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retail mortgage lender, extending bond counsel terms, removing a notice requirement before bond issuance, and repealing outdated statutory provisions.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:

• </c> the resetting of um estimated payments the resetting of um estimated payments by<00:14:45.440><c
• That estimated payment is a very short piece of paper.
• That estimated payment is a very short piece of paper.
• That estimated payment is a very short piece of paper.
• ,</c><01:03:45.039><c> I</c> tempering of the estimated payments, I tempering of the estimated payments

Committee: Senate Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• The formula is found in Chapter 40S, Section 2, payment of smart growth school cost reimbursement.
• Payment of smart growth school cost reimbursement.
• What has made Chapter 40R truly effective are the incentives payments provided to municipalities.
• All three of these bills significantly increase the payment for cities and towns that adopt zoning...
• ...of these bills significantly increase the payment for cities and towns that adopt zoning overlays

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses

Summary: The Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses held a brief hearing on several housing and planning bills. Testimony focused on Senate Bill 176 and House Bill 313, which would update Chapter 40R smart growth zoning incentives and double municipal payments for adopting qualifying zoning districts, and Senate Bill 177, a technical correction to Chapter 40S so starter-home districts created under Chapter 40Y would also qualify for school cost reimbursement. Benjamin Fierro, representing the Home Builders and Remodelers Association of Massachusetts, strongly supported the bills, arguing that the current incentives are too modest, that starter homes are needed for young and first-time buyers, and that the school reimbursement fix is necessary to align the statutes. Nally Soto of the Massachusetts Housing Coalition also supported the bills, saying the higher incentives would help municipalities approve more housing and address the housing shortage. Representative Kassner testified on House Bill 303, a remote community development planning bill modeled on Executive Order 418. She said it would restore and expand statewide comprehensive planning for land use, transportation, housing, open space, infrastructure, and climate resilience, with regional planning agencies playing a key role. Committee members asked about how Chapter 40S reimbursement is calculated and how the planning bill would interact with existing regional planning commissions. One member also spoke in support of the housing bills and described local challenges with affordability, land costs, and compliance with the MBTA Communities law. No votes were taken during the hearing. The chair closed testimony after a final call for additional witnesses and announced that the committee would continue working on the bills and hold one more hearing in September on additional measures and late-filed bills. The committee then adjourned by motion and second.

Transcript Highlights:

• For those farms, payments would be based on production history established through their DMC enrollment
• For those farms, payments would be based on production history established through their DMC enrollment
• amounts based upon the farm's payment amounts based upon the farm's 2022<00:09:57.839><c> milk</c><00
• For those farms, payments of that year.
• For those farms, payments would<00:10:31.440><c> be</c><00:10:31.600><c> based</c><00:10:31.839><c> on

Bills: HF3298 , SF3832 , HF3528 , HF3516 , HF3972 , HF4118

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• A lot of states offer payment plans... ...that do this.
• And then that third party is handling the installment payments.
• They get the full payment for a 12-month registration.
• Again, we've limited that to maximum... ...each payment.
• Obviously, that's a... ...payment payments. And I appreciate that.

Bills: AB49 , AB169 , AB188 , AB284 , AB296 , AB306 , AB356 , AB366 , AB467 , AB499 , AB515 , AB540 , AB542 , AB595

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving on down to line 80 for the community-based first-generation home buyer down payment assistance
• Line 99, um, starting in fiscal 28, is a payment for the debt service obligations for $100 million of
• </c><00:31:50.559><c> assistance</c> home buyer down payment assistance home buyer down payment assistance
• </c><00:59:21.359><c> assistance</c> community down payment assistance community down payment assistance
• We're seeing larger down payment assistance needed and layering of multiple programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• In closing, I'll say the changes to CalFresh under H.R. 1... ...improve payment accuracy.
• We continue to serve them, but we lose the payment for reimbursement for these services.
• We didn't always give this payment. So this, it's PPS for the UIS population.
• Okay, so for about 10 years, they've had this payment.
• Okay, so for about 10 years, they've had this payment.

Summary: The subcommittee heard an extended briefing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on Medi-Cal and CalFresh, followed by testimony from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and county officials. DHCS described major Medi-Cal changes in H.R. 1, including work/community engagement requirements, six-month redeterminations, reduced federal matching for some emergency services, narrower immigrant eligibility, reduced retroactive coverage, and limits on provider taxes and directed payments. CDSS outlined CalFresh changes, especially the expanded able-bodied adults without dependents time limit, reduced exemptions and waivers, and the new federal-state-county administrative cost split. Both departments emphasized implementation plans, automation, outreach, and county coordination, while acknowledging significant expected coverage losses and administrative burden. The LAO and an independent policy expert discussed how H.R. 1 could increase demand on county indigent care systems and public hospitals as people lose Medi-Cal. They reviewed the history of county indigent care, 1991 realignment, and AB 85, explaining that counties already rely on a patchwork of funding and that current realignment revenues are often used for public health rather than indigent care. They warned that counties may face large increases in uninsured residents, with wide variation in how counties respond, and raised concerns about equity, financing, and whether a more standardized state-county program should be created. Committee members pressed witnesses on county funding, exemptions, homelessness, older adults, undocumented residents, and the effect of administrative burden versus true ineligibility. County representatives from Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Tulare, and San Bernardino described the expected local impacts and asked for additional state support. They said H.R. 1 would drive major losses in Medi-Cal and CalFresh enrollment, increase uncompensated care, strain eligibility staff, and worsen homelessness and food insecurity. Several counties urged the Legislature to fund eligibility workers, preserve enrollment, and consider a CalFresh match waiver; Santa Clara and San Bernardino also cited local tax measures and staffing reductions already underway. No formal vote or committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section four describes the payment process. Section five clarifies the appropriation.
• Section four describes the payment process. Section five clarifies the appropriation.
• Section four describes the payment process. Section five clarifies the appropriation.
• But that was the first payment.
• </c><00:58:59.720><c> for</c> law that provided sfia payments for law that provided sfia payments for

Bills: HF2274 , HF1932

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: taxation, income tax, property tax, corporate tax, homestead credit, local government aid, tax credits, economic development, taxpayer assistance, tax credit outreach, tax preparation, free tax help, IRS, Department of Revenue, general fund appropriation, earned income tax credit, child tax credit, volunteer income tax assistance, VITA, low-income taxpayers

Transcript Highlights:

• Flex Buy offers a payment structure focused on providing lower payments for the first 36 months of the
• structure uh being lower payment structure uh being lower payments<01:17:52.239><c> for</c><01:17:52.480
• So, we also often see uh payment.
• </c><01:18:39.760><c> in</c> the requirement for payments in the requirement for payments in substantially
• </c> alternative to make these payments alternative to make these payments affordable<01:19:58.000><c

Committee: Senate Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• That's about 18 million rent payments, right?
• So, the payment to their bank account.
• ,</c> addition, nonfraud, just overp payments, addition, nonfraud, just overp payments, was<01:26:53.320
• Now payments are due to applicant error.
• </c><01:45:48.320><c> and</c> in the top 10 in terms of payment and in the top 10 in terms of payment

Committee: House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• It consolidates the debt of the State Police Retirement System into one payment base.
• It effectively closes, creates a single mortgage payment, and the consolidated debt will be paid off
• Amendment three, after payments, delete 'effective June 30, 2020.'
• So we will reduce the payment time down.
• Debt or credit would be paid over 15 years, so we will reduce the payment time down.

Committee: House Retirement

Summary: The Retirement Committee met on March 26, 2026, with a quorum present. House Bill 24 was voluntarily deferred at the start of the meeting. The committee then heard House Bill 20, which would have allowed retired teachers to return to work under superintendent discretion while drawing retirement benefits. Representative Bagley argued the bill would help address teacher shortages by letting districts hire experienced certified teachers, while Representative Taylor raised broader concerns about how returning retirees are treated. After discussion, HB 20 was voluntarily deferred. The committee next considered House Bill 25, a technical update to the Teachers’ Retirement System to conform with changes in the Internal Revenue Code, including benefit commencement and surviving spouse election provisions. Catherine Whitney of TRSL said the bill is routine compliance legislation reviewed periodically by the system’s tax attorney. An amendment was adopted, and HB 25 was reported favorably as amended. House Bill 23, a cost-of-living adjustment bill for LASERS retirees, was also amended to raise the benefit cap from $80,000 to $81,201 and then reported favorably as amended. House Bill 42 proposed a phased retirement program for higher education employees in the Teachers’ Retirement System, allowing partial retirement and part-time work with partial benefits. Bacala said it was intended to help retain talent at universities and was based on prior task force recommendations; an amendment was adopted to set the participation framework for universities, and the bill was reported favorably as amended. House Bill 32, a LASERS cleanup bill addressing disability retiree restoration, administrative errors, and benefit calculations, was described by LASERS as technical in nature and was reported favorably. House Bill 13, a State Police Retirement System reamortization bill, was amended to adjust timing and technical provisions and then reported favorably as amended. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 41 on the Firefighters’ Retirement System board makeup. A new amendment package replaced earlier amendments and would eliminate term limits, expand elected active-member seats from two to five, remove chief association appointments, and require vacancies to be filled by election. Supporters described it as a compromise intended to better represent the system’s active members, while the Louisiana Fire Chiefs Association objected that chiefs had been left out of the negotiations and said they provide important budget and governance expertise. Despite the opposition, the committee adopted the amendments and reported HB 41 favorably as amended.

Transcript Highlights:

• It consolidates the debt of the State Police Retirement System into one payment base.
• It effectively closes, creates a single mortgage payment, and the consolidated debt will be paid off
• Amendment three, after payments, delete 'effective June 30, 2020.'
• So we will reduce the payment time down.
• Debt or credit would be paid over 15 years, so we will reduce the payment time down.

Committee: House Retirement

Transcript Highlights:

• We had always intended the advance payment not to be combined with a look back, so that if a family—and
• you may recall, to obtain or qualify for the advance payment, a family had to be at the 300% federal
• We were thinking could just get that advance payment.
• We had always intended the advance payment not to be combined with a look back, so that if a family,
• So no double payment there.

Committee: Senate Local Government and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• That's going to depend a lot on the payment timing.
• payment receipts for Idaho farmers and ranchers, mostly farmers, in 2026.
• As we look at the next piece of this, which is government payments, just looking at it over time, most
• Those were those coronavirus-related payments that came into farmers and really provided a lifeline in
• But for the most part, there's a purple section there, which is conservation payments.

Committee: House Agricultural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• So, Kentucky Interactive, also known as Tyler Technology, has offered to help us put an online payment
• </c><00:04:00.480><c> method</c><00:04:01.280><c> so</c><00:04:01.519><c> that</c> an online payment
• method so that an online payment method so that employers<00:04:03.439><c> that</c><00:04:03.680><c>
• It's just we're just purchasing a one-time basically software portal to receive the payments.
• So I I think &gt;&gt; uh to receive the payments.

Summary: The commission first returned from executive session and reported that no action was taken. It then approved a motion finding there was no reason to believe the respondent in case 25 LAC1 had committed or was about to commit a violation of the code, and dismissed the complaint under KRS 6.86(1)(b)3. Members next reviewed and approved the September financial report, which staff said was based on state accounting data and showed the commission within year-to-date budget parameters. Staff also reported that all required forms for the recent reporting period had been filed and that there were no outstanding forms. The main substantive discussion concerned a proposed one-year, $6,000 contract with Tyler Technology/Kentucky Interactive to add an online payment portal for the commission’s re-registration process. Staff said the system would let employers pay registration fees online using an employer ID, reduce manual handling of 3,000 to 3,500 forms and hundreds of credit card payments, and improve security by keeping credit card information out of commission staff hands. Members asked about user fees and procurement concerns; staff explained that users would still pay the existing credit card processing fee, that an e-check option would also be available, and that the $6,000 cost was viewed as below the de minimis threshold. The commission approved the contract. In other updates, staff said informal opinions were included in the materials and remained confidential, reported on a presentation to the UK Martin School, noted that the regular session calendar would likely require meetings to shift during the legislative session, and said the commission’s statutory recommendations had been received by LRC and referred to a state government committee. The meeting then moved into executive session to discuss a personnel matter.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those staff currently operate the oversight of payment approval.
• So these payments, do we have payments also to Movers for each of the quarterly updates?
• section where we actually make the payments out of.
• So we are forcing those payments, us to make higher payments and continue to make payments instead of
• the deferred comp matching payment section.

Committee: House Budget

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.