Transcript Highlights:

• The GED is a test-based credential, and success requires a 9th-through-12th-grade reading level.
• More than 50% of our graduates To fifth-grade reading level.
• But they don't read at a grade-point level that allows them to pass that test.
• The per-student amounts provide for school-level personnel and school-level resources, as well as district-level
• However, they can be transferred within each other to meet needs at the district level.

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then heard an interim study proposal on Arkansas adult education and the Excel Center model, presented by Goodwill Industries of Arkansas and the University of Notre Dame’s Lab for Economic Opportunities. Witnesses argued that about 300,000 Arkansas adults lack a high school diploma or GED and described the Excel Center as a diploma-granting public charter option for adults 19 and older, with wraparound supports such as child care, transportation, tutoring, life coaching, and career services. They said the Arkansas campuses are not state-funded, highlighted growth in enrollment and graduation outcomes, and cited research showing improved employment, earnings, and reduced criminal justice involvement for graduates. Committee members discussed the role of Goodwill’s nonprofit mission, the need for multiple adult education pathways, and the relationship between adult education challenges and broader state efforts such as LEARNS and ACCESS. The committee then debated the interim study proposal procedure, including whether questions should have been taken before the vote. The motion to adopt the ISP passed, and members noted that the study would broadly examine adult education, GED testing, high school diplomas, charter schools, in-person adult education, and funding allocation. Several members asked for follow-up information on current adult education funding, the availability of Excel Centers, and the criminal justice study results. After that, staff from the Bureau of Legislative Research gave a detailed adequacy funding overview for Arkansas K-12 education. They reviewed national funding principles and then explained Arkansas’s revenue streams and distribution system, including general revenue, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, local property-tax revenues, and facilities partnership funding. They also walked through the state’s foundation formula, categorical aid, supplemental aid, and additional funding, including the per-student matrix amount of $7,771 for 2025 and how funds are allocated to districts and charters. Members asked about student support staff, special education high-cost occurrences, ALE funding, teacher salary equalization, and the Excel Center’s treatment in funding totals; staff said some of those questions would be addressed in a later spending presentation. The meeting ended after the committee was told the department was present mainly to answer questions and no further business remained.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, I do have a few slides that We have some high-level information about OIG functions, so I want to
• and at the federal level.
• And so I think there are a lot of concerns at the county level about that impact.
• and what's happening at the state level, and how we as a state are investing in it.
• But let's level set here a little bit, okay?

Transcript Highlights:

• So that got codified in this law, is that you leave and if you need a level of care that's not available
• So I will go through the allocation for you at a high level, and so we used the department to utilize
• So the state treatment facility is the highest level of care and that's where people go when they have
• of care exists for children when they exit a Baker Act and they need a higher level of care.
• So we are working to build that level here. It's like a ladder.

Summary: The Human Services Subcommittee met to review implementation of House Bill 7021, the recent overhaul of Florida’s Baker Act and Marchman Act, and to hear from DCF Assistant Secretary Erica Floyd Thomas about how the department is using the $50 million appropriation tied to the bill. Representative Maney, the bill sponsor, gave a lengthy background on why he pursued the reforms and emphasized that the goal was to improve access, reduce unnecessary crisis interventions, and give agencies the resources needed to carry out their responsibilities. He and the chair both noted that the bill was the product of many years of work and broad bipartisan support. DCF reported several early outcomes and implementation steps, including a statewide reduction in Baker Act initiations over the past five years, strong diversion rates from crisis through 988, mobile response teams, care coordination, and forensic multidisciplinary teams, and the creation of new tools such as a Baker Act dashboard and the first annual Marchman Act report. The department described key statutory changes: law enforcement discretion in initiating Baker Acts, a single-petition process, remote appearances, stronger discharge planning, interim services, updated parent notification and hold-period rules, an ombudsman office for children’s behavioral health, and regional collaboratives to identify local service gaps. DCF said it has updated manuals, FAQs, trainings, and rules, and that the managing entities have begun contracting for services. Members asked about how the $50 million was allocated, why much of it went to crisis capacity rather than outpatient care, how much has been spent so far, whether administrative costs are capped, and how the department will measure success. DCF said most of the money was used to preserve and expand crisis beds, detox beds, CSU beds, short-term residential treatment, discharge planning, and outpatient supports, with $1.3 million for the ombudsman and regional collaboratives and $48.3 million to managing entities. The assistant secretary said the department tracks readmissions, utilization, provider capacity, and monthly and quarterly reports from managing entities, but it is still early to see full effects because contracts were only recently executed. Members also raised concerns about children, families, veterans, workforce shortages, transparency, and gaps for hard-to-place individuals, including those with developmental disabilities or dementia. The meeting ended with no formal action beyond adjournment after questions were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• And there’s different levels of HUD. That’s federal. We can’t touch that.
• That is not my level of expertise. But still wanted to do something.
• Levels one and two generally operate within the confines of a hospital, and Level 3 is a freestanding
• And level three is a freestanding community-based facility that provides the highest level of behavior
• I won't say crisis-like, at crisis level problems.

Bills: HR267, HCR105, HCR107, HCR110, HCR113, HCR114, SB4, SB52, SB57, SB145, SB152, SB194, SB237, SB333, SB433, SB483, SCR37

Keywords: diabetes, amputation, amputations, diabetic foot ulcer, peripheral artery disease, PAD, wound care, podiatry, vascular disease, endocrinology, limb salvage, health policy, public health, healthcare costs, insurance coverage, Louisiana Department of Health, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, Louisiana Center for Health Innovation, patient education, screening

Transcript Highlights:

• rather than the let's start up a new audit level."
• let's start up a new audit level let's start up a new audit level >> might<00:20:26.480>
• <00:23:21.760> We education audit at the school level.
• We education audit at the school level.
• So, I don't think local level as well.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Legislative Performance Audit and Oversight Committee met to accept prior minutes and receive updates on ongoing audits. Audit staff reported progress on three education-related reviews: special education (34 of 71 observations completed, draft expected in the second quarter and final in the summer), education freedom accounts (22 of 41 observations completed, draft expected in the second quarter and final in the summer), and the doorway program (5 of 13 observations completed, draft expected by the end of February and final by April or May). No committee questions were raised on the audit status update. The committee then discussed possible future oversight topics, beginning with SNAP and concerns about fraud and work requirements. Members suggested inviting DHS officials and contract administrators to explain program operations and compliance, and also discussed whether the Department of Justice Medicaid fraud unit or other experienced officials could provide useful context. Members noted New Hampshire’s existing oversight layers, including the Executive Council and the joint HHS oversight committee, while also expressing interest in hearing more directly from department staff about staffing and contract management capacity. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on whether to pursue an audit of special education at the local school level. Members debated whether to wait for the ongoing statewide special education review and a legislative study commission report, or to begin scoping a local audit now so work could start sooner. Supporters argued that local-level spending, identification rates, and effectiveness vary widely by district and that an audit should examine both costs and outcomes; others cautioned that the scope would need to be manageable given limited audit staff and that the statewide report may help narrow the focus. The committee also briefly discussed a potential audit of the Bureau of Elderly and Adult Services, but no decision was made on that item.

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's talk about data level versus entity-level exemptions that are in several other states.
• Let's talk about data-level versus entity-level exemptions that are in several other states.
• Can you tell us your thoughts about the difference between data-level and entity-level exemption?
• I'll start with the entity-level exemption versus the information-level exemption.
• That's a concern to some level.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee hearing focused on a package of Massachusetts privacy and technology bills, especially measures to ban the sale of location data, establish a comprehensive consumer data privacy law, and regulate biometric recognition and surveillance pricing. Chairs and sponsors argued that self-regulation has failed, that data brokers and large tech companies routinely collect and monetize sensitive information, and that state action is needed because federal protections are weak or absent. Several speakers tied the bills to reproductive health, gender-affirming care, domestic violence, children’s data, and other sensitive uses of location and biometric information. Supporters included legislators and advocates who backed H. 86/S. 197 (Location Shield), H. 78/S. 45/H. 104/S. 29 (comprehensive privacy bills), H. 99/S. 47 (surveillance pricing in grocery stores), and H. 36/S. 36 (biometric recognition accountability). They emphasized data minimization, bans on selling sensitive data, consumer rights to access, delete, and opt out, and in some cases a private right of action. Several witnesses said Massachusetts should lead or align with other states, while others argued that stronger protections are needed because data can be weaponized by stalkers, anti-abortion actors, abusive partners, insurers, or law enforcement. Industry and coalition witnesses urged the committee to favor a more standardized, interoperable framework modeled on laws already adopted in other states, warning that novel definitions, data-minimization rules, and private rights of action could create compliance burdens, confusion, and costs for businesses, including small businesses. They argued that entity-level exemptions for sectors already covered by federal laws like HIPAA or GLBA promote consistency, and that Attorney General enforcement is preferable to private lawsuits. Committee members questioned witnesses on patchwork concerns, the scope of exemptions, and whether the proposed bills would harm or help consumers and small businesses. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; written testimony was noted as due later, and the committee continued taking testimony from multiple panels and virtual witnesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first is the disposal of legacy transuranic, low-level, and mixed low-level waste.
• The first is the disposal of legacy transuranic low level and mixed low level waste.
• Like, where would it be at the level?
• Some other things we've done at the staff level and board level at Sandia.
• Some other things we've done at the staff level and board level at Sandia.

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from the Environment Department on PFAS contamination in private wells in La Cienega, Santa Fe County. Staff said the plume likely came from historic use of firefighting foam associated with airport and National Guard fire-training activities, with possible additional contribution from septic systems and consumer products. They described the contamination as affecting about 200 private wells, the short-term response of providing residential filters through a $2 million legislative appropriation, and ongoing work to define the plume’s full extent, identify responsible parties, and consider longer-term regional water solutions. Members asked about filter costs, replacement schedules, disposal of used cartridges, follow-up testing, health studies, and whether cleanup or containment had begun; the department said cleanup would follow once the plume is fully mapped and that DOH is soliciting interest in a blood study. The committee also discussed the need to track disposal of PFAS filters and the possibility of broader statewide capacity for similar work. The committee then took up abandoned uranium mine cleanup. NMED and EMNRD staff reviewed the new uranium mine reclamation program created by HB 164, the state dashboard tracking sites, and the FY26 appropriation of $20 million for neglected contaminated sites, of which $12 million is being used for neglected uranium mines and the remainder for other contaminated sites. They said six contractors were hired, three priority sites in Grant County are moving forward quickly, and additional sites are being prepared for possible FY27 work. Members pressed for details on how funds are spent, why the revolving fund remains unfunded, how federal, state, tribal, and landowner requirements are coordinated, where contaminated material will be moved, and whether cleanup could also address homes built with contaminated materials. Staff said the work is governed by multiple regulatory layers, that the state is seeking an additional $25 million for FY27-FY28 plus a time extension, and that partnerships with tribes would require longer-term agreements. The committee also discussed federal cleanup efforts and the new Good Samaritan law, with members urging stronger advocacy for New Mexico sites, including tribal lands, and asking whether the Attorney General should pursue legal action against federal parties responsible for legacy contamination. Staff explained that some sites are already covered by settlement funds tied to responsible parties, while neglected sites are those with no responsible party and no other cleanup program. The committee then heard from EMNRD on Class VI carbon sequestration primacy. Staff said New Mexico currently has no operating Class VI wells, about 27 Class II acid-gas injection wells are operating, and only a small number might be candidates for conversion. They explained that the state’s primacy application would require more public outreach than federal rules alone, and that cost estimates for post-injection site care are based on long planning horizons, with some costs borne by operators and some by the state after closure. No votes were taken on the substantive items discussed; the committee approved the prior meeting minutes and took a brief recess between presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• with behavioral health needs requirements for guardianship to trans transition patients to the next level
• Oftentimes, we have violence toward the staff, high levels of staff burnout with our physicians and our
• Ideally, they would have the acute phase managed and go to a lower level of care, but the overall capacity
• And then, if an unhoused individual needs care in a higher level of care, it is even more difficult to
• Those individuals who do not need a higher level of care still need a place to be able to recuperate.

Summary: The meeting focused on hospital “avoidable days” and the difficulty of discharging medically stable patients who still need post-acute placement or social services. Presenters from Saint Anthony Hospital Midtown, the Oklahoma Hospital Association, City Care, and OU Health described common barriers including lack of skilled nursing, rehab, long-term care, behavioral health, and hospice placements; insurance prior authorization delays; Medicaid and Social Security eligibility delays; guardianship and Adult Protective Services bottlenecks; limited home health and private duty nursing; and the challenge of placing unhoused, uninsured, or medically complex patients. Several speakers emphasized that these delays reduce bed availability, increase emergency department boarding, contribute to staff burnout, and expose patients to hospital-acquired conditions and other harms. The testimony included multiple examples of patients remaining in acute care for days, weeks, or even months after being medically ready for discharge, including patients awaiting guardianship, disability determinations, or placement in facilities willing to accept them. Speakers also highlighted special populations such as patients with behavioral health or substance use disorders, medically fragile children, patients with criminal histories, and unhoused individuals who need respite or hospice care. City Care described its planned 40-bed medical respite facility, set to open in 2027, as a way to provide clinical support and housing navigation for patients too sick to recover on the street or in shelters. Witnesses recommended policy and system changes such as standardizing preauthorization protocols, expanding rural swing-bed and home-based services, increasing public guardianship resources, improving data collection on homelessness, expanding private duty nursing hours, and creating more placement options for complex patients. They also suggested better coordination between hospitals, DHS, APS, the Health Department, and post-acute facilities, including a database of facility services to improve discharge planning and keep patients closer to home. No votes or formal committee actions were taken in the transcript, but the chair indicated the issue would require collaboration across multiple agencies and partners.

Transcript Highlights:

• The income level is different on the California Lifeline compared to ACP.
• level.
• The income level is different on the California Lifeline compared to ACP.
• For example, ACP, I believe, is 200% of poverty level versus lifeline is 185% of the poverty level.
• I mean, this is where the questions about the level of staffing come in, right?

Summary: The hearing was an informational budget session on energy agency proposals, with no votes taken. Early discussion focused on Proposition 4 climate bond implementation, including funding for demand-side grid support, offshore wind development, and transmission financing. The Department of Finance said the budget includes allocations for demand-side grid support and offshore wind, but not yet for the $325 million transmission financing piece pending a required study. The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged the Legislature to consider whether to wait on offshore wind funding, whether to keep shifting funds into demand-side grid support, and how to direct future transmission financing. Members also raised concerns about local technical assistance for offshore wind, Salton Sea priorities, and the need for more information before final decisions. The California Energy Commission and CPUC then reviewed the broader energy package. The CEC highlighted the demand-side grid support program’s growth, distributed energy backup assets, long-duration storage, hydrogen grants, and the SIRP clean energy reliability program. CPUC testimony emphasized affordability, wildfire mitigation costs, rooftop solar cost shifts, and efforts to reduce rates while maintaining reliability and clean energy goals. Members questioned CPUC staffing, delays in proceedings, coordination with the CEC and CAISO, and the impact of rate increases on customers. The agencies also discussed the AB 3264 transmission financing study, with CPUC saying work on the study had already begun and was on track for the July 1 deadline. Several trailer bill and implementation items were also discussed. The committee reviewed a proposal to extend the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program surcharge, with members split over whether it should be handled in budget trailer bill language or policy legislation; the administration said the surcharge supports a critical program serving about three-quarters of a million Californians. The committee also heard a CPUC data-sharing proposal to allow nondisclosure agreements for transmission and reliability data, which members generally supported as a technical fix. DWR explained a proposal to clarify language for the Electricity Supply Strategic Reliability Reserve so it can potentially sell three gas-fired units it owns, and the CEC presented a federal transmission grant proposal tied to grid-enhancing technologies and ratepayer cost recovery. Finally, the committee discussed California Lifeline and possible broadband pilot reforms in light of uncertainty around federal Universal Service Fund support, with CPUC saying it is exploring a statewide standalone broadband option for eligible customers.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the highest level. It's typically also the most expensive level for a processor to achieve.
• So it's That's the highest level.
• typically also the most expensive level typically also the most expensive level for<00:28:26.720
• In those USDA level of inspection.
• So those are the three levels.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• bioolids and then based on the levels bioolids and then based on the levels they<00:16:07.360>
• We do have a level of PAS threshold.
• However, this level of coated wire.
• <00:42:52.319> in level, assembly level or something in level, assembly level or something
• <01:14:01.199> across background levels across background levels across many<01:14:03.280>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:20:37.520> of their members with a strong level of their members with a strong level of
• <01:42:44.400> is estimation, it is the reserve level is estimation, it is the reserve level
• purpose is to rebuild back to a level purpose is to rebuild back to a level where<01:43:07.760><
• The 600% RBC is a sufficient level 297.
• So it would 579% of the control level.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up the pooled risk management program bill and reviewed a new amendment drafted with input from the Insurance Department and Legislative Services. Department witnesses explained that the proposal would move oversight of pooled risk management programs from the Secretary of State’s office to the Insurance Department, add a licensure requirement, preserve the programs’ non-insurer status, and exempt them from third-party administrator licensure. They also described a series of solvency tools in the draft, including financial reporting, risk-based capital standards, minimum capitalization, investment limits, commissioner examination and enforcement authority, rulemaking authority, merger and affiliate-transaction review, confidentiality protections, and a separability clause. A major theme of the discussion was that pooled risk management programs differ from commercial insurers because the risk remains with the member local governments rather than being backed by a state guarantee fund. Witnesses said the bill is designed to emphasize solvency over return of premium and to give the Insurance Department a regulatory “toolbox” to prevent insolvency, including a proposed $5 million excess or stop-loss coverage benchmark, optional accessible policies, and a requirement that boards vote on dividends or premium returns when capital exceeds 600% of risk-based capital. Members questioned how this approach differed from the original Secretary of State bill and whether assessments on towns would still be possible; the department responded that the new framework would allow more flexible oversight and alternatives to immediate court action. The committee also discussed why the statute should continue to say the programs are not insurers, with the department explaining that this preserves their autonomy and avoids applying unrelated insurance laws and premium taxes. Members asked about the department’s workload and were told the department believed it could absorb the new duties without additional funding. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• You have the federal poverty level; that's the national level.
• And there's different levels.
• The base level, the base level.
• The base level, the base level.
• And so that trickles through for districts and general. ...level, the base level.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to put an AP in, who signs the checks, who makes deposits, who has different levels.
• We are that detail level.
• We are that who has different levels. We are that detail<00:23:46.720> level.
• I think the town should detail level.
• also be looking at that same level also be looking at that same level because<00:23:50.720> we

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As a level one trauma its operation.
• required to do at the state level. required to do at the state level.
• , at a state level.
• , at a state level.
• for your level one trauma? for your level one trauma? Dr.<01:56:06.960> Scott. Dr.

Transcript Highlights:

• Different programs have different levels, either set in statute or they are lending programs.
• It just gives the park residents a chance and helps to level the playing field just a little bit.
• It just gives the park residents a chance and helps to level the playing field just a little bit.
• It just gives the park residents a chance and helps to level the playing field just a little bit.
• So this again is trying to give residents a little bit more level playing field. Sen. Draheim.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Here, a huge spike in auto theft that is coming back down, but not back down to pre-pandemic levels.
• So we're talking about a dramatic decline in murder, not just from 2020 levels, but even relative to
• the pre-pandemic levels, to some of the lowest levels ever seen.
• And after this, normal levels of enforcement can maintain safety.
• That's data that's not collected or easily available at the state or national level.

Summary: The House Committee on Community Safety held a December 4, 2025 work session focused first on crime trends and then on policing effectiveness. Adam Gelb of the Council on Criminal Justice reviewed long-term national data showing major declines in reported crime and victimization since the early 1990s, a pandemic-era spike in homicide and some violent crime, and a recent drop back toward pre-pandemic levels. He also highlighted a sharp decline in juvenile arrests and incarceration, a substantial reduction in racial disparities in imprisonment, and noted that much of the disparity reduction appears tied to changes in arrest patterns. James McMahon of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs then presented Washington’s 2024 crime report, saying total crime fell 8.4% from 2023, with decreases in violent crime, property crime, murders, robberies, aggravated assaults, hate crimes, and vehicle theft, while crimes against society rose. He emphasized that domestic violence makes up about half of crimes against persons, that Washington remains above its 2019 levels in several categories, and that underreporting affects the data. Marshall Clement of the Council of State Governments Justice Center added that Washington remains one of the states still above 2019 violent-crime levels, with homicide and juvenile victimization especially concerning, and noted wide variation in juvenile arrests and violent-crime trends across cities and counties. Jeff Asher of the Real Time Crime Index said his near-real-time data through September 2025 suggests continued national and Washington declines in murder, violent crime, and property crime, with Washington’s murder trend likely continuing downward into 2025. The second half of the work session shifted to policing methods and clearance rates. Richard Hahn of the Niskanen Center argued that disorder and neighborhood conditions affect public safety perceptions, that environmental design and street lighting can reduce crime, and that police agencies need better deployment, investigative capacity, and clearance rates, especially amid staffing shortages. Mark Kropanski of Arnold Ventures summarized research finding that police staffing matters, hotspots and problem-oriented policing reduce crime, and better investigations increase deterrence and trust; he stressed that homicide clearance rates remain only around 60% in Washington and that property-crime clearance is much lower. Marshall Clement returned to focus on Washington’s solve rates, saying only 44% of violent crimes reported to police are solved, with 62% of homicides, 51% of aggravated assaults, 25% of rapes, and 31% of robberies cleared in 2024, and that large numbers of serious crimes remain unsolved over a three-year period. He urged state leaders to set goals, improve data collection, strengthen investigative resources, and support victims and witnesses. No votes or formal actions were taken; the session was informational and included extensive member questions about juvenile crime, domestic violence, underreporting, detective staffing, and how to improve clearance rates.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we, of course, need to accelerate production at all levels.
• We have tried for reforms at the federal level to unlock some of those dollars in a better way.
• We're not to the A plus level.
• We are going to be providing a high-level overview today.
• down to the regional and local levels.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This shows the level of demand for our financing in the coming years.
• That financing is tax-exempt federally and at the state level.
• Board, we operate the only level two trauma service in South County.
• Our most popular level of coverage is silver plans.
• to their pre-2021 levels, which are laid out in the Affordable Care Act.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These cities generally... up to a baseline level of cyber security up to a baseline level of cyber security
• because they have more federal level because they have more sophisticated<00:10:26.760> networks<
• And this is great, but the small cities that I mentioned, without even a baseline level of IT maturity
• And this is great, but the small cities that I mentioned, without even a baseline level of IT maturity
• Israel. baseline level so uh yes we do serve as baseline level so uh yes we do serve as an<00:23:20.640

Keywords: 1187, senate, all