Transcript Highlights:

• makes sense to evaluate it now.
• We should evaluate it there.
• And as I look at what we would be evaluating next year and what we're evaluating this year, probably
• the final evaluations.
• evaluated twice.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• initial review and then an evaluation. initial review and then an evaluation.
• that must be included in the evaluation. that must be included in the evaluation.
• expenditure evaluations. expenditure evaluations.
• Um it evaluation findings.
• um conduct tax expenditure evaluations. um conduct tax expenditure evaluations.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• However, when a child is incompetent, the evaluator In that evaluation, the evaluator has to make a decision
• Those findings would be from the evaluator, or we would get an evaluation done first.
• evaluator, thinks.
• The other evaluator lives in Illinois and does his evaluations over telemedicine.
• State evaluation.

Transcript Highlights:

• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate

Summary: The task force first approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, including a correction removing language that suggested the auditor’s office would contract with a security vendor. Members then moved to a bill draft on concessions (LC 27.0161.00000), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, clarify that proceeds go to the entity’s operating fund or general fund, and make other technical updates. OMB explained the draft and answered questions about scope, fragmentation, vendor restrictions, school districts, and whether concession proceeds could be directed to nonprofits; OMB said the draft could be refined further, including clarifying covered entities and contract length. No vote was taken on the draft during the discussion. OMB also reported on other survey items. It said a proposal to broadly allow agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering/land surveying vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is working well for the agencies that already have it. On legal notices, OMB said it has been working with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernization, including an ADA-compliant online notice system and possible statutory updates to reflect changing technology and notice definitions. On click-through agreements for routine IT purchases, OMB and the Attorney General’s office said policy clarification—not statutory change—was enough, and the $20,000 threshold was intended to distinguish low-dollar adhesive contracts from purchases where terms can be negotiated. The committee also heard that OMB and the Center for Distance Education had resolved questions about alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures through existing policy, so no statutory changes were needed there. North Dakota University System representatives gave a brief update on ongoing collaboration with OMB on statutory efficiency ideas, including concessions and surplus property. Finally, the task force discussed a draft on requirements for new or expanded spending programs, which would require agencies to identify purpose, expected benefits, alternatives, success measures, and full implementation costs, and would require reporting on outcomes over time. Members debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how to use the new program evaluators, whether real-time dashboards should be used, and how to choose which programs to evaluate; staff from Legislative Council said they would work with OMB and the auditor’s office to revise the draft and process.

Transcript Highlights:

• under the current evaluation process. under the current evaluation process.
• receive the evaluation upon request. receive the evaluation upon request.
• evaluated now? I believe it's 94. evaluated now? I believe it's 94.
• performance evaluation. performance evaluation.
• any oversight on case evaluation time. any oversight on case evaluation time.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee began a work session on House Bill 1600, concerning access to the centralized voter registration database on election days. Secretary of State David Scanlan testified that the state already has a new statewide voter registration system connected to town clerks and supervisors of the checklist, and that the bill was probably unnecessary but acceptable if the legislature wanted it. He raised concern about language that could require direct electronic access in every polling place, noting that some polling locations lack reliable internet or cell service and that municipalities can change polling locations, which could make a rigid requirement expensive and impractical. Members discussed whether the bill should be clarified to allow direct or indirect access, including use of a phone-based workaround, and the secretary said that would address his concern. The committee then voted on HB 1600. Representative Maguire moved ought to pass with an amendment adding “direct or indirect access” on page one, line seven, and the motion was seconded. The amendment was adopted 9-0 by voice vote, and the committee then voted 9-0 to OTP the bill. The chair stated that HB 1600 would be placed on consent. The committee next took up House Bill 1197F FN, a technical correction to insurance laws. Members noted it had already passed the House with amendment and that the fiscal note was effectively indeterminate but would not affect the general fund because the insurance agency is self-funded. The committee voted 9-0 to OTP the bill; the chair said consent calendar placement would be decided by the full committee. Finally, the committee opened a work session on House Bill 11:30 FN regarding judicial performance evaluations. Representative Lynn, the bill’s sponsor, argued that the fiscal note overstated the immediate cost and said the judicial branch could likely manage through the current biennium while implementing the new system. He also supported making judges’ names public and said the bill’s anonymity provisions were aimed at protecting the identities of questionnaire respondents, not the judges being evaluated. Members asked about public disclosure, internal access to evaluation materials, and the removal of language allowing the governor and executive council to receive evaluations on request; discussion continued on those points, but no final vote on HB 11:30 FN was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• , collect that data, and complete those evaluations.
• the reliability of the evaluation results.
• Our evaluation plans were finalized and approved by L.A.S.C.
• We look forward to seeing what the evaluations bring.
• I'm really interested in this evaluation.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:13:00.880> summaries<00:13:01.400> from<00:13:01.560> evaluations evaluation
• summaries from evaluations evaluation summaries from evaluations presented<00:13:03.360> on<00
• <00:13:21.320> summaries evaluation summaries evaluation summaries uh<00:13:22.720> for
• evaluation findings. evaluation findings.
• more detail the evaluation findings. more detail the evaluation findings.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Tax Expenditure Review Commission met on June 17, 2026, approved the January 20, 2026 minutes, and then adopted updated commission procedures. The procedural changes, presented by Legislative Budget Office Director Christian Larson, required a quorum of voting members to complete evaluations before a formal recommendation vote, and allowed members to bundle or unbundle tax expenditures for voting. The commission approved the revised procedures by roll call vote, with five ayes and four excused. The commission then reviewed member evaluation summaries for tax expenditures presented in December 2025 and January 2026. It first considered the alcoholic beverage tax credits for small brewers and microdistilleries, and after discussion voted to recommend repeal of those two expenditures, while leaving the small winery credit for a later meeting because it lacked enough member responses under the new procedures. The vote on the repeal recommendation passed 4-1, with Commissioner Marquart voting no. The commission next approved the lawful gambling bundle, which included bingo, raffle, and related exemptions. Larson reported that most members recommended continuation for each item, and the commission voted to recommend continuing all six lawful gambling expenditures. It then reviewed the residential utility services bundle—residential heating fuels, residential water services, and sewer services—where members generally favored continuation but several noted possible modifications or caps for higher-income users; the commission voted to recommend continuation of the bundle. Finally, the commission reviewed the data center equipment sales tax exemption, which Larson said had an estimated annual revenue loss of $95 million and was intended to create jobs in construction and data center industries. Members raised questions about its effectiveness and whether the exemption should be modified or capped, but the commission ultimately voted to recommend continuation. The meeting concluded with these recommendations set to be included in the commission’s 2026 annual report.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:18.800> from frequency of required evaluations from frequency of required evaluations
• to evaluate a teacher annually or as the need may arise.
• to evaluate a teacher annually or as the need may arise.
• <00:26:55.080> the often in terms of evaluating the often in terms of evaluating the teacher
• Evaluations, the certified evaluations, is a completely different topic.

Keywords: The previous live stream for this committee experienced a technical issue. This is the complete meeting recording recovered from backups., 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 44, “Landon’s Law,” sponsored by Rep. Candy Massaroni. The bill would allow schools to keep anti-choking devices such as LifeVac on hand while limiting liability. Testimony from Equal First Aid and LifeVac emphasized that choking is a leading cause of death for children, that the devices are noninvasive and FDA-registered, and that updated Red Cross guidance allows their use when standard rescue protocols fail or are not feasible. Lauren McCubbins, Landon McCubbin’s mother, gave emotional testimony about her 8-year-old son’s death from choking at school and urged the committee to give schools an added rescue option. Members asked questions about how the device works, whether the Heimlich maneuver remains part of the protocol, and whether the bill is limited to LifeVac or applies to similar devices. The bill was reported favorably, with a roll call vote showing unanimous support from members present. The committee then heard a bill sponsored by Rep. J. Baker aimed at reducing administrative burdens in schools and supporting teacher recruitment and retention. The measure would lengthen the required evaluation cycle for tenured teachers from every three years to every five years, provide teachers a copy of their employment contract upon request, streamline professional development provisions, update continuous school improvement plan filing requirements, restore schools’ ability to use Title II funds for certain programs after an unintended consequence of prior legislation, and require KDE to review reporting requirements and eliminate those not required by law. Rep. Baker said the bill was developed with teachers and administrators through a working group and is intended to reduce “check-the-box” tasks so educators can focus on instruction. Amanda Butler of Spencer County Schools and other educators testified that the changes would save time, preserve funding for mentor and induction programs, and reduce repetitive paperwork. Rep. Fleming asked for clarification on the longer evaluation cycle, and an educator witness explained that each evaluation involves pre-observation, observation, and post-observation time and that districts would still retain flexibility to evaluate more often if needed. No final vote on this bill was included in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• First on the agenda is evaluating competency.
• In terms of evaluation services...
• I had to get them evaluated.
• An evaluation for competency is not a full evaluation for AOT.
• 90 days before the evaluations.

Transcript Highlights:

• That, in turn, Impacts competency evaluation.
• And whether we can get competency evaluations. So, I think, I hope...
• Evaluation.
• If a physician or evaluation facility decides to seek commitment of the client for evaluation and treatment
• , the court may order detention for evaluation.

Transcript Highlights:

• timely evaluations.
• timely evaluations.
• timely evaluations.
• timely evaluations.
• timely evaluations.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• criteria and proposals are evaluated against that.
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate
• So I think the structure of how do we pick what we're going to evaluate.
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate
• But it seems like they're evaluating programs in that section.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll hear a second evaluation update on November 1, and then a final evaluation report is due on September
• the reliability of the evaluation process.
• Evaluations is that you're all sensing. Great.
• So the teacher evaluations are critical.
• our teacher evaluation system.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um um as as good program evaluations.
• just done as a um a program evaluation just done as a um a program evaluation in<00:15:28.800>
• staff for broader evaluations.
• Um you for uh broader um evaluations.
• can you evaluate can you evaluate if<00:37:50.160> we're<00:37:50.400> if<00:37:50.640

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:

• are evaluated for special education services.
• On the evaluation, I think you said your evaluation is currently running $3,000? $2,000-$3,000.
• evaluations to make sure we get our evaluations done in a timely manner.
• That full initial individual evaluation, but we do re-evaluations every three years on students.
• So this funding proposal is only looking at reimbursing that initial evaluation, but we do many evaluations

Bills: SB568, SCR5, SB57, SB1447, SB27, SB24

Keywords: special education, funding, individualized education program, visual impairments, accessibility, support services, state education code, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the evaluation of fitness—these are the folks that really haven't been evaluated for unfit or
• <00:29:52.000> of<00:29:52.240> fitness evaluation of fitness evaluation of fitness um<
• evaluation of fitness. evaluation of fitness. >> That's<00:33:56.399> correct.
• So I need a 704 evaluation.’ Why can’t they stay in DCR while they are being evaluated?”
• the people who need to be evaluated. the people who need to be evaluated.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The briefing focused on the Hawaii State Hospital’s overcrowding, construction defects in the new addition, and how Act 26 and related court-ordered processes are affecting admissions and discharges. The chair said the hospital has become increasingly forensic-focused, has lost beds after the closure of Kahimohala, and may face further costs and possible litigation over the defective addition. Hospital and Department of Health officials said they are working with the attorney general and contractors on repairs, and that the hospital is currently using all 292 licensed beds, including 13 waiver beds, while average daily census last fiscal year was 376. Officials explained that the high census is driven by both increased admissions and discharge barriers. They said the loss of Kahimohala returned patients to the state hospital, and that Act 26-related petty misdemeanor cases are contributing to admissions. They also said limited lower-level placement options delay discharges. Hospital staff reported that many patients are repeat admissions, about 22% were unhoused before admission, and a significant share are in categories such as fitness-to-proceed evaluations and conditional-release violations. They said these groups could potentially be reduced if evaluations were done elsewhere and if more community or supportive housing were available. The chair and senators questioned whether some fitness-to-proceed detainees need to be held at the state hospital at all, and whether the Clark consent order requires transfer to the hospital. The attorney general’s office said the Clark injunction does not govern unfitness-to-proceed cases; instead, the requirement comes from state statute, and the statute could be changed. Director Johnson said DCR cannot keep such detainees because the court orders them into the custody of the Department of Health, and the department cannot provide the needed therapeutic level of care in a correctional setting. The discussion also emphasized co-occurring substance use and mental illness, especially among petty misdemeanor defendants, and the need for supportive housing and a decompression plan to reduce readmissions and free beds for civil commitments.

Transcript Highlights:

• criteria and proposals are evaluated against that.
• We don't have a program evaluation division.
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which?
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate
• But it seems like they're evaluating programs in that section.

Summary: The task force approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, striking language about contracting with a security vendor. Members then reviewed a draft bill on concessions procurement (LC 27.0161), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, update language for vending and merchandising machines, and clarify where concession proceeds are deposited. OMB explained the bill and said it was open to further changes, including language to address artificial fragmentation, clarify which government entities are covered, and possibly set contract-length limits. Members raised questions about whether the bill would apply to school districts, park districts, airports, and other political subdivisions, and about whether concession agreements could direct proceeds to nonprofits or other secondary recipients; OMB said the statute is intended to require proceeds to go to the government entity’s operating fund or general fund. OMB also reported on other survey suggestions. It said a proposed general authority for agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is best limited to high-volume agencies. On legal notices, OMB said it had made progress with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernizing online notices, improving ADA compliance, and discussing rate and definition changes. On click-through agreements, OMB and the Attorney General’s office concluded no statutory change was needed after revising internal guidance; the $20,000 threshold was described as a practical cutoff for adhesive, nonnegotiable software terms. OMB also said issues raised by the Center for Distance Education on alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures had been resolved through policy clarification. The University System gave a brief update on its collaboration with OMB and said it was continuing to review concessions, surplus property, and capital project statutes with all institutions involved. The task force then discussed a draft bill on requirements for new or expanded spending, intended to require agencies to identify program purpose, needs, alternatives, success measures, and budget details, and to report on outcomes over time. Members and staff debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how much should be real-time versus periodic, and whether the bill should include full implementation costs for pilot programs. Legislative Council staff said the new program evaluation division is still being built out, that staffing remains limited, and that the office plans to continue working with OMB and the executive branch to refine the proposal before the next meeting. No final action was taken on the draft bills beyond directing further work and follow-up for the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So to evaluate these mechanisms, we developed five evaluative criteria that are really intended to address
• Program evaluation study that is currently underway.
• In terms of the evaluation phase, the evaluation is underway.
• In terms of the evaluation phase, where the evaluation is underway, our draft and final report will be
• We're still evaluating it. So far, this has worked out pretty good. We're still evaluating it.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not independently verify or evaluate the data. In 2024, 213 municipalities.
• We do not independently verify or evaluate the data.
• apply to each evaluation.
• How are we evaluating this?
• And that's what we'll evaluate using tax data to the extent that we can.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee met on September 17, 2025, in hybrid format. After roll call, the committee initially lacked a quorum and deferred approval of the July 15 minutes until Representative Berg arrived; the minutes were then adopted. Members also discussed the proposed 2026 JLARC meeting schedule, including possible changes to address crowded July meetings and the annual tax exemption review workload. Staff presented the annual lodging tax expenditures report, noting that 213 municipalities received distributions in 2024, with 91% reporting compliance, $114 million awarded for more than 1,700 activities, and no independent verification of the self-reported data. Several members questioned the value and usefulness of the report, and the executive committee indicated it may recommend removing the statutory reporting requirement. The committee then heard the preliminary performance audit of the Office of Privacy and Data Protection, which found the office meets its statutory responsibilities and has high user satisfaction, but recommended updating the statute to better match the office’s current capacity and focus and improving performance measures to reflect long-term privacy outcomes rather than outputs. Members asked about FERPA and other federal privacy laws, and OPDP staff said they provide general privacy training and consultation but not law-specific training unless requested. The committee adopted the final report on Washington State recreational boating programs without recommendation, after staff reported that boating revenues support both general government and boating activities and that no participating agencies submitted formal comments. Members asked about boater safety education and possible overlap among the six agencies involved; Parks staff said education has reached more than 500,000 boaters and that fatalities and incidents have declined. The committee also reviewed planned study questions for a JLARC review of Labor and Industries’ enforcement of farm worker laws, with members raising scope questions about the term “farm worker” versus “agricultural worker,” and for DNR’s Eastern Washington sustainable harvest calculation, which JLARC will review as DNR completes its recalculation. Finally, staff outlined the 2026 tax preference performance reviews covering seven preferences, and members asked about racial equity, environmental impacts, disclosure of beneficiary savings, and how the reviews will measure effectiveness; the meeting adjourned before noon.

Transcript Highlights:

• then a little bit about the evaluation then a little bit about the evaluation process<00:08:59.720
• familiar um that Commerce uh evaluates familiar um that Commerce uh evaluates the<00:09:04.519><
• at this point, and so we weren't able to do an evaluation or quantitative evaluation of that benefit
• <00:37:44.119> as to the evaluations as to the evaluations as such<00:37:47.160> um
• Commerce and then once the evaluations Commerce and then once the evaluations are<00:40:47.640><

Keywords: 1183, house