Transcript Highlights:

• Have your public... public school stakeholders all been informed that 80% of the program since 2020..
• Can this ESA program lead to that? with public schools.
• This program has brought up a lot of feelings about owner and requirements on public schools and that
• The nation's school choice programs in the aggregate involve 2.4 percent of public school kids, with
• So the billion dollars of taxpayer dollars that we're going. be putting into this program are public

Bills: SB2, SJR36, SB2, SB2, SR29, SB2

Keywords: Maverick County, recognition, economic development, Texas Senate, community celebration, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of the public health report.
• program.
• licensure program.
• But any public comment?
• We're going to move to public comment. Is there any public comment?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the department has consistently made the claim that if a student leaves a public school for this program
• utilize them, and the EFA program, being just as much a part of public education, shouldn't either.
• He said the program is not a broad movement away from public schools, that public schools remain strong
• program was going the Boucher program program was going the Boucher program was<01:52:47.679>
• expansion of voucher programs will show that we demand accountability from our public schools and we

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• from the program.
• from the program, including funding for active multiyear contracts that were not disclosed in the public
• Looks like we may have public comment—somebody walking in for public comment.
• CRDP program.
• And for some programs, that was also a deterrent for partnering in the program.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held an informational hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, focusing first on the Commission on Behavioral Health, then EMSA, and then the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). The Department of Finance said the state faces a third consecutive deficit and that the May Revision includes difficult trade-offs, including proposed eliminations or reversions of some behavioral health and public health funds. The LAO echoed concern about the structural deficit and said it was still awaiting some budget details before offering a full analysis. For the Commission on Behavioral Health, Finance proposed eliminating $20 million in Mental Health Wellness Act funds, arguing the money would help offset General Fund costs and noting future Proposition 1 innovation funding. The commission strongly opposed the cut, saying it would eliminate or delay launch-ready grants for early childhood supports, full-service partnerships, and peer respite, and would eventually end ongoing grant programming. Several advocates and commissioners testified that the funds support underserved communities and that Proposition 1 is not a substitute for the existing programs. The chair asked Finance to look for alternatives, but no vote was taken. EMSA presented mostly technical budget adjustments: increased authority for the California Poison Control System, a correction to EMSIS funding, and a reappropriation for enterprise services and data management. CDPH then reviewed a broader set of May Revision proposals, including reversions from the California Reducing Disparities Project, workforce development, STD prevention, hepatitis C prevention, hospice, and extreme heat funding, as well as a new generative AI pilot for health facility survey reporting. Members raised concerns about cuts to CRDP and gender health equity programs, especially because many grants are mid-contract and serve underserved communities; CDPH said the reversions were part of solving the deficit and that CRDP had been successful, while also clarifying that abortion.ca.gov would not be eliminated. Public comment was overwhelmingly opposed to the CRDP and related cuts, with many speakers describing the programs as life-saving and cost-effective. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Paul Public Schools.
• They serve students as a public school or as a state-designated public school.
• They serve students as a public school or as a state-designated public school.
• They serve students as a public school or as a state-designated public school.
• Paul Public Schools.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the program analyst for our elderly program, and I strongly urge that we do not cut our funding
• Lastly, on behalf of the Public Health Institute, we urge this body to reject any cuts to the CRDP program
• The funding we maintained that we retained in the program is to continue funding the existing programs
• The program requires a 30-year covenant to continue serving ISTs for 30 years, and for some programs,
• understanding of program costs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Voucher programs allocate public education funds into scholarships that can be used to apply to tuition
• Similar to voucher programs, they involve the use of public education funds.
• Mississippi has two programs, Ohio has five programs, and Wisconsin has four programs.
• Florida has two programs, and Tennessee has two programs.
• There are some voucher programs, ESA programs, tax credit scholars, and other scholarship programs across

Transcript Highlights:

• Any public comment?
• Seeing no other public comment... Thank you so much. Seeing no other public comment.
• As a county public health leader and the chair of the Commission's Program and Advisory Committee, which
• So any increase in indigent care programs without state funding will require cuts to public health.
• So any increase in indigent care programs without state funding will require cuts to public health.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits. The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements. The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually. The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank God 65% of nursing students go to public programs and not-for-profit programs.
• Go to public programs and not-for-profit programs.
• All programs, in my view, public... ...from experience what it's going to take.
• Stay enrolled, don't leave, but go join our public health program.
• programs, which at that time we didn't know that all public programs were already programmatically accredited

Summary: The committee heard and approved several health care bills. Senate Bill 68, by Senator Harrell, would require all hospital emergency departments to be prepared to treat children by maintaining pediatric equipment, staff training, written policies, a pediatric care coordinator, and completion/public posting of the National Pediatric Readiness Assessment. Senator Harrell said the bill is intended to improve pediatric emergency care in general hospitals, and the bill was supported by the Florida College of Emergency Physicians and the Florida Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics. It passed favorably. The committee also approved Senate Bill 154, which corrects the Mobile Act for dentists and dental hygienists by requiring graduates of out-of-state dental schools seeking licensure by endorsement to have attended a CODA-accredited school. The bill drew support from dental and dental hygienist groups and passed favorably. Senate Bill 40, by Senator Sharif, would require Medicaid managed care networks to ensure at least half of primary care providers offer appointments outside regular business hours, including evenings and weekends, to improve access and reduce emergency room use; it also passed favorably. A lengthy discussion centered on Senate Bill 254, also by Senator Harrell, which would tighten oversight of nursing education programs, create a temporary provisional license and preceptorship for new graduates awaiting NCLEX results, require remediation for low-performing programs, add standardized admission and exit-exam requirements, and allow the Department of Health to inspect programs unannounced. Supporters said the bill would improve quality and help students gain experience, while opponents warned it could reduce the number of nursing programs and worsen shortages, especially among private schools. After debate and testimony from nursing and school representatives, the bill passed favorably, with Senator Davis voting no. The committee then received an OPPAGA presentation on interstate health care licensure compacts. OPPAGA reviewed how Florida uses licensure by endorsement, telehealth registration, and compacts for nurses, psychologists, and physicians, and explained the potential benefits and drawbacks of joining additional compacts, including portability, data sharing, and emergency staffing versus costs, administrative burdens, and possible conflicts with Florida scope-of-practice laws. No action was taken on the presentation, and the meeting adjourned after Senator Davis requested to be recorded in support of SB 68 and SB 154.

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition to our nursing and human services programs, our allied health programs are doing well.
• These efforts include the Health Pathways Program, our Center for Career and Technical Education Program
• Some of our new initiatives include our high school LPN program, and we plan to launch an LPN program
• Do you do that for the other health care-related programs, behavioral health programs?
• So, your program here is a two-year program for the... The RN, is that correct?

Transcript Highlights:

• I have three programs to present. They're all new programs within the bond.
• park programs to develop the program over the next year.
• And then this new program will provide funding for public education work about natural landscapes and
• Is there a plan to engage the public on Is there a plan to engage the public on program development and
• We'll have public meetings to help educate people on how they actually apply for the program, and then

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations on the administration’s Proposition 4 spending plans for extreme heat mitigation and outdoor access, then took up SB 54 implementation, SB 707 textile producer responsibility, and recovery needs related to the Los Angeles fires at state parks. For the extreme heat chapter, agencies described funding for the Extreme Heat and Community Resilience Program, urban greening, urban forestry, fairground upgrades, and technical assistance for community-based climate programs. Witnesses emphasized that these are existing programs with strong demand, that technical assistance is important for reaching disadvantaged and tribal communities, and that the proposed funding would expand outreach and implementation capacity. Members asked for more detail on where funds have gone geographically, examples of successful projects, tree-planting totals, and how fairgrounds could better support fire staging and emergency preparedness. The LAO said the timing of the administration’s proposed funding generally made sense because the programs are already established, and no votes were taken. For outdoor access, State Parks, Fish and Wildlife, and Natural Resources described funding for new parks in underserved communities, deferred maintenance, state lands access, and several new or pending programs. State Parks said the park development program would fund roughly 48 projects and that deferred maintenance funding would address high-priority health, safety, and access needs. Fish and Wildlife said its lands program would improve visitor amenities and access on properties that often lack basic facilities. The Natural Resources Agency also outlined three newer outdoor-access proposals: expanding recreation in disadvantaged communities, enhancing natural resource values and trail access, and a nature/climate/education facilities grant program. The LAO distinguished between existing programs, which are ready to move forward, and the newer proposals, where the Legislature may want more input before funds are allocated. Members also raised concerns about park police vacancies, the need to track outcomes for accessibility investments, and whether Prop. 4 could help with wildfire-related recovery at state parks. CalRecycle then presented on SB 54, the plastics and packaging producer responsibility law, and members pressed hard on the delay in regulations. CalRecycle said it has held workshops, formed an advisory committee, selected the producer responsibility organization, and completed required baseline and covered-material reports, but needs more time to address complex comments and novel features such as source reduction and eco-modulated fees. Members expressed frustration that a statutory deadline was missed and asked for a concrete timeline; CalRecycle said it expects regulations in place by 2026, ahead of the PRO’s January 1, 2027 plan deadline. Finance said the Beverage Container Recycling Fund is currently healthy enough to support short-term loans for implementation. The committee also reviewed SB 707, the textile EPR law, which would create the nation’s first textile producer responsibility program; staff said the proposal would add positions and loan authority, and members noted the statutory deadlines for PRO approval, needs assessment, and later regulations. The hearing ended with discussion of the January Los Angeles fires’ damage to Topanga State Park and Will Rogers State Historic Park, where State Parks described extensive losses, emergency response work, and ongoing damage assessment. Members asked about FEMA eligibility, state funding sources, and community engagement in rebuilding, and the department said it is still assessing costs and will work with the public on reimagining the parks.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, my question is: The CPUC is proposing to increase the public purpose program fee from $1.25 per
• The funds are six public purpose programs.
• The funds are six public purpose programs for which the budgets are approved by the Legislature.
• Throughout our management of our six universal service public purpose programs, the CPUC has overseen
• Throughout our management of our six universal service public purpose programs, the CPUC has overseen

Summary: The committee first heard Issue 1 on trailer bill language to redirect funding for emergency demand-response programs. The Department of Finance proposed using about $26.9 million in General Fund originally set aside for the Distributed Energy Backup Assets program to bolster the Demand-Side Grid Support Program for summer 2026, and using about $70 million in CalCHAP interest to support ratepayer-funded demand response in summers 2027 and 2028. The CEC and CPUC said they are working on a transition from DSGS to ELRP or a successor program, while the LAO noted the General Fund money would otherwise revert to savings. Members pressed the administration on whether demand response remains important, whether DSGS has been successful, and whether the state should keep funding it through the CEC rather than shifting to a ratepayer-funded CPUC program. The CEC and CPUC said the programs are not directly comparable, emphasized different cost structures and enrollment metrics, and said a CPUC rulemaking is underway with a proposed decision expected in Q3 2026. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then took up Issue 2, a budget proposal tied to SB 254 and the new transmission accelerator. GoBiz and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank described a five-year, roughly $26 million request to staff and administer the accelerator and manage Proposition 4 and AB 1207 funds for transmission financing. Members asked about state liability, ownership of financed lines, FERC revenue requirements, and whether the program would help underserved regions and offshore wind development. Staff explained that the accelerator would only consider projects already identified through CAISO’s competitive transmission planning process, and that state financing would be a small portion of large projects intended to lower overall costs to ratepayers. The LAO said it had no specific concerns but urged the Legislature to ensure the final language matches its intent. The committee also heard Issue 3 on petroleum market oversight. The CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requested additional positions and funding to implement ABX2-1 and continue work on supply stabilization, refinery monitoring, and transportation fuels analysis. Members questioned why the work was funded through the Energy Resources Programs Account, whether existing staff from the paused price-gouging work could be reassigned, and whether the program had produced evidence of price gouging or improved supply conditions. CEC and Finance said the new positions are needed because the workload has expanded, while some existing staff remain on related analysis and reporting duties. The discussion ended without a vote in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• pre-kindergarten programs at public schools for the Committee on Public Education.
• School health and safety allotment under the School Foundation program refer to the Committee on Public
• and a parental palliative care hospital recognition program for the Committee on Public Health, HB 2059
• HB 2339 by Harrison relating to prohibiting public institutions of higher education from offering programs
• HB 2395 by Dutton relating to the grant program to provide a public-school pre-kindergarten programs

Transcript Highlights:

• Almost 90% of our patient population is on Medi-Cal or another public health program or receives charity
• So the program rules were changed, which devastated... ...the entire program system, right?
• health programs.
• public.
• systems, and other public health programs.

Summary: The subcommittee held an oversight hearing on federal actions affecting California’s public health and family planning systems, focusing first on the freeze to Title X family planning funds and then on broader CDC/public health grant terminations. Chair and members described the cuts as abrupt, harmful, and likely to create major gaps in disease surveillance, vaccination, contraception, STI testing, and other preventive services, while also criticizing the federal administration’s explanation that the actions were tied to DEI or civil-rights compliance. The chair thanked Attorney General Bonta for legal action and said the hearing was intended to document the real-world impacts and inform state budget responses. Witnesses from Essential Access Health, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, a Central Coast clinic, and other providers said California’s Title X network serves more than half a million low-income patients annually and relies on the funds for staffing, outreach, training, mobile and school-based clinics, and confidential care. They warned that the freeze has already forced reserve spending, delayed services, and could lead to layoffs, reduced hours, longer waits, and fewer appointments, especially for sexual and reproductive health care. Public comment included support for a proposed state backfill of Title X losses, with advocates emphasizing impacts on low-income, LGBTQ+, and communities of color. On the public health side, CDPH, county health officials, and local health officers testified that the CDC’s rescission of $11.4 billion in grants would affect California by an estimated $840 million and threaten lab capacity, immunization programs, health disparities work, and data systems such as CalConnect and vaccine registries. Sacramento County and others described how the grants supported outbreak response, sequencing, community vaccination clinics, and equity-focused partnerships, and said terminations had already led to canceled appointments, stopped contracts, and layoffs. Several speakers urged the Legislature to preserve and expand state “future of public health” funding and to backfill federal losses, while public commenters from HIV, immunization, labor, and county organizations echoed concerns about workforce losses and worsening health outcomes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Behavioral Health Crisis Response System, Public Information Campaign, and Sentinel Education Program
• Program costs: $389,367; 2.0 FTE. Legal services: $539,499. Office of Public Guardianship.
• office of the state public programs office of the state public defender<02:49:50.080> for<02:
• Program cost: 655.6 FTE. Public access program damage: $8,225,000.
• Support Program, 7.4 FTE. Distributions to local public health agencies, $1,018,442,571.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, approved the prior journal, and heard several brief recognitions before moving to business. Members welcomed foster care advocates for Child Abuse Prevention Month, Girl Scouts visiting the Capitol, and participants in Black Maternal Health Week, with remarks emphasizing foster youth voice, leadership development, and the need for culturally competent maternal health care and doula/midwife support. The chamber then took up House Joint Resolution 1026, honoring former Governor Roy Romer and designating a portion of I-25 as the Governor Roy Romer Memorial Highway. Supporters highlighted Romer’s long public service, his work on education and infrastructure, and his role in major state projects. A proposed amendment to strike the word “memorial” was withdrawn, the House suspended the rules to allow Romer to speak from the well, and Romer offered remarks about legislative collegiality and the importance of democracy and listening to opposing views. House Joint Resolution 1026 was adopted on a 60-0 vote, with four excused and one absent. After a brief recess, the House returned to special orders and resumed reading House Bill 1410 at length, continuing through extensive appropriations language for the Department of Human Services, including child welfare, youth services, Medicaid-related transfers, SNAP and benefits administration, and other funding line items. No final action on House Bill 1410 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• million for the conditional release program to support an MHRC program within that.
• Any public comment?
• Seeing no other public comment... Thank you so much. Seeing no other public comment.
• As a county public health leader and the chair of the Commission's Program and Advisory Committee, which
• So any increase in indigent care programs without state funding will require cuts to public health.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health heard presentations on several May Revision proposals, beginning with an overview from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance on the state’s budget condition and the administration’s efforts to reduce out-year deficits through a mix of revenue measures, fund shifts, and program reductions. The chair expressed support for some administration proposals, such as added health IT funding, county administration support, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some immigrants, and additional Covered California subsidy backfill, but also criticized proposed Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other cuts affecting counties, workforce, and rural access. The LAO said the budget still relies heavily on reserves and borrowing and urged more reserves and caution on new commitments. The Department of State Hospitals presented several proposals, including reduced county bed billing authority, limited contract exemption authority for online clinical subscriptions, reversion of unspent prior-year funds, additional lease revenue authority for the Metro Central Utility Plant replacement, funding for electronic health record implementation, and a shift of workforce development costs to Behavioral Health Services Act funds. The department also described savings and realignments in its IST and CONREP programs, including making the Independent Placement Panel permanent and adjusting funding for jail-based competency treatment and conditional release services. Members questioned the BHSA workforce funding swap, and the administration said it was part of a broader General Fund offset strategy. The Emergency Medical Services Authority requested funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for continued operation of its enterprise systems, and the Department of Managed Health Care sought funds to modernize its complaint system and claims settlement data systems. The largest debate centered on the administration’s proposed use of Behavioral Health Services Act revenues to offset General Fund spending and fund state-directed behavioral health programs. The Department of Finance said the proposal would support population-based prevention, workforce programs, mobile crisis services, and other state-directed uses, while the LAO said it was still reviewing whether the uses comply with Proposition 1 and whether the non-supplement and eligible-use requirements are met. The Commission for Behavioral Health strongly opposed proposed cuts to its Innovation Partnership Fund and community advocacy grants, arguing that both programs are central to community voice, culturally responsive services, and statewide innovation. Commissioners and many public commenters said the cuts would reduce grants to community-based organizations, tribal groups, veterans, LGBTQ communities, youth, and other underserved populations, and that the advocacy program helps communities participate in local planning and access services. The Department of Finance defended the reductions as a way to prioritize direct services and said the programs fit within Proposition 1, but members criticized the proposal as a midstream shift that would weaken community engagement and redirect funds away from prevention and advocacy.

Transcript Highlights:

• We’ve also seen, though, in these programs that the outcomes are improved in the traditional public schools
• Supporting increased funding for this program does not mean abandoning public schools.
• program.
• Even though Gator high schools offered a median of 10 athletic programs compared to 72 programs in public
• Schools offered a median of 10 athletic programs compared to 72 programs in public schools.

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , aptly called the FARM program.
• I saw that you changed the name of the HOPE Scholarship Program to just the HOPE Program.
• I saw that you changed the name of the HOPE Scholarship Program to just the HOPE Program.
• in the program?
• They come to our public schools. So... From private and homeschool to public.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee met with a quorum present and took up two bills. The first, SB 250 on rural communities by Senator Simon, was described as a broad rural development package creating an Office of Rural Prosperity, a Renaissance grant program, housing and transportation investments, added funding for rural education consortiums, and health care initiatives for rural areas. Senator Harrell asked about overlap between road funding programs, and the sponsor explained that eligible counties could receive both SCRAP and FARM funding. Several organizations waived in support or spoke in support, and the bill was reported favorably by unanimous vote. The committee then heard SB 318, the committee substitute for educational scholarship programs by President Gates. The bill was presented as a response to Auditor General findings about the rapid growth and administration of Florida’s school choice and scholarship programs. It would separate Family Empowerment Scholarship funding from the FEFP, require more frequent student enrollment verification, lower scholarship funding organization administrative fees, require return of overpayments, create a student ID system, establish a $250 million stabilization fund, require annual audits, and direct DOE to recommend future program administration through competitive procurement. Gates also offered five amendments, including technical changes to eligibility documentation and a substantive amendment requiring a DOE report on future administration and competitive selection; all five amendments were adopted. During debate and public testimony, senators and witnesses discussed accountability, software solutions, reimbursement delays, monthly attestations, and impacts on public schools and families. Supporters and opponents alike raised concerns about bureaucracy, fraud prevention, special education services, and whether the bill would help or burden parents. Gates said the bill aimed to fix tracking and payment problems without capping the program, and he noted the IEP timeline would be aligned with public school timelines. After debate, the committee reported CS for SB 318 favorably by unanimous vote, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This rule creates a public-private partnership program that is authorized under the code.
• And many public schools and private schools offer sports programs that are included.
• in a private school program or someone that wanted to play in a public school program, is that the bottom
• EFA program.
• programs?

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee met to review a long agenda of agency rule changes, beginning with housekeeping on the order of business and then taking up rules from multiple state agencies. Early items included Department of Energy and Environment rules on landfill post-closure trust fund spending thresholds and liquefied petroleum gas standards, DFA’s odometer disclosure rule allowing electronic signatures and disclosures, and several Department of Health rules covering ionizing radiation, mobile home and recreational parks, lead-based paint, counseling licensure, hearing instrument dispensers, athletic training, dental specialties and compacts, nursing, pharmacy, physician assistants, medical compacts, speech-language pathology and audiology, radiologic technology, massage therapy, community health workers, doula certification, and cosmetology/body art. Most of these were described as technical updates, conformity with recent acts, federal standards, or compact participation, and nearly all were approved without objection after brief questions and, in many cases, no public comment. The committee also reviewed Department of Labor and Licensing rules on minimum wage/independent contractor standards, boiler rules, motor vehicle commission requirements for ATV/LSV dealers, professional wrestling regulation, appraiser qualifications, and military recruiting and retention programs. Testimony generally emphasized that the rules implemented recent legislation, updated fees or licensing standards, or streamlined existing processes. Members asked a few questions about fee structures, the rationale for regulating professional wrestling, and how the National Guard’s public-private partnership and incentive programs would work; the department said the recruiting incentives would be funded from existing appropriations and were intended to improve retention and force strength. These rules were also approved without objection. The most extensive discussion came on the Department of Education’s Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom Account Program rule. The department said the revisions, based on Act 920 of 2025, were intended to add guardrails, clarify allowable expenses, and speed approval of core educational purchases. Changes included defining core educational expenses, limiting certain sports-related spending, adding an intentional misuse standard, restricting phone purchases except for disability-related needs, setting a $1,000 threshold for additional review of technology purchases, capping carryover funds at $8,500, and creating a reconsideration process for denied expenses. Members raised concerns about safeguards, appeals, sports equipment, provider credentialing, rural vendor access, and whether the department would be flexible or overly restrictive. The department said it would review every request, provide written explanations for denials, allow appeals up to the State Board, and refer suspected fraud to prosecutors if necessary. After hearing from 13 members of the public, the committee continued to discuss the rule, but the transcript ends before any final vote on the EFA rule is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the state should not be supporting programs that incentivize enrollment outside of public schools
• Let's be clear, this program is at its core about incentivizing enrollment in non-public schools.
• Public school families can use these funds for tutoring, after-school enrichment programs, and services
• The program will also empower Minnesota's low- and middle-income families to choose a non-public school
• Public school non-public schools.

Bills: HF3490, HF4040

Keywords: education finance, scholarship-granting organizations, charitable purposes, student scholarships, nonpublic schools, K-12 education, tax credit, advance payment, Minnesota tax law, child education expenses, taxpayer assistance, 1183, house