Transcript Highlights:

• There wasn't an adequacy study.
• The adequacy study.
• The adequacy study.
• And it is studied each biennium throughout this study.
• She's going to talk to us about the 2026 adequacy study process. 2026 adequacy study process.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the previous minutes and then focused on an update from the Department of Education on early childhood programs, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ongoing work to review ABC slots, which have been flat for years at about 23,800 slots and roughly $114 million. They said about 1,000 slots statewide are currently unfilled despite a waiting list of more than 2,000 families, and the department is shifting toward paying based on enrollment rather than guaranteed slots. Members asked about school choice, income eligibility, year-round access, curriculum flexibility, transportation, and whether funding should be increased or rebalanced; the department said it is collecting data, may survey providers more formally, and is considering whether to modernize income thresholds, daily rates, and other program rules. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical information on income limits and other program details. The second major portion of the meeting was a legal presentation on the framework for Arkansas school adequacy by BLR education attorney Taylor Lloyd. She reviewed the constitutional basis for a “general, suitable, and efficient” public school system, the Dupree and Lake View cases, and the principle that adequacy and equity are different but related: adequacy asks what resources are needed, while equity asks whether those resources are distributed fairly. She explained that the General Assembly must define adequacy, study it, and react to evidence over time, and that the current adequacy definition includes curriculum and career/technical frameworks, the 38 mandatory Carnegie units, state testing standards, and sufficient funding. She also described the matrix as a funding tool, not a spending mandate, and noted that categorical funds are separate from the matrix. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum then gave the historical framework, tracing legislative responses from Dupree through Lake View and into the present. She highlighted major changes such as the creation of equalization funding, fiscal distress and academic distress laws, the adequacy study process, the Educational Adequacy Fund, facilities and transportation changes, declining enrollment and student growth funding, and later adjustments to teacher salaries, isolated funding, and categorical programs. She explained that the adequacy study has evolved through committee hearings, surveys, site visits, and outside consultants, and that recent changes include updates to accountability references and the addition or removal of certain funding categories. Members asked follow-up questions about how the matrix is used, whether homeschool or private-school funding raises comparable issues, whether stakeholders include private and homeschool participants, whether school board members should be surveyed, and whether the state should revisit average daily membership versus attendance-based funding. No votes were taken on the adequacy presentations, but the committee did agree to continue the early childhood discussion in a future subcommittee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's really fascinating about their study is that, like, they did two studies, recent studies.
• . study.
• This study, and a portion of this study, was really concentrating on whether or not the recommendations
• were also part of the study.
• the study study, which involved financial data, was important for us to bring them together.

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, do you have to produce a traffic study currently?
• . study.
• continue to update that study.
• That MUD may have already done traffic studies.
• So you do the study, there's no one to give it to?

Bills: HB447, HB897, HB993, HB2673, HB3671, HB3680, HB3897, HB4506, HB4753, HB4812, HB4894, HB5148, HB5437, HB5650, HB5652, HB5654, HB5656, HB5661, HB5665

Keywords: traffic impact studies, municipal utility district, bonds, road projects, eminent domain, HB 897, Texas land sale, state property, Austin real estate, Travis County, General Land Office, Texas State Library and Archives Commission, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission, state records facility, archives building, library funding, capital improvements, lease of state land, public land disposition

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll go from there into a draft plan for the study.
• So there's going to be some overlap between these studies.
• It was not set up to answer the questions in this study.
• of plans. request for the SCPP to consider a study of plans three.
• Comment on this study, but he is not.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Select Committee on Pension Policy approved its minutes by roll call vote, then postponed an OSA annual update due to a family emergency. The committee received an Open Public Meetings Act refresher from Assistant Attorney General Kate Adams, who reviewed key compliance points including quorum and serial meetings, notice and agenda rules, executive session limits, public comment requirements, and the consequences of violations. She also noted a litigation hold notice sent to members and provided resources for further guidance. Staff then briefed the committee on E2 Second Substitute House Bill 2034, which restates and terminates LEOFF 1 on June 30, 2029, creates a restated LEOFF 1 funded by transferred assets, and places excess assets into a pension surplus holding account that could later be used by the state. The bill requires DRS to seek IRS guidance, directs OSA to calculate the transfer amount and assess any future unfunded liability, assigns implementation duties to DRS, OSA, the Pension Funding Council, the State Investment Board, and the Treasurer, and requires two SCPP studies on LEOFF 1 medical benefits and policy oversight. OSA’s actuary estimated the transfer to the surplus holding account at about $3.9 billion under current assumptions and said the bill increases the modeled chance of future state contributions if the restated plan falls below 100% funded; members asked about IRS timing, the 2029 transfer date, and whether the 110% buffer is sufficient. The committee also received an update on the LEOFF 1 medical benefits study required by the bill. Staff said the study will examine the administration of pension boards and medical liabilities, likely focusing on medical benefits, and will gather anonymized data from local boards, cities, counties, and related agencies over the next three years. Members and public commenters discussed the number and structure of local boards, whether spouses receive medical benefits, and the possibility of regionalizing or consolidating administration. No action was taken, but staff said they would return with milestones and further updates. Finally, staff outlined a possible Plan 3 study, prompted by DRS, to evaluate whether the original goals of Plan 3 have been met after 30 years. The proposed study would review historical context, member choice outcomes, policy questions, and possible recommendations over a two-year period. The committee also heard an update on new correspondence procedures, including a new online web form, a correspondence log in meeting packets, and removal of correspondence from the public website. During public comment, retiree groups urged the committee to pursue an ongoing COLA for PERS and TRS Plan 1, with interim ad hoc COLAs until then, while LEOFF 1 retirees urged caution about changing the current board structure and emphasized the complexity of medical benefit administration.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, this and I don't know who was on the interim study, but it was an interim study.
• We need to study it.
• We are doing a real study on it.
• And it seems like we have a really good idea here to study this program, to study this issue, to study
• What we do after the study, but don't do the recommendations before the study is done.

Bills: HB3005, HB3007, HB3403, HB1907, HB3175, HB3986, HB3466, HB3411, HB4246

Keywords: climatology, emergency declaration, Oklahoma Climatological Survey, environment, weather data, public policy, state governance, natural resources, advisory councils, sunset law, water quality, hazardous waste, solid waste, radiation management, public health, biosolids, land application, environmental quality, agriculture, wastewater treatment

Transcript Highlights:

• It completely depends on the kind of study you're talking about—randomized studies or observational studies
• There weren't a lot of studies when I was a kid, but the best studies—and really the only studies out
• And over time, the scientific community studied and studied and studied and found that it was wrong.
• this, that they have asked the CDC to do certain studies—animal studies, bench studies, observational
• studies, studies of the vaccine safety data link.

Transcript Highlights:

• the day the study was conducted.
• Uh, so, obviously, we have to perform the studies, get those studies approved by the entities that require
• That mud may have already done traffic studies.
• OK, now when you do this traffic study.
• So you do the study. There's no one to give it to.

Transcript Highlights:

• the study.
• do this study? do this study?
• Uh, Representative Howard, once you get the study, a $500,000 study, then what?
• more study is warranted. more study is warranted.
• <00:18:37.040> impact<00:18:37.560> study to do an economic study impact study to do

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And unlike the previous studies you've just heard, we are at the beginning phase of this study.
• And unlike the previous studies you've just heard, we are at the beginning phase of the study, so we
• Next, I'll turn the presentation over to Hope to talk about the study scope and our study questions.
• We have three planned study questions.
• Is this really a farm worker study, or is it an agricultural worker study?

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee met on September 17, 2025, in hybrid format. After roll call, the committee initially lacked a quorum and deferred approval of the July 15 minutes until Representative Berg arrived; the minutes were then adopted. Members also discussed the proposed 2026 JLARC meeting schedule, including possible changes to address crowded July meetings and the annual tax exemption review workload. Staff presented the annual lodging tax expenditures report, noting that 213 municipalities received distributions in 2024, with 91% reporting compliance, $114 million awarded for more than 1,700 activities, and no independent verification of the self-reported data. Several members questioned the value and usefulness of the report, and the executive committee indicated it may recommend removing the statutory reporting requirement. The committee then heard the preliminary performance audit of the Office of Privacy and Data Protection, which found the office meets its statutory responsibilities and has high user satisfaction, but recommended updating the statute to better match the office’s current capacity and focus and improving performance measures to reflect long-term privacy outcomes rather than outputs. Members asked about FERPA and other federal privacy laws, and OPDP staff said they provide general privacy training and consultation but not law-specific training unless requested. The committee adopted the final report on Washington State recreational boating programs without recommendation, after staff reported that boating revenues support both general government and boating activities and that no participating agencies submitted formal comments. Members asked about boater safety education and possible overlap among the six agencies involved; Parks staff said education has reached more than 500,000 boaters and that fatalities and incidents have declined. The committee also reviewed planned study questions for a JLARC review of Labor and Industries’ enforcement of farm worker laws, with members raising scope questions about the term “farm worker” versus “agricultural worker,” and for DNR’s Eastern Washington sustainable harvest calculation, which JLARC will review as DNR completes its recalculation. Finally, staff outlined the 2026 tax preference performance reviews covering seven preferences, and members asked about racial equity, environmental impacts, disclosure of beneficiary savings, and how the reviews will measure effectiveness; the meeting adjourned before noon.

Transcript Highlights:

• vaccine study. despite the fact that few vaccine study. despite the fact that few of<00:35:51.839>
• <00:41:07.440> I noted during the clinical study. I noted during the clinical study.
• and experimenting. uh uh but uh studying and experimenting. uh uh but uh we<00:43:05.280> can
• There is, in fact, a number of variables that should be considered when performing clinical studies,
• I just follow up on what we are looking at in studies.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Special Committee on COVID Response Efficacy met briefly without a quorum because many members were tied up in legislative committee of conference work. The chair said the committee would resume in June and, in the meantime, directed members to the committee webpage and the 2024 committee’s report and COVID-19 after-action report, which he said could be reviewed for possible updates and legislative recommendations on how New Hampshire should respond to future pandemics. The chair then introduced two recent articles as framing material: one about the U.S. Supreme Court declining to hear a challenge to the Los Angeles Unified School District’s COVID vaccine mandate, and another about CDC internal emails and alleged failure to publicly acknowledge vaccine safety signals. He argued these examples raised concerns about mandates, transparency, and the balance between individual rights and public health, and said the committee would revisit the issue in future meetings. Representative Pollazok thanked the chair for presenting both legal and medical perspectives and suggested the committee focus on reviewing scientific methodology and the quality of evidence behind competing claims. A member asked whether vaccine pamphlets now include risks and benefits, and the chair responded that FDA-approved products should have patient inserts available on the FDA website, including sections listing adverse events from clinical studies and commercial use. He said he would research and email the committee copies or excerpts. Members also discussed how to evaluate studies over different time periods, dosing levels, and the timing of side effects, as well as the difficulty of comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated outcomes when definitions change over time. Before adjourning, the chair said the committee would ask the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services how it would monitor and assess vaccine or pandemic-related issues in real time and whether additional structures would be needed in a future emergency. He said the committee would likely take July and August off, resume in September, and aim to have a draft report by mid-October and a final report by late October ahead of the November elections.

Transcript Highlights:

• time where we were doing the rate study time where we were doing the rate study there<00:13:52.079
• <00:15:07.839> um comparison The Benchmark rate study um comparison The Benchmark rate study
• that it would implement the rate study that it would implement the rate study at<00:45:56.480>
• study study report<00:46:38.920> um<00:46:39.200> the<00:46:39.319> rate<00:46:
• statistician um but in the rate study statistician um but in the rate study report<00:46:50.960>

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Health and Family Services met with a quorum still coming together and first handled roll call and minutes. The main presentation came from the Department for Medicaid Services, with Commissioner Lisa Lee and CFO Steve Beckle giving an overview of Kentucky Medicaid, its federal-state financing structure, and the department’s 1915(c) home- and community-based waiver programs. They explained FMAP funding levels for traditional Medicaid, administration, IT, expansion adults, and CHIP, and noted the size of the program, including more than 600,000 Kentucky children eligible for Medicaid or CHIP, about 485,000 expansion adults, over 69,000 enrolled providers, and $18.5 billion in 2024 expenditures. A major focus was the waiver system, including the acquired brain injury waivers, model waiver, independence waiver, Michelle P. waiver, and Supports for Community Living waiver. The department said these waivers are intended to keep people with physical or developmental disabilities in home and community settings rather than facilities, and that many services are not covered by Medicare or commercial insurance. Officials described participant-directed services, interagency administration, and eligibility rules, including that some waiver programs use the child’s income only rather than family income. They also reported an unduplicated waiver wait list of 13,930 people and said the General Assembly had added waiver slots in the last budget, including 650 ABI slots and 1,275 more to be allocated July 1, 2025. The department also discussed a waiver rate study conducted by Guidehouse, explaining that CMS requires a defensible rate methodology because there is no Medicare or commercial benchmark for many waiver services. They said the study used cost and wage surveys, provider and stakeholder input, and aimed to improve transparency, provider stability, and rate parity. Officials reviewed prior COVID-era Appendix K rate increases and budget-driven increases, and said the budget ultimately funded rates at about 70% of the benchmark study, while preserving higher existing rates where needed so no provider would be cut. They highlighted larger differences in behavioral support and case management rates, and said a public report is available. Members asked several questions about the potential impact of federal FMAP changes, especially possible reductions in the enhanced match for expansion adults and Medicaid IT/admin activities. DMS said any FMAP reduction would require more state general fund dollars, estimating about $75 million for each 1% drop in the expansion match, while impacts on administrative IT funding would depend on the systems being built or implemented in a given year. Members also pressed for clarification on waiver wait-list procedures, funded versus filled slots, and what happens when someone on the wait list is later found ineligible. DMS said people on the wait list may not yet have been assessed, can be reevaluated if conditions change, and are still eligible for regular Medicaid state-plan services if they qualify, even if they are waiting for waiver services.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was the project manager on this study.
• And as a reminder, the study in 2019 estimated...
• And WSDOT is currently studying that right now.
• There's a concurrent study, and we have spoken with the folks who are working on that study.
• So a lot of what the study is about is a governance study, and we've hired CPCS as consultants to help

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:

• a study, and that costs money.
• Thank you. of Finance Committee conduct a study.
• Madam Chair and expert, so if the staff are participating in this study and they—this study, which as
• And I appreciate that you want to be sure that this is studied and studied with integrity and competency
• I don't think it would succeed in a real study.

Bills: HB303, SB96, HM6

Keywords: public utility, certificate of public convenience and necessity, certificate of need, Public Regulation Commission, PRC, utility regulation, ratemaking, energy storage, battery storage, grid reliability, renewable energy, transmission, distribution, generation plant, utility expansion, service territory, mutual domestic water consumer association, economic development department, clean energy, fossil fuel reduction

Transcript Highlights:

• I was the project manager on this study.
• And as a reminder, the study in 2019 estimated...
• There's a concurrent study, and we have spoken with the folks who are working on that study.
• So a lot of what the study is about is a governance study, and we've hired CPCS as consultants to help
• Program evaluation study that is currently underway.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Water is so important, so it's a study. If it's a study, why do you require a moratorium?
• So this—generally, a study says, "Let's do a study, let's look into it."
• For the study, if you're going to study, why do you have to impose a moratorium until 2027 and do it
• I want to have a study; let's have a study.
• Science is good; studies are good.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Commissioner, the study will be completed in a month. So the study that Auburn...
• Yes, there is a study from Auburn, but we also have a study from Auburn that says...
• We know what their study says. They put it out and said, "Here's the study. It recommends this."
• What happened with that study?
• We weren't studying when... and when I say we, the study... it wasn't me personally. ...

Bills: HB1, HB143, HB1, HB92

Keywords: DUI, driving under the influence, ignition interlock, interlock device, driver license suspension, restricted license, motor vehicle, alcohol offense, first offense, repeat offender, blood alcohol concentration, BAC, license revocation, Alabama State Law Enforcement Agency, ALEA, public safety, traffic safety, chemical dependency, substance abuse, court referral program

Transcript Highlights:

• And that is the actuarial study—the left one study plan in the House. A lot of us didn't...
• one study plan...
• With the actuarial study of the left one study plan. Mr.
• Vice Chair, may I ask exactly which study you're referring to?
• Some of them are thinking COLA in terms of the study that we have, but COLA is not included in that study

Summary: The committee approved the May minutes by roll call vote and then received brief updates from the Attorney General’s office and the Office of the State Actuary. The AG’s office said it would handle legal analysis related to the committee’s work, while the actuary reported that staff were at capacity this summer due to annual valuation work, experience studies, and other retirement system projects, but would have more capacity in the fall. Members also requested access to fiscal note and actuarial materials related to the LEOFF 1 study and related legislation. The main discussion focused on the LEOFF 1 study, including actuarial funding, a proposed merger/termination/restatement approach, and the possibility of a permanent COLA for Plan 1 members. Several members supported keeping COLA recommendations in the committee’s work, while others raised concerns about whether merging or restating plans could affect benefits, legal status, or IRS tax treatment. The actuary explained that the temporary pause in certain funding rates reflected prior overfunding buffers and assumptions about future investment returns, and said future base-rate funding could still be needed depending on experience. Members also discussed constituent correspondence, which staff said largely fell into four categories: the LEOFF 1 study, Plan 1 benefits and COLAs, fossil fuel divestment, and ESSB 5357. The committee agreed that divestment concerns are more appropriately directed to the State Investment Board, not this committee. In reviewing the draft interim work plan, members added or adjusted several topics for future meetings, including a July educational briefing on LEOFF 1 history and tax/IRS issues, a September discussion of COLAs, and a December placeholder for excess compensation/pension spiking, pending coordination with the LEOFF 2 Board. The committee then approved the July agenda and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Social studies implementation.
• grade remained global studies.
• I will now go into ethnic studies.
• . studies. studies.
• <01:16:03.440> All standards in social studies. All standards in social studies.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'd like, if you can, to elaborate a little bit more on the actuarial study and what this study would
• Uh you for legal analysis and study.
• to the experts that do actuarial studies to the experts that do actuarial studies to<00:23:49.600
• > different<00:26:32.880> states So really studying the different states So really studying
• <00:31:33.520> Thank in that part of the study. Great. Thank in that part of the study.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Could be quite a huge study there. Mr. Chairman and Senator, I think the study is probably done.
• Okay, are we just hoghousing this to study? No, this is a study to tack on to the budget.
• I do think this should be a considered study, though. I think it's... ...it says shell study.
• We'd like to study it further. There are multiple vendors. Here's how we could do the study.
• It's just a study.

Bills: SB2399

Keywords: mental health, psychiatric treatment, reimbursement, medical assistance, legislative report, 908, all

Summary: The committee reconvened and first reconsidered House Bill 1612, the aerospace medical and mental health support center bill. Senator Cleary offered an amendment to reduce the general fund appropriation from $500,000 to $250,000 and require the university or project sponsors to find the remaining funding from other sources. The amendment passed, and the bill was then recommended do pass as amended, with members citing concerns about university funding, but others supporting the project as a one-time seed investment. The committee also discussed a possible future FMAP increase beginning October 1, 2026, which could reduce general fund costs by roughly $9 million, though members noted the figures were still preliminary and could be addressed later if needed. The committee then returned to Human Services budget items, including early childhood and child care funding, a community cultural center grant, and several other adjustments. Members discussed reducing the “best in class” amount, changes to child care grants and quality/infrastructure funding, and clarifying that prior child care assistance appropriations were in fact being spent. They also agreed to reduce the 1915(i) Medicaid waiver line by $2 million, with the understanding that the entitlement would still be funded as needed. The committee also considered taking guardianship funding out of House Bill 1012 because a separate bill, Senate Bill 2029, would move that funding elsewhere; members agreed that removing it from the budget could help the overall bill and could be restored if the separate bill failed. Several study amendments were discussed. Senator Cleary proposed adding a maternal health study related to prenatal services, doulas, midwives, and Medicaid, and members expressed support. The committee also discussed a software/case-management study proposal, but the department said it had not requested it and would not support it as presented, so members leaned against advancing it unless the department first evaluated it. Another amendment would authorize the department to work with the city of Grafton on a long-term plan for the LSTC campus and require a report back to the legislature; members supported that as legislative intent. The committee also agreed to remove a truancy study section for later conference discussion, and it reviewed other possible study ideas, including assistive technology, before adjourning to await updated long sheets and bill text.