Transcript Highlights:

• They did not do that within the 45-day period set by the They did not do that within the 45-day period
• The billing period on that invoice was for a period of six days, beginning on August 24th, 2024, which
• So whether we, then we, at the end of the period, right, the grant period, they submit a final report
• Well, that was the closeout period.
• I'm trying to recall that particular time period.

Summary: The follow-up informational hearing focused on the State Library’s oversight of the statewide Imagination Library and the Strong Reader Partnership (SRP), including how the original $68.2 million state investment was spent, why funds were not redirected sooner to the Dollywood Foundation, and whether spending complied with AB 157 and later SB 105. Committee members repeatedly raised concerns that SRP and the State Library had been slow to provide documents, that quarterly reporting and other contract requirements were not met on time, and that the State Library did not escalate issues earlier. State Librarian Greg Lucas said the library sent one demand letter, relied on counsel’s view that SRP could continue spending its $4.8 million so long as it furthered the program, and later redirected about $55 million to the Dollywood Foundation after paperwork was submitted. He also acknowledged the library should have shared SRP’s final report with the committee sooner and said the materials eventually received appeared satisfactory, though the chair and Senator Grove remained concerned that there was still no clear accounting of books delivered by SRP. A major portion of the hearing examined SRP’s expenditures and vendor contracts, including Shipyard for marketing and web services, SAGE Strategies for management consulting, Lotus Financial Solutions and other financial vendors, and United Way California Capital Region for a small marketing grant. Committee members questioned whether some spending, especially Changecraft’s work during the AB 157 period, amounted to lobbying or attempts to influence legislation, which the grant agreement prohibited. SRP representatives said the work was communications and stakeholder outreach, not lobbying, and that invoices reflected the board’s oversight and the nonprofit’s startup and closeout phases. They also said some work continued during the rescission and closeout period to unwind contracts and return funds, and that any reporting delays were due to transition, lack of a reporting mechanism from the State Library, and the need to collect records after vendors were canceled. Members of SRP said the nonprofit was created to build the infrastructure for a self-sustaining statewide program, expand local partnerships, and support multilingual outreach in underserved counties. They described a working board that met regularly, selected vendors collectively, and used multiple financial and administrative contractors to maintain checks and balances. However, committee members pressed them on the lack of detailed invoices, the absence of clear metrics showing how many books SRP actually delivered, and the limited apparent return on spending such as the $581,708 Shipyard contract, the $125,000 website work, and the $5,000 United Way grant. No formal vote or legislative action was taken during the hearing; it was an oversight session aimed at obtaining explanations and additional documentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then during the Mexican period, which is a briefer period in our history between 1821, when Mexico
• So the later period land grants ended up a lot larger in order to help spur population growth.
• short period from 1821 to 1848 that had some impact here in New Mexico.
• . territorial period.
• It very much resembled the Spanish-Mexican period.

Committee: House House Rural Development, Land Grants And Cultural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• recognized dental school, the board must forward the complaint to the recognized dental school on a periodic
• recognized dental school, the board must forward the complaint to the recognized dental school on a periodic
• prescribe antimicrobial flea and tick and non-antimicrobial flea and tick drugs for specified time periods
• This limits the authority of the municipality in regulating that within this space. Yeah.
• the time period for receiving the refund to 10 years after the date of purchase.

Summary: The meeting reviewed a long list of Senate and House bills, mostly from Appropriations and Education, with staff describing strike-everything amendments and whether the amended language matched other bills. Topics included electronic monitoring in care facilities (SB 1041), dental board complaint forwarding and licensure exemptions (SB 1168), revitalization district contracts (SB 1189), timeshare salesperson licensing (SB 1274), veterinary telemedicine prescriptions (SB 1286), insurer zero-estimated-exposure policies (SB 1428), advanced air mobility funding for border security (SB 1457), death benefits for law enforcement pilots (SB 1503), ATV definitions (SB 1519), pet and fowl restrictions in planned communities (SB 1582), pharmacist independent testing and treatment (SB 1713), school district self-insurance quotes (SB 1497), and a housing/historic district measure tied to SB 1118. Most of these were presented as technical or policy changes, often noting that the strike-everything language was identical to a House bill already passed. The caucus then moved through several blue-sheet concurrence items. HB 2120 received a technical Senate amendment to align property-tax disability language with updated statute, and the sponsor concurred. HB 2174 was amended to require a modeling and data organization to file models used by insurers, with concurrence noted. HB 2203, aimed at reducing duplicative ADE and school reporting, was amended so ADE must review each statutory reporting requirement and report back to the legislature; the sponsor concurred. HB 2383 was amended only to name a trampoline court law as “TIE’s law,” with no substantive policy change, and the sponsor concurred. On the remaining House bills, HB 2877 was changed from timeshare licensing to create an alternative education pathway for certified veterinary technicians, and the sponsor concurred. HB 2875, dealing with unmanned aircraft and drone delivery, was amended to adjust airport-related local authority limits from one mile to 2.5 miles and to reference consultation with airports; members raised questions about FAA preemption and local authority. HB 2428 on emission reduction credits was amended to emphasize voluntary participation and limit new credits if participation later becomes mandatory, and the sponsor concurred. HB 2176 on health care institution licensing and complaint investigations was amended to allow older abuse-related complaints, and the sponsor concurred. HB 2050 on radiologic technology standards and radiologist assistant supervision drew the most discussion; the Senate narrowed the supervision change to rural counties under 500,000 population and critical access hospitals, and the sponsor concurred while members questioned the geographic scope. Finally, HB 2010 on refunds for digital goods was amended to shorten the refund window from 10 years to five, but the sponsor refused concurrence due to a drafting error, indicating a conference committee would be needed. The caucus then concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I um for a longer period of time.
• ,</c><00:17:19.199><c> but</c> the removal of the resource limit, but the removal of the resource limit
• </c> track a little bit is after that period track a little bit is after that period of<00:54:08.480>
• And that is a sweeping limitation.
• It's limited to three very more limited.

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a full agenda today, so we'll be limiting testimony to 2 minutes.
• </c> Um, and it caps the home equity limit Um, and it caps the home equity limit for<00:25:48.120><c>
• </c><00:26:07.800><c> retroactive</c> Um, uh, and these limit retroactive Um, uh, and these limit retroactive
• </c> to have a different retroactive period. to have a different retroactive period.
• periods.

Bills: HF4401 , HF4466

Committee: House Health Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• But I will say that there is a limit to that, and that limit is if your pacing requires a certain number
• of dollars in each year over the period of time and the size of the program... ...over the period of
• stay at the current limits.
• Are we limited?
• it to North Dakota would limit potential.

Committee: Joint Legacy and Budget Stabilization Fund Advisory Board

Transcript Highlights:

• ...pay period.
• Massachusetts, to the contrary, over the same period of time, has lost 20,000 jobs.
• Massachusetts, to the contrary, over the same period of time, has lost 20,000 jobs.
• We had out-migration that continued during this period. Meanwhile, local aid fell by 15%.
• Sixteen times, we would have had to cut revenues relative to what we've had over that period.

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state’s tax collection cap/62F process so it would be based on prior-year collections plus wage growth and include surtax revenue. The committee chair and House co-chair outlined the hearing process, and the first witness was Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, who testified as the committee’s subject-matter expert on both measures. He said the income tax proposal would lower taxes broadly but would reduce state revenue by about $5.4 billion when fully implemented, with an estimated $800 million hit in FY27, and he discussed possible effects on competitiveness, taxpayer savings, and public finances. On the 62F proposal, he said the revised cap would make refunds more likely, could have produced several large refunds in recent years, and would reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions. Committee members questioned Howgate about competitiveness, outmigration, prior tax ballot measures, spending growth, MassHealth, and the interaction between the income tax and surtax. He emphasized that taxes are only one part of the state’s overall competitiveness and that housing, public services, and other factors also matter. He also noted that the surtax is constitutionally restricted but can still support ongoing spending choices. After his testimony, the committee moved to the proponents’ panel. Proponents of both initiatives, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, the National Federation of Independent Business, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that the measures would improve affordability, help retain residents and businesses, and support job growth. They cited polling support, outmigration, small-business reinvestment, and comparisons to lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, said her model showed smaller revenue losses than critics claim and projected that the revised revenue cap would not create additional annual revenue losses while producing more regular taxpayer refunds. Committee members pressed the panel on competitiveness, prior ballot initiative implementation, and whether the measures would actually address broader affordability pressures; the hearing ended with the committee continuing to take questions from the proponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• Amanda, the language in the bill says that it includes but is not limited to the purposes.
• The fiscal note specifies a cost of $119,000 over the four-year outlook period. Okay, thank you.
• , qualify for health insurance benefits, and then work for a period of time longer.
• During that waiting period, our options are limited.
• Limiting substitute hours means limiting our ability to provide continuity for our students and greatly

Bills: SB5834 , SB5835 , SB5883 , SB5905 , SB6151 , SB6163 , SB6177 , SB6173

Committee: Senate Ways & Means

Keywords: Washington retirement systems, retirement trust funds, interest earnings, public employee retirement system, teachers retirement system, state patrol retirement system, judicial retirement system, judges retirement system, school employees retirement system, public safety employees retirement system, law enforcement officers and firefighters retirement system, PERS, TRS, LERS, legal expenses, medical expenses, administrative expenses, fraud prevention, overpayment recovery, trust fund protection

Transcript Highlights:

• will maintain decorum throughout the hearing in order to hear as much from the public within the limits
• Throughout the hearing, in order to hear as much from the public within the limits of our time, we will
• time and our limited resources.
• ...done before the 270-day period?
• So is there enough manpower to actually accomplish this 270-day deadline or period?

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy heard several bills focused on grid reliability, affordability, clean energy infrastructure, and industrial decarbonization. AB 222, by Assemblymember Bauer-Kahan, would require more data reporting on data centers and aim to prevent ratepayers from bearing related grid costs; supporters said better information is needed to plan for rapidly growing electricity demand from AI and data centers, while opponents warned about privacy, security, trade-secret, and cost-shifting concerns. The bill passed the committee on a 13-4 vote, with the roll left open for absent members. AB 941, by Assemblymember Bonta, would impose a 270-day timeline for CPUC review of priority transmission projects to speed clean-energy infrastructure buildout. Supporters argued that transmission delays are slowing California’s climate goals and raising costs, while opponents raised concerns about CEQA process, staffing, and prioritization. The bill passed 15-0. AB 1191, by Assemblymember Tangipa, would make existing large hydroelectric facilities eligible for the Renewable Portfolio Standard; supporters framed it as a way to lower rates and ease affordability pressures, while opponents said it would undermine the purpose of the RPS by substituting existing resources for new renewable development. That bill failed on a 4-11 vote. AB 1280, by Assemblymember Garcia, would expand state grant programs to support thermal energy storage projects for industrial decarbonization. Supporters said it would help modernize manufacturing, cut pollution in disadvantaged communities, and preserve jobs, with broad support from environmental and clean manufacturing groups and no opposition testimony. The bill passed 17-0. AB 1117, by Assemblymember Schultz, would require the CPUC to offer optional dynamic electricity rate tariffs for customers to shift usage away from peak periods; supporters said it could lower bills and improve grid efficiency, while utilities said they were not opposed to the concept but wanted more flexibility and time in the regulatory process. That bill passed 14-0. The committee also approved its consent calendar and other noncontroversial items, with several measures moving forward unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the time limit? It's a minute. Okay. Thank you. My name is Jane Melhance.
• By design, LECs limit resale for profit. By design, LECs limit resale profits. That's not a flaw.
• investment up front and also limiting equity on sale.
• We have limited budgets as it is.
• State law limits the nonvoted bonds to certain capital purposes.

Bills: HB2521 , HB2249 , HB1796

Committee: Senate Ways & Means

Keywords: firearms, background check, gun control, public safety, legislation, HB 2249, Washington Technology Solutions, WaTech, civil service, classified service, exempt employees, state employment, state personnel, network security, cybersecurity, information technology, IT contracting, data center, systems integration, network engineering

Transcript Highlights:

• of occasions that the evidence from that period is consistent.
• is likely to be limited term.
• is likely to be limited term. and then we also think that of the workload is likely to be limited term
• It goes through a public comment period, so it's very transparent.
• It goes through a public comment period, so it's very transparent.

Transcript Highlights:

• And there's both dollar limits and scope prescriptions.
• We believe that that affordability requirement has some limitations and may be limiting the ability to
• And there's just limited capacity.
• And there's just limited capacity.
• 20-day period, whatever that looks like.

Committees: Joint Transportation , Joint Joint Transportation Committee

Summary: The committee first heard from WSDOT on capital program estimating, risk management, and cash flow. WSDOT explained the differences between design-bid-build and design-build delivery, how estimates are built from base cost, risk, inflation, and unknowns, and how risk reviews scale up by project size. Staff said design-bid-build estimates are generally accurate within about 1% across the program, while design-build projects have much wider uncertainty and are better communicated as ranges; WSDOT cited a P85 budget approach for legislative funding and a lower P45 management target. Members asked about the large cost growth on the I-5 Columbia River Bridge project and about value engineering; WSDOT said the project is unusually complex and that cost containment is limited by project requirements and policy mandates. Troy Swing also discussed the idea of a risk pool, saying it would not reduce overall program risk and would still require appropriation, while emphasizing the need for more realistic early budgeting and cash flow assumptions. The committee then received the final presentation in the WSDOT Project Delivery and Innovative Practices study from HKA Global. The consultant said WSDOT already uses a robust estimating process, but recommended improving transparency by presenting budget authorizations as ranges or estimate classes, better tracking award growth and cost growth over time, and monitoring market conditions and letting schedules to improve competition. The report also discussed surety bonding, recommending that the legislature consider restoring authority for reduced bonding on select large design-build projects or allowing phased or alternative securities, and reviewed indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracting, including job order contracts and multiple-award task order contracts. The consultant said these tools could help with smaller work packages and competition, but current Washington law is restrictive and would need changes for broader use. Next, the committee heard a follow-up report on transit-oriented development policy from the Urban Institute. The consultant said Washington’s HB 1491 is nationally notable, but warned that housing construction has slowed sharply, especially in the Puget Sound, due to high construction costs, financing costs, and other market pressures. The report recommended filling the infrastructure-funding gap created by reduced impact fees, revisiting MFTE affordability requirements so they better match local market conditions, considering minimum rather than averaged density requirements near transit, expanding public land and public development options, and creating a state system to track TOD outcomes such as affordability, gentrification, and transit access. Members questioned the study’s developer interviews, the role of rent stabilization, property tax assumptions, and parking needs; the consultant said only five private developers were interviewed and offered to provide the question framework and additional follow-up materials. Finally, the committee began a study on regulating emissions from ocean-going vessels at berth. Staff and consultants explained how shore power lets ships plug into the electrical grid and shut off auxiliary diesel engines, reducing emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, reactive organic compounds, and greenhouse gases near ports. The presentation reviewed California’s at-berth regulation, which Washington could only mirror if it acts under federal preemption limits, and outlined the study’s phases on vessel traffic, emissions reductions, implementation costs, and competitiveness impacts. No votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:45:46.760><c> additionally</c> during the audit period additionally during the audit period additionally
• </c> of limitations of limitations deadline<00:48:44.760><c> we</c><00:48:44.920><c> recommended</c><
• </c><00:56:19.680><c> can</c><00:56:19.799><c> be</c> limits firm time limits that can be limits firm
• ><c> rules</c><00:56:21.559><c> limitations</c> incorporated into the rules limitations incorporated
• </c><01:06:18.559><c> because</c> that period because that period because otherwise<01:06:20.559><c>

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on February 21 and first approved the January 30 minutes and the consent calendar, with item 2540 removed by the Department of Education and item 25057 set aside for discussion. The committee then took up FIS 25057, a Department of Transportation request tied to a federal grant for building information modeling and related data standardization across DOT systems. Transportation officials explained that the $2.405 million consultant-heavy request would connect surveying, design, construction, and asset management systems, improve efficiency and long-term asset tracking, and help the department catch up with other states. Several senators questioned the lack of immediate, quantifiable budget savings and the reliance on consultants, but the item was ultimately adopted. The committee next approved FIS 25054 for the Department of Health and Human Services after questioning a $16 million shortfall in the Children’s Health Insurance Program. DHHS explained the variance as a budgeting and accounting issue tied to separating CHIP from Medicaid managed care, pandemic-era continuous enrollment, and the new federal requirement for 12 months of continuous coverage for children. Members also approved a Cannon Mountain fee item, where park officials described a proposed price freeze for early-bird passes, a new in-season tier, and modest increases in off-season pricing, while noting operating cost pressures, strong snow conditions, and favorable customer value ratings. That item was adopted unanimously. The committee also approved the Department of Corrections item after discussion of staffing, retirement eligibility, overtime, and recidivism. Commissioner Helen Hanks said retirement-eligible staff had declined slightly, recruitment was improving, overtime hours were down, one housing floor had been closed because of lower population, and the department had reduced reincarceration by 8% over seven years, which she said produced substantial savings. The item was adopted. During informational items, the committee heard a Legislative Budget Assistant performance audit of the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights. The audit found the commission inefficient and ineffective in processing complaints, with average case closure taking 840 days, significant backlogs dating back decades, expired administrative rules, weak management controls, disorganized and outdated procedures, unreliable data, and unresolved prior audit findings. The audit included 25 recommendations, two of which may require legislative action. Commission staff said they appreciated the recommendations and expected the additional resources from the prior budget cycle to help address the backlog and improve transparency and efficiency.

Transcript Highlights:

• Over long periods of time, if the trend established itself, could go way beyond 2 million.
• The results are limited, but it's still new.
• In the period right after the Great Recession, and in that mid period leading up to the pandemic, there's
• And you can see that 2024 period, those lines... And increasing costs.
• density per acre limit.

Summary: The hearing was an outcome review of AB 2011, the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022, focused on whether the law is being used as intended to speed housing production on commercially zoned land while maintaining labor and affordability standards. Chair Haney and Assembly Member Wicks emphasized that the point of the review was not to relitigate the bill, but to assess implementation and results. The first panel of researchers and policy experts said AB 2011 has had real but still limited uptake so far, with roughly 5,800 homes proposed, entitled, or permitted under the law through 2024, concentrated mainly in San Francisco and Los Angeles counties. They also noted that the broader housing market remains constrained by high construction costs, interest rates, and flat rents, making it hard to isolate the bill’s effects from overall market conditions. Witnesses generally agreed that AB 2011 has been most effective for 100% affordable projects and for projects already using public subsidies or prevailing wage, where the ministerial process and CEQA streamlining help move developments forward. Several speakers described the law as a useful bargaining tool that can push jurisdictions to rezone or approve projects more quickly even when AB 2011 is not formally invoked. At the same time, developers and advocates said the mixed-income pathway is much less usable in most of the state because prevailing wage and the 15% affordability requirement add significant cost, especially in lower-rent markets. They also pointed to implementation issues such as narrow site eligibility rules, the “substantially surrounded by urban uses” test, industrial-use exclusions, and confusion about whether the law applies to homeownership projects. The second panel, made up of practitioners using the law, described specific projects that moved forward under AB 2011, including affordable housing developments in the San Joaquin Valley and large mixed-use projects in San Francisco. They said the law’s biggest benefit is certainty: projects that once took years to entitle can now move in months. However, they repeated calls for changes such as clarifying homeownership eligibility, loosening density and site restrictions, narrowing the industrial-use exclusion, and making the law easier to understand for developers and local staff. Members also raised concerns about uneven use across regions, especially the relative lack of AB 2011 activity in Los Angeles and Santa Clara County, and about the accuracy and lag in annual progress report data. The final panel, including the original sponsors, said they remain supportive of the law but are open to adjustments to reduce costs and improve usability while preserving labor protections and affordability goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Beginning April 1st, 2027, it removes the 2-year limitation on the recovery of overpayments.
• Beginning April 1st, 2027, it removes the 2-year limitation on the recovery of overpayments.
• the payroll period has actually ended. ended. ended.
• </c> payroll period when the payroll period payroll period when the payroll period hasn't<00:34:42.159
• paid leave hours to after the limited paid leave hours to after the fact?

Bills: SB2119 , SB3131 , SB3069 , SB3180 , SB2137 , SB2993 , SB2778 , SB2672 , SB2014 , SB2967

Committee: House Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• and non-peak periods with rates.
• ><c> with</c> peak periods and non-peak periods with peak periods and non-peak periods with uh,<00:43
• </c> we'll need over a period of 12 months. we'll need over a period of 12 months.
• ><c> time</c><00:55:10.160><c> between</c> during the period of time between during the period of time
• </c><01:05:26.920><c> I</c> This is under operational limits. I This is under operational limits.

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• Any individual or plumbing contractor who acquires three infractions within a 36-month period may have
• When enforcement authority is expanded without clear limits, compliance becomes subjective.
• If they limit those rates, then they must publish additional information.
• They're going to, you know, all of a sudden find that their opportunities are severely limited.
• They're going to, you know, all of a sudden find that their opportunities are severely limited.

Summary: The Labor and Commerce Committee held public hearings and later executive action on several bills. Senate Bill 6158, by request of L&I, would update factory-built housing and commercial structure rules to incorporate International Code Council standards and allow qualified third-party inspectors approved by L&I; the sponsor said it would make modular housing inspections more efficient and cost-effective, and L&I supported it with a requested technical amendment and no fiscal impact. Senate Bill 6197 would separate plumbing discipline standards for residential and nonresidential work, allowing suspension after five infractions in five years for nonresidential violations while keeping the current three-in-36-month standard for residential work; supporters from mechanical contractors, union plumbers, and a plumbing advisory board member said it would curb unlicensed work and unsafe practices, while opponents from contractor groups and some plumbing businesses argued it was too punitive, did not adequately distinguish commercial service from construction, and should be refined. L&I said it needed time to implement and asked for a later effective date. During executive session, the committee adopted a proposed substitute and advanced Senate Bill 5437, which voids noncompetition covenants, with a delayed effective date and other conforming changes; some Republicans opposed it as too broad. The committee also advanced Senate Bill 6117, which would extend PERC jurisdiction and state collective-bargaining protections if federal labor law no longer applies, after rejecting an amendment that would have narrowed coverage further. Senate Bill 5852, dealing with immigrant worker protections during federal I-9 inspections, advanced after the committee rejected an amendment to remove the private right of action. Senate Bill 5847, on workers’ compensation medical care and treatment access, advanced with an amendment removing penalty provisions and another adding claims manager positions; the bill was sent to Ways and Means. Senate Bills 6067 and 6136 also advanced, the former changing workers’ compensation health benefit calculations and the latter requiring L&I to publish actuarially indicated industrial insurance rates. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6302, which would address misclassification in finishing trades on public works by limiting contractors and subcontractors to no more than two independent contractors on covered finishing work such as drywall, flooring, tile, painting, and glazier work, with violators treated as employees for prevailing wage and workers’ compensation purposes. Supporters from building trades and pipefitters said the bill would reduce misclassification, protect workers, and level the playing field; opponents from general contractors and contractor associations said it would effectively ban legitimate independent contractors, reduce flexibility on public projects, and hurt small businesses. L&I said it had clarifying questions about how the cap would apply and asked for more specificity.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:07:29.919><c> on</c> a 15-year statute of limitations on a 15-year statute of limitations on
• a grace period because that 10-day period would start from the expiration of the grace period, which
• a grace period because that 10-day period would start from the expiration of the grace period, which
• If we not providing any grace periods.
• </c> grace period because that 10day period grace period because that 10day period would<00:21:16.000

Committee: House Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Testimony will be limited to one minute per individual.
• We've seen federal funding and policy changes, particularly 25, 27 period.
• It would limit the Apple Health Expansion Program to our current caseload.
• And as a reminder, we are limiting testimony to one minute.
• That limits our flexibility.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee opened with committee guidelines for the 2026 session, including limits on testimony, amendment deadlines, confidentiality expectations, and professionalism rules. Chair Ormsby also reviewed housekeeping for the public hearing, noting the meeting was recorded and live streamed, and that testimony would be limited to one minute because of the large number of sign-ups. The committee then began its work session on Governor Ferguson’s proposed 2026 supplemental operating budget, presented by OFM Director Katie Chapman, who outlined the state’s fiscal pressures: higher caseloads in major programs, a revenue forecast decline of about $390 million, federal policy changes tied to H.R. 1, inflation, and a relatively small ending fund balance. She said the governor’s budget solves about a $2.3 billion shortfall through nearly $800 million in spending reductions, revenue shifts, fund transfers, use of about $1 billion from the Budget Stabilization Account, and some tax preference changes, while also making targeted investments in areas such as child welfare, behavioral health, wildfire response, housing, and IT modernization. Chapman also explained that the proposal does not fully balance over the four-year outlook under the state’s statutory assumptions, but said the governor relied on the budget-balance law’s exception tied to BSA use and low employment growth. A question from Rep. Connors about credit ratings was answered with the view that the impact is difficult to predict and that Washington’s strong pension funding and balanced-budget framework remain positives. The public hearing drew testimony from state officials and many advocates, most of whom opposed specific cuts or fund shifts in the governor’s proposal. Secretary of State Steve Hobbs objected to proposed sweeps from the corporations and charities fund and the library archives account, citing prior cuts, layoffs, cyberattack-related costs, and the need to upgrade aging systems. Commissioner of Public Lands Dave Upthegrove urged restoration of wildfire prevention funding, saying the proposed amount was still $30 million short of the commitment in House Bill 1168 and that underfunding would increase suppression costs and risk to communities. Many education witnesses opposed reductions to Working Connections Child Care, transition to kindergarten, local effort assistance, Running Start, and higher education across-the-board cuts, arguing they would harm access, equity, and workforce development. Higher education leaders from community colleges, the University of Washington, Western Washington University, and Evergreen State College described staffing cuts, program reductions, and pressure on student services, while K-12 groups and OSPI said the budget would deepen existing funding gaps. A large portion of testimony focused on human services, health, housing, and civil legal aid. Child welfare and youth-serving organizations supported some targeted investments but opposed cuts to child care, child welfare network administration, and youth programs; advocates for foster youth, homeless youth, and mentoring programs asked for continued or increased funding. Health care and long-term care providers warned that proposed Medicaid and rate changes would reduce access for seniors, people with disabilities, and safety-net patients, while Planned Parenthood and abortion access advocates urged full restoration of the Abortion Access Project and related reimbursements. Housing and legal aid witnesses backed the governor’s proposed right-to-counsel funding but asked for more support, and homelessness advocates sought contingency funding for federal housing programs. Crime victim and domestic violence service providers repeatedly said the proposed $12 million was far short of the roughly $21.38 million needed to avoid service cuts and closures. Other testimony addressed the Climate Commitment Account shift for the Working Families Tax Credit, with environmental advocates opposing the diversion of CCA dollars and workforce advocates supporting the governor’s economic security and employment programs. No votes or formal committee action were taken during the hearing portion described in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> contradict that the Warr article limited contradict that the Warr article limited um<00:35:20.119
• </c> bedrooms must be subject to limitation bedrooms must be subject to limitation to<00:58:39.880><c
• states have a legal lending limit of 20% or more, and 32 states provide a limit of 25% or more.
• states have a legal lending limit of 20% or more, and 32 states provide a limit of 25% or more.
• Regarding the de novo period, it changes the de novo period from five years to three years and aligns

Committee: Senate Commerce