Transcript Highlights:

• Will the Auditor General please come to the podium.
• Page 13 of the Auditor General report regarding the rulemaking.
• I'm with the Arizona Auditor General.
• Two specific that are highlighted in the Auditor General report.
• Two specific that are highlighted in the Auditor General report.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee conducted sunset reviews for the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy, the State Board of Nursing, the Arizona Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners, and the Arizona Regulatory Board of Physician Assistants. The Auditor General’s reports praised each board for timely licensing in some areas but identified recurring problems with complaint investigations, public safety oversight, fee analysis, records/documentation, and internal controls. For Pharmacy, the main concerns were weak enforcement of controlled substances prescription monitoring program (CSPMP) requirements and slow complaint resolution; the board said it had implemented some recommendations, was pursuing a new database vendor, and supported legislation to strengthen CSPMP enforcement. For Nursing, the audit found a large and growing backlog of complaints and repeated delays in resolving cases; the executive director said the board was under-resourced and requested 28 additional investigative positions, while nursing stakeholders supported process reforms and cited a bill to improve timelines and fairness. For Occupational Therapy, the audit focused on missing or poorly documented fingerprint clearance card checks, delayed action on a serious criminal-charge disclosure, and other compliance issues; the board said it had accepted and was implementing all recommendations, including new procedures and rulemaking. For Physician Assistants, the audit found weak oversight by the executive director, extensive delays in complaint handling, and an incentive-pay system that did not align with key performance goals; the board said it had already made structural changes, was improving tracking and IT systems, and planned to continue implementing recommendations. After discussion and testimony from board officials, public members, and nursing stakeholders, the committee voted to continue the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy for six years until July 1, 2032, the State Board of Nursing for four years until July 1, 2031, the Arizona Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners for four years until July 1, 2030, and the Arizona Regulatory Board of Physician Assistants for a continued term with statutory changes (the transcript includes the board review and related discussion, but the final motion text for the physician assistants board is not fully captured in the excerpt). The votes on the first three continuations were approved by roll call, with members generally supporting continuation while expressing concern about complaint backlogs and the need for reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• under the State Auditor...
• Speaker, back in November, we changed the rules to allow the auditor to pick the auditor for what would
• By allowing the auditor to select an independent office, we've done.
• And put it back into professionalism by allowing the auditor to select an independent auditor to audit
• I'll quote a March 7 letter to Speaker Mariano from Auditor DiZoglio.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House first took up House Bill 58, a fiscal year 2025 supplemental appropriations bill. The chamber adopted a further amendment offered by Rep. Michael Witts of Boston, then concurred with the Senate as amended after a roll call vote of 128-23. The House then moved to the orders of the day and considered the proposed permanent joint rules for the 2025-2026 session (House No. 2026 / Senate No. 18), with Rep. Moran of Brighton presenting the package as a set of transparency and process reforms, including joint committee procedures, a 60-day reporting deadline, public posting of summaries and testimony, and revised formal session timing. A series of minority amendments offered largely by Rep. Jones of North Reading and others were debated and repeatedly rejected, including proposals to require roll call votes for post-July 31 formal business, require two weeks’ notice for such sessions, publish State Auditor audits on the legislative website, require SJC advisory opinions on constitutional disputes, extend poll windows to two hours, require advance notice of electronic polls, and lengthen amendment filing deadlines. Supporters argued these changes would improve transparency, accountability, and member access; opponents said they would slow the legislative process and reduce flexibility. Most of these amendments failed on roll call votes by margins of 128-23 or similar, while a technical amendment from Rep. Galvin was adopted. The House then adopted the joint rules package by roll call, 128-23. The chamber also adopted the House rules package for the 2025-2026 session (House No. 2024) after debate led by Rep. Galvin of Canton, who emphasized modernization, online transparency, in-person participation, and an outside audit and EEO officer. Additional minority amendments on committee reporting, timing of formal business, and poll procedures were debated and defeated, while one technical amendment was adopted. The House later returned to the issue of legislative audits, rejecting an amendment to require House audits by the State Auditor after a lengthy debate over Question 1, separation of powers, and the scope of the auditor’s authority. The session ended with a memorial tribute to former Rep. Carol Doherty and an order to adjourn until the next day at 11 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• She's been the fabric of the Auditor General.
• and the Auditor General's office truly make that difference.
• Then we can, or I guess the Auditor General knows what school that is, so if the Auditor General could
• And the Auditor General says that you're not certified.
• Did you convey this to the Auditor General? Correct.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee opened with remarks about moving JLAC to a more frequent monthly schedule and spending more time on each audit. Members also recognized Melanie Chesney of the Auditor General’s office for 32 years of service, with several members praising her work and her role in school safety and other audits. The meeting then turned to the JLAC-directed Arizona School Safety Special Audit on interoperable communication systems, with the Auditor General’s office presenting the December 2025 report. The audit found that the state had allocated nearly $26 million to interoperable communication efforts, but implementation varied widely. Auditors said all 14 law enforcement agencies used the money for interoperable systems, yet four agencies allowed private or tribal schools to participate contrary to statute, and several agencies failed to submit required expenditure reports. The report also found procurement problems: nine of 14 agencies did not follow procurement requirements or lacked documentation, many contracts lacked accountability provisions, and some agencies had not planned for ongoing costs. The audit estimated ongoing annual costs for an average rural county could range from about $16,000 to $382,000, and recommended that agencies document costs, follow procurement rules, monitor vendors, and plan for future funding. It also recommended the legislature clarify whether non-public schools may participate and revisit statutory system requirements that were vague or inconsistently interpreted. Members questioned the Auditor General about vendor licensing, whether systems could be built in-house, why some functions were not configured, and whether the systems were truly usable in emergencies. The presentation explained that some systems met requirements only in part, that Mutualink had a per-user licensing model affecting access to secure text and file sharing, and that some schools were unwilling or unable to install apps or keep devices logged in. The committee also discussed the difference between the separate school safety grant program administered by ADE and this interoperability fund, and several members expressed frustration with sole-source contracting and weak documentation. In the final portion of the presentation, auditors said only two of eight observed systems demonstrated all five critical emergency functions, while four agency systems could not be tested because they were reportedly not functioning. The committee then began hearing responses from county sheriffs, starting with the Arizona Sheriffs’ Association president, who emphasized county commitment to school safety and noted that some counties had implemented systems across multiple districts, including tribal and rural schools. No votes or formal actions were taken during the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, so, Madam Auditor, welcome to the committee.
• is Julie Blaha I'm your state auditor is Julie Blaha I'm your state auditor excited<00:02:03.439
• leave for your total staff auditor leave for your total staff auditor Blaha<00:15:52.519> uh<
• <00:18:14.720> I'd I had to tell the Iowa state auditor I'd I had to tell the Iowa state auditor
• <00:19:11.120> Blaha that to be a helpful tool auditor Blaha that to be a helpful tool auditor

Bills: HF627, HF474, HF361, HF1837

Keywords: HF627, fiscal note, fiscal notes, Minnesota Legislature, state government, committee procedure, ranking minority member, minority party, standing committee, Ways and Means, Finance Committee, legislative process, budget analysis, fiscal impact, Minnesota Statutes 3.98, committee chair, legislative transparency, HF474, Hubert H. Humphrey, Henry Mower Rice

Transcript Highlights:

• Auditor Blaha is figuring out technology. So, Madam Auditor, welcome to the committee.
• I'm your state auditor, excited to be here with you today.
• And it used to be done by the legislative auditor.
• Madam Auditor, thank you. Another good question.
• Auditor Blaha. Thank you, Chair Nash.

Bills: HF627, HF474, HF361, HF1837

Keywords: HF627, fiscal note, fiscal notes, Minnesota Legislature, state government, committee procedure, ranking minority member, minority party, standing committee, Ways and Means, Finance Committee, legislative process, budget analysis, fiscal impact, Minnesota Statutes 3.98, committee chair, legislative transparency, HF474, Hubert H. Humphrey, Henry Mower Rice

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll have some questions and stuff with the Auditor General.
• Okay, so we will have the office of the Auditor General. We've got Liam Ben Pelt for that.
• My name is Leon Van Pelt, and I'm with the Arizona Auditor General.
• I also want to thank Arizona Auditor General Lindsay Perry and her staff at the Office of the Auditor
• It also timely resolved 30 complaints auditors reviewed.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The House Commerce Committee of Reference heard sunset reviews and a performance audit presentation for the Arizona Department of Gaming, the Racing Commission, the Boxing and MMA Commission, and later the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The Auditor General reported that the Department of Gaming and the commissions generally met some statutory duties, but identified several problems: the department did not consistently obtain and review independent audits for event wagering and fantasy sports operators; the department and commissions had gaps in conflict-of-interest disclosures; the department and Boxing and MMA Commission lacked comprehensive complaint-handling processes; the department was late distributing some compact trust fund payments; and there were additional issues involving IT security, horse-racing license checks, fee reviews, public records practices, and licensing compliance. The Auditor General said the department agreed to implement all 36 recommendations, the Racing Commission agreed to six recommendations, and the Boxing and MMA Commission agreed to 13 recommendations. The department director said many fixes were already underway, including updated guidance, complaint tracking improvements, and a historical look-back on operator reporting, and she also discussed efforts to combat illegal gambling and educate minors and families about gambling risks. Committee members questioned the department about third-party audits, penalties for underpayments, public records handling, conflict-of-interest screening, and the department’s position on prediction markets and suitability standards for licensees. The director said the department would review past reports, could assess fines if violations were found, and would generally wait for final adjudication or final action in other jurisdictions before taking Arizona licensing action. After discussion, the committee voted to recommend the Department of Gaming be continued for two years until July 1, 2028, the Racing Commission for six years until July 1, 2032, and the Boxing and MMA Commission for six years until July 1, 2032. The Department of Gaming motion passed 7-4, the Racing Commission motion passed 10-1, and the Boxing and MMA Commission motion passed unanimously. The committee then heard the Auditor General’s report on the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The audit found the board timely processed many licenses and complaints and had adopted curriculum rules, but it inconsistently applied its disciplinary guidelines, sometimes issuing different sanctions for similar violations without documenting the reasons for deviation. The report also found problems with reciprocity education requirements, application review controls, inspections, and compliance with open meeting, public records, and conflict-of-interest requirements, and it suggested possible statutory changes on aesthetics scope of practice, cease-and-desist authority, and training standards for I-LEST technicians. The board agreed with the findings and said it had already updated disciplinary parameters and documentation policies, with more recommendations in progress; committee members asked about discretion in discipline, audit funding, and service efficiency, and the board highlighted its licensing volume, call response, inspections, and complaint handling performance.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm an audit manager with the Florida Auditor General's Office.
• Does the auditor keep tabs on this on a more recurring basis?
• Is the internal auditor keeping tabs on this information?
• Are you talking about the university's internal auditor?
• I can't speak to what their internal auditor will do.

Summary: The Higher Education Budget Subcommittee met to hear a presentation from the Florida Auditor General’s office on recent operational audits of four universities and to discuss how audit findings are handled. The Auditor General explained that financial audits occur annually and operational audits at least every three years, with universities required to respond in writing to findings; the office generally follows up in the next audit cycle, though it can audit sooner if needed. Members asked about accountability, whether findings are referred to other bodies, and how internal university audit functions interact with the state audit process. The chair emphasized the committee’s oversight role in ensuring public funds are used appropriately. The audit findings highlighted issues at New College of Florida, Florida A&M University, the University of Florida, and Florida Atlantic University. At New College, auditors cited invoice/payment errors, delinquent student account collection delays, prohibited extra compensation, exceeding state remuneration limits for certain employees, weak purchasing card controls, construction management cost documentation issues, and subcontractor licensing documentation gaps. At FAMU, auditors found investment accounting classification issues, delayed bank reconciliations, late vendor payments, and incomplete annual employee evaluations. At UF, auditors reported concerns over a $6.4 million consulting contract, event and catering spending, president’s office hiring and salary practices, bonus and relocation payments, continued high compensation after the president transitioned to another role, travel expenses including charter flights, and remote work agreements. At FAU, auditors found distance learning fee revenue exceeded allowable costs by about $2.8 million, carry forward funds were underreported by about $77 million, and credit card controls needed improvement. Members pressed the Auditor General on whether overpayments were refunded, whether any findings involved statutory violations, and what enforcement exists beyond the audit report. The auditor said some issues were corrected by the universities, such as New College recovering excess compensation from foundation funds, but others would be revisited in future audits; if potential fraud were identified, it would be referred to the state attorney’s office. The chair closed by noting that accountability for public spending rests with the Legislature and the committee, and the meeting adjourned without any vote or formal action beyond receiving the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Auditor Gallion is here. Would you speak to that, auditor? Yeah, I thought it was.
• And state auditor is required to perform. And state auditor is required to perform.
• Go ahead, auditor. Mr.
• Go ahead, auditor. Mr.
• Any questions for the auditor? Oh, everybody? Any questions for the auditor? Everybody’s good.

Summary: The committee was called to order, the Pledge of Allegiance and prayer were offered, and the minutes from the previous meeting were approved. Members then received a memo summarizing major audit items and began hearing audit presentations from the State Auditor’s Office and private auditors on a range of state agencies and organizations. Several audits were reported as clean, including the Bank of North Dakota, the North Dakota Guaranteed Student Loan Program, the Office of the Governor, the Office of the State Treasurer, the Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Transportation’s flexible transportation fund, Lake Region State College, and the Department of Environmental Quality. The North Dakota Stockmen’s Association also received an unmodified opinion, though repeat findings were noted for limited segregation of duties and financial statement preparation due to its small staff. The Council on the Arts audit found two findings: payroll charged to federal awards without adequate timekeeping records, and unallowable expenditures from a restricted cultural endowment fund. The Department of Public Instruction audit identified unsupported scholarship applications in the paraprofessional-to-teacher program, though additional testing showed the funds were used for their intended purpose. The most extensive discussion centered on the North Dakota Racing Commission audit, which identified four findings: overspending the promotion fund’s 25% operating limit, grant conditions not being met, improper Breeders Fund awards, and improper procurement for advertising services. Racing Commission director Bruce Johnson acknowledged complacency and weak controls, said the agency would tighten procedures, and explained that the commission had since worked with procurement and would follow the rules more closely. Auditors also explained that the commission would now be audited every two years because of the findings. Another major discussion involved the University of North Dakota School of Law, where auditors found a lack of documentation supporting admissions decisions for post-baccalaureate programs. UND officials said they remain in good standing with the American Bar Association but agreed better documentation and tools are needed; the committee pressed for more transparency and follow-up on admissions criteria. The committee also received an update on Dakota College at Bottineau, where Minot State University reported that bank reconciliations had been brought current after a significant backlog and would now be maintained through shared services. Members requested a written follow-up report on the issues and corrective actions. Finally, the North Dakota Fair Association explained that its foundation has been dissolved and remaining funds were transferred to another nonprofit for continued support of the state fair, and the Department of Public Instruction provided an update on school meal debt, saying the reported amount was about $1.1 million from a partial district survey and that debt remains a local issue, though it could be revisited if school meal funding changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• They were auditor galleons here. Would you speak to that, Auditor? Yeah. I thought it was...
• Thanks, Auditor.
• The remainder of that section, the next section relates to the state auditor, the role of the state auditor
• Go ahead, auditor. Mr.
• Any questions for the auditor? Oh, everybody. Any questions for the auditor? Everybody's good.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, up next is our state auditor, Mark Hunt. Mr. Auditor, Mark Hunt. Mr. Auditor...
• We have 156 employees, down from 164 under the previous auditor. The auditor before us had 214.
• Questions of our auditor? Senior Senator from the 13th. Thank you, Mr. Auditor.
• and the state auditor.
• We need auditors. We need auditors in the chief inspectors' division.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with a quorum, approved the minutes from the prior meeting, and heard budget presentations from the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the State Auditor. The Secretary of State’s office described its FY27 budget, emphasizing efficiency gains from technology, election security work, and business services. It said it is operating with fewer staff than a decade ago, but rising costs and outdated statutory fees are creating deficits in service of process and other operations. The office asked the committee to consider either increasing fees or allowing it to retain a larger share of business-service revenue, and it also proposed creating an Office of Entrepreneurship to help small businesses navigate state government, grants, permits, and related services. Committee members questioned the Secretary of State’s office about fee increases, the current 50-50 split of certain revenues with general revenue, and whether the proposed entrepreneurship office would duplicate existing services. The office said it would complement, not replace, Commerce, SBDC, or grant programs, and would report metrics and policy recommendations to the legislature. The Attorney General then requested a one-time $2 million special revenue appropriation to hire additional lawyers and support staff, citing increased litigation, federal and state legal work, and the need to defend new laws. He also discussed embedded DMV lawyers handling DUI revocation hearings and said the arrangement costs the office just over $200,000. The State Auditor reported that his office is largely self-funded through special revenue and said he wants to reduce reliance on general revenue over time. He highlighted savings from renegotiated leases and an open government contract, discussed the need for more auditors in the Chief Inspector’s Division, and described fraud recovery and P-card operations. A major topic was delinquent land sales: the auditor said the office sold about 17,000 parcels last year and believes online bidding and better marketing could generate substantially more revenue, with the surplus potentially shared among counties, the state, and other programs. Members also asked about securities fee changes, fairness hearings, fire department audits, IT/cybersecurity, and how surplus proceeds from delinquent land sales should be handled. The committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Auditor Gallian could...
• Auditor Gallion is here. Would you speak to that, Auditor? Yeah, I thought it was... I asked Mr.
• The remainder of that section, the next section relates to the state auditor, the role of the state auditor
• Go ahead, auditor. Mr.
• Any questions for the auditor? Oh, everybody. Any questions for the auditor? Everybody's good.

Summary: The committee convened, approved the prior meeting minutes, and received a memo summarizing major audit items. The State Auditor’s office and outside auditors then presented a series of audits, many of which were clean with unmodified opinions and no findings, including the Bank of North Dakota, the Guaranteed Student Loan Program, the Office of the Governor, the State Treasurer, the Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Environmental Quality, Lake Region State College, and the Office of the Governor. The North Dakota Stockmen’s Association audit was also clean overall, but it repeated findings about limited segregation of duties and auditor assistance in preparing financial statements, which the auditor said were expected to continue because of the organization’s small size. Committee members asked about out-of-state board addresses, and the association explained those members were North Dakota residents using South Dakota mailing addresses. Several audits did include findings. The Council on the Arts audit identified two issues: payroll charged to federal awards without supporting time records, and $12,825 in Cultural Endowment Fund spending that was not allowable under state law, including staff training, retreats, and executive director candidate travel. The Department of Public Instruction audit found unsupported scholarship applications in the paraprofessional-to-teacher program, but additional testing confirmed the funds were credited properly and students completed required school district work, so no improper payments were identified. The University of North Dakota audit found a lack of documentation and transparency in School of Law admissions decisions; the auditor said the law school used a holistic process but did not keep notes or evaluation tools to show why applicants were admitted, waitlisted, or denied. UND leadership said the school is in good standing with the American Bar Association and agreed better documentation is needed, and the auditor said the issue was the missing documentation, not ABA accreditation itself. The most extensive discussion centered on the North Dakota Racing Commission audit, which found four findings: overspending the promotion fund’s 25% operating cap, grant conditions not being met, improper breeder fund awards, and improper procurement. The auditor said promotion fund spending exceeded the cap by $327,447 and the fund balance dropped sharply over the audit period. Racing Commission director Bruce Johnson said the agency had become complacent, that grant requests were treated as routine, and that controls and documentation need to be tightened. He also explained that the breeder fund overpayments involved two horses whose ownership transfers were not properly documented before racing, and that the procurement issue stemmed from an advertising contract that proceeded without proper written procurement procedures after a misunderstanding with the State Procurement Office. The auditor said the Racing Commission will now be audited every two years because of the findings. The committee also received updates on Dakota College at Bottineau’s bank reconciliations, which Minot State University said had been brought current after an 18-month backlog, with only one account still needing cleanup; members asked for a written report on the corrective actions. The North Dakota Fair Foundation was reported to have dissolved, with remaining funds transferred to another nonprofit account for continued support of the state fair. Finally, the Department of Public Instruction provided an update on school meal debt, revising the earlier estimate to about $1.1 million based on incomplete district survey responses, and said the Anti-Lunch Shaming law likely increased meal debt because schools must feed students regardless of account balance. Members discussed the need for a more accurate year-end debt figure and possible future reporting at a later committee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• One of them is the Office of the State Auditor.
• You know, if you're an external auditor like our office is, like the legislative auditor can be, like
• 00:04:00.480> legislative<00:04:01.000> auditor office is, like the legislative auditor
• Auditor, any final thought on this topic?
• These cases can the Legislative Auditor.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: State Auditor Julie Blaha discussed fraud in Minnesota, emphasizing that recent attention on fraud during COVID-19 should be separated from broader, ongoing fraud risks. She explained that the Office of the State Auditor oversees about $60 billion in local government activity, including school districts, cities, townships, counties, special districts, and port authorities, and works both to prevent fraud through audits and to investigate cases when they arise. Blaha said the biggest current challenge is workforce shortages in accounting and accountability fields, which makes it harder to provide oversight even as public demand for accountability increases. She urged legislators to involve her office early when drafting bills so the right oversight tool can be matched to the risk, rather than simply adding an audit requirement by default. She also said a proposed Office of the Inspector General would be a useful accountability discussion, but stressed that internal audit structures are often more effective than relying only on external audits. Blaha said the public plays a major role in detecting fraud because tips are the most common way fraud, waste, and abuse are uncovered. She encouraged public employees and local officials to report concerns, especially around unusual spending or misuse of purchasing cards, and noted that reporting can be confidential and is often required for certain public employees. In her closing remarks, she warned that COVID-era fraud often involved private-sector actors and said outsourcing government work requires careful risk analysis and added oversight. The segment ended with a reminder that allegations of state government fraud can be submitted to the Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor online, by phone, or by mail.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is correct, Auditor Gallion.
• Or maybe it's giving the auditor more power.
• Chairman, and thank you, Auditor Gallion.
• Thanks, Auditor Gallion. Questions or comments for the auditor? Anyone? No, we're good.
• Auditor. Mr.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We continue to work with the auditors.
• General concerns, right, gaps in your guys' process found by the Auditor General?
• general concerns, right, gaps in your guys' process found by the auditor. list of auditor general concerns
• , right, gaps in your guys' process found by the auditor general.
• The Office of the Auditor General is the legislature.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met to consider Ruby Dylan Williams for Director of the Arizona Department of Housing. Chair Jay Kaufman opened with remarks about the committee’s role in scrutinizing nominees’ commitment to faithfully executing state law. Williams, who has served in housing roles since 2020 and as interim director since March 2025, described her background in both public service and the private sector and said her priorities would be expanding housing supply, preserving housing stability, and improving technology-driven operations and transparency. Members questioned Williams extensively about department oversight, fraud prevention, auditor general findings, homelessness policy, budget priorities, and the cost of affordable housing programs. She said the department had strengthened internal controls, added verbal verification steps for wire transfers, increased site inspections and grantee monitoring, and was tracking 68 performance metrics. She also defended the use of LIHTC and other federal housing programs as key public-private tools, said the department was working on a real-time homelessness data system, and explained that if state funding were cut, staffing would likely be reduced before core programs. Several members pressed her on past fraud and audit findings and on whether the department had been sufficiently proactive in preventing them. Public testimony was overwhelmingly supportive. Developers and industry representatives praised Williams’ experience, her knowledge of housing finance, and her role in streamlining the qualified allocation plan and improving the department’s responsiveness. They argued that her leadership has helped attract investment and increase housing production in Arizona. After debate, the committee voted 3-2 to recommend Williams’ confirmation to the full Senate, with Senators Kavanagh and Shope voting no and Senators Bravo and Ortiz voting yes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is the fact that he has included one forensic auditor, one new forensic auditor in the BCA. One.
• Is the fact that he has included one forensic auditor, one new forensic auditor in the BCA. One.
• Is the fact that he has included one forensic auditor, one new forensic auditor in the BCA. One.
• Is the fact that he has included one forensic auditor, one new forensic auditor in the BCA. One.
• Is the fact that he has included one forensic auditor, one new forensic auditor in the BCA. One.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Committee Chair Kristen Robbins opened by criticizing the governor’s fraud package as too focused on new spending and staffing, and not enough on culture change, accountability, eligibility rules, and an enterprise-wide IT/data strategy. She said the committee had heard a good overview from multiple commissioners, but she remained concerned that piecemeal technology investments and added staff would not address the root causes of fraud. Robbins also said she would introduce a bill based on issues raised in committee, including requiring grants management staff to complete Office of Grants Management training and certification. A major action announced was the launch of a new whistleblower portal at mnfraud.com, which legislators said will let people submit basic fraud allegations, after which staff will follow up and forward matters to the Office of the Legislative Auditor, BCA, law enforcement, or the attorney general as appropriate. Members noted that the Office of the Legislative Auditor already has a separate reporting portal, and there was a question about why the new site does not allow anonymous reporting; Robbins said contact information is needed so staff can follow up. She also said the portal is intended to centralize and triage reports from agency workers, service recipients, and providers. Republican members said the governor’s proposal still misses key pieces. Vice Chair Anderson argued the package mostly adds staff to agencies that failed to catch or act on fraud, and said Minnesota needs a statewide independent inspector general with authority outside agencies and a stronger whistleblower system. Representative Marion Rarick said the proposed criminal penalty increases are too small compared with federal penalties and criticized the package for adding only one forensic auditor at the BCA while DHS receives many more positions. She also argued that agency managers should face sanctions when fraud occurs under their watch and said the state needs a culture where employees can be rewarded for good work but also held accountable for failures. Members discussed several other ideas, including creating new crimes for kickbacks and theft of public funds, requiring fraud fiscal notes, improving data sharing and eligibility verification, and using better IT so systems can talk to each other. There was also discussion of whether government services should rely less on nonprofits and private contractors; one member said fraud often follows a particular business model rather than the sector itself, while another suggested capping salaries of top nonprofit executives receiving government funds. The committee also noted that the governor’s fraud package is being presented as a package but will likely move as separate provisions through different omnibus bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• The legislative auditor made three recommendations related to hospital inspections.
• As a reminder, we follow up on legislative auditor recommendations for four years.
• Therefore, the legislative auditor concludes that focusing the metric on...
• The legislative auditor has two recommendations.
• This leads us to legislative auditors two recommendations.

Summary: The committee met on December 3, 2025, with a quorum present and approved the September 17 minutes. Members first voted to suspend the 2026 JLARC lodging tax expenditure report for one year, based on staff’s explanation that the report is self-reported, not verified, and less useful than State Auditor accountability audits; the motion passed. The committee also approved renaming the JLARC I-900 subcommittee to the “Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits,” while keeping the opening script noting that the performance audit process exists under Initiative 900. The committee then heard follow-up updates on two prior performance audits. The Department of Health presented a draft strategic management plan in response to findings on hospital inspections, complaints, adverse event review, and hospital data access. JLARC staff reiterated that 72% of hospital inspections were late, that DOH did not verify third-party inspection standards or review adverse event reports, and that complaint data suggested possible language-access barriers. DOH said it concurred with the recommendations, had improved on-time inspection compliance to about 49%, planned annual updates starting in July 2026, and would work on accreditation oversight, complaint-language access, and data accessibility, though members pressed for firmer deadlines and questioned the three-year timeline for language access improvements. The Liquor and Cannabis Board also reported on its cannabis market study recommendation. JLARC staff said the agency’s data were incomplete and unreliable, limiting oversight of production, recalls, tax collection, and diversion. LCB said it had improved its current CCRS system but still relied on self-reported data, and it presented a decision package for a new traceability system estimated at about $9 million over three fiscal years. LCB described a plant-tagging and serialization approach tied to production, processing, testing, and retail, but acknowledged it did not currently have sufficient staff to fully implement the system without additional funding. The committee also received briefings on JLARC’s recommendation-tracking tools and the 2024 public records reporting summary, including a high-level review of agency response rates, request volumes, costs, and litigation. Finally, JLARC presented the proposed final report on the Office of Privacy and Data Protection, concluding that OPDP meets its statutory responsibilities and has high user satisfaction, but that its mandate should be updated to better match its current capacity and focus; the committee adopted the report for distribution. The meeting then moved into the 2025 tax preference performance reviews, where JLARC staff summarized nine reviews and noted that the Citizens Commission on Tax Preference and Performance Measurement endorsed all 17 legislative auditor recommendations, with comments on seven. Early reviews discussed included natural gas transportation fuel preferences, travel agent and tour operator B&O rates, nonprofit low-income housing development, multipurpose senior centers, disabled veteran adaptive housing, and trade convention attendance, with staff and commissioners generally recommending continuation of some preferences, modification of others, and improved objectives or performance measures where needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:09:45.120> Um, parallel with the state auditor. Um, parallel with the state auditor.
• How should we do this if the auditor already receives complaints and the auditor whose eyes we trust
• How should we do this if the auditor already receives complaints and the auditor whose eyes we trust
• <00:13:34.959> So, writing to the state auditor. So, writing to the state auditor.
• <00:16:07.759> Auditor of the bill after amended. Auditor of the bill after amended.

Bills: HF1151, HF1239, HF1240, HF2020, HF2514, HF2515, HF2451

Keywords: Compensation Council, salaries, state officials, judicial compensation, legislative process, public funds, misuse, law enforcement, accountability, state government, legislative auditor, compliance, transparency, retirement benefits, health insurance, dependents, state employees, Medicare, legislative studies, government oversight

Transcript Highlights:

• Auditor Randall said, “For the record, Judy Randall, legislative auditor.
• Um Auditor Randall. Auditor Randall said, “Uh, um, excuse me. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Um Auditor >> All right. All right. Um Auditor Randall. Randall. Randall.
• so how does the legislative auditor so how does the legislative auditor investigate<00:41:40.000
• >> Auditor<00:47:40.000> Randall. >> Auditor Randall. >> Auditor Randall.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Legislative Audit Commission Evaluation Subcommittee met on October 6, 2025, to choose additional program evaluation topics for the Office of the Legislative Auditor. Deputy Legislative Auditor Jody Mson Rodriguez explained that the commission had previously selected seven topics from an initial list of 11, with background papers already prepared on five of those items, and that the subcommittee was now being asked to select five more topics for background papers before narrowing the full set to four recommendations later in the fall or early spring. Members discussed several possible topics, especially emergency medical services, non-emergency medical transportation, MinnesotaCare eligibility, child care assistance, medical assistance fraud prevention, and U.S. Bank Stadium. David Kersner of OLA said emergency medical services and non-emergency medical transportation are distinct programs, and noted the EMS topic was evaluated in 2022 while non-emergency medical transportation had not been reviewed since 2011. Auditor Judy Randall said MinnesotaCare eligibility, child care assistance, and medical assistance fraud prevention are better suited to OLA’s financial audit division or special review unit rather than program evaluation, and that financial audits and special reviews do not require Legislative Audit Commission nomination. On process, Mson Rodriguez said the subcommittee had already met its minimum required selections under the commission’s policy and was free to choose additional topics. The discussion also covered whether to broaden the stadium topic beyond U.S. Bank Stadium; staff said the U.S. Bank financing structure alone would be a major undertaking, but they could help craft a future topic focused on maintenance across multiple facilities. No final vote or motion was taken in the portion of the meeting provided, and the chair indicated the committee would continue nominations and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Any other questions for the auditor?
• Any other questions for the auditor?
• And thanks to the department and to the auditor.
• , to the auditor for the product here.
• The auditor really did an outstanding job.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee heard an audit on the Department of Cannabis Control’s oversight of cannabis packaging and labeling, focused on whether products attractive to children are being kept out of the legal market. The auditor said the department’s rules are often vague or subjective, leading to inconsistent enforcement, and that the state relies heavily on licensees to self-police because there is no upfront review before products reach the market. The audit cited examples involving cartoon-like images, bright colors, flavor references, candy-like imagery, strain names, and beverage packaging, and recommended clearer statutory standards, possible pre-approval of packaging, better enforcement tools, and stronger tracking of repeat violators. Assemblymembers and senators largely agreed that child safety is the priority, but differed on the best policy response. Some members argued for clearer legislative limits and even plain packaging, saying products like root beer, cherry pie, and cereal-like designs are plainly appealing to children. Department officials said they had already begun reforms, including a centralized label-review team, a rubric, improved databases, and more attention to repeat violations, while also emphasizing that the illicit and intoxicating hemp markets are major sources of youth exposure and that resource constraints limit inspections. They said they are open to working with the Legislature on more specific standards and additional funding. Public witnesses split between public health and industry perspectives. A pediatrician and public health advocate urged stronger restrictions, including plain packaging, limits on flavors and potency, and a pre-market review system, arguing that vague rules have failed children. Industry representatives said they support youth protections but want bright-line, objective standards so compliant businesses can know what is allowed; they argued that most youth-targeted packaging is in the illicit market and that the legal market needs clearer rules rather than broader bans. No formal vote or committee action was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• To order this presentation by the legislative auditor.
• I'm the deputy legislative auditor L.
• >> Or I'm sorry, Auditor Randall. >> Or I'm sorry, Auditor Randall.
• um<01:22:12.719> uh think auditor the auditor Randall um uh think auditor the auditor
• we and the auditor landed. we and the auditor landed.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from the legislative auditor on a performance audit of the governor’s office and lieutenant governor’s office covering July 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024. The audit reviewed receipts, inventory, payroll, and non-payroll expenditures and found 12 findings, concluding the office generally did not comply with the criteria tested because of internal control deficiencies. The auditor said four of five prior findings that remained relevant were not fully resolved, and that the problems were widespread across financial operations, creating opportunities for waste and fraud, though no evidence of wrongdoing or misuse of funds was found. The main findings involved weak segregation of duties, late vendor payments, inaccurate reimbursements and vendor payments, missing documentation, and poor receipt management. Auditors said one employee handled purchasing, receiving, payment processing, and inventory functions without adequate oversight; vendors were often paid late, resulting in more than $1,000 in late/reactivation fees; reimbursements and some state airplane payments contained errors; and many vendor payments, reimbursements, and purchasing card transactions lacked required support. The office also failed to collect about $12,000 for events at the governor’s residence, did not fully process several deposits, and lacked documentation for some billed or deposited amounts. Members reacted strongly to the repeated control failures and the lack of documentation, with several saying the issues were pervasive and concerning even if the dollar amounts were not large. Questions focused on whether the problems reflected different treatment of vendors versus employee expenses, whether restitution was being sought, and whether legislation was needed. The auditor responded that the state already has the necessary policies and procedures, and that the issue is implementation and oversight by the governor’s office, not new legislation. The auditor also said the governor’s office had been receptive and had begun taking steps to address the findings.