Transcript Highlights:

• Yvonne Chouet, who's a professor of actuarial science and statistics at Central Of reaching out to Dr
• Yvonne Chouet, who's a professor of actuarial science and statistics at Central Washington University
• , which is one of our leading in-state actuarial training programs, would be responsible for the actuarial
• And her response was that there should not be an actuarial issue or concern to price such a liability
• So I hope that... ...from our standard textbook syllabus and actuarial exam coverage.

Summary: The House Civil Rights and Judiciary Committee held a public hearing on HB 2095, which would create training requirements for law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges on negligent driving involving vulnerable users of public ways, and would establish a rebuttable presumption of negligence in certain civil claims when a vulnerable user is injured or killed in a protected area such as a sidewalk, crosswalk, bike lane, or similar designated space. Staff explained that the bill also allows recovery of actual damages, statutory damages, attorney’s fees and costs, and, in limited circumstances, punitive damages if the defendant has previously injured or killed three or more vulnerable road users. Members questioned the unusual nature of punitive damages, the burden-shifting presumption, the three-incident threshold, and whether the education component was tied to the bill’s purpose. The prime sponsor said the training is meant to improve reporting and understanding of existing vulnerable-road-user laws, and said the bill was intended to narrow liability to protected areas and could be amended further, including on the punitive-damages threshold. Supporters, including a widow whose husband was killed while bicycling, Washington Bikes, trial attorneys, a bicycle commuter advocate, and a physician, argued the bill would better protect pedestrians and cyclists, improve police reporting, and reduce the burden on injured people and families who currently must prove negligence after serious crashes. They said the presumption would encourage safer driving and align Washington with similar frameworks used elsewhere. Opponents, including defense lawyers, the Association of Washington Cities, the Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, the Washington Trucking Associations, and the Washington Liability Reform Coalition, said the bill would expand litigation, create uninsurable risks through fee shifting and punitive damages, and could draw cities, businesses, and taxpayers into lawsuits. Some opponents also urged narrowing the bill to individuals and clarifying the protected areas and training requirements. No vote was taken; the chair closed the hearing and encouraged follow-up and amendment requests before executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• , our actuary is the largest actuary in the Medicaid space in the country.
• , our actuary is the largest actuary in the Medicaid space in the country.
• </c><01:44:24.040><c> our</c> this every day and an actuary our this every day and an actuary our actuary
• </c><01:44:26.119><c> in</c><01:44:26.239><c> the</c> actuary is the largest actuary in the actuary is
• We talk to the federal actuaries because our actuaries do the work, then the federal actuaries do their

Summary: The House Finance Division Three work session on February 21, 2025 focused on the Division of Medicaid Services budget. The chair opened with procedural guidance, noting the division’s role is to make recommendations to the full Finance Committee, that the budget must be balanced, and that members should track possible amendments ahead of a March 26 target for House Bills 1 and 2. Members also discussed the importance of using official budget documents and online resources, and the chair said no motions would be taken at this session. A major early topic was concern over a five-point Medicaid policy document and the timing of House Bill 2. Representative Tarki objected that the document appeared to be an unofficial draft and argued that significant Medicaid policy changes should have been transmitted by February 15 under state law. He said the lack of an official, posted document raised transparency concerns because the changes could affect tens of thousands of residents. Committee leadership responded that the five-point document was a working document, that it would be posted online within minutes, and that House Bill 2 is often delayed while the Office of Legislative Services finalizes and formats the governor’s proposed trailer bill. DHHS Chief Financial Officer Nathan White and Medicaid Director Henry Litman then began the budget presentation. White said the committee would use the PowerPoint as the document of record, starting with the governor’s operating budget pages 885-893, and noted that Medicaid is the largest accounting area in the state budget. He said the governor’s budget reflects about $60 million in reductions within the Medicaid area, with Granite Advantage handled off-budget and another $10 million in reductions there, for roughly a $70 million difference overall. Members asked whether the comparison was being made against an efficiency budget or a prioritized-needs budget, and White said the department could look at it different ways. The presentation then outlined Medicaid’s role in New Hampshire: it provides health coverage, serves as the state’s direct interface with the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and helps finance related services such as long-term supports, school-based services, adult dental coverage, and re-entry programs for people leaving correctional settings. White also reviewed enrollment and program context, saying New Hampshire has about one in seven residents enrolled in Medicaid, making it the fourth smallest Medicaid program in the country by enrollment, and described recent efforts such as youth re-entry and the Medicaid unwind after the end of the federal continuous coverage period. He said the state had to process more than 238,000 redeterminations after the public health emergency and that the department tried to avoid unnecessary coverage loss during that transition.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's equalized valuation per pupil.
• So the median family income and the equalized valuation per pupil.
• And again, the language of using the median, the equalized valuation per pupil.
• </c> um, the valuation and everything else. um, the valuation and everything else.
• </c> valuation question still exists. valuation question still exists.

Committee: House Education Policy and Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• ESD recommends exploration of adopting an actuarial premium rate and shifting to an actuarial rate-setting
• The report also recommended using a forward-looking rate-setting approach that is based on actuarial
• Based on the office's annual report, and third, beginning in 2030, the actuarial report must provide
• That was the basis for recommending using what we call an actuarial rate or a forward-looking rate so
• This bill will move the rate-setting mechanism in paid leave to a forward-looking actuarial model.

Summary: The Senate Labor and Commerce Committee opened its 2026 session with member introductions and a work session on the Employment Security Department’s structure and programs. ESD officials described their roles and reviewed paid family and medical leave, WA Cares, unemployment insurance, workforce services, and agricultural worker outreach. Senators raised concerns about call volume, program solvency, fraud detection, employer access to information, and whether workers can receive leave benefits while working other jobs. ESD said WA Cares is in a limited pilot, PFML has seen rapid growth, UI trust fund solvency is projected to be near the statutory trigger level, and they would follow up with more detailed information on eligibility, fraud referrals, and employer scenarios. The committee then heard Senate Bill 5292, which would replace the current PFML rate-setting formula with a forward-looking actuarial model and require a four-month reserve beginning in 2030. Supporters, including the sponsor, JLARC staff, labor advocates, and employer groups, said the change would improve stability and follow JLARC recommendations; opponents warned it could lead to higher payroll taxes and argued the program is already too costly. The chair said she intended to keep the bill narrow as it moved forward. The committee also heard Senate Bill 6014, a technical bill on pregnancy-related accommodations that would preserve the ability of pregnant workers to request certain accommodations without a doctor’s note and create a public records exemption for sensitive complaint and investigation records; the sponsor and supporters said it corrects a drafting error and protects privacy. Next, the committee heard Senate Bill 5972, which would remove the population threshold limiting interest arbitration for correctional officers in jails, and Senate Bill 5869, which would make permanent and expand from residential to all building construction sites a requirement that L&I notify employers or owners within 10 working days when a hazard is identified. Correctional officers’ representatives and labor groups supported SB 5972 as a fairness and safety measure, while the sponsor said it would create consistency across jurisdictions. Construction industry groups supported SB 5869, and L&I said it had no concerns but wanted the bill kept narrow; the chair noted the bill’s purpose was to speed hazard communication. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 5874, which would allow ESD to waive penalties for minor errors in quarterly unemployment reports, especially missing SOC/job-title information. The sponsor said small businesses were being hit with unnecessary fines, and ESD said it had identified a sharp rise in penalties and was working with the sponsor on possible fixes. The committee adjourned after the hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill ties valuation to the federal estate tax standard under Internal Revenue Code Section 2031.
• The<00:40:32.760><c> bill</c><00:40:32.960><c> ties</c><00:40:33.240><c> valuation</c><00:40:33.800><
• </c><00:40:42.440><c> at</c><00:40:42.640><c> death</c> one-time valuation at death one-time valuation
• </c> accounting, appraisals, valuation accounting, appraisals, valuation specialists,<00:41:34.600><c
• </c> restructuring to obtain valuation restructuring to obtain valuation discounts<00:42:04.040><c> for

Summary: The committee heard presentations on two tax bills: House File 4123, by Representative Agbaje, would expand Minnesota’s net investment income tax to include certain business income, especially income from S corporations and LLCs not subject to federal self-employment taxes, while keeping the current rate and million-dollar threshold; she said it would raise an estimated $88.7 million next year. House File 4616, by Chair Gomez, would impose a 1% annual tax on fortunes above $10 million. Gomez framed the bill as a response to growing wealth inequality and argued that wealthy households and large fortunes should contribute more to public services, while Agbaje said her bill would broaden the tax base and help meet state needs. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters, including Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project, Erica Mominee of the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees, Lauren Richards, and teacher Kristen Sinicariello, said the bills would help address wealth and income inequality and provide needed revenue for public health, education, and other public services. They pointed to federal tax cuts for high-income households, cuts to Medicaid and SNAP, and strains on state agencies and schools. Richards said small businesses already pay more than large corporations like Amazon, and Sinicariello argued that higher revenue would support classrooms and help equalize opportunity. Opponents, including Brian Cook of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, Dalton Danielson of the Minnesota Business Partnership, and John Beschi of NFIB Minnesota, warned that both bills would hurt business competitiveness and investment. They argued that HF 4123 would effectively create a new higher tax tier for pass-through businesses and that HF 4616 would be difficult to administer, could force sales of illiquid assets, and could discourage entrepreneurship and capital investment. No votes or final committee action were taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the committee moved through bill presentations and public testimony before member discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• levies, part of the state levy, and regular levies on the greater of $50,000 or 35% of assessed valuation
• levies, the second state levy, and regular levies on the greater of $60,000 or 60% of the assessed valuation
• threshold one, they're exempt from regular property taxes on the greater of $80,000 or 80% of the valuation
• income threshold two, they're exempt from all regular levies on the greater of $70,000 or 45% of the valuation
• threshold one, they're exempt from regular property taxes on the greater of $80,000 or 80% of the valuation

Committee: House Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• So if we're requiring a property and it's pre-flood valuation, and there's no house on that property,
• and it's pre-flood valuation, and there's no house on that property.
• 75% is coming from the federal government, that portion is what's being used for the pre-disaster valuation
• And the state matching dollars would comply then with only the amount of the valuation after disaster
• Absolutely. of the valuation after disaster. It's going to be a delicate process, absolutely.

Summary: The House Energy, Environment and Natural Resources Committee met on February 5 and heard three measures. House Bill 246 would provide state matching funds for local governments already approved for federal flood mitigation assistance to buy out and rehabilitate floodplain properties, especially in Lincoln County, to reduce repetitive flood damage and restore land to a more natural floodplain. Supporters included county officials, emergency management, and a racetrack lobbyist, all emphasizing public safety, reduced disaster costs, and community recovery. Some members raised concerns about pre-flood property valuation and anti-donation issues, but the bill passed on a do-pass motion. House Bill 271 would appropriate funds through the Office of Natural Resources Trustee for natural resource recovery and public land access, including disaster recovery projects and expansion of recreational opportunities. Supporters argued it would help restore watersheds, improve access to public lands, and support hunting, fishing, and local outdoor economies. Several members questioned whether the bill was too open-ended, whether it could affect grazing or other existing rights, and why the trustee’s office was the right vehicle; the sponsor and trustee said the office has a transparent public process and that the bill would not create new eminent domain authority or adverse changes to existing rights. The committee approved the bill 9-1, with one member explaining support but noting lingering concerns. House Bill 254 would allow investor-owned electric utilities to count avoided greenhouse gas emissions when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency programs under the utility cost test. The sponsor and utility witnesses said this would help expand programs such as heat pumps, HVAC upgrades, and all-electric development, while opponents worried it could function as a rate increase or “double dipping” because customers already pay fees supporting efficiency programs. The committee passed the bill 7-3. Finally, House Joint Memorial 3 would ask the Environment Department to study PFAS exemptions and report back during the interim as rulemaking on the PFAS Protection Act proceeds. The memorial drew both support and opposition, with critics saying it conflicted with existing statute and was unnecessary, while supporters said it would ensure a thorough review of federal changes and consumer-product exemptions. The memorial passed 8-2, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bacala provides relative to the determination of employer contributions and amortization of certain actuarial
• Price provides relative to the determination of employer contributions and amortization of certain actuarial
• Price provides relative to the determination of employer contributions and amortization of certain actuarial
• Price provides relative to the determination of employer contributions and amortization and certain actuarial
• Relative to the determination of employer contributions and amortization of certain actuarial gains for

Bills: SB8 , SB10 , SB11 , SB12 , SB13 , SB14 , SB16 , SB17 , SB18 , SB20 , SB21 , SB22 , SB416 , SB455 , SB456 , SB477

Committee: House Retirement

Summary: The Retirement Committee met on April 29, 2026, established a quorum, and heard a series of retirement-related bills, mostly cleanup or technical measures affecting various public retirement systems. SB 22 would extend Municipal Employees Retirement System eligibility to certain positions in the Second City Court constable’s office in New Orleans. SB 17 would create a funding deposit account for cost-of-living adjustments for registrars of voters’ employees’ retirement system. SB 455 would allow certain district and parish courts to participate in the Parochial Employees Retirement System. SB 456 would update compensation rules for assigned retired judges, and SB 8 would add the Louisiana Asset Management Pool as a participating employer in MERS. All of these bills were described as aligning statutes with current practice or expanding participation options, and each was reported favorably without objection. The committee also heard several Louisiana State Police retirement bills. SB 10 would repeal outdated priority allocation and retiree raise rules and adjust handling of surplus employee contributions; SB 11 would increase the funding cap for benefit increases from 2.5% to 3.5%; and SB 12 would update membership and definition language to reflect the State Police Commission rather than the Civil Service Commission. SB 18 would repeal a special exception allowing certain MERS retirees to return to part-time work while collecting full benefits, while protecting roughly 30 current participants. SB 20 and SB 21 would update actuarial gain/loss and unfunded liability funding rules for school employees’ retirement and LASERS, respectively, in light of the new permanent benefit increase funding structure. Each of these bills was supported by system officials as cleanup or modernization measures and was reported favorably. The committee spent the most time on education and return-to-work issues for teachers and public employees. SB 16 would reduce annual trustee training requirements for retirement system boards from 16 hours back to 12 hours, which witnesses said would better fit smaller systems and match the original intent of the law. SB 13 would similarly update TRSL’s actuarial funding rules after the sunset of the experience account. SB 14, based on a 2025 study work group, would consolidate and simplify TRSL return-to-work rules and expand options for retired teachers, with witnesses emphasizing teacher shortages and the need to retain experienced educators. All three were reported favorably. Finally, SB 416 would allow certain Department of Public Safety and Corrections retirees to return to critical shortage positions after one year, and SB 477 would classify the chairman of the Louisiana Gaming Control Board as a full-time state employee for retirement purposes. Both bills drew questions and discussion, especially SB 416, and both were reported favorably. The chair announced the committee’s next meeting would be moved from Monday to Tuesday, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• If the department determines, based on the independent actuarial analysis... ...that the rates paid by
• the primary plan to a subcontracting plan for a particular rating period are not actuarially sound,
• sound, while the rates paid to a primary plan are required to be actuarially sound.
• So when you talk about actuarially sound calculations, I have a very vague understanding of that whole
• So when you talk about actuarially sound calculations, I have a very vague understanding of that whole

Committee: House Health

Transcript Highlights:

• We hired a third-party actuarial firm, Health Management Associates.
• They did an actuarial study looking at Medicare claims data.
• We have a remote testifier, Tiffany Tessman Ewing, senior consulting actuary at Wakely, who's here to
• My name is Annie Tasman Ewing, and I am a senior consulting actuary with Wakely.
• I'm a fellow of the Society of Actuaries and a member of the American Academy of Actuaries.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Health Care Financing

Summary: The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing held a public hearing on a range of health care financing bills focused largely on autism services and kidney disease coverage. Committee chairs John Lawn and Cindy Friedman outlined hearing procedures and noted that written testimony would continue to be accepted until each bill is acted upon. They said the day’s bills addressed affordability and access to behavioral health services, provider reimbursement, Medicare coverage for vulnerable patients, and MassHealth eligibility asset exemptions. A major portion of the hearing concerned House Bill 4623, which would recognize board-certified assistant behavior analysts (BCABAs) in the MassHealth reimbursement framework to help address long wait lists for autism spectrum disorder services. Representative Lisa Field and several providers testified that Massachusetts families face long delays for ABA services and that adding BCABAs would expand workforce capacity, reduce costs, and improve access. Wakely actuary Annie Tasman Ewing said a three-tier model could reduce MassHealth costs by up to 6% annually, while Dr. Sandra Beaton and others described severe wait lists and said the bill would allow more families to be served sooner. The committee also heard extensive testimony on House Bill 4425 and Senate Bill 2737, which would allow people under 65 with end-stage renal disease to purchase Medigap coverage. Representative Stanley, Senator Gomez, and advocates from the American Kidney Fund and Dialysis Patient Citizens argued that current law unfairly excludes these patients, leaves them with high out-of-pocket costs, and can delay transplant eligibility because many centers require secondary insurance. Testifiers said the change would help about 846 residents, could cost insurers only a small premium increase, and might reduce Medicaid spending by avoiding asset spend-downs. Committee members asked questions about the existing statutory carve-out and the practical effects on transplant access. The hearing also included testimony on House Bill 4353 and Senate Bill 2587, which would require regular Medicaid rate reviews for ABA services. Providers and clinicians said current MassHealth rates no longer reflect the cost of delivering care, especially with new 2026 policy requirements, workforce shortages, and accreditation obligations. They emphasized that the bills would not mandate a rate increase but would create a data-driven, transparent review process. At the end of the hearing, the chairs thanked participants, invited additional written testimony, and the committee voted unanimously to adjourn the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, if you look on page five, beginning January 1st, 2027, any increase in the aggregate valuation
• Moving to the other part of the bill, the increase in the aggregate valuation not being counted as new
• land that's converted for a cell phone tower or a mobile home is put on it that would increase that valuation
• A mobile home is put on it that would increase that valuation, but it's going to be categorized as personal
• their own asset, their own Fundamentally, though, each year, counties are going to have their own valuation

Committee: House Special Committee on Property Tax Reform

Transcript Highlights:

• and I'm assuming someone would tally up the total, and then they apply three cents to that total valuation
• But I think ideally, recognizing that valuations ebb and flow and up and down, communities grow, communities
• fall, something more like a Hancock that adjusts where the levy is truly moving with the valuations.
• If the valuations are moving, the levy is moving.

Committee: House Special Committee on Property Tax Reform

Summary: The Special Committee on Property Tax Reform met to hear public testimony on House Bill 3342 and House Bill 3354. HB 3342, sponsored by Rep. Matteson, would prevent tax levies adopted before January 1, 1975 from being applied to personal property tax, with the sponsor arguing that personal property taxation on motor vehicles and similar property was not part of earlier voter-approved levies. Members questioned how the bill would work in practice, whether it should instead remove vehicles from assessment entirely, and what property classes would be affected. The sponsor said he was focused on class four personal property, especially motor vehicles, but was open to refining the language. No one testified in support, opposition, or for information, and no vote was taken. The committee then heard HB 3354, sponsored by Chair Taylor, which would reduce the Blind Pension Fund levy from 3 cents to 0.0275. Taylor said the fund’s participant numbers are declining while reserves have grown, that the department agreed the lower rate would still be sufficient, and that he wanted to keep the fund lean while preserving a cushion. Members asked about how the levy is calculated, whether it fluctuates with assessments, and whether excess funds could be transferred to public education as contemplated by the constitution. There was also discussion about the bill’s decimal wording and a possible drafting amendment to clarify the rate. No witnesses testified in favor, opposition, or informationally, and the hearing on HB 3354 was concluded without a committee vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, so you've got a valuation increase, and it doesn't seem to be, it seems to be high price, but
• Valuations, you know, with this drawdown, the hidden benefit of that is the market valuations are starting
• So when I'm showing you 21 times for the forward P/E on the S&P 500, that's a valuation measure.
• That's kind of a valuation measure. If you take earnings, times...
• Earnings, you know, the price to the earnings, and that's kind of a valuation measure.

Committee: Joint Legacy and Budget Stabilization Fund Advisory Board

Transcript Highlights:

• in it, but investing means that there's people trading back and forth, you know, so you've got a valuation
• Valuations, you know, with this drawdown, the hidden benefit of that is the market valuations are starting
• So when I'm showing you 21 times for the forward P/E on the S&P 500, that's a valuation measure.
• That's kind of a valuation measure. If you take earnings, time...
• Earnings, you know, the price to the earnings, and that's kind of a valuation measure.

Committee: Joint Legacy and Budget Stabilization Fund Advisory Board

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the October 22 minutes, and received an update on the planned Legacy Fund transparency website. Jody Smith said the site is in contract negotiations after six bidders responded, with a target go-live around November 1 after added security review. The website is intended to provide downloadable, more detailed public information on the Legacy Fund, including historical changes, legislative allocations, and investment breakdowns. Members asked about comparables and data detail, and Smith said North Dakota would likely be the first state to offer this level of sovereign wealth fund transparency. Scott Anderson of the Retirement Investment Office then reviewed Legacy Fund performance through January 31, 2026, describing strong returns, low fees, and the benefits of diversification. He noted that real estate had been a drag on returns, but it is a small portion of the portfolio, and he discussed market effects from geopolitical events, inflation, credit spreads, and private credit. Members also questioned the in-state investment program and the BND CD-Match program. Representative Bosch moved to pause new transfers to the CD-Match program until the bank reports back, and the motion passed on a roll call vote. The committee also agreed to request a cost-benefit analysis from RVK on that change. After lunch, the committee heard from RVK consultant Jim Voidko on the investment policy statement, focused on the in-state investment provisions. He reported that, after interviews with implementers and stakeholders, RVK found no major policy impediments in the current IPS and no strong calls to change the size limits or core guardrails. He emphasized the importance of risk-adjusted returns, diversification, pacing, exit strategies, and governance, and warned that foregone returns or higher spending obligations can pressure the fund’s long-term mission. He also recommended clearer terminology around “infrastructure,” distinguishing public infrastructure from commercial infrastructure, and noted unresolved policy questions about nexus and economic diversification. The committee then began reviewing proposed IPS updates with Rio staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• went up and everyone else's valuation...
• But when my bill comes in December, if my valuation went up and everyone else's valuations went up, Hancock
• Looking at dollars per $100 of assessed valuation, and boy, Looking at dollars per $100 of assessed valuation
• We do have to disclose per $100 of assessed valuation. I think that...
• Do have to disclose per $100 of assessed valuation.

Committee: House Government Efficiency

Summary: The Committee on Government Efficiency heard House Bill 2761, sponsored by Representative Banderman, which would shift solid waste grant administration from the 20 regional solid waste districts to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), preserve the grant program, clarify tipping fee increases, and give DNR authority and funding to assess, test, remediate, and manage 29 abandoned landfills. Banderman said the bill is intended to address abandoned landfill contamination, prevent problems with repeated tax sales of landfill property, and reduce administrative overhead so more tipping-fee revenue can be used for solid waste purposes. He emphasized that the bill would not eliminate current grants or change grant priorities, only the administering entity. Committee members raised concerns about the late distribution of the committee substitute, the effect on local control, the tipping fee language, and whether the bill would actually provide enough money to clean up abandoned sites. Several members questioned whether the fee increase mechanism could function like a tax increase without voter approval and whether DNR or the districts were better suited to manage the program. Supporters, including affected landowners Jim Roberts and Joe Van Lear, described contamination from an abandoned Franklin County landfill, including leachate, lead, arsenic, and PFAS, and said state agencies had told them the site could not be addressed without legislation. Opponents, including local officials and district representatives, argued that the districts provide local oversight, respond quickly to community needs, and already administer grants, recycling, household hazardous waste, and other programs efficiently. Additional testimony came from district and advisory board representatives who said the districts have issued hundreds of grants, maintain annual reporting and audits, and use local boards to tailor programs to community needs. They argued the bill would eliminate local control and could disrupt existing services, though some said they were open to reform and collaboration with DNR on abandoned sites. DNR Director Kurt Schaefer testified that the department currently lacks sufficient authority and funding to address abandoned landfills, said the districts receive more tipping-fee revenue than DNR while spending up to 50% on overhead, and argued the bill would improve efficiency and allow the state to begin addressing the abandoned landfill problem. No vote was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Employment Security Department, known as ESD, provides an actuarial report each year.
• The bill also requires the actuarial rate to close the rate collection year with a four-month reserve
• ESD has an actuarial office and is already producing this annual report upon which the rate would be
• The actuarial rate proposal in this bill also reflects a recommendation from J.
• The actuarial rate proposal in this bill also reflects a recommendation from J.

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on a series of housing, education, workforce, and court-related bills. On Substitute Senate Bill 5884, staff described changes to a sales and use tax deferral for redeveloping vacant or underused land into affordable housing, including broader eligible property definitions and lower affordability thresholds in designated areas. Testimony was mixed: builders opposed language they feared could encourage project labor agreements, while Spokane and Kent representatives supported the bill but asked for flexibility on affordability mix requirements. On Senate Bill 6256, which expands a property tax exemption for nonprofit low-income rental housing to include certain co-located community uses during construction and extends the pre-construction exemption period, testimony was strongly supportive from housing nonprofits and local housing partners, with questions focused on clawback provisions. The committee also heard Substitute Senate Bill 6027, which expands allowable uses of local housing and supportive housing sales tax revenue, adjusts a REET exemption timeline, broadens emergency housing definitions, and changes use of the Affordable Housing for All account. County, housing, and nonprofit witnesses said the bill would help preserve housing and services amid federal funding uncertainty, though Snohomish County asked for an amendment to allow rental assistance. Substitute Senate Bill 6018 would revise the Housing Finance Commission’s authority, including direct lending and bond counsel terms; commission staff said it would modernize outdated restrictions and improve financing flexibility. Substitute Senate Bill 6028 would create a revolving loan fund for mixed-income homeownership projects; supporters said it would help smaller infill projects pencil, while staff noted the loans would be subordinate and carry some risk. Later, the committee heard Senate Bill 6275 on the community reinvestment program, which would require periodic plan updates, reporting, and a WSIPP study, while also expressing legislative intent to continue at least $100 million annually in the account. Advocates, workforce groups, legal aid providers, and small business owners testified that the program supports communities harmed by past disinvestment and should be made permanent and more accountable. Substitute Senate Bill 5961 would move the Imagination Library program from DCYF to OSPI; early literacy advocates and local partners supported the transfer as better aligned with school readiness. Substitute Senate Bill 5969 would integrate IEP transition plans with high school and beyond plans, and a prior critic said amendments addressed her concerns. Second Substitute Senate Bill 5292 would shift PFML premium rate-setting to the annual actuarial report and raise the reserve target; labor and industry witnesses supported the change, while a policy group opposed the program’s costs. The committee also heard Senate Bill 5868 to add one superior court judge each in Skagit and Yakima counties. Judges and county officials testified that caseloads, population growth, and backlogs justify the additions, and county leaders said they had already budgeted for their share. Finally, Substitute Senate Bill 5827 would allow service members to use pre-discharge certification to claim veterans’ civil service preference; the sponsor said it would solve a timing problem for transitioning service members. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the transcript, as the meeting consisted of bill briefings and public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Michael Harbour next for the actuarial update. Thank you, Mr.
• Again, for the record, Michael Harbour, actuary for OSA.
• We do have actuarial fiscal notes from last session available on both of those, and I think they're adequate
• In terms of the status on that project, it's going through an external audit by the Milliman actuaries
• And the letter that we submitted from the OSA actuaries kind of provides a breakdown of the different

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Pension Policy

Summary: The Select Committee on Pension Policy Executive Committee approved the September minutes and received updates on two court cases, Fowler and Dolan. Staff explained that Fowler concerns interest calculations for members who transferred from Plan 2 to Plan 3 before 2002; the Ninth Circuit has already found liability, and the remaining issue is damages, which could be significant depending on the expert-driven calculation. Dolan was described as quieter, with briefing completed at the Court of Appeals and oral argument possible later this year or early next year. The committee also heard an actuarial update on the interim work plan, including planned informational briefings on month-of-death policy, a Plan 1 ad hoc COLA, and the OSA demographic experience study, which is still under external audit. Members asked whether updated fiscal notes had been prepared for two bills under study; staff said preliminary analysis had been done and full updates would come if the bills move forward. The committee then discussed how to handle the ad hoc COLA item and agreed to have staff draft a letter endorsing House Bill 1474 and any similar Senate bill for a one-year ad hoc COLA, to be brought back for full committee consideration in November. Staff reviewed the draft November and December work plan. The committee adopted the November agenda, which includes annual updates from the State Investment Board and Retirement Systems, the left one study closeout, and the ad hoc COLA action item. Members also discussed whether excess compensation and 2026 session prep should be handled by email rather than in a meeting, with general agreement to move the session prep to electronic communication and possibly handle excess compensation as an informational item, depending on availability. Constituent correspondence included several messages on climate change and Plan 1 COLAs, including support for the merger bill and COLAs in general. Jacob White of the LEOFF 2 Board reported that the board had only held an educational briefing on excess compensation and overtime, found the data limited, and took no further action. The meeting ended with thanks to staff and an adjournment vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• and I'm assuming someone would tally up the total and then they apply three cents to that total valuation
• But I think ideally, recognizing that valuations ebb and flow and up and down, communities grow, communities
• fall, something more like a Hancock that adjusts where the levy is truly moving with the valuations.
• If the valuations are moving, the levy is moving.

Committee: House Special Committee on Property Tax Reform

Transcript Highlights:

• This change reduces all the permitting fees by 20% across all valuations, along with reducing the installation
• This change reduces all of the permitting fees by 20% across all valuations.
• The board voted to reduce the building permit fee table by 20% for all valuations.
• This decrease... ...voted to reduce the building permit fee table by 20% for all valuations.

Committee: Senate Commerce and Human Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't understand I'm not an actuary.
• </c><00:30:01.240><c> had</c> state employees than the actuaries had state employees than the actuaries
• And an ad hoc cola of the actuaries.
• ,</c><00:59:57.240><c> and</c> and I said this with the actuaries, and and I said this with the actuaries
• <01:00:11.080><c> cannot</c><01:00:12.080><c> calculate</c> actuaries cannot calculate actuaries cannot