Transcript Highlights:

• I'm confused on the After the discussion about the note we have and in this sub and what this the note
• that The fiscal note we have on the file bill shows a fiscal note of $229 million.
• I think if you do look at The fiscal note on this, we have a fiscal note of $40 million.
• But, we believe it should be a fiscal note, or a, I'm sorry, not a fiscal note, a fiscal positive.
• That language was pre fiscal note.

Bills: HB19, HB30, HB851, HB1663, HB1681, HB1769, HB1937, HB1979, HB2428, HB2433, HB2825, HB3159, HB3424, HB3486, HB3487, HB3504, HB3605, HB3879, HB3994, HB4382, HB4752, HB5444, HB5446, HB5447, HB3199, HB4847, HB19

Keywords: local government debt, property tax, ad valorem tax, bond election, certificate of obligation, anticipation note, school district tax rate, voter-approval rate, debt service cap, municipal finance, county bonds, flood control district, hospital district, public works, tax transparency, property tax notice, November uniform election date, general obligation bonds, local debt reform, taxpayer notice

Transcript Highlights:

• change rates, quote, a publicly accessible standalone document that explains the change in rate, anticipate
• lines between patient care and sometimes asking about whether they had voter registration and taking notes
• offering this amendment to, one, clarify the application of the bill in order to reduce the fiscal note
• In calculating the fiscal note, HHSC assumed that Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 1188 applies to
• So that November Tuesday election date is the one folks are familiar with, as you noted.

Bills: SJR12, SJR81, SCR39, SB22, SB32, SB241, SB393, SB414, SB458, SB464, SB568, SB583, SB609, SB660, SB693, SB731, SB732, SB746, SB783, SB785, SB897, SB993, SB996, SB1008, SB1029, SB1035, SB1036, SB1120, SB1122, SB1147, SB1163, SB1188, SB1197, SB1209, SB1227, SB1245, SB1267, SB1307, SB1321, SB1332, SB1386, SB1394, SB1396, SB1470, SB1494, SB1537, SB1596, SB1598, SB1610, SB1664, SB1814, SB1822, SB1841, SB1948, SB2065, SB2155, SB2406, SB2407

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, border security, southern border, federal immigration policy, illegal immigration, cartels, transnational cartels, fentanyl, drug trafficking, human trafficking, Operation Lone Star, Texas border

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum call, invocation, approval of routine motions, and the reading of gubernatorial nominations and several honorary resolutions. The chamber adopted resolutions recognizing Jack and Jill of America Day and DJ Daniel Day at the Capitol, with multiple senators offering remarks praising youth leadership, perseverance, and public service. The Senate also introduced the Doctor of the Day and then proceeded to a long series of floor actions on bills. A major focus was Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 568, which overhauls special education funding and services in public schools by moving from a placement-based model to an intensity-based system tied to student needs and IEPs. Senators Bettencourt, Creighton, and Menendez emphasized transparency, parent input, evaluation funding, dyslexia services, and better alignment of funding with actual services; Senator Hinojosa shared a personal story about dyslexia and the importance of early intervention. The bill was advanced on second and third reading and finally passed 30-0. The Senate also passed SB 1396 to prohibit national sex education standards in public schools, SB 2065 on the Texas Emergency Services Retirement System, SB 1664 requiring clearer public disclosure of transmission and distribution utility rate changes, SB 1029 on advertising certain used motor vehicles, SB 1120 expanding rights for family violence victims, SB 1036 regulating residential solar retail transactions, SB 464 creating school-proximity restrictions and penalties for tobacco and vaping sales, SB 1035 giving farmers and ranchers equitable relief from certain local agricultural regulations, SB 1610 addressing civil commitment facility safety and prosecution issues, SB 1197 extending drone restrictions to spaceports, and SB 1386 changing legislative witness immunity from transactional to testimonial immunity. Another major bill was Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 1188, which updates electronic health record requirements. Senator Kolkhorst said the bill builds on Texas medical privacy law by requiring U.S.-based storage of EMR data, prohibiting recording of voter registration status and credit score information, requiring provider verification and disclosure for AI-assisted diagnosis or treatment recommendations, preserving parental access to minors’ records until age 18, and ensuring EMRs can capture metabolic health and biological sex information. A floor amendment clarified the bill’s scope and enforcement, and the bill passed 23-7. Several measures drew debate, especially SB 414 on bond ballot transparency, where Senators Eckhardt and Menendez questioned whether requiring estimated interest and total debt cost on ballots could be misleading or difficult to implement because interest rates and financing terms can change before issuance or over time. The transcript ends during that discussion, with no final action shown on SB 414.

Transcript Highlights:

• And just as a note, we have a hard stop at 11 o'clock.
• I would like to note that with these amendments, NDE would be able to remove their fiscal note entirely
• No fiscal note is always a good thing.
• DCFS fiscal note, that liability has been increasing.
• bill, has removed its fiscal note.

Bills: AB49, AB93, AB108, AB169, AB188, AB212, AB221, AB224, AB251, AB282, AB284, AB296, AB304, AB331, AB356, AB366, AB375, AB409, AB467, AB475, AB476, AB479, AB494, AB514, AB515, AB533, AB542, AB550, AB558, AB567, AB568, AB571, AB581, AB583, AB584, AB585, AB595, AB596, AB597, SB170, SB427, SB460, SB508

Keywords: educational personnel, teacher licensing, reciprocal licensure, provisional teaching, school counselors, school nurses, school social workers, state education standards, public employees, police officers, benefits, appropriation, law enforcement, outdoor education, recreation, grant program, environment, funding, health insurance, speech-language pathology

Transcript Highlights:

• Are bonds only anticipation notes or do bonds include Both types.
• Etc. 3 talks about anticipation notes, and I think so.
• A bond is it an anticipation note or no.
• And then on anticipation notes. 7 years.
• We use tax anticipation notes short term to cover the, the, the short-term needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um anticipated growth in participation.
• > transfer<00:12:34.639> between note that we can't transfer between note that we can't
• I wanted to note that from the onset.
• So I wanted to note programs do not.
• we anticipate that that is to continue. we anticipate that that is to continue.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We anticipate about another $9 million.
• <00:15:14.880> presenting<00:15:15.440> and she anticipates presenting and she anticipates
• <00:21:01.760> The things that we want to note. The things that we want to note.
• We noted the JAV system upgrades on here.
• Um, but we anticipate phase C design.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary met without a quorum and heard an update from the Administrative Office of the Courts on the judicial branch budget. AOC Director Zach Ramsey and budget director Carol Henderson outlined the branch’s current funding structure, noting that fiscal year 2026 general fund support is about 2.77% of the state general fund, below the National Center for State Courts’ typical 2% to 4% range. They emphasized Kentucky’s unusual responsibility for courthouse facilities, with the judicial branch directly involved in construction, maintenance, and operations across 229 facilities in all 120 counties. AOC said nearly 91% of its general fund is spent on personnel and other non-discretionary costs, and that the branch has long relied on agency revenue, restricted fund carryforwards, and vacancy credits to balance court operations. Members were told that Senate Bill 25 required a $34.5 million transfer into a reserve account, part of which was used to purchase the Chamberlain Avenue building in Frankfort. AOC reported that only $11.9 million remains in restricted funds, while it projects needing about $13.5 million to cover fiscal year 2026 obligations, not including roughly $9 million in flood-related remediation costs for Hardin and Franklin counties, much of which it expects to recover through insurance and FEMA. Looking ahead to the next biennium, AOC said it will seek full funding of court operations at $341 million annually, a $13.5 million increase to bring current services into the base appropriation rather than relying on reserves. It also previewed additional requests, including a 15% across-the-board pay parity plan for Kentucky Court of Justice personnel, replacement of declining master commissioner fee revenue tied to 141 deputy circuit court clerk positions, funding for technology subscription and case management system costs, JAV audiovisual system upgrades, AEDs and medical kits for courthouses, and other staffing and operational needs. Senator Funky Frommeyer asked whether the 15% salary proposal was included in the $13.5 million increase; AOC said it was not, and that it would be an additional request. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• The physical notes workflow is different from state to state, just as internal financing structure is
• So in this resolution, at what point should physical notes be provided?
• The physical notes workflow is different from state to state, just as internal financing structure is
• So in this resolution, at what point should physical notes be provided?
• So in this resolution, at what point should physical notes be provided?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on three resolutions: HCR 61, HCR 182, and HCR 183. Testimony on all three was generally supportive, with support noted from the Hawaii Children’s Action Network, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, ACLU, Chamber of Commerce, Hawaii Food Industry Association, Hawaii Renewables Fuels Coalition, the University of Hawaii, and CARES. Angela Melody Young testified in strong support on behalf of CARES on multiple items, urging consideration of county processes, financing structures, and the need for procedures free from partisan influence. For HCR 183, the University of Hawaii said it stood on its written testimony and was available for questions. The discussion focused less on opposition and more on suggested policy considerations. Testimony on HCR 61 raised questions about how physical notes or related procedures should be administered and whether the process should be housed in a nonpartisan office. On HCR 182 and HCR 183, testimony emphasized coordinating state and county financing and planning, including references to property tax classifications, general obligation bonds, and long-term statewide projects such as Aloha Stadium. At the close of the hearing, the chair recommended taking all three resolutions together. The committee voted to pass HCR 61, HCR 182, and HCR 183 unamended, with all voting members present voting aye and two senators excused. The resolutions were adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• So in June, anticipating...
• They also noted there was a highly engaged leadership team.
• It was noted that's in the new contract.
• Adoption of the revised rule is anticipated in January 2026.
• And I noted in your slide on 12, you have now a January 2025 date.

Summary: The subcommittee heard two Department of Children and Families implementation updates on measures passed in prior sessions. First, DCF reviewed House Bill 633, which increased oversight of behavioral health managing entities through biennial independent audits, standardized claims-based reporting, and new monthly outcome dashboards. The department said it had awarded the inaugural audit to Ernst & Young, found no significant waste, fraud, or abuse, but identified process risks involving financial controls, claims validation, data access, and system access controls. DCF also described its transition to standardized behavioral health coding and said the new public dashboard of 11 measures is posted on its website, though members asked for easier access and for hard copies of the audit report. Members asked about how the department distinguishes Medicaid-covered services from department-funded services, how duplicate payment risks are being addressed, and whether the new reporting and audit requirements would improve oversight without disrupting services. DCF said it is the payer of last resort for uninsured or underinsured individuals, that some overlap with Medicaid is expected because Medicaid does not cover all behavioral health services, and that new claims edits and cross-checks are being built into the system. The department also said it had not found significant negative feedback from providers and that the new requirements are intended to improve transparency and accountability. DCF then updated the committee on Senate Bill 7012, covering human trafficking data collection, domestic violence center certification, limited background-screening exemptions, expanded recruitment for child welfare staff, subcontractor liability protections, a four-year treatment foster care pilot, case management efficiency recommendations, and a statewide study of residential bed capacity for child victims of commercial sexual exploitation. The department said several items are already complete or underway, including limited exemptions in the screening clearinghouse, while others are in procurement or rulemaking. It identified Circuits 4 and 12 as the treatment foster care pilot sites and said the pilot will launch in January 2026. Members questioned recruitment metrics, pilot timing, and report deadlines; the department said final reports are expected by January and that some dates were flexible because of procurement and implementation timelines. The meeting ended after the presentations and questions, and the subcommittee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• A couple of things I would note on this slide.
• I've noted these projects in the funded phase.
• I've noted these projects in the funded phase.
• And I think that's important to note.
• So there's just a couple of upcoming items to note.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Interstate 5 Bridge met remotely with Washington legislative members to receive updates on the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program, including environmental review, cost and funding, tolling, and procurement for construction. Program staff said the final supplemental environmental impact statement was published in April 2026, with a federal record of decision expected in early summer. They described the recommended design as a single-level fixed-span bridge, centered I-5 alignment, C Street ramps, one auxiliary lane in each direction, and dispersed park-and-ride parking. Members raised concerns about transparency, the closed chat function, and the decision not to include two auxiliary lanes; staff said the one-lane option was recommended through consultation with partner agencies and analysis, but the final decision would come with the record of decision. Staff also said the diversion analysis projected less than 3% traffic diversion to I-205 in 2045, though members from Oregon and Washington expressed concern about impacts to their communities and asked for more detail on mitigation and decision-making. The committee also reviewed a major cost update. Staff said the full five-mile program is now estimated at $13.5 billion to $15.2 billion, with a likely cost of $14.4 billion, up from a 2022 estimate of $5 billion to $7.5 billion, citing inflation, schedule delays, scope changes, and more detailed risk modeling. They said the first funded phase has been reduced to a $5.68 billion package focused on the Columbia River bridge replacement, connections to I-5, Hayden Island and SR-14, bridge demolition, tolling infrastructure, and advancing light rail design. Funding for that phase was described as $5.69 billion, including $2.1 billion federal funds, $1 billion from each state, and $1.5 billion in projected toll revenue. Members asked what would happen if costs rise further; staff said the estimate includes substantial contingency, the project will use progressive design-build to manage risk, and the team will continue updating the finance plan annually. A separate tolling and traffic-revenue presentation explained that four toll scenarios were analyzed using regional travel demand modeling, a toll diversion model, and a post-processing review. All scenarios assume pre-completion tolling beginning July 1, 2028, a 50% low-income discount for eligible users, and exemptions for tribal preemptions, emergency vehicles, maintenance vehicles, and organized militia. Staff said the low-income discount would affect about 4% to 6% of annual transactions and reduce annual revenues by roughly 2% to 3%. They said Scenario 2 was used for the financial analysis and is sufficient to support the $1.5 billion toll contribution in the funded phase. Members asked about toll collection costs, revenue impacts of the discount, and how the scenarios differed; staff said collection costs are expected to be in line with other WSDOT toll facilities, but exact costs are not yet set because toll rates are not final. Finally, WSDOT staff outlined procurement and delivery steps for construction. They said WSDOT will be the lead contracting agency, using progressive design-build, with a request for qualifications targeted for early July 2026, a request for proposals in October, contractor selection in April 2027, construction starting in 2028, and tolling beginning in 2028. Staff said the approach is intended to consolidate scope, reduce interface risk, and allow transparent negotiation with an independent cost estimator, while preserving an off-ramp if a fair price cannot be reached. Members asked for more detail on timing, cost allocation, and the share of the first phase funded by tolls; staff estimated tolls account for about 26% of the first phase cost.

Transcript Highlights:

• Anticipated bid opening for that project and issuance of a construction contract is anticipated to be
• Anticipated bid opening for that project and issuance of a construction contract is anticipated to be
• Anticipated bid opening for that project and issuance of a construction contract is anticipated to be
• facility um bed capacity we anticipate facility um bed capacity we anticipate 34<00:13:14.079>
• a 24 bed facility so I would anticipate a 24 bed facility so I would anticipate that<00:39:13.079

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee heard an overview from Department of Juvenile Justice Commissioner Randy White on the state’s juvenile detention network and several facility projects. He identified the currently operating detention centers as Boyd County for females, Breathitt County for low-risk males, Fayette County for high-risk males, Adair County for high-risk youth from Jefferson and surrounding counties, Warren County for high-risk males, and McCracken County for low-risk males. Members asked about capacity and staffing; White said Boyd County houses 33 and is usually near full, Breathitt County is about half full, Fayette County runs about 80-90% full, Campbell County’s operational limit is about 25 due to staffing, Adair County can hold 60 and has hit capacity several times this year, Warren County holds 43 and usually runs near capacity, and McCracken County holds 43 and is not currently full. He said staffing is generally harder in higher-risk facilities and in metropolitan areas because of wages and housing costs. White then updated the committee on the Louisville Detention Center downtown renovation and the Lyon facility project. For the Louisville downtown facility, he said schematic design and design development are complete, construction documents are expected by late February or early March, bids are anticipated in April, and completion is projected for March 2027. He explained the delay is due to extensive renovation work needed to bring the building up to current building, life-safety, ACA, and PREA standards, including security, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, food service, and roof work. The project is designed for 64 beds for high-risk Jefferson County boys, with the facility currently vacant and those youth being housed in Adair County and Campbell County. For the Lyon project, he said the contract was issued November 21, 2024, demolition is underway, completion is expected June 14, 2026, and the facility will have 34 beds in four pods for low-risk offenders; he said the project appears to be on time and on budget within the $4.5 million authorization. The committee also discussed the medical services contract. DJJ officials said they are reviewing whether to continue with the current state contract provider, Wellpath, or pursue an RFP, while retaining current merit staff and continuing oversight through four nurse program administrators. They said DJJ uses a state master agreement to staff nurses, APRNs, and the chief medical officer, and that the current contract is about $20 million per year. Members asked about Wellpath’s bankruptcy filing; officials said they were aware of it, asked questions, and were told it would not affect Kentucky service delivery or contracting, though they could not recall the bankruptcy type and offered to provide more detail later. They also said DJJ is working with the Cabinet for Health and Family Services to become a Medicaid provider, and any future contractual partner will need to be a Medicaid provider. Finally, White described the proposed high-acuity juvenile mental health treatment facility. He said DJJ must accept court-ordered youth even when they have severe mental illness, but detention centers are not equipped to treat those youth and private psychiatric hospitals often refuse them or discharge them early. He argued that a dedicated secure treatment facility is needed for a small number of highly violent, high-need youth who require intensive psychiatric care and are disruptive in detention. The facility would provide behavioral and psychiatric treatment, reduce delays caused by lack of beds or outside placements, and serve youth determined by clinical assessment to need a secure treatment environment. No votes were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• note, you cannot have both this new funding and a revenue anticipation note out at the same time.
• <00:14:36.240> note,<00:14:36.639> you pay off a revenue anticipation note, you pay
• off a revenue anticipation note, you cannot<00:14:37.120> have<00:14:37.440> both<00:14
• /c> revenue anticipation note out at the revenue anticipation note out at the same<00:14:41.839> time
• <00:14:50.480> note pay off their revenue anticipation note pay off their revenue anticipation

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're anticipating those to come forward in FY27.
• Two of the proposals worth noting have some challenges.
• Two of the proposals worth noting have some challenges.
• Gergen said, some of these things were anticipated.
• And what that anticipating.

Transcript Highlights:

• inflation consists of the estimated cost to maintain current service levels, and it's important to note
• levels and it's current service levels and it's important<00:03:42.480> to<00:03:42.599> note
• the 2025 important to note that the 2025 legislature<00:03:45.120> would<00:03:45.319> first
• <00:06:19.720> in anticipated in anticipated in November<00:06:21.720> constitutionally
• years where we anticipate significant<00:06:40.599> challenges<00:06:41.599> on<00:06:

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: Minnesota Management and Budget presented the February 2025 budget and economic forecast, with Commissioner Aon Campbell, State Economist Anthony Becker, and Budget Director Anam Mingi outlining updated revenue, spending, and long-term balance projections. The state’s FY 2026-27 general fund outlook remains positive but weaker than in November, with an ending balance of $456 million, down $160 million from the prior forecast. Looking ahead, the planning years FY 2028-29 show a projected deficit of just under $6 billion, driven largely by spending growth outpacing revenues. Officials emphasized that discretionary inflation is a major factor in the forecast, but also noted that those amounts are not automatically appropriated and would require legislative action. Becker said the national outlook has changed since November, with higher expected inflation, higher interest rates for longer, and slower growth in later years. He highlighted uncertainty around tariffs, trade policy, immigration policy, federal spending, and possible changes to tax and debt-ceiling policy, all of which could affect Minnesota’s economy and revenues. Minnesota’s labor market remains tight, with low unemployment and rising wages, and the revenue forecast was revised upward overall for FY 2026-27, including higher income and sales tax receipts, though corporate tax revenue was slightly lower than previously projected. Mingi said projected general fund spending is up $79 million in FY 2026-27 and $960 million in FY 2028-29 compared with November. The largest increases are in education and health and human services, especially due to inflation, higher pupil counts, special education costs, long-term care, and higher Medical Assistance spending. She noted that higher utilization of weight-loss drugs also raises Medicaid costs, and that a smaller assumed bonding bill helps offset some debt service costs. The commissioner and staff repeatedly warned that federal policy changes, especially possible Medicaid reductions, pose a major risk; they said Minnesota could face billions in lost federal funding, including a potential $2.4 billion hit if the enhanced Medicaid match for adults without children were eliminated. No votes or legislative actions were taken in the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• A couple of things I would note on this slide.
• I've noted these projects in the funded phase.
• I've noted these projects in the funded phase.
• We are anticipating the record of decision.
• And I think that's important to note.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• One thing to note, the total estimated funding will change in May.
• One thing we wanted to note: we released an analysis.
• the need for cash a lot sooner than maybe was anticipated.
• As you noted, it wasn't funded as part of the last budget act.
• And as you've heard us note in other hearings, the state budget is anticipated to have very little capacity

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we are not anticipating the federal government to cover the $3.4 billion loan.
• As noted, the increase in caseload is a sign that the program is acting as intended.
• We also support this important work in AB 100, just noting, as was noted during the hearing, rising health
• We also support this important work in AB-100, just noting, as was noted during the hearing, work and
• Just noting, as was noted during the hearing, rising health care costs are a challenge across the country

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on SB 100/AB 100, the early action budget bills, with a focus on Medi-Cal funding, wildfire recovery, and several smaller budget adjustments. The Department of Finance explained that the bill would add $2.8 billion General Fund and $8.3 billion federal funds for Medi-Cal, along with other items including wildfire-related local assistance for Los Angeles County, property tax backfills for fire-damaged local agencies, Cal OES wildfire monitoring authority, nonprofit security grants, the Property Tax Postponement Fund, FARMER and Clean Cars for All funding, foster family home insurance claims, Proposition 98 technical assistance for LA wildfire-impacted schools, teacher credentialing authority, and Proposition 4 climate bond appropriations for wildfire and forest resilience projects. Much of the member discussion centered on rising Medi-Cal costs, the recent $3.4 billion cash-flow loan, and whether the new appropriation would cover payments through June. Finance said the new funds were for program costs and cash flow, not repayment of the loan, and that no additional loan authority remained. Members also debated the causes of higher Medi-Cal spending, including expanded eligibility, higher enrollment, pharmacy costs, and federal policy changes. The LAO noted that forecasting errors are not unusual but that current revisions are somewhat higher than typical, though not unprecedented. Several members emphasized that Medi-Cal supports access to care and hospital stability, while others raised concerns about sustainability and future federal cuts. Public commenters largely supported the bill, especially the Medi-Cal funding and wildfire-related provisions. Health and labor advocates argued that the program is functioning as intended by covering more low-income Californians and preventing uncompensated care. Representatives of special districts and the Altadena Library District supported the property tax backfill provisions tied to the Eaton fire. The hearing ended without a vote, with the chair noting that the committee would adjourn for floor session and that the Assembly would vote on one of the early action bills later that morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• note to be used as anticipation note to be used as collateral<00:33:11.760> in<00:33:12.000><
• The reimbursement tax anticipation note.
• has<00:33:24.480> some anticipation note though has some anticipation note though has some
• for that anticipation note. for that anticipation note.
• That's called a CR, a grant anticipation note.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Which notes the amount of funding anticipated to be received from the IIJA and the number of wells. anticipated
• The program was intended to be self-funded from fees and the bill... fiscal note anticipate a ramp-up
• So, the fiscal note for that bill in the 87th.
• I didn't anticipate that was going to be an issue.
• One side note related to this. This is to our knowledge.

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You'll see a note regarding the fact that the proposal implements legislation for the first time, and
• So, we do not anticipate that an applicant would need more than six months to go through the licensing
• So, we do not anticipate that an applicant would need more than six months to go through the licensing
• So, we do not anticipate that an applicant would need more than six months to go through the licensing
• So, we do not anticipate that an applicant would need more than six months to go through the licensing

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened its September meeting, seated alternates to establish a quorum, approved the prior minutes and consent agenda, and then moved to the regular calendar. The main substantive item was the kinship care home licensing standards rule (2025-130), which had a conditional approval request with three comments. Committee discussion focused on whether the rule and statute aligned on temporary permits, renewal, and whether a statutory amendment might be needed. Department of Health and Human Services and DCF staff explained that kinship care licenses are issued for two years and may be renewed, while the temporary six-month permit is meant to bridge applicants until licensure. They also said the rule was amended to reflect statutory language, and members suggested adding clearer language to avoid confusion. The committee then approved the conditional request, including oral amendments for clarity, and noted that any needed statutory cleanup would be added to a running list of possible changes for future filing. The committee next took up an emergency rule from the Lottery Commission concerning games of chance and video lottery terminals. Staff said the emergency rule was needed to avoid substantial fiscal harm to the state and loss of expected revenue, and that it largely builds on existing charitable gaming infrastructure. Members questioned the emergency basis and asked about precedent for using fiscal harm as justification, but staff said they did not have precedent information immediately available. The commission representative said regular rulemaking was already underway and would be brought to the commission at its October meeting. The committee did not take adverse action on the emergency rule during the discussion. Finally, the committee reviewed Department of Safety Commissioner Emergency Rule 14357 on school bus transportation qualifications. The rule creates an exception for applicants whose driver’s license validity had a gap of no more than 30 days due to suspension or non-renewal, which staff said would help address a school bus driver shortage and reduce transportation problems for students. Members raised the possibility of a legislative fix to distinguish administrative lapses from safety-related suspensions, and staff said that could be considered. The committee noted the emergency rule is only effective for 180 days and will return through regular rulemaking for fuller review. The meeting ended with scheduling for the next regular meeting on October 17 and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• But on a serious note, because I actually—I'm a Macintosh guy, but I have to have a PC for some stuff
• <00:30:56.399> happening happened that we anticipated happening happened that we anticipated
• <00:37:41.440> both better financially I anticipate both better financially I anticipate both
• We put the fiscal note, but other than that, yes. If it's in a fiscal note, it's there.
• was in our fiscal note was in our fiscal note for<00:49:55.240> uh<00:49:55.359> it

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard a budget presentation from New Hampshire Lottery Director Charlie McIntyre and CFO Jim Durus. McIntyre said the Lottery has more than tripled its return to the Education Trust Fund since 2011, from $62 million to $207 million in FY 24, while keeping expenses relatively flat over time. He explained that the Lottery operates like a business, is heavily audited, and that the governor’s budget raises the FY 26-27 revenue estimate to $185 million, up about $12 million annually from prior estimates. He attributed FY 24’s unusually strong results to record Powerball sales driven by a spike in billion-dollar jackpots tied to higher interest rates, and said scratch tickets still make up most gross sales, though Powerball is the highest-margin product. Members questioned the Lottery about the difference between gross revenue and profit, the steep rise in operating expenses, and the reasons for requested budget increases. McIntyre said the main drivers were payroll, benefits, advertising, added regulatory responsibilities from expanded gaming, and a new Salesforce customer-tracking system. He also described requested capital needs, including an outdated security system, building access and ADA improvements, and upgrades to the front office for employee safety. He said the security system is still running on an old Windows 7-based setup and that the requested upgrade would modernize cameras and add redundancy. The discussion also covered staffing and gaming expansion. McIntyre said the Lottery has 84 employees including three commissioners, with 13 funded vacancies, and that it plans to fill positions as two new gaming rooms come online in Rochester and Derry. He said the Lottery’s revenue estimates were revised upward because sports betting in Massachusetts had less impact than expected and historic horse racing machines have been more profitable than forecast. He also explained the governor’s proposal to shift historic horse racing toward slot-style machines, saying the physical machines would look largely the same but the content and math would change, and that the state’s revenue share would increase under the proposal. No votes were taken; the committee mainly asked questions and received explanations about the Lottery’s budget and revenue assumptions.