Transcript Highlights:

• So an applicant can request an exchange.
• pulled the application.
• So an applicant can request an exchange.
• pulled the application.
• pulled the application.

Summary: The committee first received a Department of Environmental Protection presentation on Florida Forever and the sale or exchange of conservation lands. DEP described Florida Forever as the state’s main conservation land acquisition program, funded in recent years at high levels, and said most acquisitions since 2019 have been within the Florida Wildlife Corridor. The presentation also explained the legal process for disposing of conservation lands: requests are reviewed by the Acquisitions and Restoration Council, then the governor and cabinet decide whether land is no longer needed for conservation or whether an exchange provides a net conservation benefit. Senator Smith asked several questions about recent land-swap proposals, public notice, political influence, and whether any transactions had bypassed the usual sequence; DEP said applications can be withdrawn before ARC review, notice is posted seven days in advance, and the council and cabinet are the decision-makers. Senator Harrington asked about the difference between Florida Forever land sales and water management district surplus lands, and DEP said the reported 2.3 acres sold referred only to Florida Forever-funded projects. The committee then heard presentations from the Department of Health and DEP on PFAS and PFOA. DOH outlined what PFAS are, their common uses, possible health impacts, and ways Floridians can reduce exposure, including water filtration and avoiding certain products. DOH said it conducts well investigations, health consultations, fish consumption advisories, and monitoring in coordination with DEP and FWC. DEP followed with a more technical overview of PFAS regulation and cleanup, explaining federal testing and drinking-water standards, Florida’s provisional cleanup levels, and the state’s response at contaminated sites, including bottled water and filtration for affected residents. Senators asked about testing requirements for public systems and private wells, disposal of used filters, and how federal rulemaking and litigation could affect Florida’s standards; DEP said public systems are required to test under EPA monitoring rules, private wells are not directly required to test, and Florida may adopt its own standards if federal action does not occur by the statutory deadline. Finally, the committee took up SB 150, which would designate the flamingo as the state bird and the scrub jay as the state songbird. The sponsor argued the bill better reflects Florida’s identity and conservation values, noting the flamingo’s iconic status and the scrub jay’s status as a Florida-only species. Members asked lighthearted questions about mockingbirds, flamingo color, and feeding costs, and an appearance card was filed in support by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. The committee debated the bill briefly and then passed SB 150 favorably by roll call vote, with all members present voting yes except Senator DiCeglie, who was excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 90% of exemptions as they are evaluated, it...
• That preference is applicable to data centers located in rural counties.
• That preference is applicable to data centers located in rural counties.
• But in 2022, the legislature, the legislature, J-LARC to evaluate it in 2026.
• And finally, a proposal we're evaluating, and we'll work on evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of

Summary: The Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on May 7, 2025, with quorum present. The commission approved the October 22, 2024 meeting minutes and then received its annual open government refresher from the Attorney General’s office, which reviewed key requirements under the Public Records Act and Open Public Meetings Act, including record retention, response deadlines, exemptions, and meeting notice rules. Staff then provided a 2025 legislative session update, noting that the legislature passed 23 tax-preference-related bills, with several signed by the governor and others pending. Highlights included bills that extended or repealed certain preferences, added reporting requirements for newspaper and digital content exemptions, authorized JLARC to adjust its work plan when data is unavailable, and created a new exemption for zero-emission buses. The commission approved updates to the 2026 tax preference review schedule, which includes eight preferences in seven reviews, and approved unchanged testimony questions for 2025. The commission also received the 2025 expedited preference review report covering 52 tax preferences, presented as an interactive table drawing on prior JLARC reviews and Department of Revenue studies. Staff then outlined the process for developing the next 10-year review schedule for 2027-2036, including surveying the legislature, incorporating new and repealed preferences, and considering a possible rolling 10-year schedule. No public comment was registered. The meeting ended with acknowledgments of Ron Buing’s long service on the commission and an announcement that the next meeting would be held August 6, 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just have one question about the application process.
• Change the earliest date to submit a license application.
• Remove to submit a license application.
• <00:12:20.560> 902<00:12:21.160> 8070 once per evaluation year. 902 8070 once per evaluation
• limiting date for the current evaluation limiting date for the current evaluation process,<00:12

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting’s minutes, and then reviewed a series of administrative regulations from multiple agencies. Most of the regulations were presented as technical updates or policy clarifications, and in each case the committee approved staff-suggested amendments without objection. The Department of Revenue regulation would delete a section on tax credits for trusts and estates to align with statute. The Kentucky Public Pensions Authority package updated definitions, sick leave credit rules, hazardous/non-hazardous employment participation, refund procedures, contribution limits, mortality table references, and incorporated federal tax references. The Board of Medical Licensure regulations addressed renewal and activation of inactive physician-assistant licenses and renewal/reinstatement timelines for athletic trainer licenses. The Fish and Wildlife regulations revised rules for Otter Creek and Peabody areas by deleting definitions and creating shooting-range permit exemptions. The committee also heard emergency vocational rehabilitation regulations that would clarify definitions, due process rights, federal compliance, service fees, in-state service preferences, and service-specific requirements; a workforce insurance regulation updating contribution/reporting rules for professional employer organizations; and a horse racing regulation adding license categories for allied animal health professionals, animal chiropractors, and equine dental providers, while updating fees, application timing, and special events licensing. Members asked questions about the horse racing licensure changes, and the agency explained they were responding to prior session changes and adding guardrails, including veterinarian sign-off for equine therapist licensure on the back side of a racetrack. The Department for Public Health package made several personnel and salary-related changes for local health departments, including salary ranges for new hires, probation and evaluation rules, salary increases after probation, and limits on certain leave payouts for employees who separate without proper notice or are dismissed for cause. The Office of Inspector General regulation added electronic prescription references and removed authority to create a new prescription number for partial dispensing of Schedule II prescriptions. The Department for Medicaid Services regulations updated provider group definitions, removed some service limits, required prior authorization for all genetic testing for non-MCO recipients, changed physician fee schedule updates from quarterly to annually, and added reimbursement for department-approved vaccines. Members asked detailed questions about genetic testing prior authorization and sleep disorder coverage; the agency said prior authorization is intended to take two to five days and that sleep disorder services generally involve sleep apnea-related treatments such as CPAP machines and sleep studies. The committee then adjourned and announced its next meeting for Tuesday, May 12 at 1:00 p.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• evaluate a rebasic. evaluate a rebasic. Okay.<01:16:17.360> Right.
• the application looks to HEO, right? the application looks to HEO, right?
• be covered in a utilities application. be covered in a utilities application.
• > I<01:17:44.640> I application but HEO's application I I application but HEO's application
• I said the application, the actual rebasing application. So, work back.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee held an informational briefing on the Public Utilities Commission’s performance-based regulation (PBR) framework and the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs’ whistleblower complaint process. Chair Jared Kohole opened the meeting, noted it was informational only with no public testimony, and explained that members would hear presentations and then have an opportunity for questions. The committee heard first from Ulupono Initiative, which provided background on why utilities are regulated, how Hawaii’s cost-of-service model and rate cases work, and why PBR was adopted to shift utility incentives away from a capital-investment bias and toward performance, efficiency, cost control, and policy goals such as renewable energy and reliability. Ulupono described Hawaii’s PBR structure as a five-year multi-year rate plan with annual revenue adjustments, a customer dividend, a Z factor for extraordinary exogenous events, and an exceptional project recovery mechanism for large projects. It also outlined performance incentive mechanisms tied to renewable portfolio standard progress, interconnection speed, reliability, and shared savings. The presentation said the current docket is evaluating a possible hybrid approach that would combine forward-looking forecasting with historical results, and Ulupono advocated for stronger incentives, arguing the current rewards are too small relative to utility revenues and should be more meaningful to better align utility behavior with legislative intent. The PUC then presented its own overview, emphasizing that the PBR docket is open and active and that the briefing was limited to the record to avoid ex parte concerns. The commission described the development of PBR in Hawaii through multiple phases beginning in 2018: an initial collaborative phase to set goals, a formal contested-case phase that produced the initial framework, later phases adding scorecards, reported metrics, and additional performance incentive mechanisms, and subsequent refinements including sunset of some mechanisms and adjustments after the August 2023 Maui wildfires. The PUC said the framework is intended to be customer-centric, administratively efficient, and protective of utility financial integrity, and that current work includes evaluating how to balance forward-looking and historical test-year approaches within the rebasing process. No votes or formal actions were taken at the briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• , to also evaluation in that technical assistance space.
• , to also evaluation in that technical assistance space.
• We're evaluating that right now and evaluating all options on how we can implement the regulations as
• We're evaluating that right now and evaluating all options on how we can implement the regulations as
• And secondly, the criteria for the grant applications.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and they will do the application.
• And the will do the application.
• <00:18:28.160> um application will get submitted um application will get submitted um through<
• commission approves project applications commission approves project applications based<00:18:40.400
• They're currently on a application.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:07 Chair Comments 00:00:36 Approval of Minutes 00:04:01 Volunteers of America 00:04:21 Soil and Water Conservation/Energy and Environment Cabinet 00:14:52 Kentucky Office of Drug Control Policy/Justice & Public Safety Cabinet 00:21:05 Kentucky Department of Agriculture 00:26:01 Early Childhood Advisory Council 00:45:18, 958, all

Summary: The Tobacco Settlement Agreement Fund Oversight Committee met to review how tobacco settlement dollars are being used and to press recipients for detailed information on total funding, administrative versus program spending, and measurable outcomes. The chair emphasized that the committee was not there for general program overviews, but to assess return on investment and whether each program should continue to receive tobacco settlement support. The committee approved the minutes from its December 22, 2025 meeting and then heard presentations from several agencies and organizations. Volunteers of America Mid-States described its southeastern Kentucky restorative justice program, which uses an evidence-based New Zealand model for juvenile cases in nine counties. The group reported tobacco settlement funding of $516,000 in FY24 and $233,500 in FY25, representing about 17% and then about 5% of the program budget, respectively. It said the funding helped expand the program from 13 cases in 2021 to 180 youth served, and cited an independent evaluation showing recidivism of 24.5% compared with 40.4% in AOC data, along with a cost of a little under $20 per day versus detention and other placements. Some members questioned whether the program fit the tobacco settlement funding categories and suggested it might be better supported through other justice-related funding sources. The Energy and Environment Cabinet’s Division of Conservation explained that tobacco funds support $1 million in direct aid to conservation districts and $2 million in cost-share projects for farmers, with 5% of the cost-share appropriation allowed for administration, or about $100,000 in FY26. Officials said the direct-aid line was moved into tobacco funding in 2019, reducing money available for farmer cost-share, and described a multi-year project approval and reallocation process. Senator Webb asked for a more specific breakdown of the $850,000 direct-aid amount, and the cabinet said it would provide that information. The Kentucky Office of Drug Control Policy reported that in FY24 it expended just under $30 million across tobacco funds, general funds, restricted funds, and a one-time federal grant, with less than 2% used for administration. Officials said most tobacco settlement money goes to Kentucky ASAP local boards in all 120 counties, supporting prevention, treatment, and some law enforcement work. The Department of Agriculture then began its presentation, describing strategic investments, loan programs, county funding, administrative costs, and a reported return of about $2.30 for every dollar spent, but the transcript cuts off before that presentation was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• This rule also adds confusion and fear to the application process.
• their applications.
• Currently in California, all foster care applicants must go through one unified application called the
• Currently in California, all foster care applicants must go through one unified application called the
• resource family, All foster care applicants must go through one unified application called the Resource

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Human Services Committee heard a long agenda of child welfare, food assistance, child care, and social services bills. Early actions included AB 308 on regional center safety training for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, AB 1049 to remove sponsor deeming from the California Food Assistance Program, AB 1201 to narrow a violent-felony bypass for family reunification services, AB 2379 to require know-your-rights training for family child care providers, AB 2429 to ease requirements in early childhood mental health consultation, AB 1755 to repeal CalWORKs’ 100-hour work penalty, AB 2478 to create a kinship family approval pathway, and AB 1969 and AB 1996 to expand coordinated cradle-to-career and child-poverty reduction efforts. The committee also began discussion of AB 1932, which would continue and strengthen community-based crisis response services. Testimony was largely in support across the hearing. Advocates, county representatives, child care providers, legal aid groups, food banks, disability organizations, and anti-poverty coalitions argued that the bills would reduce administrative barriers, improve access to benefits and services, and better protect children and families. Several authors and witnesses emphasized real-world harms from current rules, including fear of immigration enforcement, wrongful benefit denials, delayed kinship placements, and the burden of outdated eligibility requirements. On AB 1201, county welfare officials and child welfare advocates said the bill would preserve judicial discretion while allowing more parents a fair chance at reunification; on AB 2478, they said a kin-specific approval path would help place children with relatives more quickly; and on the child care bills, providers said current reimbursement and compliance systems are unsustainable. There was some committee concern about accountability and safety, especially on AB 1049 and AB 1201. One senator questioned whether removing sponsor deeming could weaken program integrity, and another raised concerns about whether narrowing the reunification bypass could expose children to unsafe environments or criminal activity. Authors and supporters responded that the bills still leave eligibility screening, judicial review, supervision, and service plans in place, and that the changes mainly remove automatic barriers or overly broad rules. Votes taken during the hearing were generally favorable: AB 308 passed 3-0 and was held on call; AB 1049 passed 2-1 and was held on call; AB 1201 passed and was held on call; AB 2379 passed 3-0 and was held on call; AB 2429 passed and was held on call; AB 1755 passed and was held on call; AB 2478 passed and was held on call; and AB 1969 and AB 1996 both passed and were held on call. The committee also noted that some bills were on the consent calendar and approved those items 3-0 while holding them open.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we would look to the number two provider in the application process.
• And then we would look to the number two provider in the application process.
• We do have an evaluator with our program that evaluates all of our programs.
• We do have an evaluator with our program that evaluates all of our programs.
• Did they not submit one with the application? Oh, no. They have an address.

Summary: The committee considered and approved several temporary appropriation requests in Section B, including spending authority for the Court of Appeals to pay appointed counsel in criminal appeals, Commerce/Aeronautics airport and aviation grants, and Insurance Department items for workers’ compensation benefits and premium tax refunds. It also approved ARPA-related requests in Section C to return unused federal funds from DHS aging, mental health, substance abuse, and Older Americans Act grants. In Section D, the committee reviewed and approved Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act requests, including Agriculture grants for wildfire preparedness and forestry capacity, a large Commerce broadband BEAD request, environmental recycling-related reallocations, and Oil and Gas Commission grants for facility repairs and sample preservation. Members questioned the broadband program’s audit process and performance safeguards; the State Broadband Director said the funds are federal, subject to audits, and payments are released only after engineering certification of completed work. The committee also approved DHS reallocations in Section E, including major transfers within Medical Services from hospital medical appropriations to private and public nursing home lines, as well as transfers for children and family services, developmental disabilities, and youth services. The committee then reviewed cash fund requests, miscellaneous federal grants, pay plan and performance fund transfers, methods of finance, and a large set of contracts. A Northwest Arkansas Community College official explained storm-damage repairs and insurance settlement issues, and DHS explained its hospital medical transfer was moving excess appropriation rather than cash. Members also questioned several UAPB tobacco prevention subgrants, especially arts-based outreach, and asked for more data on effectiveness; the committee later voted to expunge and re-refer the J-2 item for further review at a later ALC meeting. Additional discussion covered a DEQ grant to Free Geek of Arkansas for e-waste recycling, a UAPB tobacco program, and various contracts for universities, DHS services, corrections, and public safety. The meeting ended with reports filed for information and a brief member comment thanking others for concern after a tornado in Stone County; no one was injured.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are there private applications?
• Are there private applications?
• So down in the bottom of the bill, the committee may, and it gives them some leeway, evaluate the application
• It doesn't really add any additional requirements to the applicant.
• , and they still put in the same application.

Bills: HB2014, HB2113, HB2145, HB2331, HB2340, HB2389, HB2400, HB2401, HB2428, HB2494, HB2696, HB2756, HB2795, HB2955, HCM2008

Keywords: air emissions, fuel blends, environmental quality, feasibility study, Arizona Department of Agriculture, utility consumer, rate intervention, public service corporation, Arizona Revised Statutes, residential rates, consumer protection, fuel reformulation, gasoline standards, environmental regulations, ethanol supply, Air Quality, energy reliability, electric service providers, reliable resources, public power entity

Summary: The committee heard several energy and transportation bills, with testimony largely split between sponsors, industry groups, local governments, and environmental advocates. HB 2428, dealing with county and ADEQ authority to issue voluntary permits certifying emission reduction credits for mobile and non-road sources, drew neutral support from ADEQ and support from Maricopa County; it was amended and passed 10-0 with a due pass recommendation. HB 2145, which expands who may petition on gasoline supplier alternative standards, also passed, 5-4, with no amendment. A lengthy debate followed on HB 2331, as amended, which would require electric utilities to ensure 85% of generating capacity serving retail load comes from “reliable resources” by 2030. The sponsor and supporters argued the bill was needed to preserve affordable, dependable power and prevent overreliance on intermittent renewables, while opponents from the Sierra Club and Rural Arizona Action said it would effectively favor fossil fuels, raise costs, and limit cleaner energy options. The committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and the sponsor’s amendment, then passed the bill 6-4. HB 2795, which limits county zoning authority over small modular reactors once federal permitting and certification steps are met, drew strong support from nuclear and business advocates and opposition from county, city, and environmental representatives concerned about local control, safety, waste, and preemption; it passed 6-4 after amendment-related discussion. The committee also passed HB 2340, which allows the power plant and transmission line siting committee to evaluate the plant itself when reviewing transmission line applications, by a 5-4 vote. Finally, HB 2400, an emergency measure to suspend the motor vehicle fuel tax in Areas A and C during summer months and replace the lost revenue with state highway funds, prompted testimony about gas prices, boutique fuel requirements, and transportation funding needs; cities and counties opposed the diversion of highway funds, while the sponsor argued it would help consumers facing higher fuel costs. The Griffin amendment was adopted, and the bill passed with a due pass recommendation after debate on affordability versus road funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• In round two, we received 12 applications totaling about $127 million.
• In round four, seven applications totaling $39 million were submitted.
• The next is on how we evaluate applications on page five. We included certain criteria for the...
• For the application itself, and this is on page four, I apologize, and part of...
• from submitting a new application.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:32.800> the bit of disadvantage to evaluate the bit of disadvantage to evaluate the
• Chair, members of the committee, the application goes to the state and the state decides, evaluates the
• ><00:47:44.240> along demonstrate uh in an application along demonstrate uh in an application
• Um applicant identity, submitted.
• the application was rejected.

Bills: HF3217, HF2252

Keywords: bioindustrial facilities, economic development, renewable energy, advanced biofuels, state funding, HF2252, Minnesota bonding, volume cap, private activity bonds, tax-exempt bonds, public facility bonds, public facilities pool, unified pool, bond allocation, municipal finance, bond cap, housing bonds, residential rental projects, manufacturing bonds, enterprise zone bonds

Summary: The committee first approved the prior day’s minutes as amended, correcting the meeting number from the 46th to the 45th meeting. It then took up House File 3217, which would restore funding for the Minnesota Bioincentive Program. Representative Kisha argued the state should honor commitments made to companies that met program requirements and had not received full reimbursement. Testifiers from the Great Plains Institute and Minnesota Biofuels Association said the program has supported bioeconomy investment, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and generated strong economic returns, but has been underfunded, leaving unpaid claims. Members raised questions about whether the bill was retrospective and whether it should be reviewed by another committee; the bill was laid over for further consideration without a vote. The committee then heard House File 2252, a proposal to modernize Minnesota’s private activity bond volume cap by shifting unused allocation from the small issuer/manufacturing bucket to the public facilities bucket while leaving the overall cap unchanged. The bill’s public finance testifier said the current allocation formula is outdated, housing would remain the top priority, and the change would be budget neutral. Testifiers from the Minnesota Milk Producers Association and Minnesota Biofuels Association supported the bill, saying it would better align financing with rural infrastructure, clean water, manure management, renewable natural gas, dairy processing, and low-carbon fuel projects, and could lower borrowing costs for those sectors. Members questioned whether the bill fit the committee’s jurisdiction and noted it might be more appropriate for another committee; the bill was also laid over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• So to evaluate these mechanisms, we developed five evaluative criteria that are really intended to address
• and delayed application processing.
• We are currently underway with the evaluation process.
• In terms of the evaluation phase, the evaluation is underway.
• We're still evaluating it. So far, this has worked out pretty good. We're still evaluating it.

Summary: The committee began with member introductions, then heard a presentation on a draft final report studying alternative funding mechanisms for sidewalks and related pedestrian infrastructure. Consultants said current local funding sources are insufficient, with most jurisdictions unable to complete planned sidewalk networks within 50 years. They evaluated four options: a sidewalk utility fee, a modified transportation benefit district sales tax, a new real estate excise tax option, and expanded stormwater fee use for ADA sidewalk ramps. The consultants recommended authorizing the modified TBD sales tax and new REET option, considering a sidewalk utility despite legal uncertainty, broadening any authorization to all pedestrian improvements, and not pursuing the stormwater fee option. Members asked about legal authority, fairness, revenue adequacy, and whether jurisdictions had been consulted; the presenters said state enabling legislation would likely be needed for a sidewalk utility and that fairness could be defined either by direct benefit or by need. The committee then received an update on the 2025 assessment of city transportation funding needs. The consultants reported that city transportation revenues have grown in some local and federal categories since 2019, but state revenues have remained relatively flat and smaller cities are especially affected by declining fuel tax revenues and limited tax bases. They estimated annual city transportation needs at $4.25 billion, average annual spending at $1.89 billion, and a funding gap of $2.37 billion, larger than in the prior study because of updated data, inclusion of system improvements, and higher preservation costs. Draft recommendations focused on reducing costs and improving efficiency, preserving and increasing state support, and expanding local funding options, including preservation-first spending, a permanent federal fund exchange program, streamlined review processes, better coordination with WSDOT, possible property tax flexibility, and exploration of new local tools. Members raised questions about design standards, the role of density and transit, federal compliance, and whether the report would identify specific consolidation or process changes. The committee also heard a project update on evaluating zero-emission vehicle and electrification programs funded by the Climate Commitment Act. Consultants said they had reviewed roughly 23 programs and projects across seven agencies and were now evaluating options to improve delivery, including process improvements, reorganizing programs, or consolidating governance and administrative functions. Early findings highlighted staffing shortages, duplication and variation across agencies, differing levels of risk, and the challenge of coordinating climate priorities across agencies with other core missions. Members asked about program outcomes, administrative costs, whether some programs should have exit strategies, and how to strengthen the EV Coordinating Council. Finally, WSDOT provided an implementation update on its new public-private partnership authority under SB 5801, saying work is underway to prepare governance, legal, policy, and organizational structures ahead of the January 1, 2027 effective date.

Transcript Highlights:

• Four of the standards-based applications and seven of the system-based proposals teacher housing applications
• applications, through site visits.
• We're evaluating our options.
• The FCI, including those applicants, is going to be 58.10.
• However FY26 applicants is going to be 30.04.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:24:37.560> um once an a qualified applicant um once an a qualified applicant um application
• applicants um have submitted submitted submitted an<00:25:11.520> application.
• an application. an application.
• appointee an applicant for appointment. appointee an applicant for appointment.
• that they take action. applicants did submit applications applicants did submit applications um<00:27

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• application for the program.
• Most of our private schools evaluate applications... totally blind to income.
• that the applicant will respect the values and the morals of the school and that's part of the application
• A private school... it's a conversation between the applicant and the school whether the applicant...
• The back of it has the student application. I have the application also.

Bills: HB 3

Keywords: emergency communication, public safety, interoperability, Texas Interoperability Council, grant program, emergency communications, public safety radio, first responders, radio system, dispatch, 911, emergency management, Texas Division of Emergency Management, public safety infrastructure, Project 25, P25, broadband emergency alerting, outdoor warning sirens, homeland security, disaster response

Transcript Highlights:

• Operational audits evaluate internal controls and management's performance, both in establishing and
• laws, rules, contracts, grant agreements, and any other applicable guidelines.
• The first is program evaluation.
• So whatever we audit, we're looking at whether the entity is compliant with whatever applicable law,
• So have they fixed things that are applicable, or have they not fixed the things that are applicable?

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee met to receive annual overviews of its oversight responsibilities and the work of the Auditor General and OPAGA. Committee staff reviewed the committee’s authority over state and local governments, enforcement of audit-report filing requirements, repeated audit findings, Transparency Florida reporting, and lobbying compensation audits. Auditor General Cheryl Norman described her office’s independence, audit standards, quality control, and major audit areas, including the state’s annual financial and single audits, school district and university audits, operational and performance audits, and attestation work. She also noted staffing shortages, recruitment efforts, and a request for carry-forward funds to study salaries. Members asked about whether audits can quantify recoverable dollars, how school district spending comparisons are handled, and how to raise concerns about DCF-related audits or a local city audit that has been pending for years. Norman said her office can quantify findings when possible, sometimes compares costs across districts in operational audits, and that members can bring specific concerns to the appropriate deputy auditor general or the committee. She also explained that citizen or local-government audit requests may require payment of audit costs. OPAGA Coordinator Kara Collins-Gomez outlined OPAGA’s role as a legislative research unit that conducts studies directed by law, the presiding officers, or the committee, and described its policy areas, methodologies, contract monitoring, and recurring statutory reports. Deputy Auditor General Matthew Tracy explained how to read operational audit reports, including findings, criteria, condition, cause, effect, recommendations, and management responses. Deputy Auditor General Greg Senators explained financial audit reports, including audit opinions, required supplementary information, internal control and compliance findings, federal program compliance, and management letters. The meeting concluded with thanks to the presenters and a motion to adjourn, which passed without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if you have severe PTSD and you take medication for it, your benefits will be evaluated not based
• the medication at the time you are being evaluated.
• commercial data to advance its scientific research and applications.
• commercial data to advance its scientific research and applications.
• commercial data to advance its scientific research and applications.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, February 23, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For applicable projects requesting financial assistance, the conversation begins during the pre-application
• . $2.2 billion in applications were turned away.
• We authorize land application of treated wastewater through our Texas Land Application Permitting, or
• Applications are made available for review in public locations near the proposed facility, and the applicant
• So when an applicant submits an application to TCEQ, as you said, any industrial, or more domestic for

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're not only evaluating my office, but also the SCO and several other large state departments to
• And finally, Objective 8 focuses on how fusion centers themselves evaluate their own performance: what
• They're evaluating the issue through a proceeding.
• They're evaluating the issue through a proceeding.
• that Districts in the state of California do, approving charter school applications.

Summary: The committee met as a subcommittee for much of the hearing because it initially lacked a quorum, then later established one and began taking votes. The state auditor gave a status update on ongoing audits, including several JALAC-requested audits in progress, other statutory audits, staffing growth in his office, and the number of new JALAC audits his office could start in the coming months. The committee also heard that one audit request on Prop. 28 was held, and another PUC-related request was moved off consent and heard on the regular calendar. Members then heard and discussed several audit requests. Senator Cervantes presented a request to audit California fusion centers, with witnesses from the FBI and ACLU supporting the need for transparency and oversight; opponents argued the request was politically motivated and could interfere with counterterrorism work. Senator Allen presented a request on CPUC enforcement of Rule 21 interconnection timelines for solar and storage projects, supported by industry and school representatives who described long delays and financial harm, while CPUC staff said the issue was being addressed through workshops and a formal proceeding. Senator Perez presented a request to audit Caltrans’ administration of the former SR 710 extension properties and affordable sales program, citing tenant complaints about maintenance, pricing, and transparency; Caltrans said it was working to complete sales and improve administration. Senator Umberg presented a request to audit the Orange County Board of Education over transparency, contracting, litigation spending, charter oversight, and whistleblower issues, while board representatives said there was no factual basis for an audit and that existing legal remedies had not been invoked. After quorum was established, the committee approved the consent-calendar DMV license revocation audit and then approved the PUC utility timeliness audit and the Caltrans SR 710 audit. The fusion center audit was left on call after a split vote, and the Orange County Board of Education audit continued with testimony from the board’s representatives after the committee had already moved on to other business.

Transcript Highlights:

• qualified applicants.
• applicants.
• on all of our applications now.
• for the applications we reviewed.
• applicants to submit a code of conduct to complete the license application process and developed a log

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee first heard the Arizona Auditor General’s sunset review of the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The audit found some strengths, including timely licensing and complaint resolution in the sample reviewed and rules that matched statutory curriculum requirements, but it also identified a major finding that the board had imposed inconsistent discipline for similar violations and lacked documentation for deviations from its disciplinary guidelines. Other issues included missing reciprocity education requirements, weak application quality control, incomplete school and establishment oversight, and compliance concerns involving open meeting law, public records, and conflicts of interest. The report made 25 recommendations total, including two tied to the disciplinary finding and three suggested statutory changes on esthetics scope of practice, cease-and-desist authority, and eyelash technician training. The board’s executive director said the board agreed with the findings, had already implemented several recommendations, updated disciplinary policies and conflict-of-interest procedures, and was working on legislation and rule changes. After questions about enforcement consistency, licensing verification, cash handling, complaint volume, and conflict disclosures, the committee voted 7-0 to recommend the board be continued for six years, until July 1, 2032. The committee then took up the Arizona Department of Gaming, the Arizona Racing Commission, and the Arizona Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts Commission together. The Auditor General reported that the department correctly distributed more than $158 million in tribal contributions in fiscal year 2024 and issued event wagering licenses to reviewed applicants, but found several problems: the department did not consistently obtain and review independent audit reports for event wagering and fantasy sports operators, did not fully comply with conflict-of-interest disclosure requirements, and lacked comprehensive complaint-handling processes. The review also found delays in distributing Compact Trust Fund payments to some tribes, gaps in IT security and horse-racing license checks, and incomplete fee-setting and public-records practices. The report made 36 recommendations to the department, six to the Racing Commission, and 13 to the Boxing and MMA Commission, and all three entities said they agreed and would implement them. In response, the Department of Gaming director said the agency was already making changes, including a historical look-back on operator audits, updated guidance to operators, a new constituent services unit and complaint-tracking process, and improved conflict-of-interest training and forms. She also explained the Compact Trust Fund dispute, saying the department administers the fund but the beneficiary tribes must agree on the revenue baseline formula, which has been complicated by COVID-era closures; no Category Three distributions had yet been made. Committee members asked about possible revenue losses, penalties, and the status of 2024-2025 audits, as well as prediction markets and whether they are legal under Arizona’s event wagering framework. The director said the department had issued cease-and-desist letters to unlicensed prediction-market operators, would review licensed operators for suitability if needed, and would continue to enforce Arizona law. The transcript ends while questioning on prediction markets is still underway, before any vote on the gaming-related reviews is shown.