Transcript Highlights:

• University of Hawaii resident tuition University of Hawaii resident tuition fee.<00:03:28.239> This
• Um, residency with one year, right?
• ,<00:09:55.600> they So that qualify as a a resident, they So that qualify as a a resident
• year alone, over 9,000 Hawaii residents year alone, over 9,000 Hawaii residents will<00:12:52.959
• mixes uh based on student preferences mixes uh based on student preferences that<00:53:34.240>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard three University of Hawaiʻi-related measures. HB 718 HD1 would appropriate funds for faculty and staff positions at the John A. Burns School of Medicine in cardiovascular, law, biology, tropical medicine, quantitative health/biostatistics, and environmental health and safety. Testimony was in support, including from university representatives and others who submitted written testimony. Members asked whether the positions were additional and how they would affect enrollment; the university said the hires would teach medical students and conduct biomedical research, helping increase the class size to about 77 and eventually 80, and noted a workforce paper requested by the committee would be provided soon. The committee then discussed SB 1170 HD1, which would grant resident tuition at any UH campus to certain graduates of Hawaiʻi high schools enrolling in undergraduate programs. UH supported the bill and said it had adjusted its testimony in response to prior committee concerns. Members focused on the proposed four-year window, asking why that timeframe was chosen and whether the change was needed at all. UH explained that four years would allow students who left the state to return and still complete an undergraduate degree or prepare for graduate school, and said the bill would help students who come back after one or two years but otherwise would have to wait a year to reestablish residency under current rules. UH also said it was discussing possible administrative rule changes as an alternative if the bill did not pass. Finally, the committee heard HB 1300 HD1, which would fund a University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center pilot study on cancer disparities among Native Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders, Filipinos, and people living near landfills in Nanakuli, focusing on social determinants of health, lifestyle, environmental exposures, and resilience factors. Testimony from researchers and advocates strongly supported the measure, saying the study could help explain cancer disparities and support future research funding. Members questioned the cost, the reliance on future federal or foundation funding, and the practical outcome of the study. The Cancer Center said the pilot would cost about $500,000 per year for two years, with later funding sought from federal, nonprofit, or private sources; it said the study would produce longitudinal data that could help identify at-risk groups and provide evidence for policy decisions, though members expressed concern that the project needed a clearer end goal and stronger case for public investment.

Transcript Highlights:

• It just establishes a preference for certain products and um yeah, that preference is our product.
• It just establishes a preference for certain products and um yeah, that preference is our product.
• . preference. preference.
• It just gives preference. require them. It just gives preference.
• This is a preference.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a preference that is not mandated.
• affecting our local working residents. affecting our local working residents.
• residents residents besides<02:38:55.439> travelers.
• ,<02:52:28.319> but journalists per 100,000 residents, but journalists per 100,000 residents
• also establish the local preference also establish the local preference eligibility<03:16:54.239

Bills: HB2118, HB2473

Keywords: business development, arts, cultural affairs, Hawaii, commissions, administrative transfer, funding appropriation, Hawaiian culture, sense of place, land management, environmental stewardship, cultural preservation, 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard several bills related to permitting and economic development. On HB 2603, relating to permits, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development said it supported the measure with comments. Committee discussion focused on the fact that the state’s facilitated permit process appears to have been rarely or never used, the need to identify specific projects that would use it, and whether DBEDT would need dedicated staffing to administer it. DBEDT said it had found no projects under the current process, had no capacity to run the program as structured, and estimated it would need about 7 to 9 FTEs, including permitting, coordination, data, systems, and possibly legal support. The chair suggested exploring a staff assignment and comparing the concept to federal FAST-41-style expedited permitting. On HB 2140, relating to essential permitting positions, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development again supported the bill with comments. Testimony and questioning centered on a pilot program to help counties pay competitively for permitting staff. A DBEDT representative said the issue of competitive pay affected both county and state permitting offices and that the bill was intended as a temporary pilot, though a more permanent solution would be preferable. When asked how counties would fund the salary support, the witness said that was not yet discussed with the counties and agreed to follow up. The committee also noted the bill applies to participating counties. On HB 2598, relating to the Hawaii Technology Development Corporation, the State Procurement Office and HTDC offered comments, and the Department of the Attorney General raised constitutional concerns. The AG said the bill’s residency-based certification requirements, when tied to procurement, could implicate the dormant Commerce Clause, and that the required 1% contribution tied to state contracts raised unconstitutional-conditions concerns. In questioning, the AG characterized these as legal risks rather than automatic lawsuits. The committee did not take a vote. The committee then heard HB 2141, relating to state enterprise zones. Taxation, DBEDT, HCDA, the University of Hawaii Cancer Center, and HTDC testified in support, while the Tax Foundation noted the program was intended to help economically depressed areas create jobs. HTDC said the bill would help preserve the Maui Research and Technology Center’s enterprise-zone status after rezoning. Committee discussion focused on whether the enterprise zone program is being used effectively, how the bill might attract businesses to areas where the state is investing, and whether the program’s labor requirements are too burdensome for new businesses. DBEDT explained that the program requires a 10% workforce increase in the first year, which must be sustained, and said it promotes the program through county coordinators and in-person outreach. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• do is preference opioid manufacturers. do is preference opioid manufacturers.
• We have said this is them a preference.
• And I want are giving a preference to.
• I pick, who would I like to preference?
• resident to be a classified employee. resident to be a classified employee.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You must be either a resident of the state of Florida or an alumnus of the state university system or
• If you’re an out-of-state resident. Yes. Thank you. Very much.
• I'm a lifelong resident of Florida.
• And thank you also for sharing your history as a Florida resident. We appreciate that.
• to vote on individually, or would you prefer to vote as a block?

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education heard and approved two bills before moving into confirmation hearings for several university and college board nominees. CS/SB 1458 on apprenticeships and pre-apprenticeships was presented as a measure to improve consistency and transparency in local education agency partnerships, cap LEA administrative funding at 10% when applicable, and require public meetings and work papers for workforce funding model decisions. Support was noted from Associated Builders and Contractors, the Florida Chamber of Commerce, Foundations for Florida Futures, and Independent Electrical Contractors. The bill passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then considered CS/CS/SB 1726 on higher education governance and presidential searches after adopting a delete-all amendment and a late-filed amendment defining the final group of presidential applicants as no fewer than three. The amended bill added provisions on trustee citizenship and residency/alumni eligibility, interim president succession planning, longer presidential contract renewals, limits on candidate polling by universities, syllabus posting, textbook/open-access material lists, and other governance and academic policy changes. Senators raised concerns about the minimum-three finalist requirement, interim president selection, trustee eligibility, and polling restrictions, while supporters said the bill would depoliticize leadership selection and improve transparency. The bill was reported favorably after the amendments were adopted. The committee then heard confirmation testimony from multiple appointees and reappointees, including nominees for FAMU, UNF, Pensacola State College, UWF, and UF. Most nominees emphasized ties to their institutions, student success, workforce development, military connections, and institutional growth. Several UWF nominees were questioned extensively about their votes for former chair Scott Yenner and his controversial comments about women and other groups; some said they were unaware of those remarks at the time of the vote and would not have supported him with that knowledge. Public testimony on UWF expressed concern about the nominees’ lack of higher education experience, their ties to the region, and the impact of Yenner’s views. The committee later voted to recommend a block of non-UWF nominees favorably, and it agreed to vote on the UWF nominees individually, with some remaining nominees deferred to a later hearing due to time.

Transcript Highlights:

• You must be either a resident of the state of Florida or an alumnus of the state university system or
• If you’re an out-of-state resident. Yes. Thank you. Very much.
• By narrowing this down for the Board of Trustees members to only Florida residents or people who are
• And I'm a lifelong resident of Florida.
• And thank you also for sharing your history as a Florida resident. We appreciate that.

Summary: The committee first heard CS/SB 1458 on apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs. The bill sponsor said it would add consistency and transparency by requiring local education agencies and training providers to define their roles and funding shares in contracts, cap an LEA’s share at 10% when it serves only an administrative role, and require public meetings and published work papers for the district workforce education funding steering committee. Several industry and business groups appeared in support, and the bill was reported favorably without debate. The committee then took up CS/CS/SB 1726 on higher education, which was substantially revised by a delete-all amendment. The amended bill addressed presidential searches, trustee eligibility, interim presidents, polling by universities, mission reviews, and other governance issues. Members asked about the requirement that final presidential candidate groups include at least three applicants, the qualifications for interim presidents, trustee residency/alumni requirements, and limits on candidate polling. Senators Leek and Smith offered contrasting views, with Leek warning about candidate withdrawals and Smith supporting the bill as a way to depoliticize higher education governance. The bill, as amended, was reported favorably. The remainder of the meeting was devoted to confirmation hearings for university and college boards of trustees. Several appointees and reappointees from FAMU, UNF, Pensacola State College, UF, and UWF described their ties to their institutions and goals such as student success, workforce alignment, military support, research, and regional access. The UWF nominees drew the most scrutiny over their votes for former board chair Scott Yenor, whose public comments about women and other groups were criticized by senators and public commenters. Some nominees said they were unaware of the full scope of those remarks and would not have voted for him with that knowledge; others defended their votes as based on his education-reform views. Public testimony also raised concerns about UWF board members’ lack of higher-education experience and local ties. The committee confirmed the non-UWF nominees in a block vote and then began individual votes on the UWF nominees, with debate centered on Yenor-related concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• There were times when only new residents...
• approach Altadena residents to dissuade residents from rebuilding, instead urging them to accept low
• approach Altadena residents to dissuade residents from rebuilding, instead urging them to accept low
• We've heard directly from residents experiencing this pressure.
• We've heard directly from residents experiencing this pressure.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As it stands now, municipal water customers residing outside the city limits are not provided that right
• My name is Debra Fleschner, and I'm a resident of the Hamilton Creek Ranchettes in Burnett County.
• Over 80% of that infrastructure actually benefits residents outside the city limits.
• However, our costs are spread across all ratepayers, affecting both residents and people with...
• That district has been highly successful for the residents of Denton County.

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

Keywords: water service, sewer service, public utility, joint operation, infrastructure, municipality, compliance, SB 1285, bats, bat protection, wildlife protection, Texas Parks and Wildlife Code, Parks and Wildlife Code Section 63.101, hunting bats, bat possession, bat sales, bat trade, pest control, licensed pest control professional, animal control officer

Transcript Highlights:

• You can begin with whichever you prefer.
• You can be in whichever you prefer. And a second, would you like to close?
• You can begin with whichever you prefer. You can begin with whichever you prefer.
• You can begin when you're ready on whichever bill you prefer to start with.
• You're ready on whichever bill you prefer to start with. Today, I present AB 2615.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What we’re hearing is option two seems to be the preferred option.
• On NAWS, it seemed like option one was the option that was preferred by stakeholders.
• So they provide 133,000 residents.
• Ag property, and that means you're protecting farmsteads, maybe residents or two.
• It is a levee that resides in their PL 84-99 program.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > board Our members include residents, board Our members include residents, board members,<00:
• Do you have a preference?
• Do you have a preference?
• would prefer to take first?
• Do you have a preference?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 2 relates to proofs of residence that are permitted for students.
• This extends the law that provides additional proofs of residence for students to be used during the
• This section also requires that for candidates who must prove residence in their district when filing
• bill must be current in order for that document to be a permissible proof of residence.
• I'd prefer to keep the language in.

Transcript Highlights:

• There were times when only new residents...
• When all only new residents of complexes were billed for improvements.
• approach Altadena residents to dissuade residents from rebuilding, instead urging them to accept low
• approach Altadena residents to dissuade residents from rebuilding, instead urging them to accept low
• We've heard directly from residents experiencing this pressure.

Summary: The Senate Judiciary Committee heard several bills focused on health care planning, mental health court participation, homeowners association governance, groundwater enforcement, pet-policy disclosure in rentals, and post-disaster property speculation. SB 1088 would update California’s POLST and DNR laws by renaming POLST to Portable Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment, allowing electronic signatures, clarifying who may sign on a patient’s behalf, and making clear that these forms are voluntary; it drew support from the Coalition for Compassionate Care and no opposition. SB 1242 would let original family petitioners participate in CARE Court for care coordination and information-sharing, while preserving judicial discretion to exclude them if harmful; supporters said it would improve treatment coordination, while Disability Rights California opposed it as coercive and a removal of patient consent. The committee advanced SB 1242 on a 7-0 vote, with the bill placed on call. The committee also considered SB 1007, which would require more HOA budget transparency, disclosure of evidence for violations, and a lower cap on regular assessment increases without a homeowner vote. Supporters argued it would improve accountability and protect homeowners from steep fee hikes, while HOA industry groups warned it could undermine funding for insurance, maintenance, and other operating costs. Members raised concerns about the cap and the need for flexibility for large expenses; the bill passed 6-1 and was placed on call. SB 1364, as amended, would prevent a person convicted of sexual assault from obtaining custody or visitation of a child conceived from that assault, while preserving the possibility of voluntary co-parenting and aiming to qualify California for federal grant funding; it passed 8-0 and was placed on call. Later, SB 997 would give the North Fork Kings Groundwater Sustainability Agency lien authority to enforce fees and its groundwater sustainability plan, addressing an enforcement gap for a GSA created by special legislation rather than a joint powers agreement. It drew support from agricultural and county groups and passed 9-0, placed on call. SB 1296 would require landlords to disclose pet policies up front on applications, websites, and ads, and allow refund of an application fee if disclosure was not provided before payment; supporters said it would reduce wasted application costs and pet relinquishment, while rental housing groups said the ad disclosure requirements were impractical. The bill passed 8-0 and was placed on call. The final bill, SB 1090, was introduced to prohibit large property owners from making unsolicited purchase offers for five years in wildfire-disaster areas, responding to investor activity after the Eaton and Palisades fires; the author and a SAGE witness described it as a protection against disaster capitalism and predatory low offers to displaced residents.

Transcript Highlights:

• They just said that's their preferred method, so it wasn't controversial in any way.
• But also, it's a way of life for our residents as well.
• We put a lot of weight onto what our resident landowners give us for feedback.
• So being a resident... ...that are still not accounted for.
• We live in a combination of rental land and residence right next to it.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Energy Development and Transmission Committee met in interim session and approved the November 6 minutes. Chair Novak outlined the committee’s study agenda, including large energy users such as data centers, geothermal, landowner relations, wind and solar, and other energy topics across the state. The meeting was framed as informational only, with no bills or formal legislative action taken beyond the minutes approval. Testimony focused first on landowner relations. Oliver County Commissioner Dave Berger described the county’s energy history and local support for coal and related development. North Dakota Farmers Union President Matt Perdue emphasized proactive, face-to-face communication with landowners, respect for property rights, and the need for developers to be transparent about tradeoffs; he also discussed insurance and liability concerns tied to easements. Committee members asked about eminent domain, local versus state authority, and how communities can better understand the revenue and infrastructure implications of energy development. Department of Agriculture Deputy Commissioner Tom Bodine then described the department’s ombudsman programs for pipeline restoration and reclamation, wind restoration, and royalty oversight. He said the programs provide confidential, third-party assistance on reclamation and royalty disputes, but do not provide legal advice. Senators raised concerns about post-production deductions in royalty leases and whether the ombudsman can explain them; Bodine said the program can clarify statements and deductions but cannot resolve legal disputes. He also said the department has not received requests related to fiber lines. Representatives from Grid United and One Oak described their project development and landowner engagement practices. Grid United’s Brent Johnson discussed the North Plains Connector transmission project, its route selection process, voluntary acquisition approach, and efforts to avoid eminent domain by working closely with regulators, counties, townships, and landowners. One Oak’s Danette Welsh and Tom Giltner described the company’s midstream operations, extensive North Dakota footprint, and emphasis on direct landowner communication, consistent local regulation, careful construction practices, and post-construction reclamation. Members asked about setbacks, zoning consistency, invasive species prevention, outside advocacy groups, and eminent domain use; One Oak said it has not used eminent domain on its North Dakota projects, largely because most gathering lines are negotiated easements.

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 1174 supports everyday Californians by providing a bid preference for construction companies that
• Specifically, SB 1174 offers a small bid preference scale by employee ownership percentage.
• The bid preference scale is based on employee ownership percentage.
• SB 1174 also authorizes sanctions for bidders that attempt to defraud the bid preference.
• So it seems beneficial to support these companies as a complement to our existing bid preferences.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So given the preference of a homestead exemption or a compression model, which is your preference?
• Peacock's point, with all due respect, uh, we actually prefer the homestead exemption, uh, as the most
• So the distribution of benefit across, uh, all quintiles of, uh, Texas residents.
• Now it's no secret that compression is the foundation's preferred method of returning surplus monies
• I prefer Hammer, but OK, Glenn Hammer, have your way.

Bills: HB8, HB9, HJR1, HB 22

Keywords: HB 8, Texas public school accountability, school accountability, public school transparency, STAAR, state assessments, instructionally supportive assessment program, Student Success Tool, Texas Education Agency, TEA, accountability ratings, A-F ratings, through-year assessment, benchmark testing, norm-referenced assessment, college career military readiness, CCMR, local accountability plan, school district performance, campus turnaround

Transcript Highlights:

• extra $4 fee for Massachusetts residents extra $4 fee for Massachusetts residents visiting<00:47
• New Hampshire residents own these parks. New Hampshire residents own these parks.
• and non-residents.
• residents won't be charged more than New Hampshire residents for that fee.
• <00:52:09.040> for more than New Hampshire residents for more than New Hampshire residents

Keywords: 9:00am HB 155 9:30am HB 1102 10:30am HB 1109 11:00am HB 1356 11:30am HB 1469 1:00pm HB 1323 2:00pm HB 1376, 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with unanimous committee approval of amendment 2026-2021S to HB 2. Senator Lang explained the amendment corrected a drafting error so that $2.5 million in state funds, matched with federal money for a total of $5 million, could be spent during the biennium rather than lapse at the end of the fiscal year. The money is intended to stabilize Medicaid per diem rates for county nursing homes, and members agreed without objection to adopt the amendment and continue working from the bill as amended by the Senate. The committee then discussed HB 155 and a proposed amendment, 2026-201H, dealing with the business enterprise tax. The House side described the proposal as a compromise that would raise the filing threshold from $250,000 to $375,000 and create a trigger that would reduce the BET rate by 0.05% for each $100 million in combined business tax surplus, down to a floor of 0.25%. Senate members opposed lowering the rate at this time, arguing that tax relief should focus on the filing threshold, which they said would remove filing burdens for about 3,500 small businesses, and that rate cuts should be considered in a budget cycle rather than an off-year. Concerns were raised that one-time revenues, such as tax amnesty receipts or federal repatriation-related surpluses, could unintentionally trigger reductions. Representative Sweeney later offered a revised approach by moving the effective date of the trigger mechanism to January 1, 2028, and said he was also willing to carve out tax amnesty revenues or adjust the effective date to avoid using one-time funds. The Senate remained unwilling to agree to a rate reduction, though it expressed openness to raising the filing threshold further. The committee ultimately did not resolve the business tax issue and recessed to continue discussions at a later time. The final item discussed was HB 1102, concerning an increase in the research and development tax credit paired with changes to state park fees. House members supported the R&D credit increase but opposed tying it to higher park fees, citing concerns about tourism, especially at border parks, and noting that the Department of Natural and Cultural Resources had said it did not need the increase. Senate members defended the park fee changes as a fairness issue, arguing that New Hampshire residents should pay less than out-of-state visitors and that the department had not raised rates in many years. No vote was taken on this item during the discussion captured here.

Transcript Highlights:

• OB unit would have been able to remain open for our residents.
• There's been a federal preference for placing children with relatives.
• There's been state preference; every state has a preference for placing children with relatives, and
• There's been a federal preference for placing children with relatives.
• There's been state preference; every state has a preference for placing children with relatives, and

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• governor uh we did not list a preference governor uh we did not list a preference because<02:01:
• Thank you. now through the Hawaii Residency program now through the Hawaii Residency program Queens<02
• <02:58:53.239> is Psychiatry the separate residency is Psychiatry the separate residency is
• <02:59:03.680> and precept our Psychiatry residents and precept our Psychiatry residents and
• <03:00:18.120> we we do with the Psychiatry residency we we do with the Psychiatry residency

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Public Safety met on January 31, 2025, and first heard House Bill 1062, a housekeeping measure relating to the Hawaii Air National Guard. Testimony in support came from representatives of the Adjutant General and other National Guard witnesses. A member raised a technical question about language allowing the Guard to hold the rank authorized by the Department of the Air Force, and the response was that the bill should not require additional HR language; no vote was taken. The committee then heard House Bill 674, which would authorize allowances for TRICARE dental and vision coverage for Hawaii National Guard personnel ordered to active duty for more than 30 days. The Department of Defense supported the bill through Brigadier General Ross, Director of Joint Staff, and Terry Heiti also testified in support. There were no questions or action taken on the measure. House Bill 652, relating to veterans’ rights and benefits and regulating compensation for advice or assistance on veterans’ benefits, drew the most discussion. The Veterans of Foreign Wars Department of Hawaii supported the bill, arguing it would protect veterans from illegal or exploitative practices and noting its own service to more than 2,000 veterans in fiscal year 2024. Opposition came from the National Association for Veterans Rights and Veteran Benefits Guide, which argued the bill would restrict access to needed services and that some for-profit providers operate legally and should not be barred. Committee members questioned the scope of the bill, accreditation requirements, and whether nonprofit or pro bono services would be affected. A Department of Defense veteran services official said veterans can be vulnerable to exploitation and that some legal fee arrangements can be abusive, while also noting pro bono options exist. The committee did not reach a decision on the bill during the excerpt. The committee also began hearing House Bill 1058, which would create a veteran cemetery board within the Office of Veteran Services to help state veteran cemeteries comply with federal standards. The Office of Veteran Services and Terry Heiti testified in support. Members asked about the board’s membership, timeline, and consultant selection, and were told the working group was still in an organizational stage and no construction timeline had been set. The final measure discussed was House Bill 503, which would appropriate funds for a consultant to evaluate locations and designs for a Hawaii First Responders Memorial. The Department of Accounting and General Services supported the bill, and testimony in support was received from county and city officials, UPW Hawaii, and individuals. Members asked about the working group, timeline, and budget, and were told the project was still in early planning; no final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• What we're hearing is option two seems to be the option that was preferred.
• What we're hearing is option two seems to be the option that was preferred.
• Um, Red, Option one was the option that seemed to be preferred by stakeholders.
• The preferred alternative— The preferred alternative, we take a look at a number of different funding
• It is a levee that resides in their PL84-99 program.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to receive interim status updates on several water-related studies and Department of Water Resources projects. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and then heard updates on the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study. Staff reported that the committee had already received the testimony contemplated in the study plans, including input from state agencies, local governments, and out-of-state entities, and that any further action would be at the committee’s discretion. The Department of Water Resources then provided project and budget updates on NAWS and the Southwest Pipeline Project. Reese reported NAWS is expected to serve about 81,000 users, with a total projected cost of about $571 million and about $96 million remaining, while the Southwest Pipeline Project is estimated at $1.06 billion total with about $409 million remaining. Members asked about funding sources, capacity needs, and whether current and future construction is being designed for increased demand; department staff said current work is designed for ultimate capacity, but some future components may need redesign based on new requests. The committee also discussed local cost shares, Minot’s role in NAWS funding, and whether the system is adequate for peak demand. A major portion of the meeting focused on the department’s cash management, carryover, and long-term water funding outlook. The department said Resources Trust Fund revenues are tied to oil extraction taxes and are affected by stripper well exemptions and future oil price declines. Members expressed concern about large carryover balances and whether the state is obligating more money than can realistically be spent in a biennium. The department reported about $340.6 million in remaining carryover and said it is trying to reduce that through a two-tier pre-construction/construction process and closer project vetting. The department also summarized the Deloitte studies on regional governance and finance and on cost-share policy. Stakeholders generally favored keeping the current governance structures for NAWS and Southwest with improvements, while Red River stakeholders leaned toward a different option; the department said it will bring an implementation plan back in September. On cost share, Deloitte’s recommendations would reduce some percentages, prioritize projects differently, and use other measures to close a projected long-term funding gap. Members debated affordability, local burden, deferred maintenance, and whether statutory changes may be needed to allow the commission more flexibility in prioritizing and funding projects. No formal votes or final actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the updates.