Transcript Highlights:

• Is not every legally cast vote diluted by a vote cast by an ineligible voter? Think about that.
• The Secretary of State has the authority to remove constitutionally ineligible candidates from the ballot
• Secretaries of state routinely exercise this responsibility to remove ineligible candidates from the
• These powers are crucial because if a state allows a constitutionally ineligible candidate to remain
• Unfortunately, in California, the authority of the state to remove constitutionally ineligible candidates

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on July 1, 2026, heard a full agenda of election-related measures, and took final votes on several bills and one resolution. The committee also adopted two consent items, SB 1429 and SB 1430, without opposition. Members and the chair repeatedly noted committee membership changes and the final meeting of the session, and the chair emphasized the committee’s focus on protecting democracy and election integrity. Among the bills heard, SB 1369 would shorten the signature-gathering period for judicial recalls in larger counties and require paid gatherers to disclose they are compensated; supporters argued it would protect judicial independence, while the chair and some members noted the need to balance recall rights with county differences. SB 900 would reformat campaign disclosure language on large print ads and billboards to improve readability while preserving transparency, with broad support from outdoor advertising, clean money, and good-government groups. SJR 18, which condemns Citizens United and urges action against corporate spending in elections, drew support from reform advocates but also concerns about the resolution’s focus and scope; it was advanced on a party-line split with some members voting no. The committee also advanced SB 1164, a major voting-rights measure expanding California protections against vote dilution and voter suppression, adding preclearance-style review for some jurisdictions, and directing courts to interpret election laws in favor of voting access. Local government representatives opposed it unless amended, citing uncertainty, loss of safe-harbor protections, and implementation concerns, while civil-rights and labor groups strongly supported it. SB 1360, which expands language-access requirements for voters with limited English proficiency and lowers coverage thresholds, was supported by voting-rights and immigrant-advocacy groups but opposed by elections officials unless amended; the committee acknowledged the need for further work on county-level implementation and data standards. The committee also approved SB 1418, which extends protections against seizure of election records and voting systems beyond voted ballots, and SB 884, which creates a buffer zone around polling places and vote-by-mail drop locations to prevent interference with voting and ballot custody, though sheriffs and police groups opposed the arrest restrictions. SB 46, which would give the Secretary of State clearer authority to remove constitutionally ineligible presidential and vice-presidential candidates from the ballot, and SB 715, which moves candidate ballot-designation challenge deadlines earlier, also advanced. Most measures were sent to Appropriations or otherwise held on call for absent members, and the meeting ended with final roll calls and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Further on fraud prevention, any application unable to verify authenticity was deemed ineligible, and
• <01:01:57.680> And ineligible, those don't all add up.
• And ineligible, those don't all add up.
• flagged as being potentially ineligible flagged as being potentially ineligible or<01:04:14.319>
• So having operations outside of the zone doesn't make you ineligible to operate inside.

Bills: HF3217, HF2252

Keywords: bioindustrial facilities, economic development, renewable energy, advanced biofuels, state funding, HF2252, Minnesota bonding, volume cap, private activity bonds, tax-exempt bonds, public facility bonds, public facilities pool, unified pool, bond allocation, municipal finance, bond cap, housing bonds, residential rental projects, manufacturing bonds, enterprise zone bonds

Summary: The committee first approved the prior day’s minutes as amended, correcting the meeting number from the 46th to the 45th meeting. It then took up House File 3217, which would restore funding for the Minnesota Bioincentive Program. Representative Kisha argued the state should honor commitments made to companies that met program requirements and had not received full reimbursement. Testifiers from the Great Plains Institute and Minnesota Biofuels Association said the program has supported bioeconomy investment, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and generated strong economic returns, but has been underfunded, leaving unpaid claims. Members raised questions about whether the bill was retrospective and whether it should be reviewed by another committee; the bill was laid over for further consideration without a vote. The committee then heard House File 2252, a proposal to modernize Minnesota’s private activity bond volume cap by shifting unused allocation from the small issuer/manufacturing bucket to the public facilities bucket while leaving the overall cap unchanged. The bill’s public finance testifier said the current allocation formula is outdated, housing would remain the top priority, and the change would be budget neutral. Testifiers from the Minnesota Milk Producers Association and Minnesota Biofuels Association supported the bill, saying it would better align financing with rural infrastructure, clean water, manure management, renewable natural gas, dairy processing, and low-carbon fuel projects, and could lower borrowing costs for those sectors. Members questioned whether the bill fit the committee’s jurisdiction and noted it might be more appropriate for another committee; the bill was also laid over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• So why do we immediately have them become ineligible with a chance to appeal rather than giving a 30-
• >> Well, they would get a notice of ineligibility. Is that correct?
• >> How do they be how are they ineligible >> How do they be how are they ineligible
• ineligibility. Is that correct? ineligibility. Is that correct?
• with the chance to appeal ineligibility with the chance to appeal as<01:08:38.319> opposed<01

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:15 HB 1 Discussion 00:02:00 HB 1 Vote 00:15:05 HB 2 Discussion 00:17:20 HB 2 Vote 01:13:20, 958, all

Summary: The committee met on House Bill 1, which would implement Kentucky’s participation in the federal education freedom tax credit program. Sponsors said the bill would allow donors to receive a federal dollar-for-dollar tax credit for contributions to scholarship granting organizations, with no state dollars involved, and that public school districts could potentially create their own SGOs. Members asked about the removal of state tax language in the committee substitute, the meaning of the 11th Amendment waiver, whether SGOs could serve only public school students, and whether data collection could be added. The sponsors said the state tax language was unnecessary because the credit is federal, the waiver would allow federal-court litigation over the act, and a district could establish an SGO if it met federal requirements. The committee adopted the substitute and then reported HB 1 favorably with 16 yes votes, one nay, three pass votes, and one abstention. The committee then took up House Bill 2, an act relating to Medicaid and making an appropriation. The sponsor described the bill as a response to federal HR 1 and to concerns raised by the Medicaid oversight board, saying it would address program integrity, eligibility redeterminations, cost sharing, and managed care organization contracts. He said the bill would require periodic eligibility verification for expansion Medicaid enrollees, add modest cost-sharing for some services to encourage use of primary care over emergency rooms, and strengthen enforcement of MCO contracts, with penalties going into a restricted compliance fund. Members asked about the committee amendment, and the sponsor explained it restored flexibility on the number of MCOs in future procurement rather than locking in a reduction. Members also asked whether the bill had gone before the Medicaid oversight advisory board and whether a fiscal note was available; the sponsor said the board’s recommendations were incorporated and fiscal notes were included in the packet. After discussion, the committee adopted committee amendment one to PHS2 and then adopted PHS2 as amended for consideration. The sponsor continued outlining the bill’s provisions, emphasizing that it applied to the expansion population and was intended to align Kentucky law with federal requirements while improving oversight and accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• evidence that the respondent's election return should not be accepted or that the respondent is ineligible
• 01:25.920> is be accepted or that the respondent is be accepted or that the respondent is ineligible
• <00:01:28.320> As<00:01:28.560> we ineligible to be a house member.
• As we ineligible to be a house member.
• voters, those who were given ineligible voters, those who were given ballots<00:16:12.639> and

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• c><00:04:52.639> other<00:04:52.800> one<00:04:53.600> uh<00:04:53.919> ineligible
• <00:04:54.560> persons Um the other one uh ineligible persons Um the other one uh ineligible
• In 2014, the state referenced that statute, the Lottenberg amendment statute, in our ineligible person
• In 2014, the state referenced those statute, the Lottenberg amendment statute, in our ineligible person

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• distributed to the district from the CSF must revert back to the CSF, and the school district must remain ineligible
• distributed to the district from the CSF must revert back to the CSF, and the school district must remain ineligible
• CSF per-pupil calculations to exclude the weighted student count of any school district that is ineligible
• CSF per-pupil calculations to exclude the weighted student count of any school district that is ineligible

Bills: HB2035, HB2041, HB2611, HB2860, HB4004, HB4049, SCR1032

Keywords: kinship care, child welfare, foster care, relative placement, child protection, child neglect, financial resources, behavioral health, Christian Science treatment, parental rights, group homes, children's rights, safety protocols, employee training, mental health, child safety, oversight, independent committee, transparency, accountability

Summary: The Senate Committee on Government considered only SCR 1032, along with a strike-everything amendment. The amendment would require school districts, subject to voter approval, to dedicate at least 60% of operational spending to teacher pay, with a phased-in increase starting in FY 2028 for districts below that threshold. It also would penalize noncompliant districts by requiring unexpended Classroom Site Fund monies to revert, making districts ineligible for those funds until back in compliance, and directing JLBC to exclude those districts from per-pupil calculations. The Superintendent of Public Instruction could grant limited waivers of the forfeiture provisions for up to one year, not more than two consecutive years for the same district. Supporters, including representatives of Heritage Action, the Goldwater Institute, and the Center for Arizona Policy, argued that Arizona has increased school funding substantially while teacher pay has remained flat in real terms, and said the measure would improve accountability and ensure more money reaches teachers rather than district administration. They cited Auditor General findings and prior voter-approved efforts such as the Classroom Site Fund and teacher pay initiatives as evidence that districts have not prioritized classroom spending as intended. A rural school coalition testified in opposition, saying the proposal would be difficult for small districts to meet because it could force cuts to other essential costs such as fuel, insurance, facilities, and other operating needs, and that the Auditor General’s classroom-spending categories may not accurately reflect actual teacher pay. One committee member also raised concerns that the measure could harm special education and other legally required student services. During discussion, the sponsor said charter schools were excluded because they are private businesses under the state’s framework, despite receiving public funds. The committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and then voted 4-3 to give SCR 1032, as amended, a do pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now we're to the number of ineligible children. My answer will be: I don't know.
• I mean, the fact that we're even talking about ineligible... Yeah. All right.
• I'm asking my question is, are we looking at moving to serving more ineligible children there because
• I mean, the fact that we're even talking about ineligible, Yeah. All right.
• We're getting into an infrastructure bill from an ineligible children's bill, so we'll just, we appreciate

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to be receiving medical were ineligible to be receiving medical assistance.<00:19:04.160> Nearly<
• <00:19:12.559> are<00:19:12.880> receiving people who are ineligible are receiving
• people who are ineligible are receiving medical<00:19:14.160> assistance.
• <00:24:16.720> for<00:24:16.960> medical to someone who is ineligible for medical to
• someone who is ineligible for medical assistance assistance assistance that's<00:24:19.440> what<

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate File 4476, described as the human services program integrity package, and first adopted a motion declaring urgency so the bill could move quickly to conference committee before the end of session. The House then adopted a DE amendment to insert House language, followed by a technical A7 amendment clarifying that prepayment review would apply to all fee-for-service systems. Members then debated the A5 amendment, which would have removed a sunset on the periodic data matching reporting requirement tied to eligibility checks for medical assistance and MinnesotaCare. Supporters argued the report is essential for fraud prevention, accountability, and ensuring only eligible recipients receive benefits, citing missed or delayed reports and claiming the process can save the state money. Opponents said the report had been received, that federal HR1 changes would require different data-matching procedures, and that the amendment was not the right vehicle. After roll call, the A5 amendment failed, 63-67. The House next debated the A6 amendment, which would require DHS reporting on homelessness programs, including outcomes, costs, and participant movement, and would allow recoupment of funds if reporting was not provided. Supporters said the state spends tens of millions on homelessness without clear results and needs better data to guide policy; opponents said homelessness reporting and stakeholder work are already underway and objected to the amendment’s approach. Debate continued with questions about the amendment’s details and stakeholder consultation, but the transcript ends before a final vote on A6.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it creates a shared database of individuals and entities ineligible to receive government payments
• So it creates a shared database of individuals and entities ineligible to receive government payments
• So it creates a shared database of individuals and entities ineligible to receive government payments
• So it creates a shared database of individuals and entities ineligible to receive government payments
• So it creates a shared database of individuals and entities ineligible to receive government payments

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 48 attempts to remove low-level misdemeanors as ineligible for restoration, also giving parties the
• SB 48 attempts to remove low-level misdemeanors as ineligible for restoration, also giving parties the
• SB 48 attempts to remove low-level misdemeanors as ineligible for restoration, also giving parties the
• you heard, was that offenses at the level of violation and low-level misdemeanors may be deemed ineligible
• you heard, was that offenses at the level of violation and low-level misdemeanors may be deemed ineligible

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• All applicants and their contributors have to consent or they are ineligible for federal and therefore
• otherwise variety of uh students who are otherwise variety of uh students who are otherwise ineligible
• to file a FAFSA form but may ineligible to file a FAFSA form but may be<00:48:03.760> in<00:48
• to file the state law who is ineligible to file the FAFSA.<00:48:48.800> So<00:48:48.960>
• to file the FAFSA but have uh ineligible to file the FAFSA but have uh do<00:49:10.079> meet<

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Are there any ineligible offenses for this program?
• :41.360> for<01:26:41.600> this there any ineligible offenses for this there any ineligible
• . ineligible. ineligible.
• So, we've got 3,900 people that were not ineligible.
• And this is referencing ineligible.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Roll Call: 00:00:09 State of the Judiciary: 00:02:33 The Corrections - KCTCS Reentry Program: 00:49:44 Update on 2022 RS SB 90: 01:27:49, 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Committee on the Judiciary met on November 6, 2025, approved the minutes, and welcomed guests including Kentucky Specialty Courts manager Elizabeth Nichols and Boyle/Mercer Family Court Judge Bruce Petri. The committee then heard the Chief Justice of Kentucky, Deborah Lambert, deliver her state of the judiciary address, focused largely on judicial branch funding, facilities, technology, and specialty court programs. Chief Justice Lambert said the branch is facing a projected $14.3 million shortfall for fiscal year 2026 and asked lawmakers for supplemental support, access to reserve funds, and higher base appropriations to cover inflation and nondiscretionary costs. She also requested a 15% across-the-board pay increase for judicial branch employees, citing salary gaps with other state workers and declining judicial compensation relative to national averages. She emphasized that the branch has received a clean FY 2025 audit and said the requests were intended to sustain current operations rather than expand them. A major portion of her remarks covered court technology and facilities. She described the move to Chamberlain during Capitol renovations, the purchase of that building as a cost-saving measure, and the need to fund courtroom audio/video systems and a new statewide case management system. She also discussed courthouse maintenance, flood damage, mold issues, security system upgrades, and the $47 million asset preservation fund created last session, while asking for additional local facilities funding and one-time disaster-related support. Lambert highlighted specialty court and statewide program results, including foster care review boards, family recovery courts, court designated worker programs, drug and mental health courts, and the Judicial Commission on Mental Health. She thanked legislators for prior bills and support, including House Bill 1, Senate Bill 26, and the CES law, and said 2026 recommendations will focus on civil commitment reforms under KRS 202C. During questions, Senator Wheeler asked whether some courthouses are being overbuilt; Lambert said most facilities are inadequate, though some may be larger than needed, and that future needs and population changes must be considered. She also noted that virtual hearings and technology have improved efficiency. No votes or formal committee actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• those who remained absent would forfeit their legislative salary until they attend session and be ineligible
• those who remained absent would forfeit their legislative salary until they attend session and be ineligible
• those who remained absent would forfeit their legislative salary until they attend session and be ineligible
• Those who remain absent shall forgo their legislative salary until they attend session and shall be ineligible
• Those who remain absent shall forgo their legislative salary until they attend session and shall be ineligible

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House Republican leaders held a press availability focused on the ongoing Minnesota House stalemate caused by the absence of Democratic members, which left the chamber without a quorum. Speaker Lisa Demuth and Leader Harry Niska said Republicans were present and ready to work, argued that Democrats were refusing to attend session, and said the Secretary of State had not allowed motions to be taken on the floor. They also criticized Secretary of State Steve Simon for adjourning the House and for not recognizing Republican motions or members. Niska described a proposed motion under Article 4, Section 13 of the Minnesota Constitution that would have compelled absent members to attend the next session and would have withheld their legislative salary and per diem until they returned. He said the motion was blocked and argued that the Constitution gives the House authority to compel attendance and impose penalties. The leaders repeatedly said Democrats needed to “show up for work,” and said the situation was delaying negotiations over a power-sharing agreement and other House business. The discussion also touched on Representative Brad Tabke, whose seat has been part of the dispute. Republicans said Tabke had not appeared in the chamber and that his absence was not helping negotiations. Demuth said Republicans would return the next day at 3:30 p.m. and continue working if Democrats appeared. No votes were taken, and no motion was adopted during the availability.

Transcript Highlights:

• Child abuse, sex crimes, drug trafficking, and others are ineligible.
• Anyone ever convicted of any crime is ineligible.
• Records tied to any conviction in the same incident are ineligible.
• People still on supervision are ineligible.
• And anyone who has previously sealed a non-conviction record under Florida's one-shot rule is ineligible

Bills: S0212, S0656, S0682, S0810, S0812, S0890, S0892, S0900, S0928, S1084, S1284

Keywords: sexual offender, sexual predator, sex offender registry, child protection, residency restriction, loitering, proximity restriction, public swimming pool, school safety, child care facility, day care center, park, playground, conditional release, probation, community control, warrantless arrest, background check, registry screening, minor victims

Summary: The committee took up a series of criminal justice and public safety bills. SB 1084, which exempts certain identifying and location information for non-legal support staff in state attorneys’ offices from public records requests, was supported by prosecuting attorneys and reported favorably. SB 212, as amended, created new restrictions related to sexual offenders and predators, including a 200-foot restricted presence provision near certain locations and updated notification/supervision requirements; it drew strong opposition from researchers, advocates, and affected families who argued it lacked evidence and would increase homelessness, but it was reported favorably. SB 682, addressing domestic violence, coercive control, strangulation, animal abuse, injunctions, and related training and enforcement issues, received emotional survivor testimony and support from animal welfare and law enforcement groups and was reported favorably. SB 656, creating and renaming FDLE Internet Crimes Against Children funding and grant programs, was amended and reported favorably and unanimously. The committee also considered SB 810 on sealing criminal history records, which would expand eligibility for some non-conviction records and one low-level misdemeanor conviction after waiting periods and judicial review; supporters said Florida is unusually restrictive, while one senator raised concerns about the scope, and the bill was reported favorably. SB 890, creating a standalone battery by strangulation offense applicable outside domestic relationships, was reported favorably after the sponsor said it would close a gap in current law. SB 892, revising habitual offender and violent career criminal sentencing procedures and notice requirements, was reported favorably, with defense lawyers supporting the clearer pretrial notice. SB 928, “Missy’s Law,” requiring immediate remand to custody after conviction of certain dangerous crimes, was amended to include computer pornography/child exploitation offenses and reported favorably after a family member of the namesake victim testified in support. Later, SB 1284 modernized arrest and search warrant statutes, expanding judicial summons options for some misdemeanors and broadening warrant/arrest authority in certain DUI, injunction, domestic violence, and misdemeanor force cases; defense lawyers supported the judicial-discretion portions but raised concerns about DUI/BUI arrests, and the bill was reported favorably. Finally, SB 812, a technical companion to SB 810 updating public records treatment for sealed criminal history records, was amended to clarify prosecutorial access for later cases and reported favorably. Several bills were supported by law enforcement, prosecutors, and advocacy groups, while others drew opposition from civil liberties, treatment, homelessness, and criminal defense advocates. The meeting adjourned after members recorded additional votes on selected tabs.

Transcript Highlights:

• OPPORTUNITIES THE STATE HAD REGARDING IDENTIFICATION AND RECRUITMENT OF AN ELIGIBLE AMOUNT OR POTENTIALLY INELIGIBLE
• FOR THE STATE TO MORE PROMPTLY IDENTIFY AND HOLD POTENTIAL DUPLICATE PAYMENTS AND BEGIN TO RECOUP INELIGIBLE
• HANDLING OF FORMAL REQUEST OF THE SFO TO RETURN FUNDING DUE BACK TO THE STATE RELATED TO POTENTIALLY INELIGIBLE
• BASICALLY ANYONE ON 2F MAY CUT EVERYONE OFTEN DEEMED INELIGIBLE.
• REQUIRED CROSSCHECK WITH THE FINAL SURVEY TO IN SEVERAL SURVEY THREE DATA AND IDENTIFIED DETERMINED INELIGIBLE

Transcript Highlights:

• They had roads or bridges or parks that were ineligible work and then also to help with that FEMA match
• /c><00:32:00.760> that<00:32:00.920> happened<00:32:01.240> to in for FEMA ineligible
• that happened to in for FEMA ineligible that happened to some<00:32:01.560> of<00:32:01.640><
• bridges or parks that were ineligible bridges or parks that were ineligible work<00:32:05.280>
• <00:32:09.640> work pointed towards FEMA ineligible work pointed towards FEMA ineligible work

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee received a budget and program update from Kentucky Emergency Management on the state’s urban search and rescue buildout. Eric Gibson and Doug Hargrave said the legislature’s funding was used to create FEMA-type urban search and rescue capacity, including Kentucky Task Force 1 and 2, the incident support team, and the helicopter aquatic rescue/hoist team. They emphasized that the effort is not just equipment purchases but also training, credentialing, warehouse and training-facility development, canine program expansion, and coordination with local search and rescue agencies across the Commonwealth. Gibson reported that the agency executed 99.4% of the $16.175 million appropriation by the end of the fiscal year and said the team met its readiness target ahead of schedule, with equipment already being deployed in recent flood response operations. He also said $500,000 per year was set aside for local search and rescue grants, with about $482,000 awarded to 29 teams in one year and $490,000 to 36 teams in the next, averaging about $20,000 per grant. Several members urged the committee to consider increasing support for local responders in future budgets, noting rising equipment costs and the importance of local teams as first on scene. Members asked about staffing, coverage, and benefits. Gibson explained that the task force is a mixed workforce of full-time fire personnel loaned from local departments, professional service staff such as doctors and engineers, and temporary deployment staff, with workers’ compensation coverage provided through KYEM and/or home agencies depending on the arrangement. He also said local search and rescue members are not currently included in line-of-duty death benefits. In response to questions about coverage and deployment, he described the two task force locations as designed to keep resources within roughly 100 miles of every Kentuckian. The discussion also turned to recent flood response and disaster recovery. Gibson said the state had mobilized up to 24 teams over the weekend, documented roughly 60 to 80 water rescues or assisted evacuations, and was seeing significant damage in counties such as Cumberland, Clinton, and Metcalfe, including agricultural losses. He said several counties were meeting FEMA public assistance thresholds and that the state was preparing a broader relief request that could include FEMA, SBA, and USDA assistance. He also updated members on efforts to claw back and reallocate unused “strained fiscal liquidity” funds by the statutory deadline, saying notices were sent and funds were redirected where possible to unmet local needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• to be receiving medical were ineligible to be receiving medical assistance.<00:19:28.720> Nearly<
• <00:19:37.120> are<00:19:37.440> receiving people who are ineligible are receiving
• people who are ineligible are receiving medical<00:19:38.640> assistance.
• <00:24:41.200> for<00:24:41.440> medical to someone who is ineligible for medical to
• someone who is ineligible for medical assistance The clerk will call the names of the members voting

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House first adopted non-controversial motions, then approved an urgency motion to suspend the rules so Senate File 4476, the human services program integrity package, could move quickly to conference committee before the end of session. The House then adopted a DE amendment to insert House language into the bill, and proceeded to debate several amendments focused on program integrity, fraud prevention, and reporting requirements in human services programs. Representative Schultz offered Amendment A5 to remove a sunset on the periodic data matching report requirement, arguing the report helps ensure only eligible people receive medical assistance and welfare benefits and should continue to be delivered annually. Supporters said the report had been inconsistently delivered, cited past findings of ineligible recipients, and framed the amendment as a low-cost accountability measure. Opponents, including Representative Nor, said the report had been sent to the chairs, that the issue should be handled through broader HR1-related changes and negotiations with the Senate, and that the amendment was not the right vehicle. After roll call, A5 failed on a 63-67 vote. Schultz then offered Amendment A6, which would require reporting on homelessness programs, including how many people are served, total costs, outcomes, and possible recoupment of funds if reporting is inadequate. Schultz said the state spends tens of millions on homelessness programs without clear results and that better data would help the legislature make decisions and protect taxpayers. Several members supported the idea of more accountability, while others said the state already receives reports, that homelessness work is being done in partnership with stakeholders, and that the amendment was not the best approach. The discussion continued with further comments on homelessness data and program oversight, but no final vote on A6 is shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now we're to the number of ineligible children.
• Now we're to the number of ineligible children. My answer will be: I don't know.
• youth, criminalization, and ongoing statewide efforts to... ...referrals involving ineligible youth,
• I'm asking my question is, are we looking at moving to serving more ineligible children there because
• I mean, the fact that we're even talking about ineligible... Yeah. All right.

Summary: The committee first approved the February 11, 2026 minutes and then received an update from the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency on the interagency council on homelessness and continuum of care funding. Testimony described rising homelessness tied to tight housing markets, low incomes, aging homelessness, barriers to rental assistance and public benefits, and limited shelter and case-management capacity. Members discussed the need for more affordable housing, continued one-time funding for the North Dakota Homeless Grant and Housing Incentive Fund, better coordination with Health and Human Services on economic assistance and human service zones, landlord engagement, recovery housing, and reentry housing. The committee also heard that federal continuum of care funding remains uncertain, with possible shifts away from permanent supportive housing and housing-first models; members asked for a future update on the impact if federal rules reduce the share available for permanent housing. The committee then took testimony on accessibility of government services for people who are blind or visually impaired. Paul Olson of North Dakota Vision Services School for the Blind described current screening and service delivery, including infant referrals, regional staff, short-term programs, and collaboration with vocational rehabilitation. He said the targeted screening system is working, recommended maintaining the current model, and noted ongoing challenges with staffing, public awareness, and accessible state websites and documents. Public testimony from a visually impaired resident and a deaf resident emphasized barriers such as CAPTCHAs, inaccessible PDFs, employment forms that screen out applicants based on driver’s license status, shortages of interpreters, and the need for video remote interpreting and video relay services, along with training for users and agencies. Finally, the committee heard a final report on the study of child care provider licensing from HHS Early Childhood Director Kay Larson. The report summarized provider input and committee discussion on simplifying North Dakota’s child care licensing structure, reducing administrative burden, and balancing that with health and safety standards. Key topics included licensing categories, child care assistance eligibility, food program sponsorship, staff qualifications, training requirements, ratios and group size, age bands, and preschool exemptions. The committee’s recommendations included streamlining to three provider types plus a preschool designation, revising ratio and age-band rules, and carrying forward certain preschool outdoor-space exemptions. Larson noted that any changes would require statutory changes, rulemaking, and a transition period before new licensing rules could take effect.

Transcript Highlights:

• amount of their salary that they are for the days that they are not here, as well as making them ineligible
• > them they are not here as well as making them they are not here as well as making them ineligible
• 35.920> per<00:03:36.040> diem<00:03:36.360> for<00:03:36.480> this ineligible
• for per diem for this ineligible for per diem for this session.<00:03:37.200> So<00:03:37.320

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House Republicans held a press availability focused on the ongoing Minnesota House stalemate and their decision to file a lawsuit in the Minnesota Supreme Court against Secretary of State Steve Simon. Representative Niska said Simon, acting as presiding officer, had refused for four straight days to recognize him to make motions that a lesser number than a quorum is constitutionally allowed to consider. Republicans argued Simon exceeded his authority by preventing even discussion of those motions and by unilaterally controlling adjournment, while saying the House members present have the power to adjourn day to day and compel absent members. The proposed motion at issue would impose penalties on absent lawmakers, including fines equal to lost salary for days not present and ineligibility for per diem for the session. Niska cited precedent from other states, including Indiana and Texas, to support the idea that a minority can enforce quorum-related penalties, and said Minnesota case law does not address a prolonged quorum break like the current one. He said the lawsuit seeks only to require Simon to stay within constitutional bounds as presiding officer, not to remove him from the role entirely. Niska said the filing was being made that day, with courtesy copies delivered to Simon, and that the legal team is from his own law firm and would be paid privately, likely with campaign funds. He said there had been no talks with Democratic leaders that day, but he remained open to a serious offer. Republicans said they would be in the chamber every day next week at 3:30 p.m. unless Democrats returned sooner, and that there would be no gavel-in the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• you mentioned that some of them will say, 'No, I don't want a raise because it'll bump me to be ineligible
• to be in that range where they should be eligible, but because of the increase, they may become ineligible
• How are they assisted if they were previously ineligible and now they are eligible and they need it?
• to, mentioned that some of them will say, no, I don't want to raise because it'll bump me to be ineligible
• to be in that range where they should be eligible, but because of the increase, they may become ineligible

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee met with a quorum and focused on School Readiness, specifically the new provider reimbursement rates and the School Readiness Plus program. The chair gave an overview of how School Readiness is funded and administered, noting that the Legislature now sets county-based reimbursement rates using market and cost data, and that School Readiness Plus was created to help families who would otherwise fall off the subsidy “cliff” at 85% of state median income by extending assistance up to 100% of state median income. Panelists from the Children’s Forum, the Association of Early Learning Coalitions, and the Division of Early Learning described the programs as major workforce and family-support tools that help parents stay employed and help providers recruit and retain qualified staff. Testimony emphasized that higher reimbursement rates increase parental choice, help providers cover rising child care costs, and support better staffing and lower turnover. The panel also said School Readiness Plus is easing the pressure on families to turn down raises or promotions for fear of losing child care assistance, though uptake is still early because the program only began in late 2024 and is only available to current School Readiness families at redetermination. The Division of Early Learning reported about 275 children enrolled in School Readiness Plus as of March 10, with expenditures of about $161,420 through January 2025, and said participation is increasing. Members asked about the federal-state funding split, wait lists, reverted funds, coalition accountability, county-based rate differences, and whether the entrance eligibility threshold should be raised or shifted to state median income. The panel said roughly 70% of School Readiness funding is federal, about 4% has typically reverted in recent years, and the wait list is around 12,000 children, with reasons including income ineligibility, lack of available seats, and funding limits. They argued that raising the entrance threshold would expand access but would require additional funding, and they also discussed the need to reduce workforce barriers such as in-person testing and training requirements. The meeting ended with no formal action beyond the presentation and member discussion, and the subcommittee adjourned.