Transcript Highlights:

• Um, row 41, judicial branch uh,000 cost.
• There was a reduction judicial branch.
• <01:04:10.960> the judicial branch based on that the judicial branch based on that the department
• . uh judicial branch space assignment. uh judicial branch amended<01:21:01.679> RSA<01:21:02.800
• So uh from the judicial branch approval.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Summary: The Legislative Budget Assistant staff presented an overview of the Senate changes to the House-passed budget, focusing on revenue estimates, appropriations, and ending balances across the general fund and education trust fund. The presentation emphasized that the Senate’s budget reflected higher revenue assumptions than the House, driven in part by updated April revenue figures, changes to business, tobacco, and real estate transfer tax splits, and different assumptions about video lottery terminal revenue. The Senate also adjusted lapse estimates upward, especially for HHS, after receiving updated information that lapses could be much larger than originally assumed. The presenter walked through the major differences in the surplus statements for fiscal years 2025 through 2027. Compared with the House, the Senate budget generally showed higher revenues, lower or different appropriations in some areas, and larger balances carried forward, including a larger education trust fund balance and a different rainy day fund transfer. The Senate’s approach also changed several policy assumptions, such as maintaining liquor revenue dedication, removing the House’s meals-and-rooms distribution cap, changing the treatment of unique revenue, and altering the process for meeting a targeted revenue amount by giving the governor more flexibility. On the appropriations side, the Senate removed or modified several House reductions and added funding or adjustments in areas including the judicial branch, corrections, HHS, the Human Rights Commission, and certain settlement costs. The presenter also highlighted Senate changes in House Bill 2 and related budget provisions, including a new arts tax credit, a nursing home bed fee, changes to Medicaid premium assumptions, and differences in how motor vehicle inspection repeal and BLT-related revenue are handled. No votes were taken in the portion shown; the discussion was informational and comparative, aimed at explaining the Senate budget changes before conference committee negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to thank you as now we move to a judicial branch.
• Judicial branch.
• Let's start with the department, judicial branch. Good afternoon, Assemblymember Ramos.
• I'll be providing an overview of the May revision to the governor's budget for the judicial branch.
• Prior to 2425, unspent monies were regularly reverted in conversations with the judicial branch that

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Venables sends a nomination in the judicial branch. I sit down for about two and a half.
• The The unique differences between the legislative, executive, and judicial branch, there's a unique
• The judicial branches at work. every day, 24-7, of a two-year biennium. The legislative branch...
• One of the things that I found find disconcerting, not about the judicial branch, but there are some
• to the judicial branch.

Keywords: Texas Water Fund, water management, infrastructure funding, local governments, workforce development, community colleges, educational programs, sustainability

Summary: The meeting focused on several crucial issues, including the Texas Water Fund and its implications for development in the state. Various members highlighted the critical need for effective management of water resources, discussing the role of the Water Development Board and their strategies for outreach to local governments. The committee engaged in a thorough examination of funding projects and the sustainable financing necessary for communities facing challenges in meeting their infrastructure needs. Additionally, there was notable discussion regarding promoting workforce development and the alignment of educational programs with the demands of the job market as indicated by recent trends in community colleges.

Transcript Highlights:

• branch and with counil for the judicial branch and with me<00:20:08.400> I<00:20:08.559> have
• from the judicial branch but it depends from the judicial branch but it depends on<00:21:47.640>
• branch Family Division to the judicial branch Family Division implementation<01:07:04.640> committee
• <01:11:26.840> branch<01:11:27.159> quarterly Hampshire judicial branch quarterly Hampshire
• branch Innovation commission judicial branch Innovation commission report<01:11:35.800> these

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee on the Children and Family Law Committee met organizationally to continue work on family court issues, building on a prior special committee’s report and taking a collaborative approach with the Judiciary. The chair said the group would focus on solutions rather than rehashing public complaints, and identified three main topics for early study: specialization and training of family court judges, the extent to which judges should be bound by the rules of evidence, and whether mediation in family cases should be mandatory or voluntary and what qualifications mediators should have. A fourth concern was also raised about overlap between superior court domestic violence cases and family court custody/support matters, and whether one judge should hear both. Members discussed whether to divide into smaller subcommittees, but the prevailing view was to work as a committee of the whole at first. Most members agreed that additional public testimony was unlikely to add much, though recent concerns could still be emailed to the committee. The committee then heard from Attorney Erin Krian, general counsel for the judicial branch, and Judge Michael Mace. Krian said the judicial branch could provide additional witnesses on mediation and judicial training, including Judge Kissinger, and noted the branch was preparing materials on how other states handle the issues. Mace described the history of the Family Division and said he had reviewed older reports going back to the 1990s. He also outlined current judicial branch efforts, including expanded shadowing for new judges, monthly family-law trainings, and a year-long focus on family law topics. He reported that court rules had been updated to clarify notice requirements for minor guardianship changes, and that the branch had received positive feedback on the family access motion, which provides a statutory timeline and listed remedies for parenting-time disputes. Members also discussed prior committee work on rules of evidence and family court procedures. One member recalled recommending quiet review of any judges who appeared to apply evidence rules inconsistently, and Krian said the administrative judge can review complaints even if they come from a single person. The committee also received a status update on prior initiatives, including a federal grant for guardian ad litem services for indigent litigants in four locations, testing of redesigned court forms, and continued training improvements. The chair scheduled the next subcommittee meeting for April 1 and the full Children and Family Law Committee for April 8, with further documents from committee research and NCSL to be circulated.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll simply ask our commit our judicial I'll simply ask our commit our judicial branch<00:49:18.640
• I'm the state court administrator for the Minnesota Judicial Branch.
• Minnesota Judicial Branch. I'm pleased Minnesota Judicial Branch.
• permanent funding for the judicial permanent funding for the judicial branch<00:53:11.440> cyber
• independence of the judicial branch. independence of the judicial branch.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There's the judicial branch, there's the legislative branch, and there's the executive branch.
• So You have the letter in front of you from the judicial advisory council.
• To protect judicial immunity.
• CSCDs remain under the judicial branch in the government code, and judges still hold responsibility for
• So how does someone get on the judicial advisory council?

Bills: SB1465, SB2110, SB1771, SB206, SB1584, SB1386, SB1696, SB1806, SB1428, SB1390, SB1381, SB201, SB1778, SB1332, SB1836, SB1369, SB1794, SB1290, SB175, SB1379

Keywords: professional engineers, surveyors, licensure board, sunset extension, state board, occupational licensing, engineering license, surveying license, professional regulation, regulatory board, sunset review, emergency clause, Oklahoma O.S. 59, board appointments, lay member, Oklahoma Workforce Commission, workforce development, data collection, economic development, outside counsel

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not authorize qualified contractors to exercise quasi-judicial or discretionary authority.
• This dedication to quality resulted in SIG being selected as the handgun of choice for all branches of
• timelines when close to a legislative session and authorizes electors to file a petition seeking judicial

Bills: S0212, S0218, S0442, S0460, S0532, S0554, S0644, S0686, S0692, S1054, S1106, S1128, S1134, S1138, S1338, S1434, S1506, S1620, S1748

Keywords: sexual offender, sexual predator, sex offender registry, child protection, residency restriction, loitering, proximity restriction, public swimming pool, school safety, child care facility, day care center, park, playground, conditional release, probation, community control, warrantless arrest, background check, registry screening, minor victims

Summary: The committee first considered SB 1434 on infill redevelopment. A late-filed strike-all amendment narrowed eligibility criteria, including environmental and adjacency requirements, density and intensity limits, and exclusions for certain lands and military areas. The amendment was adopted without opposition, and the bill then passed favorably on an 8-0 vote, with testimony both for and against from advocacy groups. Members then heard several bills related to criminal justice, land use, and local government operations. SB 212 on sexual offenders and sexual predators was amended to add public swimming pools and related restricted-location provisions; the committee heard extensive opposition testimony arguing the bill lacked empirical support and could worsen homelessness and burden families, while supporters said it would reduce temptation and improve safety. The amended bill passed 8-1. SB 686 on agricultural enclaves also received a strike-all amendment clarifying development allowances near interstates and protected-area non-preemption; after opposition from a county Republican committee and support from housing and business groups, it passed 10-0. SB 554 updating nonprofit corporation law, SB 1338 on charitable giving and endowment restrictions, SB 532 on court fee retention by clerks, and SB 218 on land use regulations after hurricanes all passed favorably, each with little or no opposition. The committee also approved SB 692 on cybersecurity standards and liability after debate over whether the bill created enough compliance incentives and whether its liability presumption should apply retroactively; supporters said it would encourage adoption of cybersecurity frameworks, while opponents warned it could weaken local standards and create litigation issues. The bill passed 9-2. SB 1138 on qualified contractors was amended to preserve local government authority while allowing licensed professionals to conduct limited pre-application reviews, and it passed 11-0. Finally, SJR 1104 on religious expression in public schools passed 8-3 after extensive public testimony and debate, with supporters saying it would enshrine existing protections in the Constitution and opponents warning it would favor majority religions and increase bullying and litigation. The committee then took up SB 1106 on requiring state agencies and instructional materials to use “Judea and Samaria” instead of “West Bank,” with the sponsor arguing it reflected historical truth and opponents saying it erased Palestinian identity and inserted the state into an international naming dispute; the transcript ends during public testimony on that bill before any vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill just sets timelines for judicial recusals. Yield. We have a motion in a second.

Bills: HB3790, HB2941, HB2959, HB3087, HB3974, HB3500, HB3697, HB3262, HB3582, HB4226, HB3037, HB4139, HB4143, HB4144, HB2936, HB3322, HB4296, HB3278, HB4202, HB4176, HB3303, HB3648, HB4119

Keywords: home repairs, consumer protection, contracts, homeowner rights, rescission, fentanyl, overdose, first responders, drug reporting, immunity, controlled substances, penalties, school abuse reporting, child abuse, neglect, mandatory reporting, student safety, school employee misconduct, administrator reporting, superintendent

Transcript Highlights:

• I uh submitted a the judicial branch.
• > foresee<01:55:34.960> a judicial branch could foresee a judicial branch could foresee
• actually the judicial branch when they actually the judicial branch when they actually conduct<02
• judicial branch is brought into judicial branch is brought into alignment<04:30:18.880> with<
• <04:42:26.080> I judicial branch. So, is it necessary? I judicial branch.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of government, the judicial branch, the state court system.
• of government, the judicial branch, the state court system.
• I think the other thing that's unique about the judicial branch is that we're grounded, of course, and
• I mentioned our judicial structure.
• The Chief Justice serves as the Chief Administrative Officer of the Judicial Branch, and the Supreme

Summary: The Justice Budget Subcommittee met for an introductory overview of the justice budget and the major agencies within it. Chair Maney explained that the committee would hear broad presentations rather than detailed budget questions, and the first panel included the Department of Juvenile Justice, Department of Corrections, Commission on Offender Review, Department of Law Enforcement, Office of the State Courts Administrator, and the Attorney General’s Office. Each agency described its mission, staffing, budget, and major responsibilities, with repeated emphasis on public safety, rehabilitation, staffing shortages, technology needs, and the importance of mental health services and education in reducing recidivism. Secretary Hall described DJJ’s prevention-to-aftercare continuum, including civil citation, detention, probation, and residential commitment programs, and highlighted reductions in juvenile arrests and commitments. Secretary Dixon said DOC’s biggest issues are staffing, overtime, and inflation, while noting progress in education, reentry, and a low recidivism rate. FDLE Commissioner Glass outlined the agency’s investigative, forensic, intelligence, and protective functions, including work on fentanyl enforcement and crime reporting systems. The State Courts Administrator emphasized the judiciary’s constitutional role, case volume, and challenges in providing interpreters, experts, and technology support. Chief Deputy Attorney General Guard described the office’s litigation, criminal appeals, consumer protection, and opioid recovery work, especially defending state laws and recovering opioid settlement funds. Members then asked questions about prison conditions, immigration enforcement, court filing fees, crime reporting, staffing ratios, and transnational gangs. Agency leaders responded that they were not aware of ICE contracts in some cases, that FDLE works with immigration authorities and detention facilities under existing authority, and that filing fees are a legislative policy decision. The committee also heard from the Justice Administrative Commission, prosecutors, public defenders, guardian ad litem, regional conflict counsel, and capital collateral regional counsel, who focused on indigent representation, dependency and death penalty cases, and persistent staffing and retention problems. No votes were taken, and the meeting concluded after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, in December, uh, judicial branch.
• stability of our judicial branch. stability of our judicial branch.
• Judicial branch salaries average 17% lower than executive branch comparable positions.
• Judicial branch salaries have fallen well behind those of the executive branch by an average overall
• judicial branch that keeps them running. judicial branch that keeps them running.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:09 State of the Judiciary: 00:02:33 The Corrections - KCTCS Reentry Program: 00:49:44 Update on 2022 RS SB 90: 01:27:49, 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Committee on the Judiciary met on November 6, 2025, approved the minutes, and welcomed guests including Kentucky Specialty Courts manager Elizabeth Nichols and Boyle/Mercer Family Court Judge Bruce Petri. The committee then heard the Chief Justice of Kentucky, Deborah Lambert, deliver her state of the judiciary address, focused largely on judicial branch funding, facilities, technology, and specialty court programs. Chief Justice Lambert said the branch is facing a projected $14.3 million shortfall for fiscal year 2026 and asked lawmakers for supplemental support, access to reserve funds, and higher base appropriations to cover inflation and nondiscretionary costs. She also requested a 15% across-the-board pay increase for judicial branch employees, citing salary gaps with other state workers and declining judicial compensation relative to national averages. She emphasized that the branch has received a clean FY 2025 audit and said the requests were intended to sustain current operations rather than expand them. A major portion of her remarks covered court technology and facilities. She described the move to Chamberlain during Capitol renovations, the purchase of that building as a cost-saving measure, and the need to fund courtroom audio/video systems and a new statewide case management system. She also discussed courthouse maintenance, flood damage, mold issues, security system upgrades, and the $47 million asset preservation fund created last session, while asking for additional local facilities funding and one-time disaster-related support. Lambert highlighted specialty court and statewide program results, including foster care review boards, family recovery courts, court designated worker programs, drug and mental health courts, and the Judicial Commission on Mental Health. She thanked legislators for prior bills and support, including House Bill 1, Senate Bill 26, and the CES law, and said 2026 recommendations will focus on civil commitment reforms under KRS 202C. During questions, Senator Wheeler asked whether some courthouses are being overbuilt; Lambert said most facilities are inadequate, though some may be larger than needed, and that future needs and population changes must be considered. She also noted that virtual hearings and technology have improved efficiency. No votes or formal committee actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• How do you explain how this is not an intrusion into our judicial branch, an unconstitutional intrusion
• into the judicial branch?
• <00:31:36.919> branch<00:31:37.720> um into our judicial branch um into our judicial
• /c><00:31:42.840> do<00:31:43.120> you judicial branch and also how do you judicial branch
• branch.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 90 / Senate Bill 17, a birth-related measure backed by the Kentucky Birth Coalition. Sponsors said the bill had been worked on for several years and described changes including a transfer agreement, insurance requirements, proximity to a hospital, informed consent, and accreditation/medical director standards that helped win neutral or non-opposition from the Hospital Association. The bill was reported favorably after a roll call vote with unanimous support. The committee then heard Senate Bill 65, presented by Senator Steve West and Representative Derrick Lewis. They said the bill would make regulations found deficient through the committee review process null and void by statute, and would bar agencies from reissuing the same or similar language for up to a year. Supporters argued this was needed to hold agencies accountable because deficiency findings alone had not led to action. After questions about specific Medicaid behavioral health regulations and concerns about legislative overreach, the bill passed the committee on a roll call vote, with some members passing or explaining reservations. Finally, the committee considered Senate Bill 84, with a House committee substitute. Sponsors said the substitute was intended to strengthen the bill and reflect the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision by ending Chevron deference and requiring courts, not agencies, to interpret law. Opponents, including Audrey Ernsberger and Katherine Hargraves, argued the bill would intrude on the judiciary, violate separation of powers, and could harm public health, environmental, and workplace protections. Committee members also raised concerns about whether the bill told courts what standard to use; sponsors responded that agencies could still present persuasive arguments, but courts should not defer to them. The committee substitute was adopted, and the bill then passed the committee on a roll call vote, with several members passing or expressing constitutional concerns.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, row 41 judicial branch budget reduction removed by the Senate.
• <01:10:56.159> branch,<01:10:57.280> we On page 14 under the judicial branch, we On
• of about 7.8 million on the judicial of about 7.8 million on the judicial branch.<01:11:06.480><
• There was a reduction judicial branch.
• <01:11:18.800> the judicial branch based on that the judicial branch based on that the department

Keywords: LBA Briefing on Budget, 928, house, all

Summary: The presentation was an LBA overview of Senate changes to the House-passed state budget, with Michael Kane explaining how Senate Finance updated revenue and spending estimates after April revenue figures and agency discussions. He said the Senate’s revenue outlook was higher than the House’s in some areas, but lower in others, especially video lottery terminal revenue, and that the biggest differences also came from changes to revenue splits between the general fund and education trust fund, lapse estimates, and several policy changes in House Bill 1 and House Bill 2. Kane highlighted several major revenue and policy differences: the Senate changed the business tax, tobacco tax, and real estate transfer tax splits; adjusted liquor revenue dedication; removed the House’s meals-and-rooms distribution cap; delayed the Lakes Region facility proceeds plan; altered the PECARD fund treatment; added a granite patron of the arts tax credit; and changed the treatment of unique funds and video lottery terminal revenue. On spending, he noted Senate changes to judicial, corrections, HHS, human rights commission, and other budgets, including additional settlement costs, higher lapse assumptions, and a different approach to Medicaid premium revenue and retirement savings. He also described Senate additions such as a nursing home bed fee, Hampstead Hospital transition funding, and changes to the YDC claims settlement fund. The presentation focused on comparing House and Senate surplus statements across fiscal years 2025 through 2027, including projected ending balances and rainy day fund transfers. Kane repeatedly emphasized that the numbers were still dependent on final revenues and lapse amounts, and that some balances would be carried forward and trued up later in the biennium. No committee vote or final action was described in the excerpt; it was an informational budget briefing and comparison of the two chambers’ proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, uh, I coming to the judicial branch.
• So in all three parts of the judicial branch.
• Uh you also there the judicial branch.
• Um so in all three parts of the judicial Um so in all three parts of the judicial branch.<00:33:
• I do the New Hampshire judicial branch.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to continue its review of recommendations for New Hampshire’s family court, with the chair emphasizing a collaborative approach and noting that the group would focus on the origins of the family division, recurring problems identified in earlier reports, and comparisons with other states. Members discussed organizing testimony into three broad topics: the court hearing process and pro se litigant preparation, mediation/arbitration/counseling, and the interaction of domestic violence issues with family court and related criminal proceedings. The chair also noted that the subcommittee would not meet again for two weeks and encouraged members to review materials from Judge Michael Mace and NCSL research on other states’ family court systems. Attorney Heather Culp, senior administrator for the judicial branch’s circuit court, testified about New Hampshire’s ADR programs. She explained that the Office of Mediation and Arbitration, created by statute in 2007, oversees more than 12 statewide ADR programs across the Supreme, Superior, and Circuit Courts, including family division programs such as divorce-parenting mediation, neutral case evaluation, guardianship, termination of parental rights, and voluntary adoption mediation. She said the divorce-parenting mediation program is the largest family division ADR program, with about 3,400 mediation sessions in 2023 out of roughly 6,700 cases, and that most cases involving minor children are referred to mediation soon after the first appearance session. Culp described the family division process as beginning with a first appearance session led by a case manager, who provides information, helps with paperwork, and schedules mediation, usually within 30 to 45 days. She said mediation is strongly encouraged in parenting and divorce cases, but there is no requirement to reach agreement, and parties may settle some issues while leaving others for court. She also explained that mediation is prohibited or limited in certain domestic violence cases: cases with active civil protection orders may proceed only with both parties’ consent and possible safeguards, while cases involving criminal protective orders are not sent to mediation. Mediators in court-referred family cases are contracted with the court and must be certified by the executive branch’s mediator certification board; mediators do not communicate with judges, except through a brief ADR report noting whether the case settled or what the next procedural step is. Members asked about referrals, timing, and the meaning of “neutrals,” and Culp said the court uses in-house contracted neutrals for family division ADR and does not refer divorce-parenting cases to outside providers.

Transcript Highlights:

• > carried<00:13:44.880> by judicial branch bill carried by judicial branch bill carried
• not include employees of the Minnesota judicial branch.
• not include employees of the Minnesota judicial branch.
• not include employees of the Minnesota judicial branch.
• not include employees of the Minnesota judicial branch.

Bills: HF2300

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• treat another with more contempt than the judicial branch just treated this body.
• Now, that would be one thing if the judicial branch was merely evidencing a contempt for the legislature
• Now, that would be one thing if the judicial branch was merely evidencing a contempt for the legislature
• It's quite another thing when the judicial branch comes into this chamber, It's quite another thing when
• the judicial branch comes into this chamber and demonstrates a contempt for the people of Arizona, the

Bills: HB2226, HB2406, HB2663, HB2695, HB2805, HB2976

Keywords: veteran status, veterans court, treatment court, diversion program, initial appearance, arrestee processing, criminal procedure, DD-214, Department of Veterans' Services, prosecuting agency, court notification, military service, armed forces, veterans benefits, reentry, mental health court, drug court, specialty court, Arizona criminal law, pretrial hearing

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2663, which updates military leave protections for state and non-state employees by aligning statutory language with how service members’ orders are described. Representative Pena said the change was intended to remove confusion without affecting benefits, and members noted it would help protect employees called to training, deployment, or state active duty. The bill passed unanimously with a due pass recommendation. The committee then heard HB 2976, a bill addressing administrative control of justice courts and due process for elected justices of the peace when state or county entities take action affecting their statutory authority. Supporters, including two Pima County justices of the peace, described administrative orders that transferred control of their courts without notice, findings, or a meaningful chance to respond, and argued the bill would require notice, a hearing, written findings, and review before such changes. The Arizona Supreme Court’s government affairs director opposed the bill as unconstitutional, arguing the state constitution gives the Chief Justice administrative supervision over all courts and that the legislature cannot impose those procedures by statute. After a lengthy and at times contentious exchange over constitutional authority and the role of elected JPs, the committee voted 6-1 to give HB 2976 a due pass recommendation. After a recess, the committee considered HB 2406, which requires the Arizona Department of Veterans’ Services to study how aware veterans are of available state, local, and federal benefits and to report recommendations for improving awareness. Testimony in support emphasized that many veterans do not know the full range of benefits available to them and suggested surveys, outreach, and other low-cost methods to gather information. Some members questioned whether a study was necessary or how it would be conducted, but several said they would support it for now; the bill received a due pass recommendation by a 5-1-1 vote. Finally, the committee heard HB 2226, which requires courts at initial appearance hearings to ask whether a defendant is a veteran and, if so, to consider referral to veterans’ treatment or diversion programs. Supporters said the bill would help identify eligible veterans early in the process and connect them to services, while one member raised Fifth Amendment concerns about asking the question before counsel is present. The sponsor and testifier agreed to work on an amendment clarifying that the answer could not be used against the defendant in later proceedings. The committee moved the bill forward with a due pass recommendation, with members indicating support pending that amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• For the legislative and judicial branch budgets, I'm going to speak relative to the House budget.
• which we can fund employee pay is the judicial branch.
• Next up, we will take up House Bill 504, which is the judicial branch budget.
• which is the judicial branch budget. which is the judicial branch budget.
• c><00:03:25.080> course<00:03:25.600> of judicial branch um over the course of judicial

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:23 HB 503 Discussion 00:01:00 HB 503 Vote 00:02:17 HB 504 Discussion 00:02:53 HB 504 Vote 00:04:48 HB 500 Discussion 00:05:19 HB 500 Vote 00:29:18 HB 900 Discussion 00:32:02 HB 900 Vote 00:33:00, 958, all

Summary: The Kentucky Senate Appropriations and Revenue Committee met with a quorum and first took up House Bill 503, the legislative branch budget, adopting a committee substitute and reporting it favorably. The chair said the Senate version fully funds defined calculations, provides 2% raises in each fiscal year for legislative employees, removes a paragraph on operating expense reductions, and includes $1 million in the first year for a judicial branch salary study. House Bill 504, the judicial branch budget, was then amended and reported favorably; changes included 2% annual raises for judicial employees, revised operating expense language, $1 million each year for county current services, retention of Boyle County fit-up language, reporting requirements for smaller capital projects, full funding for nine judges added in 2022, and removal of furlough prohibitions and certain budget implementation language. Both bills passed the committee unanimously with favorable expressions to the floor. The committee then considered House Bill 500, the executive branch budget, adopting a committee substitute before hearing a lengthy summary of major spending and policy changes. The chair described statewide 2% annual employee raises, agency base reductions with many exemptions, increased school safety and 911 funding, veterans and military funding, local government and severance-related changes, attorney general and auditor funding, pension and retirement system support, education funding changes including SEEK, postsecondary and scholarship provisions, public safety and corrections funding, and multiple capital projects. The chair also highlighted Medicaid-related provisions, including added waiver slots, increased state-directed payments, a 2.5% reduction in managed care vendor payments for plan years 2027 and 2028 with savings redirected to fee-for-service rates, and additional funding for behavioral health and public health programs. The bill was reported favorably after members explained their votes, with several noting they had only recently received the full 228-page bill and wanted more time for detailed review. Finally, the committee adopted a committee substitute for House Bill 900, an appropriation measure for government agencies, and reported it favorably. The chair said the bill remains a work in progress and that one-time funding requests from across the Commonwealth and across party lines would continue to be addressed as the process moves forward. All measures considered during the meeting passed the committee with unanimous or near-unanimous favorable votes, and the meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• also hear budget proposals from the judicial branch and the Department of Justice.
• judicial officer funded.
• So first, focusing on 24-25, we recommend that the legislature have the judicial branch share its processes
• That as we heard from the judicial branch has already been implemented.
• So we support the judicial branches in maintaining that flexibility in this funding.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We've heard that through from our judicial branch.
• We've heard that through from our judicial branch.
• We've heard that through from our judicial branch.
• We've heard that through from our judicial branch.
• House Bill 504 is the judicial branch budget.

Keywords: 958, all