Transcript Highlights:

• By switching to a refund process, this means purchasers will have to apply to the Department of Revenue
• Eligibility for the refund is limited to homeowners who have site-built homesteads.
• So the amendment specifies the refund process and caps the amount of tax that may be refunded for each
• You know, and I've kind of been—I have a thought process as I'm looking at it.
• You know, and I've kind of been—I have a thought process as I'm looking at it.

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs met with a quorum present and heard three bills. First, the committee considered Senator Osgood’s home hardening products bill (CS/SB 78). An amendment was adopted that changed the sales tax exemption for impact-resistant doors and windows into a refund process, limited eligibility to homeowners with site-built homesteads valued at $700,000 or less, capped the refundable tax at $500,000 per property, and set the refund period for two years beginning July 1, 2026. After the amendment, the bill was reported favorably. The committee then took up Senator McClain’s SB 208 on land use and development regulations. The bill would define compatibility and infill residential development, allow administrative approval of certain infill projects, and set standards for local development-related fees. Several members and stakeholders discussed possible changes to the compatibility and fee provisions. Testimony included opposition from Audubon Florida, the Florida Association of Counties, the Florida League of Cities, and 1,000 Friends of Florida, who raised concerns about sprawl, public participation, the 100-acre infill threshold, and impacts on rural lands and the Florida Wildlife Corridor. Support came from Highland Homes and several groups that waived in support, including AARP, the Florida Chamber of Commerce, and Associated Industries of Florida. The bill was reported favorably after debate. Finally, the committee heard Senator Trumbull’s SB 118 on special assessments for recreational vehicle parks. The bill clarifies that if a local government levies a special assessment on an RV park space or campsite, the assessed square footage cannot exceed the maximum square footage allowed for a recreational vehicle. An amendment clarified the maximum square footage as 400 square feet. After brief discussion and no opposition, the committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I wanted to give that background information because the LOI process, a letter of intent process, because
• the LOI process, a letter of intent process, is not designed to be disruptive.
• A law shall because the LOI process, a letter of intent process, is not designed to be disruptive.
• We all know that's a very paper process, very cumbersome process.
• That's a very paper process, very cumbersome process.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a summer meeting in process.
• <00:38:16.320> Um, standardized process for that. Um, standardized process for that.
• and that they were going to go refund and that they were going to go refund back<02:03:39.360>
• tax, but they're applying for a refund tax, but they're applying for a refund for<02:08:46.320><
• they're going to get where the refund they're going to get where the refund comes<02:08:57.760><

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• violations through the complaint process violations through the complaint process there<00:09:35.160
• Immediate access to the political contribution refund program.
• the Department of Revenue refunded the Department of Revenue refunded $447,000<00:14:59.120>
• <00:15:10.680> to per donation as a maximum refund to per donation as a maximum refund to
• <00:18:29.120> but in terms of all of our processes but in terms of all of our processes but

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Jeff Sigerson, executive director of the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, who outlined the board’s mission and core programs: campaign finance disclosure, economic interest statements, and lobbying registration/reporting. He described the board as an independent agency with six members, noted current vacancies and confirmation requirements, and said the board’s budget request was essentially flat, with a base budget of about $1.793 million and most costs tied to salaries, office space, and other fixed expenses. He also reviewed the board’s enforcement structure, emphasizing civil-only penalties, a complaint-driven process, and the availability of reports, enforcement actions, and advisory opinions on the board’s website. Sigerson highlighted several recent and upcoming changes. Local ballot question committees for city, school district, levy, and bond issues now must register with the board if they exceed $750 in activity, and the board is preparing outreach and online registration tools to help local committees comply. He also discussed the public subsidy and political contribution refund programs, saying the board paid out about $2.12 million to 230 House candidates in 2024, that 93% of candidates signed the subsidy agreement, and that 2023 PCR refunds totaled about $447,000 for candidates and $1.616 million for party donors. He noted that the PCR maximum refund was recently increased from $50 to $75 per donation, and that payments could drop significantly in 2026 if the one-time supplement is not renewed. A major focus of the presentation was the board’s lobbying report and related legislative recommendations. Sigerson said the board is moving from tracking marginal expenses to tracking the subjects and entities being lobbied, and that lobbying will be expanded from certain metro-area governmental units to all cities, counties, school districts, townships, and other political subdivisions, potentially adding thousands of lobbyists. He said the board held two public hearings and received 23 written comments on proposed changes. The board’s main recommendations were to broaden the expert-testimony exception so that certain paid experts at local hearings would not need to register as lobbyists, while still requiring disclosure of who testified, before whom, and on what subject, and to adjust the current lobbying definition for local government employees and officials who spend more than 50 hours a month on intergovernmental lobbying work.

Transcript Highlights:

• we'll work with the broker on a process. we'll work with the broker on a process.
• <00:20:40.960> There curious about the RFP process. There curious about the RFP process.
• Uh thank you whole process works.
• And in this particular RFP process.
• :31:14.480> little help the process a little help the process a little >> go<00:31:15.520

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on Friday, November 21st and first approved the October 17th minutes, with one member abstaining because she was not present. The committee then adopted the remainder of the consent calendar after removing two items for separate consideration. On tab four, members discussed item 25282 with the Commissioner of Administrative Services and Public Works staff; the project had been delayed after testing revealed design errors and flaws, and the committee was told the work would restart with test piles the following week and was projected for completion in fall 2027. The item was approved. On tab five, item 25279 concerned a Health and Human Services facility project and a federally required element added late in the process. Commissioners explained that the project had originally been funded at $21 million, later required additional financing, and that the legislature had recently lifted a restriction so non-ARPA funds could be used. They also said the sale of the existing Manchester property would not be needed to complete the build, that a broker RFP was about to be issued, and that any sale would require further approvals. The committee approved the item. The committee then approved item 25280 after a brief exchange about rainy day fund estimates and prior budget assumptions, and approved item 25278 without discussion. Item 25272 drew questions about the consumer advocate’s RFP for outside utility-rate-case assistance; the office said it eliminated proposals focused only on return on equity work after the Eversource decision, selected a Michigan firm for spreadsheet and operating-cost analysis, and noted there were no in-state firms doing this specialized work. The committee approved the item, with one member recorded in opposition. On tab nine, item 25261 concerned a new judicial council budget obligation tied to legislation and public defense staffing needs. The presenter said the request reflected a late-added obligation from the judicial branch, that more requests may still be needed, and that public defense staffing was strained by vacancies and competition from Massachusetts. The committee approved the item. Under informational items, members received an update on 529 plan distributions and on interest and dividends tax refunds, with Revenue Administration saying roughly $21 million more in refunds remained and that the repeal-related refunds were nearly finished. The committee also noted an environmental services item for which questions would be submitted separately. The next meeting was set for December 19th at 11:00 a.m., and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• onboarding process works? onboarding process works?
• The refund ability to request a refund is three days.
• But this is a process question.
• But this is a process question.
• But this is a process question.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee focused primarily on a bill concerning long-term care insurance rate increases and consumer notice. Members and staff discussed replacing or supplementing a proposed public hearing requirement with annual reporting, website updates, and consumer-facing disclosures about approved rate increases, carriers writing the products, and how the products work. Several participants emphasized that long-term care policies are long-term products, that rate increases can be spread over many years for actuarial reasons, and that consumers need better information about trends and the impact of increases. A major point of disagreement was whether the bill should try to cap premium increases. One member argued the real problem is unexpected increases of 15% to 20% and urged a statutory cap to protect consumers. Insurance department representatives and others responded that hard caps had been struck down in prior case law, that the department’s core responsibility is solvency, and that carriers need sufficient premium to pay future claims. They also said the market is struggling because many carriers stopped selling the product, leaving in-force policies to bear the cost, and that overly restrictive caps could cause insurers to withdraw from the state. The discussion then shifted toward a compromise requiring carriers to notify policyholders before a rate increase is approved and allowing a 60-day comment period. Participants debated whether the notice should come from the carrier, how confidentiality rules would apply before approval, and what the department should do with public comments. The department said it already reviews filings carefully and that submitted rates are often adjusted before approval; lawmakers noted that prior commissioners had pushed back on increases in some cases, including a seven-year moratorium. No final vote was taken in the excerpt, and the chair repeatedly tried to move the subcommittee along to other bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:09:39.120> I this enters the legislative process, I this enters the legislative process
• <03:16:18.560> of<03:16:18.880> over refunds with the average refund of over refunds
• Processing delays translate directly into refund delays, needlessly causing financial... proud to have
• delays in receiving your uh re refund delays in receiving your uh re refund because<03:22:49.680
• The agency was able to process more than 165 million income tax returns and delivered refunds to 104

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Monday, April 27, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:01:55.280> to So section one of the bill allows individuals to contribute their tax refunds
• And the trust fund can receive contributions from individual income tax refunds as well as grants, other
• um income tax refunds as well as<00:02:58.720> grants,<00:02:59.360> other<00:02:59.680
• :03:49.120> a<00:03:49.360> competitive<00:03:49.840> grant<00:03:50.239> process
• <00:03:51.200> and through a competitive grant process and through a competitive grant process

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:01 SB 69 Discussion 00:00:30 SB 69 Vote 00:05:52, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and took up only one item: Senate Bill 69, sponsored by Senator Julie Adams. The bill would create an autism spectrum disorder trust fund in the state treasury, allow taxpayers to contribute a portion of their individual income tax refunds to the fund, and authorize additional grants, contributions, and appropriations. Senator Adams said the fund is intended to support autism spectrum disorder research and services in Kentucky, administered by the Cabinet for Health and Family Services with grants awarded through the advisory council on autism spectrum disorders based on a statewide needs assessment. She also noted the bill includes an emergency clause. During questions, Senator Boswell confirmed the tax refund contribution option would be available on both paper and electronic returns. Senator Funky From asked how families would access services, and Senator Adams explained that providers would apply for grants to the trust fund, which would then review and award funding if the proposal was deemed a good use of the money. No outside testimony was presented; a signed-up witness from the Russell County Fiscal Court did not speak. The committee then moved the bill, with Senator Boswell making the motion and Senator Neil seconding it. The roll call resulted in 12 yes votes and no nays, and Senate Bill 69 passed the committee with a favorable expression. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Subdivision 7 provides for refundability of the credit.
• , subdivision three lays out the process, subdivision three lays out the process, required<00:20:
• /c><00:20:50.600> or seven provides for refundable or seven provides for refundable or refundability
• refundability of the credit. refundability of the credit.
• why does it need to be a refundable why does it need to be a refundable credit?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• most um every dollar of a tax refund most um every dollar of a tax refund that<00:16:40.319>
• Would I be eligible for a refund under your proposal?"
• <01:11:30.320> if single mom doesn't get a tax refund if single mom doesn't get a tax refund
• <01:14:49.880> under would I be eligible for a refund under would I be eligible for a refund
• Somebody who pays sales taxes is not eligible for a refund under your bill.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The process performed this study.
• refundable or sold. refundable or sold.
• the zoning process. the zoning process. >> Thank<01:04:00.799> you.
• It's a 30% refundable credit. fantastic. It's a 30% refundable credit.
• refund, you get your full two million. refund, you get your full two million.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:07 Roll Call 00:00:14 Discussion of Pro-Growth Housing Policies 00:02:01 Discussion of Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit 01:11:13 Adjournment 01:40:27, 958, all

Summary: The Kentucky Housing Task Force met and heard first from the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce, which presented findings from a housing study done with the Home Builders Association. The chamber said housing is now a major economic-development issue, citing survey results that 90% of community leaders said their region could not absorb a major job announcement and 66% said housing is holding back Kentucky’s economy. The chamber described Kentucky’s housing shortage, rising home prices, declining permits since 2008, and the need for more production to support growth. It urged policy changes including zoning and land-use reform, tax incentives, regional approaches, and especially a residential infrastructure fund modeled on Indiana’s low-interest loan program to help communities finance roads and other infrastructure needed for new housing. Members asked about the severity of the problem, workforce shortages in permitting and construction, the loan interest rate, repayment, and whether Kentucky could replicate Indiana’s results; the witness said the issue is a crisis and that the program would be a revolving public-private partnership, likely around 3% interest, with implementation details still to be worked out. The Kentucky Bankers Association then testified that the housing gap is especially acute for households at 80% of area median income and below, which it said represents about 70% of Kentucky’s housing need. It emphasized that the shortage affects both urban and rural counties and pointed to examples such as Rowan County, where workers at major employers must commute long distances because local housing is unavailable or unaffordable. The bankers said high interest rates remain a major barrier and proposed a $20 million bank commitment for a revolving fund tied to tax credits to finance new housing, not refinances. They cited Hope of the Midwest as an example of a successful tax-credit housing model with a long track record and no defaults, and said the proposal would leverage public-private partnerships to create new units. Committee members questioned how the proposed fund would compare with industrial revenue bonds and whether it could be structured like Kentucky’s tobacco settlement fund, with seed money, a review board, scoring criteria, and possible population thresholds to ensure smaller communities benefit. The bankers said the proposal would be another tool for cities and counties, specifically tied to residential infrastructure, and that larger cities should not be able to capture all of the resources. No formal votes or actions were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are no date changes, as I understand it, and the amount applied for refund has changed.
• There are no date changes, as I understand it, and the amount applied for refund has changed.
• <00:26:48.120> has however of the applied for refund has however of the applied for refund
• We're still in the process of doing that. But once again, thank you for considering this.
• uh uh political contribution refund uh uh political contribution refund program<01:02:04.480>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I did not begin this process introducing a full ban.
• We have a money transmitter license, and that is a rigorous process.
• They received full refunds from us.
• They received full refunds from us.
• Delaware's permitting process regularly stretches beyond two years.

Bills: HB373

Keywords: infused beverages, THC, alcohol control, regulation, non-intoxicating cannabinoids, marijuana, legalization, taxation

Summary: The Senate Banking, Business, Insurance & Technology Committee met in hybrid format and heard testimony on several bills. HB 373, as amended, would regulate hemp-derived THC-infused beverages by defining the products, limiting them to 10 mg of Delta-9 THC per container, restricting sales to package stores and licensed marijuana retail stores, requiring testing and labeling, and imposing a 50-cent per container tax; the sponsor said the bill is intended to create guardrails and protect youth, and a wholesaler representative testified in support. HB 398 would allow racinos to serve alcohol until 2 a.m. and remove local authority to require earlier closing times; the sponsor and Bally’s representative said it would help Delaware remain competitive and increase revenue, and no opposition was heard. HB 433 would let municipalities and counties extend last call for bars, restaurants, and clubs from 1 a.m. to 2 a.m.; a witness from Connect Delaware supported it as a competitiveness and retention measure, emphasizing that it is permissive rather than mandatory. The committee also heard extensive testimony on HB 441, which would ban cryptocurrency kiosks/crypto ATMs in Delaware and require existing machines to be removed within 90 days. The sponsor and supporters, including AARP, the Delaware Department of Justice, and the League of Women Voters, argued the machines are heavily used in scams, especially against older adults, and that regulation has not been effective. CoinFlip opposed the bill, saying it is a regulated operator, that the fraud statistics are overstated or incomplete, and that Delaware should instead adopt a regulatory framework and amendment. HB 465 would update the criminal code to formally define virtual currency and incorporate it into theft, money laundering, racketeering, and search-and-seizure provisions; the sponsor said it would align Delaware law with modern crypto-related crimes, and no opposition was presented. The committee then heard HB 467, which would prevent landlords from requiring renters to buy insurance from a specific company while still allowing them to require coverage meeting lease terms; the sponsor described it as a consumer-choice bill and there was no public opposition. HB 435 would require payment parity for certified registered nurse anesthetists and physicians when the same services are provided; the sponsor, nurse anesthetists, the Delaware Health Care Association, the Department of Insurance, and ChristianaCare supported it as a workforce and access-to-care measure, with no opposition. Finally, HS 1 for HB 450, the Road DE Act, would overhaul permitting and traffic-impact review, emphasize peak-hour traffic, set density standards in growth areas, create a transportation impact fee, and direct some revenue to open space, farmland, and coastal restoration; realtors, builders, environmental groups, engineers, and GEAR supported it as a way to speed permitting, reduce sprawl, and improve infrastructure planning. The committee adjourned after public comment; no votes were recorded in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Not all of them are refundable. This one would be refundable.
• Not all of them are refundable. This one would be refundable.
• Not all of them are refundable. This one would be refundable.
• Not all of them are refundable. This one would be refundable.
• Not all of them are refundable. credit. Not all of them are refundable.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House File 5055, the governor’s supplemental tax budget. Commissioner of Revenue Paul Marquart outlined the proposal as a balanced budget package that would leave a positive bottom line in the current biennium and beyond. He emphasized family-focused tax relief, especially a new refundable young child credit for children ages 0 to 4, which would provide up to $3,000 for one child or $6,000 for two or more, benefit about 104,000 families, and phase out at higher incomes. He also described federal conformity changes, including updates to business interest deductions, dependent care credits, and Section 179 expensing, along with omitted federal items such as research expensing and opportunity zones due to cost and policy concerns. Marquart also defended broader tax modernization proposals, including expanding the sales tax to selected consumer services such as accounting, banking, brokerage, and legal services while lowering the statewide sales tax rate, and creating a social media tax on consumer data collection that would fund an AI readiness special revenue fund rather than the general fund. He said these changes would make the sales tax less regressive and better aligned with the modern economy. Additional provisions mentioned included a gun-related gross receipts tax on firearms and ammunition, cannabis tax technical changes, historic structure rehabilitation conformity, and added auditors for tax compliance. Testimony from outside groups was mixed. Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project supported the governor’s approach as a response to federal tax and spending changes, praised the decision not to conform to opportunity zones or federal no-tax-on-tips/overtime provisions, and urged even stronger revenue measures. Brian Lake of the Minnesota State Bar Association strongly opposed the proposed sales tax on consumer legal services, arguing it would burden low- and middle-income people in sensitive cases and create unfairness when individuals litigate against the state. Tanner Fritsinger of the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees supported the sales tax base expansion and the social media tax as ways to broaden revenue without raising the base rate. The committee chair thanked the commissioner and then began hearing public testimony, with additional testifiers queued up.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we did start that process while she was in the hospital.
• until there's no remaining entry fee refund.
• Others offer a specific set refund, such as 80% or 90%.
• to the resident under the contract. ...and the terms and conditions of the process by which the refund
• and the terms and conditions of the process by which the refund will be made to the resident or the

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several aging-related bills, with most speakers focusing on housing stability, home-based services, and care transitions. Representative Badger and a commissioner testified in support of H4039, which would create a universal breakfast and lunch program at senior centers funded through a new Senior Breakfast and Lunch Fund, arguing it would reduce food insecurity and social isolation among older adults. Representative Lipper-Garabedian and multiple providers then supported H780/S495, the hospital-to-home partnership program, describing how embedded aging-services liaisons help older patients transition safely from hospitals to home, reduce readmissions, and avoid nursing facility placement; witnesses from Mystic Valley Elder Services and Mass Aging Access cited pilot results, including hundreds of patients served and examples of substantial cost savings and successful discharge planning. The committee also took testimony on S478, which would require continuing care retirement communities to disclose entrance-fee refund policies more clearly at enrollment. Senator Lovely and LeadingAge Massachusetts said the bill would improve transparency for residents and families, while a consumer witness said her family experienced delays and confusion in getting a refund after her mother left a CCRC. Members noted the issue is also being examined by a special commission on CCRCs. A large portion of the hearing focused on S475, a statewide bridge subsidy program for older adults facing housing instability. Advocates from the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless, Western Massachusetts, Somerville, Northampton, East Hampton, Old Colony Elder Services, and Somerville’s Office of Housing Stability described rising senior homelessness, long waitlists for subsidized housing, and cases where short-term rental assistance kept older adults housed while they waited for permanent housing. Somerville witnesses said the pilot program helped nine households remain housed and that some participants have since moved into permanent housing. Members asked about wait times, program design, and how to prioritize applicants; witnesses emphasized flexibility, emergency risk, and the need for a statewide expansion. The hearing also included testimony on S465, an ALS bill that would expand home care access regardless of age and bar the use of quality-adjusted life-year metrics in coverage decisions, with the sponsor and ALS Association arguing the measure would reduce discriminatory treatment and better center patient care. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, the applicant has requested the two-step approval process.
• Item 35 is the consideration of Resolution No. 2 for not exceeding $425 million of GO refunding bonds
• to refund the Series 2016 bonds and tender other outstanding bonds for savings.
• for not exceeding 425 million of GA Refunding Bonds to refund the Series 2016 bonds and tender other
• “A more transparent and accountable budgeting process.

Keywords: 974, senate, all

Summary: The State Bond Commission met on May 21 with a quorum present and approved the April 16 minutes. The commission then reviewed and approved a large slate of local government and public authority financing requests, including election propositions for the November ballot, water and sewer infrastructure projects, fire protection and recreation district bonds, school board financing, and several refunding transactions. Most items were found to meet technical requirements and were approved on motions by Speaker DeVillier and seconded by Senator Talbot. Among the more notable items were the East Baton Rouge City-Parish refunding bonds for the Greater Baton Rouge Airport District, the City of Kenner’s retroactive approval request tied to a convention center agreement with GMB Basketball LLC, a Louisiana Housing Corporation financing increase for the Federal City Building 10 affordable housing project, and preliminary approval for the Northwest Louisiana Finance Authority’s Petro Tower redevelopment in Shreveport. The commission also approved financing for Southern University’s Scott’s Bluff student housing project and the Crescent City Schools/Harriet Tubman Charter School project. The Crescent City Schools item prompted questions about how MFP funds are used; staff explained that lease payments would support the bonds and that MFP funds are generally split between educational expenses and facilities-related costs. The commission received six monthly cost-of-issuance reports, which required no action, and a status update on the state debt schedule. It also approved Resolution No. 2 authorizing up to $425 million in general obligation refunding bonds to refund the Series 2016 bonds and tender other outstanding bonds for savings, with pricing tentatively set for June 16 and closing for June 30. During other business, New Orleans City Council President J.P. Morel thanked the commission for its role in helping address the city’s fiscal crisis and for approving a charter amendment election item aimed at strengthening budget oversight. The meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• Refundability was not the agreement.
• the R&D credit refundability the R&D credit refundability um<00:02:35.200> and<00
• But the a refundable Minnesota. Fine.
• <00:04:38.000> was spreadsheet, but the refundability was spreadsheet, but the refundability
• or it's not refundability.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for qualified tips and for qualified overtime compensation; state aid for school districts; surplus refund
• These are not fiscally responsible, and it is deeply disappointing that we could not have had a process
• But this bill went through a very different process than that, and that is unfortunately why we're here
• And then I'm not really happy about a $300, $600 refund.
• Our mission is to provide Wisconsinites an opportunity to access the legislative process and connect

Keywords: 970, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The application process is a paper-based process, and we need to look at what an institution is telling
• The application process is a paper-based process, and we need to look at what an institution is telling
• Do you keep track of the complaints from students who finish that process, the tuition recovery process
• Some kind of survey process at the end.
• That has not been the easiest of processes or the most simple of processes to get the Bureau up and running

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:32:19.680> important free look period for refunds, important free look period for refunds
• Our data shows that only 48% of consumers receive any refund, and those refunds average just 16% of the
• <01:10:32.640> the getting a refund for the getting a refund for the for<01:10:33.960> the<
• <01:16:53.640> because us and they get a full refund because us and they get a full refund
• thought in this process. thought in this process.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all