Transcript Highlights:

• Our institutions use this as well.
• Our institutions use this as well. puts these numbers together. Our institutions use this as well.
• How does this work for our institutions?
• I think the world where our institutions can compete head to head, particularly public institutions,
• So if you're an adult learner and you need to pick something here at this institution and that institution

Committee: House Joint Committee on Education

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 24 institutions in the state of New Mexico.
• So we've had a few institutions, higher ed institutions. That were hit this year, right?
• That's dispersed to the institutions.
• Public higher education institutions.
• We are asking for a reauth so we have that money ready to go for the institutions or institution depending

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have one institution that does like American Sign Language.
• So, yes, it certainly benefited a particular institution, while other institutions could argue we have
• That's all I have for the two research institutions formula.
• And the question I would ask then for our institutions is, are we creating a moving target for our institutions
• “The four-year regional institutions is about $6,000 to $8,000, and then the two research institutions

Committee: Joint Higher Education Funding Review Committee

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review a proposed process for identifying and addressing low-producing academic programs, then moved into discussion of draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the ND University System described how other states and systems define low-producing programs, emphasizing multi-year enrollment and completion thresholds, cost and workforce review, and the role of governing boards. She reported that North Dakota institutions already review programs in varying cycles, often use shared resources and stackable credentials to keep low-enrollment programs viable, and cited recent system actions over five years: 100 programs placed on inactivation, 75 terminated, and 384 new programs created. Committee members raised concerns about workforce-critical programs, duplication, exemptions, and whether the legislature or the State Board of Higher Education should drive the process. The chair said he wanted the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting and suggested the legislature may use funding leverage, including a possible holdback, to encourage the review process. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft funding formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal used fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder rate of $7,000 per undergraduate FTE and $10,500 per graduate/professional FTE, plus incentives for completions in high-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council explained that the formula also included separate treatment for research funding, external grants, and capital building tiers, and that the MD program at UND would remain fixed funding outside the formula. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the in-demand program list, the treatment of external grants, and how the proposal compared with current appropriations. The chair noted that the formula numbers were illustrative and not final budget amounts. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. It used fall census FTE with no weighted economic factor, a higher undergraduate rate of $8,750 per FTE, and completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other credentials. Members noted that the proposal would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and questioned whether the same structure should apply across institutions with very different missions and sizes. Committee discussion focused on fairness, hold-harmless concerns, and whether the nine institutions should be grouped differently. The committee did not take formal action, but the chair indicated the formulas would continue to be discussed later in the meeting and in future work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our institutions use this as well.
• Our institutions use this as well.
• How does this work for our institutions?
• I think the world when our institutions can compete head-to-head, particularly public institutions, that
• So if you're an adult learner and you need to pick something here at this institution and that institution

Committee: House Joint Committee on Education

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education met to hear an informational presentation from the Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development on Missouri’s higher education funding model and related workforce trends. Commissioner Bennett Boggs described the department’s mission, its data and workforce partnerships, and the need to better align postsecondary education with Missouri’s labor market, noting projections that 65% of jobs in the 2030s will require education beyond high school. He emphasized that the current “base-plus” funding approach dates to 1992 and no longer reflects demographic, technological, or economic changes, and said the department wants every institution to remain healthy and serve its region. Deputy Commissioner Leroye Wade outlined a proposed cost-based, performance-informed funding framework with four main parts: fixed costs, variable program costs, performance measures, and a mechanism for targeted legislative investment. He said the model is intended to be data-driven, transparent, and more responsive to enrollment changes, program mix, completion outcomes, workforce needs, and collaboration among institutions. He also reviewed the history of the effort, including a 2022 legislative appropriation for a study, a 2023 report, and subsequent interim and bill activity. Committee members asked about educational attainment goals, the P20W longitudinal data system, persistence and completion rates, and how the model would account for mission differences and student outcomes. Representative John Black, sponsor of the bill discussed, said the legislation is meant to move Missouri toward a 21st-century higher education funding system by tying appropriations more closely to state goals and institutional performance rather than continuing automatic across-the-board increases. He said the department’s work and the bill are intended to prompt continued refinement of the model, and he warned that declining enrollments and tight state finances make reform urgent. No votes were taken; the committee heard the presentation, allowed brief public comment, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• of these institutions.
• They can afford the match with institutional reserves, institutional bonds, and in accordance with the
• institution meets that graduation rate.
• Neither institution meets that graduation rate, and that graduation rate, by the way, is neither institution
• Two-year institutions, tribal colleges, projects, except providing the design phase, two-year institutions

Bills: SB234 , SB210 , SB243 , SB244 , SM16 , HB8

Committee: Senate Senate Education

Keywords: foster children, school transportation, education funding, public education, child welfare, New Mexico Highlands University, soccer field, women's sports, infrastructure improvement, funding allocation, student athletes, appropriation, New Mexico State University, nutrition, travel support, funding, education, university support, financial assistance, parenting students

Transcript Highlights:

• And the responses from the institutions...
• So, yes, it certainly benefited a particular institution, while other institutions could argue we have
• So, yes, it certainly benefited a particular institution, while other institutions could argue we have
• And the question I would ask then for our institutions is, are we creating a moving target for our institutions
• The four-year regional institutions are about 6,000 to 8,000, and then the two research institutions

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review how North Dakota might identify and address low-producing academic programs and to discuss draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the NDUS explained that the State Board of Higher Education is already developing a system-wide policy, using models from other states such as Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Connecticut. She described how low-producing programs are typically flagged by multi-year enrollment or completion thresholds, then reviewed for workforce demand, mission fit, cost, accreditation, and regional need before any action is taken. Committee members asked about what counts as a program, how costs are analyzed, whether certificates are included, how exemptions work for mission-critical or high-demand fields, and whether the board or legislature should set the rules. Johnson said the board is the appropriate body to lead the process, but legislators could use funding leverage if they wanted to encourage action; the chair asked the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal uses fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder undergraduate rate of $7,000 per FTE and a graduate/professional rate of $10,500, plus incentives for completions in in-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council walked through the projected funding effects, noting that the model would increase funding for NDSU and reduce it for UND in the current biennium, with different results in the next biennium as enrollment changes are recognized. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the definition of in-demand programs, the treatment of research funding, and the exclusion of state-appropriated dollars from the external grants calculation. The chair emphasized that the numbers were illustrative and that appropriators would set the actual dollar amounts later. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. That model uses fall census FTE without a weighted economic factor, applies a higher undergraduate rate, and adds completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other completions. Members noted that the formula would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and discussed whether the nine institutions should be treated more uniformly or split into smaller groups because of their different missions and sizes. Committee members and staff repeatedly stressed that the formulas are still being refined and that some institutions would likely need hold-harmless adjustments or other transition measures. The meeting ended with the chair directing the committee to continue the discussion later and to expect further work on both the low-producing program policy and the funding formulas.

Transcript Highlights:

• So when an institution sees more students, When an institution sees more students taking more classes
• Higher education institutions.
• Mostly that's because those support services can differ institution by institution.
• Two measures were removed that affected all of the institutions other than research institutions.
• They tell the institutions, excuse me, they tell the institutions, programs.

Bills: SB37 , SB29

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Keywords: high-quality literacy instruction, science of reading, structured literacy, reading instruction, literacy assessment, dyslexia screening, phonics, phonemic awareness, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, biliteracy, English language learner, ELL, bilingual education, dual language program, reading intervention, reading difficulty, reading improvement plan, literacy coach

Transcript Highlights:

• So, yes, it certainly benefited a particular institution, while other institutions could argue we have
• Representative Nathe said that some schools are two-year institutions and some are four-year institutions
• And the question I would ask then for our institutions is, are we creating a moving target for our institutions
• If the cost is different between two institutions, why is the right policy decision Institutions, why
• The four-year regional institutions are about $6,000 to $8,000, and then the two research institutions

Committee: Joint Higher Education Funding Review Committee

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Collaborate with another institution, maybe dedicate institutional resources to make this a go.
• But do we need it at five institutions or six institutions?
• and NDSU have collaborated with feeder institutions.
• I would be interested in looking at maybe the last three bienniums on an institution-by-institution basis
• And it's substantial, both those institutions.

Committee: Joint Higher Education Funding Review Committee

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For every $1 in state and federal grants to our students, our member institutions award $6 in institutional
• </c><00:01:49.399><c> collectively</c> colleges our institutions collectively colleges our institutions
• </c><00:02:33.120><c> work</c> students our institutions work students our institutions work intentionally
• </c><00:03:41.560><c> is</c> Year a priority for our institutions is Year a priority for our institutions
• <c> is</c> degree from our member institutions is degree from our member institutions is more<00:04:38.840

Committee: House Higher Education Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, section institutions.
• They are an R1 institution.
• They are an R1 institution.
• They are an R1 institution.
• They are an R1 institution.

Committee: Senate Higher Education

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we'll delve into the economic impact of these institutions.
• AICUM institutions contribute significantly to the...
• Institutions and the impact their institutions and their alumni play in moving Massachusetts forward.
• It's an institution that's a proud liberal arts and research institution.
• a win-win relationship between the community and the institution.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on the economic impact of Massachusetts higher education institutions, with opening remarks noting the significance of September 11 and the role colleges and universities play in the state’s economy, workforce, and research ecosystem. UMass leaders testified first, describing UMass as a major employer and economic driver that educates large numbers of Massachusetts residents, supports thousands of jobs, and generates billions in annual economic activity. They emphasized the importance of research funding, warned that federal grant cancellations, suspensions, and slowdowns were harming research operations and talent retention, and voiced strong support for Governor Healey’s proposed DRIVE initiative as bridge funding to protect research capacity and jobs. Committee members focused heavily on workforce preparation in emerging fields such as AI, cyber, quantum computing, and engineering. UMass leaders said AI is being embedded across curricula and research, but also warned that financial constraints forced reductions in PhD admissions, especially in computer science and engineering, which could weaken the future workforce pipeline. They also described the practical effects of grant uncertainty, including reduced graduate admissions and concerns about losing researchers to institutions abroad. Members asked for more detailed data on grant timing, funding gaps, and where students and researchers were going. A second panel from private colleges and universities, including AICUM, Suffolk, Smith, and Clark, highlighted the broad economic and civic contributions of private higher education. Testimony cited large annual economic impacts, job creation, tax revenue, community service, legal clinics, dual enrollment, entrepreneurship support, sustainability investments, and access programs. Speakers also discussed enrollment pressures, COVID-related social and mental health challenges, student visa and federal policy concerns, and the need to preserve liberal arts alongside career-focused training. The committee then heard from MIT, where testimony focused on research commercialization, biotech spinouts, and the role of federal, philanthropic, and industry funding in sustaining innovation; members pressed for more data on funding sources and asked what state policy could do to keep talent and businesses in Massachusetts. The hearing continued with additional public higher education testimony, including Bridgewater State, Bristol Community College, and Northeastern, which emphasized workforce-aligned programs, social mobility, apprenticeships, co-op education, and the need for better coordination between higher education, employers, and state workforce systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:10:05.360><c> of</c> K through2 schools, institutions of K through2 schools, institutions of
• </c> behind an institution. behind an institution.
• Uh institutional opens it up.
• Is it going to be an institution?
• </c> higher education institution. higher education institution.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ability to have access to adult stem cell therapy, was tremendously championed and supported by this institution

Bills: HJR34 , HB6 , HB18 , HB39 , HB107 , HB114 , HB138 , HB247 , HB300 , HB647 , HB748 , HB762 , HB793 , HB1240 , HB1275 , HB1397 , HB1584 , HB1700 , HB1875 , HB1894 , HB1965 , HB2071 , HB2254 , HB2340 , HB2350 , HB2516 , HB2712 , HB2713 , HB2715 , HB2760 , HB2842 , HB3088 , HB3104 , HB3260 , HB3479 , HB3575 , HB3687 , HB3788 , HB4163 , HB4187 , HB4205 , HB4370 , HB4384 , HB4655 , HB4753 , HB4809 , HB4850 , HB5195 , HCR90 , HCR98 , SJR60 , SB203 , SB317 , SB719 , SB801 , SB867 , SB1071 , SB1232 , SB1319 , SB1483 , SB1633 , SB1798 , SB1978 , SB2233 , SB2363 , SB2603 , SB2607 , SB2717 , SB2797 , SB2841 , SB2928 , SB3038 , SJR5 , SB4 , SB9 , SB21 , SB23 , SB27 , SB34 , SB40 , SB75 , SB213 , SB458 , SB482 , SB493 , SB840 , SB841 , SB843 , SB912 , SB1241 , SB1253 , SB1350 , SB1388 , SB1423 , SB1535 , SB1559 , SB1789 , SB1951 , SB2037 , SB2143 , SB2155 , SB2544 , SB1 , SB17 , SB260 , SB509 , SB1506 , SB1637 , SB1833 , SB2308 , HB2525 , HJR34 , HB1393 , HB26 , HB388 , HB2712 , HB1633 , HB685 , HB762 , HB2286 , HB1606 , HB1458 , HB1240 , HB2791 , HB3146 , HB1397 , HB2061 , HB647 , HB4738 , HB2563 , HB128 , HB581 , HB766 , HB2259 , HB2358 , HB4384 , HB748 , HB793 , HB1734 , HB2340 , HB2350 , HB3104 , HB5180 , HB1584 , HB3806 , HB3804 , HB3803 , HB1522 , HB3597 , HB1612 , HB4224 , HB1314 , HB2254 , HB1237 , HB3126 , HB2856 , HB3114 , HB3505 , HB4205 , HB5652 , HB3687 , HB2025 , HB3395 , HB2495 , HB138 , HB18 , HB1700 , HB4655 , HB2516 , HB1894 , HB1965 , HB300 , HB2713 , HB39 , HB114 , HB24 , HB3088 , HB4163 , HB3479 , HB2842 , HB519 , HB609 , HB1275 , HB1592 , HB3348 , HB120 , HB6 , HB247 , HB1533 , HB2421 , HB2273 , HB2464 , HB2011 , HB3575 , HB3788 , HB4370 , HB4809 , HB5057 , HB5084 , HB5534 , HB5668 , HB3424 , HB2715 , HB2564 , HB2760 , HB2765 , HB2898 , HB3260 , HB3800 , HB4396 , HB5195 , HB4341 , HB43 , HB5686 , HB2467 , HB2468 , HB2518 , HB4310 , HB4386 , HB4490 , HB180 , HB5323 , HB2 , HB149 , HB4945 , HB2434 , HB2529 , HB3161 , HB3745 , HB4044 , HB5155 , HB5667 , HB4996 , HB2697 , HB2492 , HB2355 , HB2282 , HB2001 , HB1902 , HB1866 , HB1445 , HB1443 , HB1306 , HB1024 , HB908 , HB305 , HB285 , HB449 , HB171 , HB47 , HB3464 , HB2637 , HB4263 , HB5436 , HB4429 , HB3986 , HB3966 , HB3510 , HB2560 , HB2026 , HB2688 , HB4076 , SJR36 , SJR50 , SJR63 , SCR12 , SCR39 , SB2023 , SB1978 , SB62 , SB666 , SB847 , SB284 , SB854 , SB810 , SB1505 , SB583 , SB507 , SB1434 , SB1772 , SB2016 , SB1122 , SB731 , SB397 , SB508 , SB1436 , SB287 , SB1882 , SB393 , SB1791 , SB209 , SB2429 , SB1085 , SB1975 , SB2717 , SB1262 , SB636 , SB2056 , SB884 , SB1200 , SB1845 , SB2458 , SB801 , SB3014 , SB3013 , SB758 , SB2797 , SB2076 , SB2876 , SB1640 , SB1449 , SB1181 , SB1234 , SB2926 , SB2841 , SB1528 , SB1854 , SB317 , SB1250 , SB2082 , SB1237 , SB2819 , SB629 , SB2608 , SB1602 , SB2009 , SB867 , SB640 , SB1698 , SB2680 , SB913 , SB1071 , SB1086 , SB1087 , SB1483 , SB1444 , SB1553 , SB1556 , SB1703 , SB2133 , SB2297 , SB2298 , SB2622 , SB2955 , SB2334 , SB1367 , SB2044 , SB2363 , SB2565 , SB1888 , SB3036 , SB3057 , SB3043 , SB3063 , SB3035 , SB203 , SB2688 , SB2522 , SB2459 , SB2655 , SB2251 , SB1884 , SB2928 , SB2566 , SB1749 , SB2549 , SB2553 , SB2919 , SB1944 , SB1232 , SB1798 , SB2603 , SB2607 , SB2683 , SB1319 , SB3038 , SB3045 , SB1538 , SB719 , SB3071 , SB3065 , SB823 , SB3062 , SB719 , HB39 , HB114 , HB138 , HB247 , HB300 , HB762 , HB793 , HB1275 , HB1584 , HB1700 , HB1894 , HB1965 , HB2254 , HB2340 , HB2350 , HB2760 , HB2842 , HB3088 , HB3104 , HB3260 , HB3479 , HB3575 , HB3687 , HB3788 , HB4163 , HB4205 , HB4370 , HB4655 , HB4809 , HB5195 , SB1978 , SR508 , HJR34 , SB963 , SB1383 , SB1883 , SB1968 , HB2525 , HB112 , HB117 , HB557 , HB783 , HB869 , HB876 , HB1039 , HB1201 , HB1347 , HB1359 , HB1650 , HB1788 , HB1904 , HB1955 , HB2370 , HB2849 , HB2853 , HB3066 , HB3169 , HB3178 , HB3179 , HB3196 , HB3241 , HB3567 , HB3672 , HB3715 , HB3720 , HB3883 , HB3954 , HB3976 , HB4070 , HB4098 , HB4222 , HB4327 , HB4359 , HB4412 , HB4683 , HB4755 , HB4894 , HB4926 , HB5115 , HB5165 , HB5320 , HB5437 , HB5499 , HB5596 , HB5650 , HB5651 , HB5654 , HB5656 , HB5658 , HB5659 , HB5661 , HB5662 , HB5665 , HB5666 , HB5670 , HB5671 , HB5672 , HB5674 , HB5676 , HB5677 , HB5678 , HB5679 , HB5680 , HB5681 , HB5682 , HB5688 , HB5694 , HB5695 , HB5696 , HB5699 , HCR46 , HCR59 , HCR81 , HCR83 , HCR84 , HCR111 , HCR142 , HB112 , HB117 , HB557 , HB783 , HB869 , HB876 , HB1039 , HB1201 , HB1347 , HB1359 , HB1650 , HB1788 , HB1904 , HB1955 , HB2370 , HB2849 , HB2853 , HB3066 , HB3169 , HB3178 , HB3179 , HB3196 , HB3241 , HB3567 , HB3672 , HB3715 , HB3720 , HB3883 , HB3954 , HB3976 , HB4070 , HB4098 , HB4222 , HB4327 , HB4359 , HB4412 , HB4683 , HB4755 , HB4894 , HB4926 , HB5115 , HB5165 , HB5320 , HB5437 , HB5499 , HB5596 , HB5650 , HB5651 , HB5654 , HB5656 , HB5658 , HB5659 , HB5661 , HB5662 , HB5665 , HB5666 , HB5670 , HB5671 , HB5672 , HB5674 , HB5676 , HB5677 , HB5678 , HB5679 , HB5680 , HB5681 , HB5682 , HB5688 , HB5694 , HB5695 , HB5696 , HB5699 , HCR46 , HCR59 , HCR81 , HCR83 , HCR84 , HCR111 , HCR142

Keywords: HJR 34, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, ad valorem tax, property tax exemption, real property, border counties, U.S.-Mexico border, United Mexican States, border security, border security infrastructure, landowner, county tax base, local government, tax relief, property value increase, infrastructure improvements, voter approval, November 2025 ballot, mental health

Bills: HJR34 , HB6 , HB18 , HB39 , HB107 , HB114 , HB138 , HB247 , HB300 , HB647 , HB748 , HB762 , HB793 , HB1240 , HB1275 , HB1397 , HB1584 , HB1700 , HB1875 , HB1894 , HB1965 , HB2071 , HB2254 , HB2340 , HB2350 , HB2516 , HB2712 , HB2713 , HB2715 , HB2760 , HB2842 , HB3088 , HB3104 , HB3260 , HB3479 , HB3575 , HB3687 , HB3788 , HB4163 , HB4187 , HB4205 , HB4370 , HB4384 , HB4655 , HB4753 , HB4809 , HB4850 , HB5195 , HCR90 , HCR98 , SJR60 , SB203 , SB317 , SB719 , SB801 , SB867 , SB1071 , SB1232 , SB1319 , SB1483 , SB1633 , SB1798 , SB1978 , SB2233 , SB2363 , SB2603 , SB2607 , SB2717 , SB2797 , SB2841 , SB2928 , SB3038 , SJR5 , SB4 , SB9 , SB21 , SB23 , SB27 , SB34 , SB40 , SB75 , SB213 , SB458 , SB482 , SB493 , SB840 , SB841 , SB843 , SB912 , SB1241 , SB1253 , SB1350 , SB1388 , SB1423 , SB1535 , SB1559 , SB1789 , SB1951 , SB2037 , SB2143 , SB2155 , SB2544 , SB1 , SB17 , SB260 , SB509 , SB1506 , SB1637 , SB1833 , SB2308 , HB2525 , HJR34 , HB1393 , HB26 , HB388 , HB2712 , HB1633 , HB685 , HB762 , HB2286 , HB1606 , HB1458 , HB1240 , HB2791 , HB3146 , HB1397 , HB2061 , HB647 , HB4738 , HB2563 , HB128 , HB581 , HB766 , HB2259 , HB2358 , HB4384 , HB748 , HB793 , HB1734 , HB2340 , HB2350 , HB3104 , HB5180 , HB1584 , HB3806 , HB3804 , HB3803 , HB1522 , HB3597 , HB1612 , HB4224 , HB1314 , HB2254 , HB1237 , HB3126 , HB2856 , HB3114 , HB3505 , HB4205 , HB5652 , HB3687 , HB2025 , HB3395 , HB2495 , HB138 , HB18 , HB1700 , HB4655 , HB2516 , HB1894 , HB1965 , HB300 , HB2713 , HB39 , HB114 , HB24 , HB3088 , HB4163 , HB3479 , HB2842 , HB519 , HB609 , HB1275 , HB1592 , HB3348 , HB120 , HB6 , HB247 , HB1533 , HB2421 , HB2273 , HB2464 , HB2011 , HB3575 , HB3788 , HB4370 , HB4809 , HB5057 , HB5084 , HB5534 , HB5668 , HB3424 , HB2715 , HB2564 , HB2760 , HB2765 , HB2898 , HB3260 , HB3800 , HB4396 , HB5195 , HB4341 , HB43 , HB5686 , HB2467 , HB2468 , HB2518 , HB4310 , HB4386 , HB4490 , HB180 , HB5323 , HB2 , HB149 , HB4945 , HB2434 , HB2529 , HB3161 , HB3745 , HB4044 , HB5155 , HB5667 , HB4996 , HB2697 , HB2492 , HB2355 , HB2282 , HB2001 , HB1902 , HB1866 , HB1445 , HB1443 , HB1306 , HB1024 , HB908 , HB305 , HB285 , HB449 , HB171 , HB47 , HB3464 , HB2637 , HB4263 , HB5436 , HB4429 , HB3986 , HB3966 , HB3510 , HB2560 , HB2026 , HB2688 , HB4076 , SJR36 , SJR50 , SJR63 , SCR12 , SCR39 , SB2023 , SB1978 , SB62 , SB666 , SB847 , SB284 , SB854 , SB810 , SB1505 , SB583 , SB507 , SB1434 , SB1772 , SB2016 , SB1122 , SB731 , SB397 , SB508 , SB1436 , SB287 , SB1882 , SB393 , SB1791 , SB209 , SB2429 , SB1085 , SB1975 , SB2717 , SB1262 , SB636 , SB2056 , SB884 , SB1200 , SB1845 , SB2458 , SB801 , SB3014 , SB3013 , SB758 , SB2797 , SB2076 , SB2876 , SB1640 , SB1449 , SB1181 , SB1234 , SB2926 , SB2841 , SB1528 , SB1854 , SB317 , SB1250 , SB2082 , SB1237 , SB2819 , SB629 , SB2608 , SB1602 , SB2009 , SB867 , SB640 , SB1698 , SB2680 , SB913 , SB1071 , SB1086 , SB1087 , SB1483 , SB1444 , SB1553 , SB1556 , SB1703 , SB2133 , SB2297 , SB2298 , SB2622 , SB2955 , SB2334 , SB1367 , SB2044 , SB2363 , SB2565 , SB1888 , SB3036 , SB3057 , SB3043 , SB3063 , SB3035 , SB203 , SB2688 , SB2522 , SB2459 , SB2655 , SB2251 , SB1884 , SB2928 , SB2566 , SB1749 , SB2549 , SB2553 , SB2919 , SB1944 , SB1232 , SB1798 , SB2603 , SB2607 , SB2683 , SB1319 , SB3038 , SB3045 , SB1538 , SB719 , SB3071 , SB3065 , SB823 , SB3062 , SB719 , HB39 , HB114 , HB138 , HB247 , HB300 , HB762 , HB793 , HB1275 , HB1584 , HB1700 , HB1894 , HB1965 , HB2254 , HB2340 , HB2350 , HB2760 , HB2842 , HB3088 , HB3104 , HB3260 , HB3479 , HB3575 , HB3687 , HB3788 , HB4163 , HB4205 , HB4370 , HB4655 , HB4809 , HB5195 , SB1978 , SR508 , HJR34 , SB963 , SB1383 , SB1883 , SB1968 , HB2525 , HB112 , HB117 , HB557 , HB783 , HB869 , HB876 , HB1039 , HB1201 , HB1347 , HB1359 , HB1650 , HB1788 , HB1904 , HB1955 , HB2370 , HB2849 , HB2853 , HB3066 , HB3169 , HB3178 , HB3179 , HB3196 , HB3241 , HB3567 , HB3672 , HB3715 , HB3720 , HB3883 , HB3954 , HB3976 , HB4070 , HB4098 , HB4222 , HB4327 , HB4359 , HB4412 , HB4683 , HB4755 , HB4894 , HB4926 , HB5115 , HB5165 , HB5320 , HB5437 , HB5499 , HB5596 , HB5650 , HB5651 , HB5654 , HB5656 , HB5658 , HB5659 , HB5661 , HB5662 , HB5665 , HB5666 , HB5670 , HB5671 , HB5672 , HB5674 , HB5676 , HB5677 , HB5678 , HB5679 , HB5680 , HB5681 , HB5682 , HB5688 , HB5694 , HB5695 , HB5696 , HB5699 , HCR46 , HCR59 , HCR81 , HCR83 , HCR84 , HCR111 , HCR142 , HB112 , HB117 , HB557 , HB783 , HB869 , HB876 , HB1039 , HB1201 , HB1347 , HB1359 , HB1650 , HB1788 , HB1904 , HB1955 , HB2370 , HB2849 , HB2853 , HB3066 , HB3169 , HB3178 , HB3179 , HB3196 , HB3241 , HB3567 , HB3672 , HB3715 , HB3720 , HB3883 , HB3954 , HB3976 , HB4070 , HB4098 , HB4222 , HB4327 , HB4359 , HB4412 , HB4683 , HB4755 , HB4894 , HB4926 , HB5115 , HB5165 , HB5320 , HB5437 , HB5499 , HB5596 , HB5650 , HB5651 , HB5654 , HB5656 , HB5658 , HB5659 , HB5661 , HB5662 , HB5665 , HB5666 , HB5670 , HB5671 , HB5672 , HB5674 , HB5676 , HB5677 , HB5678 , HB5679 , HB5680 , HB5681 , HB5682 , HB5688 , HB5694 , HB5695 , HB5696 , HB5699 , HCR46 , HCR59 , HCR81 , HCR83 , HCR84 , HCR111 , HCR142

Keywords: HJR 34, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, ad valorem tax, property tax exemption, real property, border counties, U.S.-Mexico border, United Mexican States, border security, border security infrastructure, landowner, county tax base, local government, tax relief, property value increase, infrastructure improvements, voter approval, November 2025 ballot, mental health

Transcript Highlights:

• Can institutions apply for renovation projects or only new construction, and can two-year institutions
• Can institutions apply for renovation projects for only new construction, and can two-year institutions
• of these institutions.
• They can afford the match with institutional reserves, institutional bonds, and in accordance with the
• Two-year institutions, tribal colleges, projects, except providing E design phase, two-year institutions

Bills: SB234 , SB210 , SB243 , SB244 , SM16 , HB8

Committee: Senate House Education

Keywords: foster children, school transportation, education funding, public education, child welfare, New Mexico Highlands University, soccer field, women's sports, infrastructure improvement, funding allocation, student athletes, appropriation, New Mexico State University, nutrition, travel support, funding, education, university support, financial assistance, parenting students

Summary: The Senate Education Committee began by announcing that SB 210 would be rolled over to Friday and would not be heard. The committee then returned to SB 234, which would provide foster child school transportation funding statewide rather than only for Albuquerque Public Schools. Members adopted an amendment striking the APS-only language and making the bill statewide after testimony from the sponsor, PED, and others that foster youth transportation is a growing issue and should have its own funding stream. The committee discussed how the money might be distributed and whether the $1.2 million appropriation would be sufficient, then voted do pass on SB 234 as amended. The committee next heard HB 8, which creates a Higher Education Major Projects Fund for large capital projects that are difficult to fund through existing capital outlay processes. Testimony from the sponsor, LFC, HED, and university representatives explained that the bill would support projects such as the UNM School of Medicine, an NMSU multidisciplinary building, student housing, student life projects, and certain Division I athletic facilities, while requiring design readiness, institutional matches, and legislative oversight. Several senators raised concerns about the clarity of the prioritization process, the Division I-only athletics language, the recurring nature of future funding, and the relationship to other capital funding streams, but the committee ultimately voted do pass on HB 8. The committee then considered SB 243 and SB 244, nearly identical bills for UNM and NMSU that would each appropriate $5 million for student health, student support, nutrition, travel, scholarships, and other athletic department needs. Athletic directors testified that conference realignment, higher travel costs, nutrition demands, and new revenue-sharing/NIL obligations have increased expenses, and sponsors said the bills were intended as one-time appropriations. Some senators questioned whether the requests should be recurring or funded through university revenue rather than the state, but both bills received do pass recommendations. Finally, the committee heard SM 16, as amended, which asks HED to convene a task force to study parenting students in higher education and recommend ways to collect data and improve support. Supporters said better data is needed to understand barriers such as child care and transportation, and the memorial passed with a do pass recommendation. The committee then adjourned until Friday morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's pretty fast for an institution.
• That's pretty fast for an institution.
• Or hiring faculty at a home institution and contracting out to another institution. ...hiring faculty
• The transcripts look uniform as they're produced from institution to institution, with the exception
• You know, institutions, and other observations, institutions have just been engaging faculty to kind

Committee: Joint Higher Education Institutions Committee

Summary: The Higher Education Institutions Committee met at NDSU and heard an extensive presentation from President David Cook/President Stewart and NDSU leadership on the university’s priorities, including enrollment, student success, research growth, and use of New Horizons funding. Leaders emphasized NDSU’s land-grant mission, its role in workforce development, and its goal of becoming more distinctive through strategic planning, recruitment and retention, commercialization, and partnerships. They highlighted that NDSU awarded 2,370 degrees in 2025, produces a large share of the state’s engineering, nursing, and agriculture graduates, and reported strong outcomes for graduates staying and working in North Dakota. They also noted enrollment headwinds, competition from other institutions, and the need to manage tuition waivers more carefully through a scholarship optimization effort. Provost Sherry Vale outlined academic stewardship efforts, including review or consolidation of low-producing programs, strategic hiring tied to institutional priorities, faculty workload policy changes, and expanded online and regional offerings. She said the university is using New Horizons dollars to strengthen advising, student support, and programs in engineering, agriculture, and health. NDSU leaders also described new or expanded academic offerings such as robotics and automation, artificial intelligence, material science and engineering, nuclear engineering certificates, accelerated nursing, nurse practitioner certificates, a Master of Health Administration, and a clinical research master’s program with Sanford Health. They stressed that these investments are intended to improve student completion, meet workforce needs, and increase return on public investment. The committee also heard testimony from students and recent graduates who described the value of NDSU’s education, mentorship, internships, research opportunities, and support services. Alyssa Hodges spoke about pharmacy education, public health work, and campus support as a parent and student; Ethan Blessy described engineering coursework, internships with Marvin, and career preparation; and Aiden Freolic discussed neuroscience research, federally funded projects, and plans for graduate study. Their testimony was followed by presentations on partnerships with Gateway to Science for K-12 STEM outreach and with Sanford Research on biomedical research, clinical trials, obesity research, and a joint biostatistics hire. NDSU also highlighted systemwide shared services, Governor’s School programming, and research growth, including a reported 8% increase in research expenditures from $199 million to $215 million. No bill votes were taken; the meeting was informational and featured presentations, testimony, and discussion of future planning and partnerships.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's pretty fast for an institution.
• That's pretty fast for an institution.
• Opportunities at the institutions.
• Or hiring faculty at a home institution and contracting out to another institution.
• The transcripts look uniform as they're produced from institution to institution, with the exception

Committee: Joint Higher Education Institutions Committee

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But they can go to other institutions. They can choose another institution if they would like to.
• But they can go to other institutions. They can choose another institution if they would like to.
• And they can go to other institutions. They can choose another institution if they would like to.
• We have four-year regional institutions. We have two-year institutions.
• We think that our two-year institutions and our four-year institutions are really important.

Committee: Joint Higher Education Institutions Committee

Summary: The committee met at Dakota College at Bottineau, approved the January 15, 2026 minutes, and heard a campus presentation from Dean Corey Gorder and President Steve Shirley. Gorder outlined DCB’s leadership changes, its affiliation with Minot State, and extensive shared services with Minot State, UND, and NDSU in areas such as business office functions, financial aid, payroll, HR, Title IX, printing, and institutional research. He said shared services help smaller campuses access expertise, and committee members asked about cost allocation and accreditation limits; Gorder said the arrangements are negotiated between institutions and that, to his understanding, academic accreditation is not affected by these service-sharing agreements. The committee also discussed DCB’s enrollment, dual credit reach, and program mix, including nursing, dental assisting and hygiene, paramedic training, drone certification, and farm management. Gorder said DCB wants to expand higher-demand, trade-oriented programs, strengthen Minot programming, and address facility needs, especially residence halls and space constraints in dental programs. Members asked detailed questions about dual credit, including how DCB develops relationships with high schools, whether it has exclusivity, who teaches the courses, and whether credits transfer. Gorder said relationships are built through outreach and existing school connections, that schools may choose other providers, and that DCB pays stipends to instructors under institution-specific formulas. NDUS staff Lisa Johnson said transfer problems are rare within North Dakota and usually arise only with highly selective out-of-state institutions. Gorder also noted that DCB’s dual credit and campus programming are heavily tied to rural schools and that the college is trying to streamline dual credit delivery as enrollment and staffing demands grow. The committee then heard from the North Dakota Student Association, whose representatives outlined student priorities from the last legislative session and the interim. Their main themes included campus safety, mental health resources, academic freedom, scholarships and affordability, teacher incentives, workforce readiness, housing, food accessibility, student research funding, internships, and campus collaboration. They said they supported or opposed various bills related to those issues during the 69th Legislative Assembly and emphasized that students want affordable, safe, and academically strong campuses. Committee members asked about housing affordability, food insecurity, research opportunities, and dual credit transfer and expansion. No votes were taken on policy matters during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• c> as</c> institution.
• Um these institutions as institution.
• or within the institution.
• institutions are struggling also.
• institutions are struggling also.

Keywords: 910, house, all