Transcript Highlights:

• It is both a fiscally prudent strategy that is a correction from the past.
• The projected ending fund balance in fiscal year 26 is negative 26.3 million.
• Fiscal years 2026 and 2027 are projected by NMSEA Benefit Consulting.
• It was sent out earlier this fiscal year.
• Slide two just kind of gives an overview of where we finished fiscal year 25.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• came up with a budget that is fiscally came up with a budget that is fiscally responsible,<00:01
• So this there's a fiscal part to it.
• <00:12:34.320> documents this that budgets are fiscal documents this that budgets are fiscal
• It is fiscally<00:41:24.160> responsible.
• fiscally responsible. It is progrowth. fiscally responsible. It is progrowth.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh we've allowed any fiscal year 27.
• starting fiscal year 2027 going forward through 2031.
• :28:16.880> year up to 328 328,000 starting fiscal year up to 328 328,000 starting fiscal year
• <00:29:37.200> impacts and we don't know the fiscal impacts and we don't know the fiscal impacts
• Um so if they if the fiscal year 29.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• SO FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR WE ARE APPROPRIATING 131 MILLION.
• SO FOR IV AND V THEIR CONTRACT IS 3.3 MILLION FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.
• YOU'RE LOOKING FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR OR TOTAL PROGRAM COST? OKAY.
• I KNOW YOU'RE ASKING SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR.
• IS HARD TO QUANTIFY A FISCAL IMPACT ON IT.

Transcript Highlights:

• Both of these programs are new programs that were implemented for the first time in fiscal year. 24 25
• year, which the legislature reverted Andrey appropriated for the same purpose in this current fiscal
• I'm so for fiscal year.
• So it process fiscal years. And that's important to note as well and talking about the budget.
• overlaps with 2 fiscal years.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it'll change through the end of this fiscal year.
• But so that's To build again in the second fiscal year of the biennium.
• For fiscal year 26 and then fiscal year 27, we've got $26 and $29 million.
• These are based on the current 2025 baseline, fiscal year 2025 baseline.
• That one time and not 12 times over the course of a fiscal year.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Fiscal year 27 cost increases are not yet published.
• In fiscal year 2024, it was around 14%.
• We ended the last federal fiscal year at about 11%.
• It's come down to 11% in federal fiscal year 2025.
• It's come down to 11% in federal fiscal year 25.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing was a FY27 budget session on Health and Human Services held in Mattapan, hosted by the Joint Committee on Ways and Means. Opening remarks from Senator Lydia Edwards, Representative Brandy Fluker-Reed, Representative Russell Holmes, and Boston Public Library President David Leonard emphasized the significance of holding the first Ways and Means hearing in Mattapan, the importance of community access, and the role of libraries as human services institutions. Committee members and attendees introduced themselves before agency testimony began. MassAbility testified first, describing its mission to support people with disabilities through employment, independent living, and disability determination services. The agency highlighted federal funding uncertainty, a modest FY27 budget reduction, and a proposed reworking of its home care program, which it said is outdated and should better target those most in need. Members questioned the home care cut, staffing reductions, and federal coordination. MassAbility also shared a participant story about recovery and community support to illustrate the impact of its services. The Massachusetts Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing then presented its FY27 request, focusing on interpreter and captioning access, workforce development, emergency communication, aging-related hearing loss, and transition services for deaf and hard-of-hearing youth. Members asked about interpreter shortages, after-hours emergency coverage, ASL education, and community training; the commission said it is expanding mentorship and referral systems but still faces staffing and vendor challenges. The Massachusetts Commission for the Blind followed with a $30.8 million request, describing services for nearly 9,000 consumers, peer support groups, vocational rehabilitation, and Turning 22 services, while noting federal funding uncertainty and a 7% budget cut. Members raised concerns about maintaining services with fewer resources, and the commissioner said the agency had trimmed overhead and could manage the proposal. The Office for Refugees and Immigrants closed the segment, outlining expanded legal, housing, workforce, citizenship, and financial literacy supports for immigrants and refugees, including Know Your Rights trainings, legal defense initiatives, and the Massachusetts Access to Counsel Initiative. Members discussed the effects of federal policy changes, the loss of refugee resettlement funding, and the need for state support to fill gaps. No votes were taken in the portion provided; the hearing consisted of agency presentations and committee questioning.

Transcript Highlights:

• It now contains data from 2009 through the current fiscal year.
• The user can choose a fiscal year and the data is categorized by agency.
• You can compare disbursements for two fiscal years.
• The annual reversion report gives you the compare reversions by fiscal year.
• The information is divided into five categories and viewable by fiscal year.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to receive updates on Transparency Florida and related transparency tools. The Governor’s Office and the Department of Financial Services described the Transparency Florida website, the state payment and contract systems, and the local-government financial reporting system (Logger X/XBRL), emphasizing public access, searchable payment and contract data, downloadable reports, and ongoing upgrades. Members asked whether school districts and the Department of Corrections are included in these systems; staff explained that state agencies like Corrections are covered through Transparency Florida, FACTS, and the state financial reports, while Logger X is for local governments. Committee staff reported that the Transparency Florida Act’s requirements have been met and noted that any new recommendations would need legislative action; members were invited to submit recommendations by October 30. The committee then reviewed repeated audit findings for local governments and educational entities. Staff explained the statutory process for “three-peat” findings: first requesting an updated written corrective-action status, then possibly requiring an appearance before the committee, and finally taking further action if findings remain uncorrected. Most entities were recommended for written updates, while the City of Daytona Beach was singled out for an in-person appearance because of a repeated finding involving unexpended building permit balances. Members also raised questions about specific entities, including McIntosh, White Springs, Pahokee, and the Fred R. Wilson Memorial Law Library special district, with staff explaining the nature of the findings and noting that some entities may warrant further review. The committee adopted a motion to accept staff’s recommendations and to send letters to entities with uncorrected audit findings in late-filed 2023-24 audit reports. It also approved a motion directing the Auditor General and OPPAGA to conduct the required audit of the Department of the Lottery for fiscal year 2025-26, with the Auditor General handling financial, internal control, and compliance work and OPPAGA preparing operational recommendations. The meeting concluded with notice that the next meeting was tentatively scheduled for November 3 at 3:30 p.m., followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a fiscal note of $2.6 million that would come into the next legislative session.
• We have a fiscal note of $2.6 million that would come into the next legislative session.
• After the amendment, we don't have the fiscal note until it's adopted, but the current fiscal note with
• Senator Dwyer has a question: The fiscal note has both general fund and other funds.
• So the fiscal note is the increased dollars to replace that. Further discussion.

Bills: HB1603

Keywords: Native American, grave protection, repatriation, cultural heritage, tribal compliance, 908, all

Summary: The Appropriations Committee met with a quorum and announced it would begin meeting at 8 a.m. for the rest of the week to work through a growing bill list. The committee first approved House Bill 1603, a companion to the Historical Society budget dealing with NAGPRA, including a $500,000 matching grant to be divided among North Dakota’s five tribes and a committee to address repatriation of human remains and cultural items. The vote was unanimous, 15-0. The committee then considered House Bill 1225, which would increase penalties for reckless endangerment involving a firearm and create a mandatory prison term. After debate over public safety concerns versus the bill’s fiscal note and prison costs, the committee adopted a do not pass recommendation by a 9-6-1 vote. Members also discussed House Bill 1018, the State Historical Society budget, and approved an amendment that adjusted one-time funding items, including NAGPRA compliance, museum exhibits, military gallery funding, local historic grants, and line-of-credit repayment. The amended bill then received a due pass recommendation by a 14-2 vote. The committee next approved House Bill 1468, a behavioral health facility grant for St. Hayes, which supporters said would expand in-state access to acute and adolescent behavioral health care and reduce the need to send patients out of state. The bill passed 14-1. It then amended and passed House Bill 1485, increasing the personal needs allowance for certain Medicaid recipients by $15 and indexing it to inflation; the amendment and the bill as amended both passed 14-2. Finally, the committee approved House Bill 1016, the Adjutant General/National Guard budget, after adopting an amendment that funded disaster relief, response equipment, IT and website costs, and staffing changes for the watch center; the amended bill passed 14-2. The committee adjourned after completing six bills and planned to resume the next morning at 8 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is referred to the Committee on Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development.
• From the Committee on Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development: Senate Bill Number 222 receives
• From the Committee on Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development: House Bill Number 111 receives
• From the Committee on Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development: House Bill Number 112 receives
• From the Committee on Fiscal Responsibility and Economic Development: House Bill Number 113 receives

Bills: SJR 3, SB 5, SB 21, SB 72, SB 703, SB 764, SB 790, SJR 36, SJR 3, SJR 34, SJR 18, SCR 9, SB 616, SB 565, SB 384, SB 5, SB 21, SB 72, SB 140, SB 262, SB 370, SB 372, SB 495, SB 627, SB 703, SB 764, SB 842, SB 971, SB 790, SB 767, SB 480, SB 1066, SB 929, SB 765, SB 523, SB 62, SB 19, SB 18, SB 666, SB 688, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 706, SB 847, SB 869, SB 890, SB 992, SB 1145, SB 494, SB 290, SB 766, SB 11, SB 10, SB 13, SB 263, SJR 3, SB 5, SR 172, SR 176, SR 177, SR 190, SR 193, SR 194, SR 202, SR 203, SR 208

Keywords: dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, research funding, state budget, prevention, healthcare, medical research, Dementia Prevention and Research Institute, research institute, funding, grants, state health initiatives, cryptocurrency, bitcoin, investment reserve, economic resilience, financial security, vehicle rental, damage waiver

Transcript Highlights:

• in fiscal year 27.
• programs 5 million in F year uh fiscal programs 5 million in F year uh fiscal year<00:34:37.480>
• <00:34:39.919> year year 26 5 million in fiscal year year 26 5 million in fiscal year 27<00
• It won't have a fiscal impact."
• attorneys we wouldn't have any fiscal attorneys we wouldn't have any fiscal impact<01:33:18.480>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first recessed briefly, then took up HB 570, the prescription drug affordability board (PDAB). The chair and several members discussed the House amendment to repeal the board, which removed the fiscal note. The main concern raised was that the PDAB had not yet produced a clear business case showing value for the taxpayer investment, despite several years of work and four annual reports. Supporters of the repeal said the board’s recent report was largely redundant and that the board should either demonstrate a strong return on investment or be shut down; others cautioned against discarding the program too quickly and urged more time to refine the mission and legislative language. No vote was taken, and the committee appeared to agree to retain the bill for further work, with the possibility of revisiting it in a formal executive session on Tuesday. Members also shifted into discussion of HB 2, beginning with Section 85 on opioid abatement trust fund dollars for shelter programs. Department of Health and Human Services officials explained that the provision would provide $10 million from the opioid abatement trust fund, replacing general funds in the governor’s budget, while also noting an additional $2.5 million prioritized needs request for shelter care that was already fully funded. Committee members asked about shelter bed capacity, job placement efforts, and the remaining balance in the opioid fund; DHHS said there are 934 contracted beds and that case management includes help with housing and employment. Officials also said the current proposed budget includes another $1 million later in HB 2 from the opioid fund. The committee then began discussion of Sections 86 through 87, which would preserve the department’s ability to transfer funds between personnel lines. DHHS said the provision is operationally critical and that losing it would make it extremely difficult to manage the department, though it would not have a direct fiscal impact. The next item introduced was Section 88, extending a suspension related to eligibility for services until July 1, 2027; DHHS indicated that if the suspension were not continued, it would likely increase expenditures for Community Mental Health Centers and potentially others. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• further explanation about the fiscal aspects from House Fiscal?
• the fiscal the fiscal note<00:03:55.720> thank<00:03:55.879> you<00:03:56.000>
• further explanation about the fiscal further explanation about the fiscal aspects<00:04:07.519><
• yes I was just uh reading the fiscal yes I was just uh reading the fiscal note<00:47:12.520>
• In your packets is the fiscal note.

Bills: HF2382, HF639, SF1075, HF1243, HF1087, SF1360, HF739, HF2337, HF1220, HF712, HF1219

Keywords: accident reporting, law enforcement, data privacy, contracted service providers, public safety, HF639, Minnesota driver license, Department of Public Safety, driver medical review, loss of consciousness, voluntary control, seizure, nonepileptic seizure, epilepsy, antiseizure medication, physician statement, medical certification, commercial driver, CDL, medical examiner's certificate

Transcript Highlights:

• It's actually part of the fiscal responsibility to kind of put that in here, so I want to make sure that
• The fiscal note had recommended four FTE. Representative Pinto, the amendment says two.
• <00:40:03.760> note especially before having a fiscal note especially before having a fiscal
• <00:42:24.599> note because we're recommended a fiscal note because we're recommended a fiscal
• <00:53:15.599> note organization does with a fiscal note organization does with a fiscal note

Bills: HF8, HF1416

Keywords: wetlands, environmental review, permitting efficiency, Pollution Control Agency, construction permits, environmental impact statements, local government, business regulation, environmental assessments, HF1416, relocation grants, economic development, business relocation, site selection, business incentives, grant extension, appropriation extension, DEED, Department of Employment and Economic Development, request for proposals

Transcript Highlights:

• This chart shows the trend of the state's revenues and expenses over the past five fiscal years.
• The audit for fiscal year 2025 resulted in 33 findings.
• I realize it came out during fiscal session, and a lot of us are just now getting through this.
• Unfortunately, it was during fiscal session. March? Yes, sir. This report came out in March.
• fiscal year 2026 right now, that would end June 30th, would be part of the DHS 2026 audit.

Summary: The committee met to adopt prior minutes and reports from its executive and standing committees, including counties and municipalities, educational institutions, and state agencies. Those reports covered routine audit activity, delinquent private water and sewer audits, municipal accounting compliance issues, education audit findings, and several state agency audit items. The committee also reviewed and adopted the State of Arkansas annual comprehensive financial report for fiscal year 2025 and the related single audit report, both presented by Legislative Audit staff. The state financial report showed unmodified opinions on the state’s financial statements and described total assets of about $41.9 billion and liabilities of about $11.1 billion, along with retirement system assets of $39.9 billion and a net pension liability of $9 billion. Two material weaknesses were identified: insufficient internal controls at the Office of State Technology to monitor threats and unauthorized access, and a Division of Workforce Services methodology change for unemployment-related estimates that was not properly documented or approved. The single audit covered $12.4 billion in federal awards across 469 programs, with 16 major programs reviewed; it resulted in 33 findings, 14 with questioned costs totaling $16.6 million, and qualified opinions for the Summer EBT program, the Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund, and the Child Care Development Fund cluster. Members questioned agency officials in detail about the Summer EBT questioned costs, DHS unresolved findings, broadband grant documentation, cyber security controls, workers’ compensation liabilities, and child care funding and reporting. DHS explained that the Summer EBT issue involved drawing federal funds in advance rather than as benefits were redeemed, and said the process has been corrected. Broadband officials said the questioned $6.6 million reflected documentation-detail disagreements across many invoices rather than missing payments. OST officials described new logging, endpoint detection, and phishing-training efforts, and DFA and Education officials addressed specific audit findings and corrective actions. The committee ultimately moved to hold the two large statewide reports over until the August meeting for further review, with discussion continuing on whether to release some agency staff in the meantime.

Transcript Highlights:

• And under the guise of fiscal responsibility, there is no fiscal responsibility when you do this.
• And under the guise of fiscal And under the guise of fiscal responsibility,<00:04:36.840> there
• is no fiscal responsibility, there is no fiscal responsibility<00:04:38.400> when<00:04:38.560
• So, there is no fiscal, into poverty.
• was cruelty dressed as fiscal was cruelty dressed as fiscal responsibility.<00:05:02.600> There

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House and Senate DFL lawmakers, joined by Unidos Minnesota and other allies, held a press event responding to a budget deal they said would end MinnesotaCare coverage for roughly 20,000 undocumented adults at the end of the year while preserving coverage for children. Speakers, including Rep. Cedrick Frazier, Sen. Sandy Leafman, and Emilia Gonzalez Davalos, argued the agreement was cruel, would harm vulnerable families and essential workers, and was being justified under a false claim of fiscal responsibility. They said the affected people are Minnesota residents who work, pay taxes, and contribute to the state, and they rejected the idea that private insurance markets are a viable substitute. The speakers emphasized that many enrollees are receiving ongoing care such as cancer treatment, dialysis, insulin, and asthma medication, and warned that losing coverage would push people into emergency rooms and increase costs for hospitals and communities. They also said the deal set a dangerous precedent by using mixed-status families and undocumented workers as bargaining chips in negotiations. Several speakers framed the issue as part of broader attacks on immigrant communities at the federal and state levels. In response to questions, the lawmakers said they had not been given meaningful input on the agreement, that the DFL leadership had tried to make the “least harm” choice, and that the members speaking would vote no on the provision. They said their focus was on this specific health-care agreement rather than other budget bills, and they indicated the program’s cost was within projections, citing about 20,000 enrollees, roughly 17,000 adults, and spending under $4 million so far. The event ended with a call to continue fighting the deal and to pursue a Minnesota public option and broader long-term coverage solutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Myself, I'm with House Fiscal.
• We interpret and analyze revenue estimates for fiscal notes, and we also offer confidential fiscal analysis
• we also off offer confidential fiscal we also off offer confidential fiscal analysis<00:02:12.560>
• <00:08:00.159> year in fiscal year in fiscal year 25<00:08:02.120> uh<00:08:02.560>
• The committee will start processing fiscal notes, and the same phenomenon exists on fiscal notes where

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The meeting was an informational walkthrough for the Health Finance and Policy Working Group, focused on committee structure, budget basics, and major health-related accounts and programs. Staff explained the roles of House Research and House Fiscal, then reviewed key funds used by the committee, including the general fund, government special revenue fund, federal funds, the health care access fund, remediation account, and drinking water revolving fund. They also outlined the committee’s main budget areas, noting that medical assistance is the largest general fund item and that the Department of Health is a substantial agency funded by a mix of federal, general fund, and special revenue dollars. A major portion of the presentation covered subsidized health coverage programs. Staff described Medical Assistance (Minnesota’s Medicaid program) as an entitlement for eligible Minnesotans, with no premiums or cost sharing, and explained its managed care and fee-for-service delivery systems. MinnesotaCare was presented as a separate federal-state basic health program for people who are not eligible for MA, with income limits, premiums for adults age 21 and older, and cost-sharing requirements; staff noted that federal premium tax credit changes affect MinnesotaCare premium ranges. The presentation also summarized MNsure’s role in the individual market and in determining eligibility for premium tax credits, cost-sharing reductions, MinnesotaCare, and MA. The committee also received an overview of health-related licensing boards and occupational regulation. Staff said Minnesota has 16 health-related licensing boards, funded mainly through the state government special revenue fund and subject to legislative appropriation, and explained that health occupations may be regulated by the Department of Health, the Office of Emergency Medical Services, or the boards under chapter 214. Interstate licensure compacts were briefly noted as a way to ease practice across states. No bills were debated and no votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• year 27-28 and $6.4 billion in fiscal year 28-29.
• Is this fiscally? From the Revenue Estimating Conference. Is this fiscally responsible to do this?
• They're scoring fiscal impacts on tax rate changes on malt beverages, they're scoring fiscal impacts
• We are a fiscally responsible city. We are conservative.
• We have been fiscally conservative with our property taxes.

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, the proposed constitutional amendment on property tax relief, which would reduce assessment growth on non-homestead property, expand homestead exemptions, create a new exemption for new homesteaders, and direct counties, cities, and school districts to use property tax revenues for specified core services. Senator Avila presented the measure as the governor’s plan to provide historic relief and argued that local governments should tighten budgets and prioritize core functions. Senators raised concerns about the lack of fiscal scoring, the breadth and ambiguity of the permitted uses, the effect on special districts and local services, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. The committee adopted several amendments, including Avila’s amendment clarifying that ad valorem revenues could be used for county and municipal operations and administration and other expenditures not prohibited by law, and Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal. Other amendments failed, including proposals to allow user fees and non-ad valorem assessments, add a sunset, redirect tourism development taxes, narrow the small-business provision, and change the ballot title to reference local service reductions. Grall’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund requirement was adopted, while the committee also rejected Berman’s title-change amendment and Smith’s sunset and tourism-tax amendments. The committee then returned to the bill as amended for questions, including extended debate over whether the proposal would affect noncitizen residents, the impact on local government finances, and whether local governments would respond with higher fees or special assessments. The meeting ended with the bill still under discussion after the final round of questions, with Avila saying he would continue working with the governor’s office on the language before the next vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't believe the fiscal note takes into account rebates.
• We have developed a fiscal estimate and sent it to JLBC.
• The fiscal estimate is a two-part fiscal estimate. The first is previous denials.
• We have developed a fiscal estimate and sent it to JLBC.
• The fiscal estimate is a two-part fiscal estimate. The first is previous denials.

Bills: SB1041, SB1050, SB1131, SB1138, SB1249, SB1267, SB1272, SB1317, SB1461, SB1488, SB1504, SB1517, SB1523, SB1580, SB1582, SB1584, SB1585, SB1602, SB1630, SB1654, SB1672, SB1673, SB1718, SB1761, SB1819, SB1826, SB1827

Keywords: electronic monitoring, nursing care, assisted living, resident rights, privacy, consent, surveillance, veterans, lifetime pass, state parks, Arizona, access, disabled veterans, cardiac arrest, defibrillators, school safety, emergency response, CPR training, Arizona education funding, automated license plate readers

Transcript Highlights:

• We know there will be a fiscal note. And yet here we are saying no, no fiscal note.
• fiscal note. fiscal note.
• be a fiscal note.
• I was just reading the fiscal note.
• I was just reading the fiscal bill.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• impact in fiscal 27, a $5.9 million impact in fiscal 28, and a $7.6 million impact in fiscal 29.
• So in this case, we are discussing fiscal 26 monies.
• Chair, Representative Livingston, the fiscal 25 total receipts were $1.27 billion.
• We do have a supplemental request in this fiscal year. Correct. Mr. Chairman, Mr.
• Does HCBS have a current shortfall projected for fiscal year 26? Mr.

Keywords: 1182, all