensate Edwards $70 for the missing shoes, deny the food claim, and deny the tablet claim because the tablet had been returned and any malfunction was reported outside the department’s reporting window.

Transcript Highlights:

• payments by 10 percentage points beginning in 2028 until the state-directed payments are no greater
• Prior to HR1, these state-directed payments may be set up to the average commercial rate.
• payments by 10 percentage points beginning in 2028 until the state-directed payments are no greater
• for administrative payment errors.
• On the provider payment side, it ratchets down payments until they hit Medicare levels.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused first on the impacts of H.R. 1 on Medi-Cal and California’s health care system. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined provisions including work requirements, semiannual redeterminations, reduced retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal matching for emergency services for some immigrants, restrictions on lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for certain abortion providers. She said the law could put tens of billions of federal dollars at risk, with estimates of up to 3 million members losing coverage from work requirements, about 400,000 from more frequent redeterminations, and major pressure on hospitals, clinics, and rural providers. She also noted the state is considering implementation timelines, possible delays, and planning for communications, county systems, and a rural health transformation fund. Testimony from Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, the California Hospital Association, and the Western Center on Law and Poverty echoed those concerns. Planned Parenthood said the federal defunding provision would immediately threaten access to reproductive health care, with possible clinic closures, reduced hours, and workforce cuts if injunctions are lifted; it estimated about $305 million in annual federal matching funds are at stake in California. The hospital association warned that reduced provider taxes and state-directed payments could cut hospital revenue by an estimated $66 billion to $128 billion over 10 years, risking service reductions and closures, especially in rural areas. The Western Center argued the changes would reverse ACA-era coverage gains, increase churn and administrative burden, and disproportionately harm working poor people and those experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation, notification, state mitigation options, and the effect on hospitals and patients; no votes were taken. The second panel addressed community health impacts of recent immigration enforcement actions. CHIRLA described raids as a public health crisis that creates fear, trauma, family separation, and avoidance of health care. Los Angeles County Department of Health Services reported declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits in immigrant-heavy areas after enforcement actions, and said it has responded with multilingual outreach, patient navigation, telehealth, and assurances that patient information remains protected. The Children’s Partnership said enforcement also disrupts children’s access to early childhood education and schools, citing increased absences and fear among families, and urged stronger protections, legal services, and funding for child care and school-based supports. Members asked for more data on visit declines, the effects on children and families, and how to reduce the chilling effect on care-seeking and benefit enrollment.

Transcript Highlights:

• At the very least, HB 291 should be amended to clarify it applies only to the remittance and payments
• The rounding method calculation... and payments of taxes to the appropriate jurisdictions in cash.
• , the payment to the retailer or to the tax authority should still be based on the amount owed on the
• Or New Mexico wasn't taxing the lease payments on these qualified productions that were happening on
• Chair and Representative, the question about the tax payment, kind of interjecting in property taxes

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 108, which amends the Watershed District Act to fix a problem created by last year’s changes: appointed watershed district boards could not legally levy taxes, even though several districts already had mill levies. The sponsor and staff explained the bill would preserve the existing tax authority by tying it to the soil and water district responsible for the watershed district. There was no public opposition, and the committee voted do pass on HB 108 as amended. The committee then heard House Bill 154, a tax credit bill intended to decouple New Mexico’s Advanced Energy Equipment Tax Credit from changing federal definitions and to add fusion machines and related components to the state definition. Supporters from economic development, industry, utilities, and education argued the bill would provide certainty, attract advanced manufacturing, and help New Mexico compete for investment without changing the credit’s caps or fiscal impact. Members questioned why hydrogen, geothermal, and small modular reactors were not included; staff said those technologies were not in the federal definition and that adding them now could create unintended consequences. The committee voted do pass on HB 154, with one member voting reluctantly yes. House Bill 291, the Taxation and Revenue Department’s annual tax code cleanup bill, was then presented and amended twice. The first amendment preserved New Mexico’s independent definition of qualified research for the tech jobs and R&D credit. The second removed a proposed expansion of the film tax credit to certain tribal expenditures after concerns about fiscal impact; members discussed possible future approaches for tribal film activity and the film partner loophole. The bill also makes technical and policy changes including rounding certain payments to the nearest nickel, waiving interest when tax deadlines are extended for good cause, removing small late-filing penalties in some cases, allowing delinquent taxpayers to renew permits under installment agreements, intercepting excess delinquent property tax auction proceeds for other state tax debts, clarifying tobacco tax treatment for larger vape cartridges, and tightening film credit rules. After public opposition from business groups and discussion from members, the committee voted do pass on HB 291 as twice amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, this is the first meeting, an organizational meeting today, regarding the future of payments and
• This is a special initiative commission to study the future of payments and sales transactions by credit
• , credit card fees, mobile payments, buy now, pay later financing, and other aspects of the payments
• Commonwealth of conducting sales transactions with consumers using credit cards or other means of payment
• check, or similar means; two, the impact of the increasing use of credit cards or other means of payment

Summary: The meeting was the first organizational session of the special commission created by Chapter 238 of the Acts of 2024 to study the future of payments and sales transactions by credit card and the impacts on small businesses. Chair James Murphy and Senator Paul Feeney explained that there would be no testimony at this meeting; instead, commissioners introduced themselves and discussed how the commission would structure its work and future hearings. The commission’s charge includes examining payment trends, cashless transactions, credit card fees, mobile payments, buy now, pay later financing, and the impact of Section 28A of Chapter 140D on small businesses, with a final report and recommendations expected. Members and stakeholders generally supported the proposed approach, including hearings focused on business and consumer experiences, the legal and regulatory landscape, and policy options such as transparency measures, fee disclosures, reporting requirements, and possible limits. Several participants emphasized that swipe fees are a major and growing cost for retailers and restaurants, and that the issue is timely given changes in payment habits and developments in other states. One member suggested the commission also consider cryptocurrency in transactions, and another raised the possibility of holding hearings in locations outside the State House to improve access for small businesses across the Commonwealth. The chairs said staff is still organizing hearing topics and may group testimony by subject matter. They announced a tentative first hearing date of April 8 in Gardner Auditorium, with testimony allowed in person, online, or in writing, and noted that the number of hearings will depend on public interest. The commission also agreed to invite members to suggest experts or additional topics, and the meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn that passed unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• We use that rate to discount future benefit payments.
• The 15-year mortgage, your payments are higher, but when you compare that to the interest you paid over
• So you have kind of competing interests of higher payments in the short term versus longer-term savings
• So it's like you think one-fifth, two-fifths, getting all the way to the payment.
• So then this way, it's smooth. ...way to the payment.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement and the Senate Committee on Labor, Public Employment, and Retirement held a joint hearing required by law to receive an independent report from the California Actuarial Advisory Panel on CalPERS. Chair McKinnor and Senator Smallwood-Cuevas opened by emphasizing CalPERS’ importance to retirement security for public employees and to the state budget. Scott Tarando, CalPERS Chief Actuary and a CAP member, presented on the statutory disclosure requirements in Government Code Section 2029, including the use of CalPERS’ 6.8% discount rate and the need to show how changes in investment return assumptions and amortization periods affect liabilities, contribution rates, and budgets. Tarando explained that lower investment returns increase contribution rates and unfunded liabilities, while higher returns reduce them. He also described CalPERS’ 20-year amortization period for new unfunded liabilities, comparing it to a mortgage and noting that shorter periods raise near-term costs but reduce long-term interest costs. He said the CAP has recommended a 15- to 20-year range and that CalPERS’ current approach is intended to smooth volatility for a large, ongoing plan. Members asked about the meaning of average service lifetime, the timing of valuation data, whether more current data could be used, the effect of AI and workforce changes on assumptions, and whether contribution changes affect retiree benefits. Tarando said retiree benefits do not change with annual valuations, that CalPERS uses audited year-end data because it is the most reliable basis for rates, and that AI impacts are being monitored but are too early to quantify. Committee members also discussed CalPERS’ funded status, with Tarando saying it had improved from the mid-60% range about 10 years ago to around 79% at fiscal year-end and over 80% more recently, reducing pressure on employers and the state budget. Michael Cohen, CalPERS’ investment operations chief, said CalPERS had complied with federal information requests and that its annual audits are publicly available, but no formal federal review had been released. In public comment, a representative of the California State Association of Counties praised the improved funded status and the role of PEPRA reforms. The chairs closed by reaffirming CalPERS’ fiduciary duty and the goal of protecting retirement security for public workers; no votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is supported by workers' comp payments made by employers. Next item is B4.
• I think it's important to note for the committee, as we've said before, the payment distribution in this
• As we've said before, the payment distribution in this particular grant program is different from anything
• But we have the appropriation in that line to make those payments that we're talking about right now,
• Number nine, DHS with ERISA Health, and amends an existing contract for board payment for children in

Committee: All JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE

Summary: The committee heard a series of appropriation requests and contract reviews across multiple sections. In Section B, members approved temporary appropriations for the Court of Appeals, Commerce/Aeronautics, and Insurance-related payments and refunds. Section C ARPA requests from DHS were approved to return unused federal funds. Section D infrastructure-related appropriations, including wildfire preparedness, broadband BEAD funding, forestry support, recycling, and oil and gas sample preservation, were approved after questions about broadband audit controls and performance safeguards. Section E DHS reallocations were approved, including large transfers within Medical Services from hospital medical to private and public nursing home lines, along with smaller transfers for children and family services, developmental disabilities, and youth services; members asked about the source and purpose of the medical services transfer. Sections F and G were reviewed, covering cash fund requests, federal grants, and miscellaneous grants, including community college storm repairs, corrections commissary and maintenance, 911 enhancements, maternal health, disability determinations, state police equipment, digital newspaper archiving, and CDL data improvements. In Section H, the committee reviewed pay plan appropriations and performance fund transfers tied to the new Class and Comp pay plan. Section I reviewed three methods of finance for UA Little Rock, UAMS, and the University of Arkansas system. In Section J, the committee reviewed discretionary grants, including a $1.4 million HIV services grant and nine tobacco prevention subgrants through UAPB. Members questioned the effectiveness, metrics, and addresses of some tobacco-cessation arts-based grantees, especially Arts Absolutely Inc.; after discussion, Representative Kavanaugh moved to expunge the vote on J2 and refer it back for review at a later ALC meeting, and that motion passed. J3, a Department of Energy and Environment grant for propane safety training and e-waste recycling services, was then reviewed. The committee also reviewed contracts in Section K. K-1 ratified emergency management nuclear planning work performed during a transition between agencies. K-2 construction contracts included architectural and engineering services for corrections, National Park College signage, a Razorback Road parking facility, and UAMS cyclotron installation. K-3 intergovernmental contracts covered health, education, autism waiver, stroke, newborn screening, Medicaid evidence review, and radiation testing services. K-4 out-of-state contracts included staffing, IT, tobacco prevention, audit, marketing, planetarium, recruitment, and janitorial services; Senator Irvin noted one contract appeared to belong in the out-of-state list rather than intergovernmental. K-5 in-state contracts covered staffing, cleaning, re-entry and treatment services, foster care and disability services, hearing officers, asbestos abatement, campus IT support, and janitorial work. The meeting ended after a brief personal update from Senator Irvin about tornado damage in Stone County and thanks to members for their concern, followed by adjournment.