Transcript Highlights:

• And this is probably really interesting to the group here today.
• Anyone is interested in kind of looking how we structured it.
• So in the interest of time, I'm going to try to hit the highlights.
• We're going to be monitoring calculating and then for the supplemental funding program.
• And so we calculate those measures and share them with the health plans.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• because 70% is what we had calculated because 70% is what we had calculated with<00:15:43.560>
• Have you gone through that calculation, and if so, what is it?
• I have not gone through that calculation on the nurses.
• I have gone through that calculation on the expansion.
• What an interesting process that these families have to go through.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Health and Family Services met with a quorum still coming together and first handled roll call and minutes. The main presentation came from the Department for Medicaid Services, with Commissioner Lisa Lee and CFO Steve Beckle giving an overview of Kentucky Medicaid, its federal-state financing structure, and the department’s 1915(c) home- and community-based waiver programs. They explained FMAP funding levels for traditional Medicaid, administration, IT, expansion adults, and CHIP, and noted the size of the program, including more than 600,000 Kentucky children eligible for Medicaid or CHIP, about 485,000 expansion adults, over 69,000 enrolled providers, and $18.5 billion in 2024 expenditures. A major focus was the waiver system, including the acquired brain injury waivers, model waiver, independence waiver, Michelle P. waiver, and Supports for Community Living waiver. The department said these waivers are intended to keep people with physical or developmental disabilities in home and community settings rather than facilities, and that many services are not covered by Medicare or commercial insurance. Officials described participant-directed services, interagency administration, and eligibility rules, including that some waiver programs use the child’s income only rather than family income. They also reported an unduplicated waiver wait list of 13,930 people and said the General Assembly had added waiver slots in the last budget, including 650 ABI slots and 1,275 more to be allocated July 1, 2025. The department also discussed a waiver rate study conducted by Guidehouse, explaining that CMS requires a defensible rate methodology because there is no Medicare or commercial benchmark for many waiver services. They said the study used cost and wage surveys, provider and stakeholder input, and aimed to improve transparency, provider stability, and rate parity. Officials reviewed prior COVID-era Appendix K rate increases and budget-driven increases, and said the budget ultimately funded rates at about 70% of the benchmark study, while preserving higher existing rates where needed so no provider would be cut. They highlighted larger differences in behavioral support and case management rates, and said a public report is available. Members asked several questions about the potential impact of federal FMAP changes, especially possible reductions in the enhanced match for expansion adults and Medicaid IT/admin activities. DMS said any FMAP reduction would require more state general fund dollars, estimating about $75 million for each 1% drop in the expansion match, while impacts on administrative IT funding would depend on the systems being built or implemented in a given year. Members also pressed for clarification on waiver wait-list procedures, funded versus filled slots, and what happens when someone on the wait list is later found ineligible. DMS said people on the wait list may not yet have been assessed, can be reevaluated if conditions change, and are still eligible for regular Medicaid state-plan services if they qualify, even if they are waiting for waiver services.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that doesn't go into the calculation on... ...doesn't go into the calculation on Medicaid.
• What I found interesting, Mr.
• That's interesting. How did they know that?
• It just seems we're not doing it all; it just seems interesting to me, I think, because what would make
• And you know, this would not affect child support at all; the judge won't calculate this into...

Bills: HB37, HB187, HB177, SB63, HB82, SB48, HB33, HB37, HB33

Keywords: judicial compensation, salary increase, court system, Alabama legislation, judges, HB187, court fees, docket fee, sheriff's fund, sheriff's office, jail operations, law enforcement, county sheriff, court filing fees, Alabama Code 12-19-312, solicitor's fund, clerk's fund, forensic services trust fund, budget flexibility, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• That's an important thing. of the formula are calculated based on of the formula are calculated based
• Um, we calculate that through fiscal year 26, and that's the last year that we'll be calculating that
• And when we calculate it in fiscal year 26, that will be the last time we calculate it, and so then those
• <04:52:19.120> that 25% for that child um we calculate that 25% for that child um we calculate
• using a a pretty technical calculation using a a pretty technical calculation Mark<05:07:58.840>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Division II committee heard a Department of Education budget presentation from Commissioner Frank Edelblut and CFO Tammy Valen-cour. The department outlined its organizational structure and emphasized that it functions largely as a flow-through agency for school funding. The commissioner reviewed general fund and Education Trust Fund items, including state aid, dropout prevention, special education, building aid, lease aid, charter schools, Education Freedom Accounts, and the district adequacy calculation. He also highlighted the public school infrastructure fund, saying the state has invested well over $50 million in school safety since 2018 for measures such as access controls, locks, and window film, and argued that safety spending should be ongoing rather than reactive. Members asked about the variability in the school infrastructure line, special education aid, and the Discovery Education learning platform. Edelblut explained that some safety funding had come from one-time surplus appropriations rather than the agency line, and said special education aid was underappropriated because districts submitted more invoices than expected; he said the governor added $16 million to address the shortfall. He also described CTE renovation funding, noting four projects were initially proposed but only Jaffrey and Milford were still moving forward, with local votes required and the state covering 75% of costs. He said Milford’s project was omitted from the governor’s budget by oversight. The department also reviewed enrollment trends, noting public school enrollment has fallen from about 230,000 students in 2002 to about 185,000 today. Edelblut clarified that charter students are not eligible for Education Freedom Accounts, while EFA students attending non-public schools are counted as EFA students. He described several one-time surplus-funded initiatives, including Student Clearinghouse, MTSSB work, civics curriculum development, computer science education, and adult education. He also discussed a $4 million CTE tuition and transportation grant, saying it was kept as a competitive grant rather than a formula grant to avoid creating an ongoing maintenance-of-effort commitment that could jeopardize federal Perkins funding. In the final portion, Edelblut identified prioritized needs in the department’s budget, especially funding for a state administrator for assessment to support the legislatively required civics assessment, and additional support for the Discovery Education platform. He said every school in the state is using the platform and cited more than 1.5 million educator engagements, while a member raised concerns about mixed reviews and uneven district awareness of the program. No votes or formal actions were taken during the presentation and question period.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, they always look at these calculations as what is the assumed interest rate, uh, which has been 6.75
• as what is the calculations as what is the assumed<03:26:34.720> interest<03:26:35.160> rate
• interest once a member retires<03:31:29.319> we<03:31:30.080> then<03:31:31.080> calculate
• <04:10:44.279> so the unfunded liability calculation so the unfunded liability calculation
• separated out and calculated separated out and calculated differently<04:35:17.920> than<

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 622, but after the sponsor said further research raised concerns, he asked that the bill be tabled. The committee then moved in executive session and voted unanimously to find the bill inexpedient to legislate, sending it to consent. The committee also retained House Bill 349, the ophthalmologic laser bill, after members said more time was needed for the professions involved to work out training standards and provide additional information; that motion also passed unanimously. The committee then discussed House Bill 244, a municipal building/fire code recodification measure. Members said the bill needed more review and careful scrutiny because of its length and possible unintended effects, and they voted unanimously to retain it as well. House Bill 534 was then heard; the sponsor said the bill did not do what was intended because of a misunderstanding about current processing, and the committee voted inexpedient to legislate and placed it on consent. The committee next considered House Bill 233, with an amendment to remove a requirement affecting the New Hampshire Vaccine Association. Supporters argued the bill would reduce an unnecessary burden and improve transparency, while opponents said the committee should not single out one private 501(c)(3) organization. The amendment was adopted 8-5, and the bill as amended then passed 7-6; a minority report was requested. Finally, the committee opened House Bill 536, a proposed 1.5% cost-of-living adjustment for certain state retirees. The sponsor and supporters argued retirees had not received adequate COLAs and that the bill would help offset inflation, while the retirement system testified that the proposal would add significant costs, including an estimated $1.5 million for the state, $6.6 million for political subdivisions, and about $100.7 million in present-value unfunded liability, with the impact reflected in future employer contribution rates.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the things about this committee that is kind of interesting is that, unlike other committees,
• on the I don't know. which is important that all the taxes are calculated on the total transaction cost
• We represent the interests of the 9,000-plus convenience stores throughout New England, as well as fuel
• Yet, the manufacturers, who the calculation of this piece of the puzzle would be, would have to hire
• It's going to be an impossible thing to enforce or even calculate.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure held a public hearing on two bills: House Bill 5138, concerning consumer protections for cash transactions amid penny scarcity, and House Bill 5036, concerning consumer information related to tariffs. Chairs Tackey Chan and Senator Payano opened the hearing, noted the committee’s one-year anniversary, reviewed procedures, and explained that the Senate and House were both in session, with Senator Payano prepared to take over if needed. The committee heard from several industry and legislative witnesses, and the hearing was eventually closed by motion and voice vote. Supporters of H. 5138, including Senator Paul Feeney, the Massachusetts Package Stores Association, the Massachusetts Restaurant Association, and the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association, said the bill would create a clear statewide rounding standard for cash transactions if pennies become scarce. They argued it would improve operational efficiency, reduce confusion, provide legal clarity, and protect businesses and consumers by requiring notice and limiting the rule to cash payments. The Retailers Association of Massachusetts also supported the concept but suggested amendments, including changing mandatory rounding language to allow flexibility and clarifying that taxes and fees would not be affected. Witnesses were largely opposed to H. 5036. The Retailers Association, the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association, and the Massachusetts State Auto Dealers Association said tariff-related shelf or price disclosures would be difficult or impossible to implement because tariff costs change frequently and are hard to trace through complex supply chains. Auto dealers emphasized the challenge of calculating tariff impacts across thousands of vehicle parts and models, while retailers said the proposal would add burdens and could increase costs. No votes on the bills were taken during the hearing; the only formal action was adjournment of the hearing after testimony concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• > the Evaluation is calculated using the Evaluation is calculated using the following<00:26:11.040
• So, I'll go ahead and ADT calculations.
• ,<00:39:31.160> but I found this rather interesting, but I found this rather interesting,
• :40.600> abandoned interesting.
• Conversion of abandoned interesting.

Keywords: 00:05 Call to Order and Roll Call 01:55 Bridge Improvement Program 18:56 County Priority Projects Program 38:10 Transportation Alternative Program 51:47 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for the first interim meeting of the 2025 Budget Review Committee on Transportation and heard from Bobby Jo Lewis, commissioner of Rural and Municipal Aid at the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. She reviewed the new County City Bridge Improvement Program, created in the 2024 regular session, reporting that phases one and two are complete, 45 bridges have been funded so far, and about $18.45 million has been authorized. She said roughly $6.549 million remains for phase three in the current fiscal year, with about $26.445 million in bridge applications still pending. For fiscal year 2026, the program will again have $25 million and will use four application phases. She also described a training resource, Local Bridges 101, and said a new executive advisor, Greg Meredith, has been brought in to help with the bridge program. Members asked how rollover applications would be handled, whether they would be re-evaluated with new applications, how the program would account for bridge longevity and load posting, and how isolated communities would be prioritized. Lewis said applicants not funded in FY25 would be contacted and could choose to roll their applications into FY26, and all applications would be evaluated together at the end of each phase. She said preservation projects are assessed for how much they extend a bridge’s life, and isolated community access bridges or closed bridges with no detour access receive priority. She also said the department aims for equitable distribution across regions and plans to produce a map showing where funds have been awarded. Lewis then turned to the County Priority Projects Program and the Local Assistance Road Program established in House Bill 546 and related resolutions. She said the application cycle opened June 1 and closes October 1, with 106 memoranda of agreement being prepared for awards in House Joint Resolution 46. She described updated application and reporting forms, a scoring matrix, and a County City Pavement Evaluation Manual used to rate projects based on preservation of assets, average daily traffic, recent improvements, safety, cost, and district priority. She said projects must be rehabilitation projects designed to restore the original condition of the road, cannot exceed $500,000, and must use local match percentages tied to the economic development grant program formula. She also reported on funding status for prior road projects, including completed, partially completed, pending, and underrun amounts that may be reauthorized. Committee members asked about photo documentation, online access to project materials, how to measure whether projects truly restore roads to original condition, and what happens when project costs exceed estimates. Lewis said the department is still working on how best to store and share the large volume of photos, and that projects are certified through district offices and local sign-off after completion. She said overages are the responsibility of the applicant because the state does not have additional money beyond the awarded amount. No formal votes were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Of Andrew Revalus due to reasons of personal interest. Clerk, will you note?
• I'd like to be shown as not voting on the executive nomination for reasons of personal interest.
• But if closing could always be moved, what's how are you gonna calculate that?
• But that's not calculated in this fiscal impact. Is that correct? You for the question.
• Can you kind of show us how that calculation is?

Bills: HB2894, HB3418, HB3415, HB3413, HB3414, HB3416, HB3417, HB3419, HB3420, HB1739, HB1752, HB1979, HB2941, HB2992, HB3075, HB3086, HB3177, HB3269, HB3278, HB3279, HB3497, HB3644, HB4432, HB3720, HB3849, HB3882, HB3919, HB3941, HB4118, HB4141, HB4268, HB4342, HB4428, HB4429, HB4434

Keywords: HB2894, Oklahoma Rural Jobs Act, rural jobs, rural investment, tax credit, capital investment tax credit, state tax credits, economic development, rural fund, rural investor, qualified investment, eligible business, Department of Commerce, rural business, investment certification, tax liability, credit cap, workforce development, small business finance, rural development

Transcript Highlights:

• So I think it's interesting that Senator Shamp brought up two very important points.
• We advocate for the best interest of children in family court.
• We advocate for the best interest of children in family court.
• This has plainly proven not to be in the child's best interest.
• This has plainly proven not to be in the child's best interest.

Bills: SB1015, SB1049, SB1066, SB1081, SB1092, SB1133, SB1134, SB1139, SB1147, SB1148, SB1168, SB1189, SCR1001, SCR1002, SCR1005, SCR1010

Keywords: gender transition, detransition, healthcare liability, medical malpractice, youth protection, legal action, Arizona law, spousal maintenance, court guidelines, self-sufficiency, financial support, marriage dissolution, child safety, dependency cases, attorney regulation, foster care, legal representation, probation, dangerous crimes, children

Summary: The Senate Judiciary and Elections Committee heard several bills and took action on multiple measures. SB 1066 would create civil liability for knowingly or recklessly publishing fraudulent scientific research, allowing the Attorney General, county attorneys, and injured parties to sue; the sponsor and supporters argued it would deter research fraud and protect the public, while opponents warned it would chill research and speech. After debate over peer review, fraud standards, and the bill’s scope, the committee voted 4-3 to give SB 1066 a do-pass recommendation. SB 1015 would impose strict personal liability on providers who perform gender transition procedures on minors, including liability for later detransition costs and injuries; supporters framed it as accountability for irreversible treatment on children, while opponents called it discriminatory and likely to function as a backdoor ban. After testimony from the sponsor, medical professionals, detransitioners, and civil liberties advocates, the committee also passed SB 1015 on a 4-3 vote. The committee then considered SB 1049, which would limit spousal maintenance awards to four years and change the factors courts use in setting support. The sponsor said the bill was intended to curb long-term maintenance and align support with self-sufficiency, while judicial and family-law witnesses explained the existing guideline system, the 2022-2025 court study, and concerns that a hard cap could ignore case-specific circumstances such as disability or housing instability. The committee adopted an amendment setting the duration cap at four years and approved the bill as amended by a 4-2 vote. SB 1189, allowing campaign funds to be used for personal security for candidates and family members, passed unanimously after supporters cited threats against public officials and personal experiences with harassment. The committee also passed SB 1081, which would prevent a Department of Child Safety attorney from appearing before a judge they had appeared before in the prior five DCS cases; the sponsor said it was meant to reduce familiarity between attorneys and judges, while opponents raised concerns about rural court access and arbitrary limits. SB 1133, which would eliminate the need for a candidate to file a second financial disclosure statement if one had already been filed that year, was amended to add an emergency clause and passed unanimously. The committee then moved to SCR 1001, a referral measure to end early voting at 7 p.m. on the Friday before the general election and require affirmative request for a mail ballot by voters who have provided proof of citizenship; the transcript cuts off as that measure was being introduced.

Transcript Highlights:

• a tax calculator my website and our ERP and I've got to have an API connection so that I am calculating
• This revenue has been deposited into an interest-bearing escrow account.
• We do currently use ESA, and I think this is an interesting concept.
• We do currently use ESA, and I think this is an interesting concept.
• And then, obviously, you save all that interest going forward also on that bond.

Bills: HB2143, HB2273, HB2290, HB2373, HB2784, HB2794, HB4037

Keywords: public safety, retirement system, investments, trust fund, board of trustees, financial report, income tax rebate, Pinal County, taxpayer eligibility, state revenue, financial assistance, transaction privilege tax, business location, tangible personal property, shared vehicle, sourcing, income tax, veterans, donations, tax refunds

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee first set aside House Bill 2794 at the sponsor’s request and then took up House Bill 2290, which would clarify Arizona transaction privilege tax sourcing rules for tangible personal property by specifying that an order is received at a seller’s business location and that server location does not control sourcing. The sponsor said the bill codifies existing, historic treatment and would provide certainty for taxpayers, while the League of Arizona Cities and Towns opposed it, arguing it would be a major departure from current practice, could shift revenue away from rural communities, and could create multiple tax rates for a single transaction. The Department of Revenue said it was neutral, acknowledged ongoing ambiguity and administrative complexity, and explained that a 2023 draft ruling had been based on a legal analysis but was never finalized. Several business and association witnesses supported the bill as necessary to prevent inconsistent audits and to preserve origin-based sourcing for in-state sellers. After extended debate, the committee passed HB 2290 on a 5-3 vote, with one member absent. The committee then heard House Bill 2373, which would add a space on the individual income tax return for taxpayers to voluntarily direct part of a refund to the Veterans Donations Fund or a veterans service organization fund. The sponsor and a representative of veterans advocacy groups described it as a simple, voluntary way to support veterans organizations and local projects. No opposition was raised, and the bill was approved unanimously by the members present, 8-0, with one absent. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 2143, a technical change to Public Safety Personnel Retirement System law that would limit the 5% ownership cap to publicly traded corporations. PSPRS representatives said the change would reduce compliance costs and avoid unnecessary workarounds while maintaining existing investment safeguards and diversification rules. Members discussed that ASRS does not have the same cap and that PSPRS already has broader limits on concentration risk. The bill was presented as an administrative cleanup measure, and discussion focused on clarifying that it would not increase investment risk.

Transcript Highlights:

• That rate would be rounded to the nearest hundredth for the calculation.
• I would be interested, though, Mr. Chairman, if we could.
• When Alex started this whole committee almost a year ago, it was an interesting, factor.
• But that's how that's calculated. On the completion factors, this is what you'll see.
• Now, before we go, before we do the committee work, comments by interested persons.

Summary: The committee met to discuss higher education funding and capital building policy. Members first heard an update from NDUS Deputy Commissioner Lisa Johnson on low-producing academic programs. She described a proposed board policy using a five-year rolling window and thresholds of fewer than 10 undergraduate graduates or fewer than 5 graduate graduates, with programs flagged for three consecutive review periods going to the board. Possible outcomes would include continuation, continuation with modifications, inactivation, or termination. Members asked about how the review would account for program costs, service to other students, workforce demand, and the difference between inactivation and termination. Johnson said the board would consider broader factors and that campuses already do detailed program analysis. Several members also asked about cost savings and staffing impacts from program terminations, and Johnson said the board would try to provide more information later. The committee then received a report on the Capital Building Fund from Jamie Wilkie. He reviewed the program’s history, matching requirements, and recent uses, noting that about $334 million in state and matching dollars has been invested overall, with most going to deferred maintenance and extraordinary repairs. Members discussed whether the program is reducing deferred maintenance and requested updated systemwide data on deferred maintenance and campus space utilization. Wilkie said the board is considering a new study to update deferred maintenance figures, which are based on information more than 12 years old. He also reported that several institutions have used current biennium funds for projects such as residence hall renovations, health sciences housing, generators, and building repairs. Later, the committee began a detailed walkthrough of a draft bill that would replace the current higher education funding formula with an FTE-based model and also revise the capital building fund structure. The draft would use fall enrollment FTEs, add completion incentives for degrees in in-demand fields, and create a separate research funding component for UND and NDSU tied to doctoral completions and external research expenditures. Members raised concerns about the use of older data in the formula, the treatment of waivers, the weighting of professional and health sciences programs, and the use of CIP codes to define CTE and education incentives. The bill draft would also combine capital building fund tiers, broaden eligible uses for deferred maintenance and legislatively authorized projects, change matching requirements, repeal the old formula chapter and the capital pool, and transfer funds from the Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund into the capital building fund. No final votes were taken during the portion provided; the meeting was primarily discussion and review.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm interested in learning more about the special ed Goalbook.
• We calculate that as $16,759, roughly.
• It's interesting, though, that they...
• And so some of the categorical framework is interesting to me.
• And so some of the categorical framework is interesting to me.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to discuss special education funding and retention, beginning with approval of the prior meeting minutes and then hearing a presentation from North Dakota United on a statewide special education survey and retention rubric. Presenters described how the rubric and survey were developed from special educator input around four domains: paperwork and due process support, workload, student and staff safety, and paraprofessional management. They reported high levels of stress and burnout, including increased workload, difficulty taking prep and lunch time, concerns about mental health, and widespread difficulty filling special education positions. Committee members questioned the survey’s lack of a general-education comparison group, the interpretation of terms like “rarely” and “sometimes,” and whether results could be broken down further by district size, unit, or disability area. The survey results showed the weakest area was workload, with respondents reporting caseloads increasing without corresponding adjustments, little additional support or compensation when workloads rise, and few negotiated-agreement protections. Paperwork and due process also scored poorly, with many teachers saying they rarely receive dedicated time during the duty day, often work outside contract hours without compensation, and take work home on evenings and weekends. Student and staff safety scored somewhat better but still showed gaps in crisis follow-up, notification about violent behavior, protective gear, and leave options after incidents. Paraprofessional management also drew concern, especially low pay, insufficient staffing, limited administrative support, and the burden placed on teachers to supervise and train paras. Several teachers then testified directly about the practical impact of these issues. One special education teacher described the job as combining instruction, legal compliance, and paraprofessional supervision, often requiring work beyond contracted hours and contributing to burnout and turnover. Another testified that special education case managers are effectively doing three full-time jobs and that the paperwork and caseload demands are a major reason people avoid or leave the field. Committee members discussed whether the problems are primarily local or state-level, whether more funding would solve them, and whether changes to the funding formula or weighting for high-cost students might be needed. No formal vote or action was taken beyond a recess and return to order for the next presentation, which continued the discussion of possible special education study objectives and potential policy directions.

Transcript Highlights:

• interests of our son. Didn't show up. interests of our son. Didn't show up.
• I appreciate you. interest of a child, what is that? If if interest of a child, what is that?
• Thank you. to parenting time calculation. to parenting time calculation.
• calculation of child support. calculation of child support. >> Certainly.
• So, how would that be calculated? is. So, how would that be calculated?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These figures will be used to determine two multipliers, the highest of which will be used to calculate
• The calculation will be done annually, with the first calculation occurring in December of 2026.
• The calculation will be done annually with the first calculation occurring in December of 2026.
• Chairman, but I think the committee probably is more interested in the counties that are not compared
• Chair: It's 1% that would come from the calculation of the market pay enhancement, which is based on

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with a quorum present and approved the minutes from the prior meeting. The committee first reconsidered House Bill 5212, restoring a technical amendment from the Education Committee, then reported the amended bill to the full Senate with a do pass recommendation and adopted the title amendment. It also heard and advanced House Bill 407 on the Industrial Access Road Fund, allowing an additional possible $3 million transfer in some years, expanding eligible uses, and raising county/municipal spending caps; the Economic Development Committee’s technical amendment was adopted before the bill was reported. The committee then took up House Bill 4765, which would raise salary schedules for state police, teachers, and school service personnel and was amended with a strike-and-insert provision creating a market pay enhancement tied to county and regional income data. Several senators objected that the proposal would benefit only some counties, but the amendment was adopted by division vote, 10-6, and the bill was reported. Other bills reported included House Bill 5162 on tax lien sale procedures, House Bill 5382 extending the Neighborhood Investment Tax Credit Program to 2031, House Bill 5685 authorizing up to $150 million in revenue bonds for State Culture Center improvements backed by excess lottery funds, House Joint Resolution 42 raising the homestead exemption from $20,000 to $40,000, House Bill 4010 creating an airport hangar grant program, House Bill 4404 increasing volunteer fire departments’ spending cap for training and promotional materials, and House Bill 4592 requiring standardized campus safety mapping data at higher education institutions after an amendment changed the requirement from permissive to mandatory. The committee also reported House Bill 4784 extending the qualified opportunity zone business tax modification, House Bill 5088 increasing benefits in the DNR police officer retirement system with a $4.25 million cash injection, and several supplemental appropriations: Senate Bill 842 for the Spay-Neuter Assistance Fund, Senate Bill 846 for Culture and History repairs and equipment, Senate Bill 872 for DNR repairs and equipment after reducing the amount to $10 million, Senate Bill 876 for three state hospitals, Senate Originating Bill 1 for Culture and History, Senate Originating Bill 2 for highway spending authority, Senate Originating Bill 3 for corrections IT and special services, Senate Originating Bill 4 for tobacco education, and Senate Originating Bill 5 for the Armory Board. The committee adjourned after reporting all listed measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do that first September 1st calculation, then we do an October 1st calculation for Dr so that we say
• that first September 1st calculation that first September 1st calculation then<01:19:02.600>
• then we do an October 1st calculation then we do an October 1st calculation for<01:19:04.440>
• <01:21:51.440> the calculate the calculate the municipalities<01:21:53.880> state<01:21
• <01:27:27.880> costs don't pay there are interest costs don't pay there are interest costs

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee met to review a large package of bills, with the first four—HB 717, 742, 773, and 603—focused on special education aid, formerly called catastrophic aid. Chair Ladin explained that the committee needed to move a special education bill forward by March 4 and was trying to determine which bill would serve as the vehicle. He described the current formula and the difficulty of estimating the fiscal impact of lowering the threshold from 3.5 times the statewide average cost per pupil to a lower level, noting that DOE did not have reliable data on how many students would fall into the lower-cost bands. The committee also noted that several other bills in the package addressed SWEP and adequacy issues, and that HB 510 dealt with due process rather than funding. Mark Mello of the Bureau of School Finance testified that the department only has reliable data for special education expenditures above $70,000 per student, since claims are submitted for reimbursement at that point. He said the bureau was trying to estimate how many students might fall between 2.5x and 3.5x or 3x and 3.5x the average cost, but that the basic answer was they did not know and that any estimate would be difficult. He explained that moving the threshold from 3.5x to 2.5x would create a minimum additional cost of about $13.6 million based on existing claims, not counting new students who would enter the range. Members discussed whether districts already had the underlying data, whether a survey should be required, and how districts know when to begin tracking costs for reimbursement. The committee also discussed proration and the state’s share of special education aid. Mello explained that the current 80% state share is modeled in the formula, but the actual payment has been prorated because appropriations have not matched the statutory liability; he said the state liability was about $50 million, while the budget had provided $34 million, resulting in a 68% payment rate. HB 742 was described as a bill that would eliminate proration by paying the liability directly from the education trust fund with an overflow mechanism. Members also discussed possible alternatives such as changing the state share, using a lower threshold in a transition period, or requiring districts to submit data. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion provided; the committee was still in discussion and considering which bills to advance.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's interesting.
• It's fairly easy to calculate, to be honest.
• That's in the best interest of our taxpayers.
• I looked at the tax calculator myself.
• So why, okay, in the interest of So why, in the interest of consistency and staying within statutes and

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, a proposed constitutional amendment to reduce property taxes by lowering assessment caps on non-homestead property, expanding homestead exemptions over time, and allowing local governments to increase exemptions further. The sponsor argued the measure would provide broad property tax relief while requiring revenues to be directed to core services such as public safety, education, infrastructure, and natural resource projects, with a trust fund intended to help local governments transition. Senators raised concerns about the lack of a fiscal score, the effect on counties, cities, school districts, and special districts, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. Several amendments were debated. Senator Polsky’s amendment to explicitly authorize user fees and non-ad valorem assessments to offset lost property tax revenue failed. Senator Avila’s amendment broadening permissible uses of ad valorem revenue to include county constitutional officers and other expenditures approved by local governing bodies was adopted after debate over whether the bill would otherwise underfund essential functions. Senator Smith’s sunset amendment, which would have made the constitutional changes expire after five years, failed. Senator Smith’s amendment to allow tourism development tax revenue to support public safety and education also failed. Senator Graal’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund language was adopted, with supporters arguing the Constitution should not promise an unfunded account. Additional late-file amendments were considered. Senator Berman’s proposal to change the ballot title to more neutrally describe the measure as affecting property taxes and local community service reductions failed. Senator Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal was adopted, preserving school taxes. Senator Smith’s amendment narrowing the non-homestead assessment cap reduction to small businesses only failed. The committee then returned to the bill as amended and continued questioning the sponsor about eligibility, fiscal impacts, and whether the proposal could lead to local governments offsetting lost revenue through special assessments or other charges.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, how do they calculate fees now? Yeah. How do they, Mr.
• Chairman, how do they calculate fees now?
• Chairman, how do they calculate fees now? Yeah. How do they, Mr.
• Chairman, how do they calculate fees now?
• Chairman, I've been given some interesting other information.

Bills: HB2003, HB2063, HB2111, HB2116, HB2210, HCM2007

Keywords: driver education, instruction permit, underage drivers, motorcycle licenses, traffic regulations, corrections oversight, appropriation, independent office, public safety, funding, driver license, examinations, motorcycle awareness, traffic laws, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 2003, which would lower the instruction-permit age for Class D, G, and M licenses from 15 and a half to 15, while increasing supervised practice requirements for minors: 50 hours for Class G with 20 at night, 50 hours for Class M, and a nine-month permit holding period before licensure. The sponsor argued the bill builds on Arizona’s graduated driver licensing system and is intended to improve teen safety, citing other states with longer permit periods and lower teen fatality rates. Questions focused on who certifies the supervised hours, with staff explaining that a parent, legal guardian, or custodial parent signs off, though driver education remains an alternative. The bill received a do-pass recommendation by a 9-1 vote. House Bill 2063, which appropriates $1.5 million from the General Fund in FY 2027 to the Corrections Oversight Fund, drew emotional testimony in support from a mother whose son died after a prison suicide, and from advocates who said the oversight office is needed given prison health care problems and federal receivership. The sponsor said the funding would support prison oversight and transparency. The committee then approved the bill unanimously, 10-0. The committee also passed House Bill 2116, appropriating $1 million to the Colorado River litigation fund, after the sponsor said the money would help Arizona prepare for possible litigation over Colorado River cuts and that the issue affects nearly every district in the state. Members discussed whether the funding should come from the WIFA fund instead of the General Fund, but the bill received an 8-0 do-pass recommendation with two not voting. The committee also considered House Bill 2210, which would prohibit the state, local governments, and private entities from using ADS-B aircraft surveillance data to calculate, generate, or collect aircraft fees. Supporters, including pilots and the Arizona Pilots Association, argued the technology was intended for safety and should not be used for billing, warning that fee collection could discourage pilots from keeping the system on. Opponents, including the Arizona Airports Association and the City of Phoenix, said airports should retain local control over fee collection methods and that the bill was a solution in search of a problem. After extensive debate about federal requirements, safety, and billing practices, the bill received a tied 4-4 do-pass recommendation. Finally, HCM 2007, a memorial urging renaming sections of State Route 69 to honor veterans of several wars, passed 5-4. The committee also briefly noted that some bills were being held at members’ request.

Transcript Highlights:

• It does include the interest, and does it say penalties also?
• I mean, the interest that's accumulated, I know that part would go to the child.
• So is that also, so let's say the child is 12, is it calculating the next six years of obligation?
• So, interest would be a part of it.
• Determinations reflect the full picture of a child's safety and best interests.

Bills: HB368, HB3311, HB1734, HB2495, HB2716, HB793, HB3376, HB2524, HB3421, HB3446, HB3181

Keywords: electronic devices, family violence, criminal prosecution, protective orders, tracking, harassment, family allowance, decedent's estate, surviving spouse, minor children, inheritance, child support, maintenance, HB 1734, Family Code, Section 155.207, suit affecting the parent-child relationship, SAPCR, continuing exclusive jurisdiction, jurisdiction transfer

Transcript Highlights:

• them two ways to be able to calculate them two ways to be able to calculate their<00:43:06.000><
• <00:47:35.200> the of explain how you would calculate the of explain how you would calculate
• It is that the current system has two different calculations, and when those calculations are done each
• I'm sorry, I conflict of interest?
• interested in listening to the public. interested in listening to the public.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Without inflation in that calculation, that balance would be 1.61 billion.
• well as six months' worth of interest.
• well as six months' worth of interest.
• well as six months' worth of interest.
• <00:51:21.799> on elsewhere anything that's calculated on elsewhere anything that's calculated

Keywords: 1183, house