Transcript Highlights:

• This balance is a primary goal of the legislation that extended the program.
• And so we just need to balance those.
• And CARB is really seeking to find this balance between ambition and affordability.
• I think that's an important balance to be very, very deliberate about.
• It's a much harder balance to actually strike.

Summary: The committee heard an overview of CARB’s proposed amendments to California’s Cap-and-Invest program, implemented under AB 1207 and SB 840 after last year’s reauthorization through 2045. CARB said the draft rule changes are intended to support affordability, market certainty, and the state’s 2030 and 2045 climate targets, while also addressing offsets, utility allowance transfers, leakage protections for industry, and post-2030 allowance budgets. Members emphasized the importance of completing the rulemaking on schedule this spring so the changes can take effect by September 1, 2026. A major focus was how allowances are allocated among electric utilities, natural gas utilities, industry, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. CARB explained that the proposal transfers natural gas utility allowances to electric utilities over time to support electrification and ratepayer protection, while maintaining free allowances for industry to reduce leakage risk and preserve in-state manufacturing and refining. Several members and panelists questioned whether the proposed utility changes could raise rates, whether the transition from gas to electric credits should happen faster, and whether the industrial allocation changes reduce climate credit and GGRF revenues more than necessary. CARB and panelists said they were open to additional data and comments, and noted that the proposal is still in public comment. The committee also discussed carbon capture, carbon removal, and refining. Members asked CARB to ensure that CCUS and CDR are clearly recognized as viable compliance pathways and to keep SB 905 rulemaking on track. On refining, members raised concerns about imported gasoline, leakage, and the need for better data on the carbon intensity of imported fuels; CARB said cap-and-invest applies to fuel suppliers at the rack, while life-cycle accounting issues are handled more through the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and related modeling. CARB said it is continuing technical work on those data tools. In the second panel, the LAO, IEMAC, EDF, and SCAPA representatives generally agreed that the program faces real tradeoffs between affordability, ambition, and leakage protection. The LAO and IEMAC stressed that the Legislature should scrutinize how CARB divides the allowance “pie,” since more free allocations to utilities or industry mean less revenue for GGRF. EDF argued the program could be somewhat more ambitious in the near term without harming affordability, while SCAPA said the proposal would reduce allowances for publicly owned utilities and could undermine early decarbonization investments and ratepayer benefits. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• out of balance, the effects ripple throughout the landscape.
• It seeks to restore balance to this ecosystem.
• Healthy ecosystems require balance, accountability, and timely action.
• Our conservation efforts, the balanced ecosystem, is totally destroyed.
• We want healthy wildlife and we want balance.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on House Bill 2619, which would create a joint legislative task force to review and recommend ways to reduce regulatory burdens in agriculture, and on House Joint Memorial 4009, which asks Congress to ensure federal wildfire response agencies remain capable of protecting communities, natural resources, and firefighter safety. On HB 2619, the prime sponsor and supporters from the Washington State Department of Agriculture, cattle, wheat, potato, onion, and dairy interests said the bill responds to farm stress and suicide concerns by examining regulatory overload; WSDA supported the concept but noted a fiscal note, and members discussed whether the task force scope and cost could be reduced before policy cutoff. On HJM 4009, staff and the sponsor described the memorial as a request for stronger federal wildfire capacity and coordination, with testimony from tribes, counties, forest landowners, conservation groups, and public employees emphasizing wildfire risk, smoke impacts, and the importance of federal-state cooperation; the committee also repeatedly tied the memorial to support for state wildfire funding under 1168 and heard broad support for restoring that funding. The committee then took up House Bill 2221, which would require the Department of Fish and Wildlife to designate at-risk ungulate populations and begin predator mitigation when certain population declines occur, while also requiring annual reporting and white-tailed deer surveys. The sponsor argued the bill addresses rapidly declining deer and elk herds, predator pressure, food security, and rural economies in northeast Washington. Supporters included some local residents, ranchers, sheriffs, county officials, and the Colville Tribes, who said predators, livestock conflicts, and reduced hunting opportunity are harming communities and that the state should act more aggressively. Opponents included WDFW staff, Washington Wildlife First, the Sierra Club, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, and other conservation voices, who said the bill is not scientifically supported, would be costly, and wrongly blames predators rather than habitat, forage, weather, disease, and vehicle collisions; several said predator control would have limited value and could undermine wolf recovery. Some agricultural and sportsmen groups supported the bill in principle but asked for amendments, especially to remove or revise the in-state wolf translocation provision. No final votes or executive action were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• propose using the rollback millage rate, our new revenue, and our carry forward, the use of our fund balance
• And then $12.3 million utilization from our fund balance.
• And then our fund balance here, $12.3 million, is a little over 17% of our total budget, relying upon
• The remaining balance of that ad valorem collection is what we use and leverage with our partners to
• Our balance for these projects is $281 million, which we will look to fund over Our balance for these

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government heard budget presentations from the Northwest Florida, Suwannee River, St. Johns River, Southwest Florida, and South Florida water management districts for FY 2026-2027. Each district described its preliminary budget, major funding sources, staffing levels, and priorities within the four core missions of water supply, water quality, natural systems, and flood protection. Common themes included reduced budgets from the prior year due to completion of major projects, continued reliance on state appropriations and ad valorem revenue, rising construction and maintenance costs, and the need to maintain aging infrastructure while advancing alternative water supply, springs restoration, flood control, and land management projects. Committee members repeatedly asked how much of each district’s budget and personnel were devoted to the core missions, how maintenance and operating projections were developed, and how projects were selected. The districts generally said most spending was tied to core responsibilities, with administrative overhead relatively small, and explained that budgets are built through a mix of staff analysis, governing board direction, strategic basin planning, and cooperative funding with local, state, and federal partners. Several districts highlighted specific projects, including Water First North Florida, Black Creek, Taylor Creek Reservoir improvements, Crane Creek, Everglades restoration, and various springs and watershed projects. The districts also noted challenges from hurricanes, inflation, cybersecurity, and aging water control structures. South Florida Water Management District’s presentation focused on Everglades restoration and the large-scale infrastructure needed to move, store, and clean water in South Florida. The director said the district’s $1.05 billion preliminary budget is largely for flood control, water supply, ecosystem restoration, and maintenance of extensive canals, levees, pumps, and reservoirs, and emphasized that recent restoration investments are producing measurable water quality and salinity improvements. No votes were taken on the district budgets, and the committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• propose using the rollback millage rate, our new revenue, and our carry forward, the use of our fund balance
• Funding sources reside from four areas: federal, state, our district, and then also fund balance itself
• And then $12.3 million utilization from our fund balance.
• Thomas. those timber stands in those areas as well and then our fund balance here 12.3 million dollars
• Our balance for these projects is $281 million, which we will look to fund over Our balance for these

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government heard budget presentations from all five water management districts for FY 2026-2027: Northwest Florida, Suwannee River, St. Johns River, Southwest Florida, and South Florida. Each district described its preliminary budget, major funding sources, staffing levels, and how most of its spending is tied to the four core missions of water supply, water quality, natural systems, and flood protection. Several directors noted budget reductions from the prior year largely because major projects were completed or because grant/appropriation funding is not yet fully reflected in preliminary budgets. Committee members repeatedly asked how districts project operations and maintenance costs, how projects are selected, and what share of staff and spending is devoted to core missions versus administration or regulatory work. Northwest Florida Water Management District said its preliminary budget is $93.4 million, down about 15%, with 97% of spending tied to core responsibilities and a request for additional regulatory services funding. Suwannee River Water Management District presented a $70.4 million budget, emphasized its rural/agricultural character and spring protection work, and highlighted the Water First North Florida reclaimed-water recharge project; members also discussed its need for an additional FTE to handle consumptive use permit reviews tied to a new lower Santa Fe rule. St. Johns River Water Management District presented a $181 million budget, highlighted major water supply, water quality, flood protection, and land management projects such as Taylor Creek Reservoir, Water First North Florida, Black Creek, Crane Creek, and Lake Jessup restoration, and said about 93% of its budget supports core missions. Southwest Florida Water Management District presented a $227.6 million budget, with major spending on alternative water supply, water control structure repairs, watershed projects, and land management; officials said 93.4% of the budget supports core missions and discussed rising construction costs for aging infrastructure. South Florida Water Management District presented the largest budget at $1.05 billion, focused on Everglades restoration, flood control, water supply, and ecosystem recovery; the director described major reservoirs and treatment projects, the EAA Reservoir, and ongoing efforts to improve water quality and restore flows to the Everglades and Florida Bay. The committee took no formal votes on the district budgets and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• propose using the rollback millage rate, our new revenue, and our carryforward, the use of our fund balance
• And then $12.3 million from fund balance.
• And then our fund balance here, $12.3 million, is a little over 17% of our total budget, relying upon
• Our balance for these projects is $281 million, which we will look to fund over the next 18 years.
• Our balance for these projects is $281 million, which we will look to fund over the next 18 years.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard budget presentations from five water management districts for fiscal year 2026-2027: Northwest Florida, Suwannee River, St. Johns River, Southwest Florida, and South Florida. Each district described its preliminary budget, major funding sources, staffing levels, and how most of its spending is tied to the core statutory missions of water supply, water quality, natural systems, and flood protection. Several directors noted budget reductions from the prior year, largely because large projects were completed or because grant and appropriation funding is not yet fully included until awarded. Testimony focused on major district priorities such as springs protection, alternative water supply, flood control infrastructure, land management, agricultural cost-share programs, and water quality restoration. Examples highlighted included Northwest Florida’s springs and watershed work, Suwannee River’s agricultural and springs-related projects and the Water First North Florida recharge effort, St. Johns River’s Taylor Creek Reservoir, Black Creek, Crane Creek, and Indian River Lagoon restoration projects, Southwest Florida’s large alternative water supply program and aging water control structures, and South Florida’s Everglades restoration, reservoirs, and flood control system. Members repeatedly asked how districts choose projects, how they forecast maintenance costs, and what share of staff and budgets are devoted to core missions. Several districts said project selection is a mix of staff analysis, governing board direction, stakeholder input, and state or federal priorities. They also explained that they use cost estimation tools, market monitoring, strategic or basin planning, and periodic reevaluation of capital plans to keep projections current. A few districts requested additional funding or positions, including Northwest Florida’s request for more regulatory services funding and Suwannee River’s request for one additional FTE tied to permit review under a new rule. No votes on the district budgets were taken during the hearing, and the committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So there's one of those new terms: actuarial balance.
• So this actuarial balance metric is similar, but it's not ideal...
• So this actuarial balance metric is similar, but it's not identical to a funded ratio in pensions.
• The next two phases focus on that actuarial balance measure that we spoke about before.
• So we would anticipate it would lead to an increase in the actuarial balance calculation.

Summary: The Pension Funding Council met on October 8 with introductions from council members and staff, then received a detailed presentation from the Office of the State Actuary on long-term economic assumptions and the state pension systems’ financial condition. OSA reported that the combined pension systems are currently 100% funded on a smoothed basis, with open plans above 95% funded, and that legacy Plan 1 systems remain on a path toward full funding under current policy. The actuaries recommended updating assumptions to 3% inflation, 3.5% general salary growth, and a 7.25% investment return, while keeping Plan 1 membership growth at 1%. They also explained asset smoothing, the role of recent strong investment returns, and the expected budget impacts of the recommended changes. Representatives from the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council and the State Investment Board offered supporting perspectives, generally describing the assumptions as reasonable and consistent with their own outlooks. The council also heard an overview of the Long-Term Services and Supports Trust Program (WACares) from DSHS and OSA. Program staff described the program’s social insurance structure, premium collection, benefit eligibility, and upcoming implementation milestones. OSA reported that the program’s first actuarial valuation showed a positive actuarial balance under the base scenario and recommended no change to the current 0.58% premium rate during the program’s early learning phase, noting that future changes would depend on experience and the program’s risk-management framework. OSA also said the recommendation would remain the same regardless of the outcome of the pending ballot measure affecting investment options. During public comment, a representative of the Washington State School Retirees Association urged continued work on Plan 1 funding and related legislation, while the Association of Washington Cities cautioned against increasing pension assumptions in a way that could raise future employer costs and reduce flexibility for current local government services. In action, the council adopted a motion to maintain the current long-term economic assumptions by a 4-2 vote, adopted the recommendation to keep the WACares premium rate at 0.58% by a 6-0 vote, and then elected Katie Chapman as council chair by unanimous vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It balances the interests of consumers and the financial viability of utilities.
• Denying a utility the ability to seek recovery of its costs would ultimately disrupt this balance.
• The balancing act is to maintain the financial health of utilities while also safeguarding consumers
• It would set the balance of the regulatory compact in which the utility is operating as a monopoly.
• Because that ultimately, you know, with that balance, any way we can efficiently navigate that balance

Bills: HB29, HB685, HB1633, HB1689, HB1690, HB1918, HB2010, HB2500, HB2608, HB2626, HB29

Keywords: water audit, water loss, water loss mitigation plan, municipally owned utility, municipal utility, water conservation, Texas Water Development Board, TCEQ, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, water leakage, leak detection, billing data accuracy, utility validation, water audit validation, water scarcity, water management, infrastructure, public utility, conservation plan, administrative penalty

Transcript Highlights:

• Item B is a decrease related to unexpended balances. carried forward.
• So since we have unexpended balance at the expended balance authority to be able to roll that over.
• Page 9 is a summary. of the fund balance. In 2007, we were at $51 million.
• So it's a cash balance benefit program. It's designed to reduce.
• The balance is already at 4.25 billion, which is the highest since 2020.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• for the enacted biennial budget, had, relative to recent biennia, a relatively small ending fund balance
• So can you tell me, by not balancing over the four-year outlook, is that going to affect our state's
• So I think some of those things, on balance, we'll have to see where things go and what decisions...
• So I think some of those things, on balance, we'll have to see where things go and what decisions the
• We must balance today's crisis with long-term solutions that shape a better future.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• We cannot balance the budget on the backs of our most vulnerable.
• That amount would be coming out of the GGRF fund, and we think that's a more balanced approach moving
• Well, currently, our operational balance for the out years is negative, and that is something that we
• I think this is the balance that the $30 is trying to achieve: to come to a point where we save money
• California is deeply disappointed that this new budget is balanced on cuts and not on new revenue.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They've got really low balances if you... I think the first 10 to 12 off this list.
• They've got really low balances.
• If you look right next to the column, just to the left of jobs created, that's our balance of what's
• They've got really low balances.
• If you look right next to the column, just to the left of jobs created, that's our balance of what's

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation, Highways and Public Works met to receive public testimony and act on port priority applications for inclusion in the FY 2027-2028 Port Priority Construction and Development Priority Program. After approving the March 9, 2026 minutes, the committee heard from Commissioner Andrew Kilshaw of the Office of Multimodal Commerce on two applications from the Avoyelles Harbor and Terminal District: a building addition and waterfront industrial improvements project, and a Workforce Training Center redevelopment project. He said both met program criteria and projected substantial state benefits, jobs, and high benefit-cost ratios. Committee members asked about the projected jobs, the unusually high benefit-cost ratio, and the status of other port projects. Kilshaw and DOTD’s Molly Bergoin said the program has a backlog of more than $200 million, but the department is working through it, with some projects nearing closeout. They also said the annual request cap has been increased and that a tiered funding approach is being considered to help projects compete for federal dollars. Members expressed support for expanding investment in ports and for a statewide strategic plan. Chairman Boriak moved to accept the port priority applications received through March 1, 2026, for inclusion in the FY 2027-2028 program. There was no objection, and the committee accepted the projects. The meeting then adjourned without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• I move to lay over the balance of the calendar till later in the day.
• the balance of the calendar until later today.
• I move to lay over the balance of the calendar until later in the day.
• The motion is to lay over the balance of the calendar until later in the day. All in favor say I.
• We will lay over the balance of the calendar later in the day. Uh, announcements. Senator Mob.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's the situation we're in where we need to find a way to balance our budget.
• We need to find a way to balance our budget and provide the services that we're best able to provide
• So it's the situation we're in where we need to find a way to balance our budget.
• We need to find a way to balance our budget and provide the services that we're best able to provide
• And so I think we really wanted to use as little as we could, but had to balance a lot of other costs

Summary: Senate budget writers, led by Chair June Robinson with Senators Noel Frame and Derek Stanford, rolled out the Senate operating budget and described it as a difficult supplemental budget shaped by flat revenue growth, rising maintenance costs, and uncertainty from federal actions, including H.R. 1 and tariffs. They said the proposal aims to preserve core services such as K-12 education, health care, food assistance, housing stability, and long-term care while making targeted reductions and avoiding broad-based tax increases like sales, property, or B&O tax hikes. A major focus of the discussion was how to pay for the Working Families Tax Credit and how to handle cuts in the Working Connections child care program. Robinson said the Senate budget uses policy changes, especially an attendance-based payment adjustment, rather than the governor’s proposed enrollment cap and waitlist, because lawmakers wanted to avoid destabilizing the child care workforce and reduce harm to families. She also said the Senate is open to negotiating with the House on the Climate Commitment Act use of funds for the tax credit, noting that the statute allows it, though some advocates oppose that approach. The senators defended using $750 million from the rainy day fund, saying it was preferable to deeper cuts and still leaves reserves above $1 billion in the near term. They also argued that Washington’s revenue system is too dependent on property and sales taxes and that a future “millionaires tax” could help stabilize funding, especially for education and other core services. In response to criticism from educators and Republicans, they said the state has made progress on school funding and that rising program costs reflect increased need and utilization rather than waste. No votes were taken in the transcript, and the event was a budget rollout and press Q&A rather than a formal committee action.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is related to Washington State's four-year balanced budget requirement and state operating budget
• There is an exception to the requirement for our budget to balance in the ensuing biennium during times
• The funds that are covered by the four-year balanced budget requirement include the general fund, the
• So I start reading the bill, and it's talking about balanced budgets and things like that.
• So I start reading the bill and it's talking about balanced budgets and things like that.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee held public hearings on several bills and took executive action on House Bill 2747. HB 2747 would change how Washington estimates future revenue in its four-year balanced budget outlooks by using the official revenue forecast instead of the current 4.5% growth assumption for the next two biennia. Staff described the bill as a technical change with indeterminate fiscal effects, and supporters said it would make budgeting more realistic and sustainable. The committee adopted a technical amendment and then reported the bill out of committee with a do pass recommendation by a vote of 26 ayes, 3 nays, and 2 excused. The committee also heard Second Substitute Senate Bill 6182, which would create an abortion savings program funded by a new annual assessment on health carriers offering exchange plans. Staff said the bill would generate about $10 million in fiscal year 2027 and about $2.1 million annually thereafter, with most funds going to grants for abortion care providers and some administrative costs for the Office of the Insurance Commissioner and the Department of Health. Supporters said it would stabilize access to abortion care and help low-income patients, while opponents argued it would force taxpayers and insurers to subsidize abortion and raised concerns about oversight, morality, and premium impacts. Substitute Senate Bill 6355, which would create a Washington Electric Transmission Authority to support new transmission projects and related tribal clean energy work, drew testimony from utilities, labor, clean energy advocates, counties, and landowners. Supporters said the state needs faster transmission buildout to improve reliability, support clean energy, and reduce congestion costs; opponents and county representatives raised concerns about eminent domain, loss of local tax revenue, board accountability, and the need for stronger landowner and county involvement. Staff estimated the bill would have a several-million-dollar general fund impact and noted possible indeterminate local revenue effects. The committee also received a briefing on engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6260, which would reduce funding or eligibility for several K-12 programs, including bus depreciation, Running Start, and transition to kindergarten; public testimony was overwhelmingly opposed, with school officials, educators, community college representatives, students, and rural districts warning of reduced opportunities and harm to small and low-income districts.

Transcript Highlights:

• for the enacted biennial budget, had, relative to recent biennia, a relatively small ending fund balance
• So can you tell me, by not balancing over the four-year outlook, is that going to affect our state's
• So I think some of those things, on balance, we'll have to see where things go and what decisions...
• So I think some of those things, on balance, we'll have to see where things go and what decisions the
• We must balance today's crisis with long-term solutions that shape a better future.

Bills: HB2289

Keywords: appropriations, budget, fiscal matters, state spending, general fund, supplemental budget, biennial budget, substitute bill, public defense, civil legal aid, courts, judicial branch, homelessness, supportive housing, affordable housing, behavioral health, juvenile rehabilitation, youth services, child welfare, foster care

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:16:32.160><c> Thank</c> As we enact a balanced budget. Thank you, Commissioner Campbell.
• So it is a balance between the requests of the administration and the requests of the public, and we
• So it is a balance people of Minnesota.
• So it is a balance between<00:31:17.919><c> um</c><00:31:18.320><c> the</c><00:31:18.640><c> requests
• and manage uh the desires of the balance and manage uh the desires of the public<00:31:39.519><c> and

Bills: HF2783

Keywords: state government finance, biennial budget, appropriations, Minnesota Management and Budget, Healthy Aging Subcabinet, Office of Healthy Aging, older adults, aging policy, long-term care, caregivers, public health, Medicaid fraud, medical assistance fraud, attorney general subpoena power, fraud enforcement, business filing fraud, Secretary of State, deceptive mailings, consumer protection, certified public accountant

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> So that is not a lot a large balance So that is not a lot a large balance um<02:29:32.720><c> because
• balance balance &gt;&gt; that's<02:33:41.840><c> the</c><02:33:42.000><c> same</c><02:33:42.160><c>
• However, balance was about 76 million.
• What the balance was at that date. Okay. What the balance was at that date.
• </c><02:39:13.600><c> was</c> bienium, what the balance was bienium, what the balance was and<02:39:15.600

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: House Finance Division 3 met in work session and opened with procedural remarks from the chair about the committee’s schedule, deadlines, and recommendation options, noting the meeting was advisory and no votes were expected. The first bill discussed, House Bill 1569, concerned repealing the directive to sell the Anna Philbrook Center for Children property in Concord. Testimony from DHHS and New Hampshire Hospital focused on whether the property could be subdivided, the relationship to Senate Bill 572, the status of the city of Concord’s first right of refusal, and the practical effects of a sale. Witnesses said the $5 million sale estimate was a budget assumption, that moving staff and equipment would create some relocation costs, and that the center had required significant recent maintenance and renovation spending. Members also discussed the number of transitional housing beds at the site, the temporary nature of those beds, and whether the property should remain available given hospital workforce and service needs. The committee then turned to House Bill 661, which had been recommitted for further review after new information emerged. The chair summarized federal developments, including a December 2025 ACF letter and a related executive order, as well as a federal HHS press release about states diverting foster youths’ Social Security survivor benefits. Representative Walner explained that amendment 3055H had been drafted to move the bill forward in smaller steps, with a fiscal note requested on the amendment because the original bill was viewed as too large and expensive. Members discussed whether the committee had received copies of the amendment and whether federal guidance or funding had changed the policy landscape. The discussion also included broader questions about foster youth benefits and whether federal action would support state implementation. One member cited ACF language stating that only 11 states had enacted policies to stop interception of survivor benefits and that technical assistance would be available to the remaining states. The meeting remained in work-session mode throughout, with no votes taken and no final recommendations made during the portion provided. The chair indicated the committee could return to the bills later in the month.

Transcript Highlights:

• So balance of the trunk highway fund.
• That bill balanced the transparency.
• </c><02:07:41.280><c> this</c> cannot and will not uh balance this cannot and will not uh balance this
• And so we needed to balance that.
• </c><02:40:28.240><c> roads</c> making sure that we are balancing roads making sure that we are balancing

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• no balance.
• balance of my time.
• </c> balance of my time. balance of my time.
• </c> the balance of my time. the balance of my time.
• </c> the balance of my time. the balance of my time.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, July 14, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He said he wants to find a balance that protects labor friends while also making sure they have good
• He said he wants to find a balance that protects labor friends while also making sure they have good
• He said he wants to find a balance that protects labor friends while also making sure they have good
• He said he wants to find a balance that protects labor friends while also making sure they have a good
• Only when you have that good balance do you have...”

Keywords: 1183, house