Transcript Highlights:

• The result, capped by the emergency regulations adopted in September. has been to obliterate the hemp
• Heidelbach talked about to a milligram cap. That has been unsuccessful.
• This year are either having their caps increased to 24 months or eliminated altogether.
• It's a low six-month reserve cap remaining.
• Raising the reserve cap does not impact the revenue CSLB receives.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It is likely going to... continue to grow even should it hit the cap to the extent that any interest
• We're hitting the cap on how many resources we can get. A significant portion of those dollars to.
• The current law caps funding for this. The grant cap is currently set at $30 million.
• A $30 million cap doesn't go a long way to address the needs of the rural areas of Texas.
• I'd be in favor of removing the cap personally, but I'm just one of 27 on this dais.

Bills: HB 104, HB2054, HB3459, HB3745, HB4486, HB4488, HB4601, HB104

Keywords: Texas Future Fund, investment review board, economic stabilization, innovative technology, national defense, HB 2054, Texas volunteer fire department assistance fund, Rural Volunteer Fire Department Assistance Program, volunteer fire departments, wildfire mitigation, wildland fire, rural fire protection, insurer assessment, insurance premium tax, state appropriations, firefighting grants, emergency services, high-risk wildfire areas, Texas Comptroller, Texas Government Code

Transcript Highlights:

• of of $8 million in the sets this uh cap of of $8 million in the department<00:37:15.760> cash
• So we're just capping it at $5 million total and asking for that to be the example when we're talking
• We should be capping lower than $8 million. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• So we're just capping it at $5 million total and asking for that to be the example when we're talking
• So this Well, what this amendment a cap.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the corrected journal, and then received committee reports advancing several bills, including House Bills 1262, 1183, 1184, 1331, 1332, and 1333, along with Senate Bills 2, 20, 80, 137, and 141. The chamber also removed House Bill 1331 and Senate Bill 80 from the consent calendar and later took up special orders for second reading. Senate Bills 20 and 137 were considered on the consent calendar, their committee reports were adopted, and both bills passed second reading and were placed on the calendar for third reading and final passage. The Committee of the Whole report was then adopted by a 32-0 vote with 3 excused. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on House Bill 1332, which concerns the legislative department cash fund. Sponsors and supporters described the bill as transferring $12 million to the general fund and capping the fund balance at $8 million to improve transparency and align spending with current needs. Senator Pelton offered amendment L4 to lower the cap to $5 million and remove automatic inflation adjustments, but the amendment failed on a voice vote. The bill itself was then adopted. House Bill 1333, dealing with payment of legislative department expenses, was also adopted after discussion of salary-related adjustments and cash fund transfers. Senate Bill 141, which creates an optional $5 motor vehicle registration fee to fund wildlife crossings and related transportation improvements, drew the most debate. Supporters emphasized reduced vehicle-animal collisions, lower insurance costs, and the ability to leverage federal matching funds; several senators described personal or constituent experiences with wildlife crashes. Opponents argued existing bridge enterprise and wildlife cash funds should be used instead of creating a new fee, even if optional. Despite that opposition, the bill passed. Senate Bill 143, renaming the Colorado Youth Advisory Council review committee in honor of the late Senator Faith Winter, also passed unanimously. House Bill 1019 was laid over until April 27, and House Bill 1331, which modifies legislative interim activities and reduces an appropriation, passed after amendment L2 clarified that per diem and travel payments would not be made for meetings not actually held.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill provides simple cap.
• that support support tax caps. And Mr. that support support tax caps. And Mr.
• Speaker. local tax cap when voters approve a local tax cap when voters approve a bond.<07:37:17.120><
• Voting stations are open for 30 seconds. the presence of a tax cap, and if I the presence of a tax cap
• cap, which is to cap<07:40:26.958> spending,<07:40:28.000> would<07:40:28.240> I

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So this included cap calculation requirements.
• The cap calculations last year... Certifying information.
• And the 3% cap, specifically, how that's determined?
• Because the 3% cap on a county right now, do we need to have the caps in place? So go ahead, Mr.
• I mean, the cap is going to do that.

Summary: The subcommittee of the Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee met to begin its study of whether the content of the real estate tax statement should be revised to improve transparency. Legislative Council staff reviewed the study directive from HB 1176 and the statutory requirements for tax statements, including required line items such as true and full value, mill levy, legislative tax relief, primary residence credit, legacy fund share, discounts for early payment, and special assessments. The Tax Department then explained how the current uniform statewide statement is prescribed and approved, and noted that changes are typically driven by statute and implemented collaboratively with counties and vendors. County officials from NDACO, including auditors from McKenzie and Richland counties, described the full annual property tax timeline from budgeting through mailing final statements. They explained how counties gather budgets, calculate levies, verify taxable values, handle centrally assessed property, and prepare required notices and statements. They also said public attendance at budget hearings is generally very low, though the notices and statements generate some calls, mostly about whether attendance is required or why taxes are changing. Several members questioned the usefulness of the legislative tax relief line and the complexity of the 5% discount calculation, and county officials said the current process can be confusing and depends on manual data entry and coordination among counties, vendors, and taxing districts. The committee also discussed assessment frequency, valuation equalization, the 3% cap, and whether more frequent reassessment would reduce large jumps in taxable value. County officials said they try to use rotating reassessments and sales-ratio reviews to keep values within statutory tolerance, but staffing, training, and local market changes make the work difficult. NDACO staff estimated, based on a small county survey, that tax statement preparation and mailing costs average about 74 cents per statement, with outsourcing generally cheaper than in-house printing, and said HB 1176 added some mailing and administrative costs even if the tax statement itself did not change dramatically. Software vendors from CPT and Tyler then began presentations showing how their systems handle budgeting, valuation notices, tax statement generation, primary residence credit processing, and levy worksheets, emphasizing that many of the required calculations and reports are still manually entered or verified by county staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• The cap calculations last year, The cap calculations last year was the first year, as you know.
• But we talked about the total levy report yesterday and the 3% cap.
• And the 3% cap, specifically, how that's determined?
• Because the 3% cap on a county right now, do we need to have the caps in place? So go ahead, Mr.
• I mean, the cap is going to do that.

Summary: The subcommittee of the Tax Reform and Relief Committee met to begin its study of the feasibility and desirability of revising the content of the real estate tax statement to improve property tax transparency. Legislative Council staff reviewed the study directive under House Bill 1176 and the statutory requirements for tax statements, including required line items such as true and full value, mill levy, legislative tax relief, primary residence credit, and the Legacy Fund portion of that credit. The Tax Department then explained how the current uniform statement is prescribed and approved, and noted that changes are typically driven by statute and implemented collaboratively with counties and vendors. County officials from the North Dakota Association of Counties described the full annual tax cycle, from county budgeting and valuation notices to budget hearing notices, levy certification, cap calculations, and final tax statement mailing. They emphasized that counties and auditors do extensive coordination with taxing districts and neighboring counties, and that the process is labor-intensive and often manual. Members discussed the limited public response to budget notices and tax statements, the difficulty of explaining the legislative tax relief line, the 3% cap and valuation issues, and whether more frequent assessments or different timing would improve understanding. Several members and witnesses noted that many taxpayers only engage when they receive their final bill, and that clarity may be more important than adding more detail. NDACO also presented a rough cost survey from eight counties, estimating an average tax statement cost of about 74 cents and a statewide total near $600,000 for printing and mailing tax statements alone, with outsourcing generally cheaper than in-house printing. Witnesses noted that House Bill 1176 added other mailings and notices, increasing county workload and cost beyond the statement itself. The committee then heard from software vendors, who explained how their systems handle tax billing, budget notices, valuation notices, primary residence credit processing, and tax levy calculations, and they identified the 1600/1685 primary residence credit and discount interaction as a current programming challenge. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and focused on gathering testimony and identifying issues for possible future recommendations or bill drafts.

Transcript Highlights:

• : 1% of the vehicle price, capped at a maximum of $350.
• It is a capped fee. It is not a mandatory fee. You are correct. It is a capped fee.
• Whereas if you go up, you ultimately hit that cap and anything beyond that stays at that cap.
• Whereas if you go up, you ultimately hit that cap and anything beyond that stays at that cap.
• And then what it prohibits them from is imposing a cap.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 712, which would expand California’s smog-check exemption for classic vehicles by adding model years 1976 through 1986 in phases, with a sunset in 2032. The author and supporters, including lowrider advocates and the Specialty Equipment Market Association, argued the bill would preserve car culture, support a small class of rarely driven collector vehicles, and reduce burdens on owners who struggle to find equipment for older smog tests. Opponents, including air district officials, the American Lung Association, and other environmental groups, warned the bill would weaken an important emissions-control program and increase pollution. After discussion, the committee adopted the motion to do pass as amended to Appropriations on a roll call vote of 10-0, with the roll held open for additional votes. The committee then heard SB 800, which requires Caltrans, working with local governments, to assess mitigation measures for suicide prevention on locally owned overpasses crossing state highways. The bill was presented as a response to recent tragedies in Rancho Cucamonga and was supported by local officials, health organizations, and suicide-prevention advocates, who said the measure would help identify high-risk locations and lead to life-saving interventions. There was no registered opposition. The committee members expressed support, and SB 800 was passed to Appropriations on a unanimous roll call vote, with the roll held open. Next, the committee considered SB 30, which would prohibit California public entities from selling, donating, or transferring decommissioned diesel locomotives and railroad equipment with Tier 1 or older engines unless the engine is removed, while allowing Tier 2 and newer transfers under certain conditions. The author and supporters framed the bill as a climate and public-health measure to prevent older, dirtier locomotives from continuing to pollute elsewhere, while transit agencies opposed it, arguing it could limit useful transfers of equipment that still supports passenger service and could be better handled through case-by-case air-quality review. After debate, the committee voted 6-4 to pass SB 30 as amended to Appropriations, with the roll held open for later additions. The committee also heard SB 791, which replaces the flat dealer document processing charge cap with a 1% fee capped at $350, along with new disclosure requirements. Dealers and industry groups supported the bill as a way to recover costs and improve transparency, while consumer advocates opposed it as an unjustified increase that would burden buyers. The committee approved SB 791 on a 8-? roll call vote and held the roll open. The meeting then moved on to SB 34, a port-air-quality bill presented by Senator Richardson, but the transcript ends during testimony and debate on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, the senior workoff program benefit is capped at $2,000 and the veterans benefit is capped
• This bill will raise that cap for veterans to $2,000 to bring equity and balance between the two programs
• So this bill proposes a simple but meaningful change: to raise the benefit cap for a veterans property
• just didn't update, you may recall, that we took the important step in that package of raising the cap
• Local officials are reluctant to raise the senior benefit cap until the veterans cap is raised too, because

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue held a hybrid hearing on 32 bills related to veterans and service members, with opening remarks from Chair Madaro and Senator Eldridge emphasizing the committee’s work on tax credits and property tax relief, including follow-up to the HERO Act of 2024. The chairs outlined hearing procedures, noted the August 23 reporting deadline for House-filed matters, and explained that testimony would focus on issues including voluntary contributions, sales tax, property tax, and economic development. No votes were taken during the hearing. Several bills drew testimony in support of expanding or simplifying veterans’ property tax benefits. Rep. Sylvia supported H. 3255 to raise the veterans’ property tax workoff cap from $1,500 to $2,000, matching the senior workoff program. Rep. Soder and Sen. Moore advocated for stronger property tax relief for disabled veterans, including H. 3245 and S. 2046, with Moore proposing a disability-based exemption and state reimbursement to municipalities. Rep. McGregor supported H. 3175, which would eliminate the need for veterans to refile annually for exemptions unless their status changes, arguing it would reduce burdens on veterans and assessors. Testimony also addressed line-of-duty death benefits and local implementation concerns. Mary Ann Cardi supported H. 3188 to clarify that surviving spouses of police and fire personnel who died in the line of duty qualify for a full real estate exemption. Chris Clark, Senator Sear, and Counselor Ludke all backed the veterans’ workoff bill, describing it as an equity fix that would align the veterans’ program with the senior program and help municipalities like Barnstable use the benefit more effectively. After hearing from all scheduled speakers and confirming no additional in-person testimony, the chairs adjourned the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• often is the current 50 million cap often is the current 50 million cap exceeded<00:47:38.559>
• ; it’s the per-production cap, right?
• As you guys heard the issue, if you up the per-production cap, you’ve got to up the overall annual cap
• You give caps. Well, we have currently caps, so for per-production that’s 17 million.
• <00:49:44.799> well what what do you do you give caps well what what do you do you give caps

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several measures on agriculture, energy, stadium governance, and hotel consumer protections. On SB 448 relating to agriculture, Agra Business Development Corporation and the Hawaii Farm Bureau testified in support of a proposed conservation easement acquisition in Central Oahu; the chair asked follow-up questions about the exact location, cost, and agricultural potential of the land, and the witness said the parcel had good soil and water and was former pineapple land, with cost still to be provided. On SB 827 relating to meat processing, the Department of Economic Development and Tourism said the state needs more meat-processing capacity and that any grant program should complement, not compete with, existing efforts; the Attorney General’s office warned the bill lacked legally sufficient standards for grants of public money under the state constitution and offered draft standards. Several industry and chamber witnesses supported the measure, while discussion focused on the need for brick-and-mortar or modular facilities, infrastructure costs, federal inspection needs, and access for hunters and neighbor islands. The committee then took up SB 1269 relating to geothermal resources, which drew broad support from county officials, energy consultants, utility representatives, and community advocates, with one witness opposing it. Supporters described geothermal as a viable, indigenous, firm baseload energy source that could help reduce Hawaii’s high electricity costs and support clean energy goals; one witness emphasized prior work in New Zealand and another urged the state to move forward with exploration. A DBEDT representative explained that the department is coordinating geothermal-related work with the Hawaii Technology Development Corp., the University of Hawaii, and the Hawaii State Energy Office, noting a prior $3 million appropriation, phase-one community engagement work, and plans to seek a contractor for geoscience and exploration in phase two. Members pressed DBEDT to explain how this bill fits with other geothermal measures moving through different committees, and the chair asked the department to review SB 993 and better coordinate the package of geothermal bills. On SB 1337 relating to the Stadium Authority, the stadium manager testified in support of clarifying quorum rules, explaining that the authority currently has eight seated voting members out of nine possible voting seats and that the bill would help ensure voting members are counted for quorum; he said meetings have not been delayed. Finally, on SB 883 relating to hotels, the Attorney General’s office raised First Amendment and contract-law concerns and recommended adding a purpose statement and a non-impairment savings clause. Unite Here Local 5 and other supporters said guests should be notified of hotel service disruptions such as construction, closures, or labor disputes, while opponents questioned who would enforce the law, what penalties would apply, and whether the measure could require hotels to pay damages even without a complaint. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, here we go: cap-and-trade.
• There's no **GGRF** without cap-and-trade. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
• Rudner-Sutter** pointed out at the very end about cap and trade and the need.
• We need action on cap and trade sooner rather than later. Thank you. Good afternoon.
• We are in support of extending cap-and-trade authority on item number two.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• off sales uh there was a growler cap off sales uh there was a growler cap that<00:20:13.320>
• They are capped on the amount that they can produce.
• That rate cap will save organizations roughly $14 million per year.
• Is there a cap on that? Mr. Chair, Representative, there's not a cap on that.
• Thank you. year is there a cap on that or Miss Wade year is there a cap on that or Miss Wade Mr<01:36

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• But it might increase the usage of the tax credits, in which case we need to address the cap that we
• And it would also remove the cap from what's in there now.
• I think we're really close to the cap.
• So this has Nothing to do with those income caps that were a part of the originally filed bill.
• and capped at only 50% of the individual or entity making the contributions' taxable income.

Bills: SB683, SB1579, SB1389, SB1387, SB1390, SB1391, SB2063, SB1829, SB2060, SB1842, SB1398, SB1212, SB2158, SB102

Keywords: education, tax credit, student support, private school, Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit, financial assistance, homeschooling, qualified expenses, property tax, valuation increase, taxpayer rights, homestead, protest process, school choice, tuition assistance, income limits, parental choice, accreditation, sales tax, motor vehicles

Transcript Highlights:

• there's lots of wells that have been uh there hundreds of them in fact and many of them have been capped
• there's lots of wells that have been uh there hundreds of them in fact and many of them have been capped
• And the second question is how many of those has been capped?
• question is how many of those has second question is how many of those has been<00:04:28.800> capped
• been capped? been capped?

Bills: SB174, SB174

Keywords: business taxes, annual reports, Alabama Tax Tribunal, tax appeals, local government, SB174, alternative energy, alternative energy wells, alternative energy facility, geothermal, geothermal energy, subsurface energy, energy storage, energy capture, energy generation, hydropower, solar energy, oil and gas well conversion, well conversion, plugging and abandonment

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, repealing the education trust fund targeted aid cap.
• So, this notion that we don't cap things is just completely erroneous.
• Capped a whole bunch of towns in the fiscal capacity disparity aid.
• The cap should not be based Manchester.
• Why would it be okay to all of a sudden, three years later, cap it?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Cap-and-Invest program, as well as a handful of our other climate policies.
• I'll be focusing mainly on the Cap-and-Invest program today, but also worth noting that we do oversee
• Zooming in a little bit to the Cap-and-Invest program.
• So when we talk about anything that we are engaging in policy development on under the Cap-and-Invest
• By contrast, the Cap-and-Invest program, which Joel just talked about, is an emissions standard.

Summary: The committee held an interim work session focused first on carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS), then on hazardous waste and extended producer responsibility (EPR). On the CCUS topic, industry and nonprofit presenters described point-source capture, direct air capture, mineralization, and geologic sequestration, emphasizing Washington’s basalt formations and state trust lands as strong candidates for storage. They argued that CCUS can help hard-to-abate industrial sectors, support jobs and investment, and provide a pathway for compliance, while also noting the need for clearer permitting, subsurface rights, pipeline authority, and storage infrastructure. Ecology and Commerce staff explained current state policy touchpoints, including Cap-and-Invest offsets and exemptions for permanently stored CO2, the public comment process underway to define “thousand-year” permanence, and how CCUS might fit within the Clean Energy Transformation Act without counting emitting generation as non-emitting. Some presenters supported more state action and primacy over federal permitting, while others warned about costs, energy use, uncertain capture performance, and the need to ensure real net greenhouse gas reductions and long-term liability protections. Members asked about public meetings, whether mineralized carbon would qualify as exempt under the Climate Commitment Act, the timeline for Ecology guidance, aquifer and water-quality concerns, energy intensity of capture systems, and liability if storage later proves problematic. Responses said Ecology’s guidance process is already underway, public meetings will be virtual, mineralized carbon would likely qualify if it meets the permanence standard, and EPA rules require storage in deep saline formations below drinking water aquifers. Industry speakers said capture energy use varies by source and concentration, and one presenter noted that some states use trust funds funded by injectors to address long-term liability. The second half of the session shifted to hazardous waste and EPR. Ecology staff reviewed existing product stewardship programs for electronics, paint, batteries, and mercury lights, and described moderate risk waste and household hazardous waste management in Washington. They highlighted that E-Cycle and PaintCare are producer-funded, that the battery stewardship program will begin in 2027, and that the mercury lamp program is in transition after its prior stewardship organization exited, prompting enforcement notices and a pending replacement plan. Ecology recommended best practices for future EPR programs, including clear producer and product definitions, full producer funding, convenience standards, annual reporting, and strong agency enforcement and plan approval authority. Local government speakers from King County and Douglas County described rising collection costs, equity and access barriers, rural travel distances, and the need for stable funding and flexible local implementation. King County said it collected over 3 million pounds of hazardous products in 2025 and supports EPR as a way to shift costs from ratepayers to producers, while Douglas County emphasized that rural residents will participate when services are accessible and that future systems should account for geography and local infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also increases the cap, correct? >> No, the cap stays the same.
• So this does increase the cap. Is that right?
• So this does increase the cap. million. So this does increase the cap.
• But this does increase the cap by 5 million.
• But this does this does increase the cap But this does this does increase the cap by<00:25:31.760

Bills: SB62, HB361, HB244, HB377, HB411, HB422, HB423, HB425, SB16, HB452, HB354

Keywords: SB62, Alabama, conservation and natural resources, hunting license, fishing license, wildlife heritage license, license identification, government-issued ID, residency determination, in-state residency, student residency, tuition classification, public higher education, domicile, resident status, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, DCNR, Section 9-11-32, Section 9-11-33, Section 16-64-3

Transcript Highlights:

• So, that will cap that.
• Um, the first thing that will<00:02:28.720> do<00:02:28.959> is<00:02:29.680> cap
• the scuff fund at 15 will do is cap the scuff fund at 15 million<00:02:32.000> because<00:02:
• So, that will<00:02:37.599> cap<00:02:37.920> that.
• It will also if the will cap that.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:25 SB 129 Discussion: 01:14 SB 129 Voting: 03:35, 958, all

Summary: The Standing Committee on Economic Development, Labor, and Tourism met for its fourth meeting and considered one bill sponsored by Senator Mike Nees concerning unemployment insurance and the SCUF (Service Capacity Upgrade Fund). Senator Nees explained that the bill would lower employer rates tied to the fund, while continuing to support unemployment insurance system upgrades. He said the fund was created after problems with the unemployment computer system and that employers had borne the cost successfully. Nees also described a planned floor amendment, agreed to by the chamber and cabinet, that would cap the SCUF fund at $15 million and redirect contributions to the regular unemployment insurance fund if that fund falls below the prior year’s level. He said this would prevent overfunding technology while ensuring benefit payments remain protected. Committee members responded favorably, with remarks praising the bill and joking about government spending and the unemployment system’s handling during COVID. The committee first reported the bill favorably on a 9-0 vote, then later recorded additional votes from members and guests, bringing the tally to 11-0 in support. The chair announced the bill would be reported with favorable expression and that it would have the same recommendation on the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so now we're going to introduce the Indigo Milk Cap. Uh, Haley Collins is...
• The indigo milk cap is a blue mushroom.
• So, why the indigo milk cap should be a good state mushroom for Kentucky is the last one.
• And this adds to our reasons why the indigo milk cap should be our state mushroom.
• <00:15:00.800> Uh cap should be our state mushroom. Uh cap should be our state mushroom.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 01:17 SB 19 Discussion: 02:23 SB 19 Vote: 16:41, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It actually has to count toward that revenue cap.
• It actually has to count towards that revenue cap.
• I just wanted to ask for clarification on that cap. Is that CPI or 5%?
• But it does not actually change the wording of the CPI or 5% cap. Okay.
• That's for a taxing jurisdiction to come and say, I can hit my revenue cap each time.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Each facility type was also capped at the amount that they could receive each year.
• above the caps, but we're limited to that.
• the caps, but we're limited to that.
• So for those, for the 1950s, eligible hours above the caps, but we're limited to that.
• of 100,000 and then of the 210 non-accredited facilities, 23 reached the cap of 75,000.

Summary: The committee opened with roll call, welcomed members back for the first committee weeks, and heard brief personal updates from several senators before moving into agency implementation updates on recently enacted health care laws. The Agency for Health Care Administration reported on Senate Bill 64 creating rural emergency hospitals, explaining that AHCA adopted the required rules effective June 1, 2025, but that no hospitals have yet been designated. Members asked about possible hospital conversions, accreditation and survey responsibilities, and whether Florida would apply for federal rural health transformation funding; AHCA said it intends to apply and has already been working on the issue with federal officials. AHCA also reviewed the non-emergent care access plan requirement under Senate Bill 7016. The agency said hospitals with emergency departments must submit plans that help redirect non-emergent patients to appropriate care settings while complying with EMTALA, and that 83 plans had been received and 63 approved as of September 30. Members asked about data collection, managed care coordination, and the state’s health information exchange; AHCA said it has moved to a new HIE vendor and will continue monitoring implementation and possible care gaps. AHCA then updated the committee on the TEACH program, saying $6.8 million was spent in 2024-25 across 59 parent organizations and 229 facilities, with more than 1,800 students and nearly 380,000 clinical hours reimbursed. The agency said rulemaking is nearly complete, a new nursing student category and expanded facility eligibility were added, and a federal 1115 workforce waiver remains stalled after CMS signaled it will not approve new workforce demonstrations. AHCA also reviewed House Bill 121 on KidCare eligibility, explaining that implementation of the 300% poverty-level expansion remains blocked by federal litigation and waiver issues tied to premium nonpayment rules; members and public speakers urged action to close the coverage gap. Public testimony on AHCA’s presentation came from representatives of health centers and advocacy groups, who said the non-emergent care access plan has improved hospital-health center coordination and reduced repeat emergency use, and who urged implementation of KidCare expansion for children in the coverage gap. The Department of Health then presented updates on FRAM, the Sanadi screening grant program, the Health Care Innovation Revolving Loan Program, telehealth maternity care, swimming lesson vouchers, and House Bill 159 on pharmacist dispensing of HIV post-exposure prophylaxis. DOH reported strong participation in FRAM and the telehealth maternity program, 24 Sanadi grant awards in 42 counties, 4,945 swimming lesson vouchers issued last year and 2,371 so far this year, and three approved certification courses with five pharmacist certifications issued under HB 159. Committee members asked about recruitment of dentists and other providers, telehealth maternity outcomes, and why participation in the maternity program remains below expected levels; DOH said outreach and regional referral networks are expanding and more detailed outcome data will be included in the upcoming legislative report.