Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:07.759> evaluation authorizer performance evaluation authorizer performance evaluation
• <00:03:29.120> charter executing the performance charter executing the performance charter
• are establishing the initial performance are establishing the initial performance contract<00:05
• and uh with MAPES the performance and uh with MAPES the performance evaluation<00:10:00.560>
• performance consistent uh with statute. performance consistent uh with statute.

Bills: HF3487, HF3421

Keywords: anonymous reporting, school safety, education, crisis intervention, threat reporting, early literacy, reading instruction, teacher preparation, teacher candidates, teacher licensure, educator licensing, Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, PELSB, field experience, supervised practicum, evidence-based reading, science of reading, literacy methods, teacher training, preservice teachers

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, legislative finance Committee investment pension performance report.
• If they're one year performance, 10-year performance, and those performance relative to a benchmark,
• How our funds are performing currently.
• You're you're the top performer, and then at the bottom you're doing bad, you're, you're the bottom performer
• So those of performing 25 and above the 25th percentile and the latter are performing below the 75th

Transcript Highlights:

• and have the resources to perform at their maximum.
• and have the resources to perform at their maximum.
• So with that, let's go ahead and start. ...the resources to perform at their maximum.
• The preeminent statute was enacted about a year before performance funding.
• The pipeline program was created in 2022 to reward performance and excellence.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education received a presentation from Tim Jones, Senior Vice Chancellor and CFO for the State University System of Florida, on the system’s funding methodology, budget structure, tuition, and performance-based funding. He outlined the system’s scale, including 12 universities, more than 430,000 students taking classes, about 78,000 employees, and a roughly $20 billion operating budget. He also reviewed tuition levels, noting Florida’s low resident undergraduate tuition, the lack of tuition increases since 2013, and the distinction between state-set resident tuition and Board of Governors authority over other tuition categories. Jones described several funding components, including performance funding, preeminence funding, faculty recruitment and retention programs, universities of distinction, nursing pipeline and matching programs, and operational enhancements. He explained that performance funding is based on a 100-point model tied to retention, graduation, employment, and other metrics, with student success plans required if scores decline or fall below 70 points. He said the current performance funding allocation is $350 million and the legislative budget request seeks $400 million. He also said the new SUS 30 strategic plan will lead to updates in the performance metrics and benchmarks, with some changes possibly phased in over time. Senators asked questions about how the new strategic plan will affect future scoring, how long universities have to improve after declining scores, and how out-of-state enrollment and tuition are handled. Jones said universities will be evaluated on the current metrics for the upcoming budget cycle, while the new plan’s changes will be developed later and may include glide paths. He also said there is no statutory cap on nonresident students, though the Board of Governors has a 10% systemwide guideline under discussion, and that graduate out-of-state tuition varies by program and requires institutional and Board of Governors approval. No votes were taken, no public testimony was offered, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• They are responsible for performing the annual evaluation of the plan.
• A big part of our funding is how the MOSERS investment portfolio performs.
• And long treasuries were the worst performing asset class.
• That longer-term performance is going to take time to improve relative to peers.
• I would say definitively that performance has improved. Peer ranks are peer ranks.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Public Employee Retirement held a hearing focused on the Missouri State Employees’ Retirement System (MOSERS) and its long-term financial condition. MOSERS Executive Director Abby Spieler and investment consultant Tim McKinery outlined the system’s structure, membership, funding policy, and investment approach. They reported that as of the June 30, 2025 valuation, MOSERS had a 55.4% funded ratio, about $17.4 billion in liabilities, and about $9.6 billion in assets. They explained that the FY27 employer contribution rate was certified at 32% under the board’s minimum contribution policy, up from 30.25%, and said the increase is tied to a $46 million new decision item in House Bill 5. The presentation emphasized that MOSERS is a mature plan with more retirees and inactive members than active employees, and that slow or declining payroll growth has made it harder to pay down unfunded liabilities. MOSERS described recent policy changes intended to improve long-term stability, including lowering the investment return assumption over time, updating mortality assumptions, and adopting a minimum employer contribution policy. The board’s 2024 asset-liability study also led to a shift toward more public equity exposure and less fixed income, with the consultant saying asset allocation has been the main driver of relative investment underperformance versus peers in recent years, though recent returns have improved and the portfolio has outperformed its policy index over shorter periods. Committee members questioned why the funded ratio has fallen over time, whether past investment assumptions were too optimistic, and whether the board had been too conservative in its asset allocation. MOSERS representatives responded that the earlier strategy was a board-approved risk-balanced approach and that hindsight makes the results easier to judge, while stressing that current changes are intended to improve long-term outcomes. Members also asked about the impact of inactive members, the automatic refund proposal for small terminated accounts, and the ongoing Catalyst Capital litigation. MOSERS said the proposed legislation would automatically refund small inactive balances and auto-escalate deferred compensation contributions, and reported that litigation-related attorney fees have been about $20 million so far. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after questions and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:02.640> funding so about the performance-based funding so about the performance-based
• other items, including performance other items, including performance funding?
• The performance fund.
• the determinants of that performance the determinants of that performance funding<00:58:32.880><
• Two, what is the purpose of performance Two, what is the purpose of performance funding?

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The House Postsecondary Education Committee held its first-ever meeting and first meeting of the session, with Chairman Tipton outlining committee procedures, attendance rules, and the process for submitting committee substitutes. After a roll call confirmed full attendance, the committee heard a presentation from Senator David Givens on the history and purpose of Kentucky’s performance-based funding model for postsecondary education. Givens said the model was created to replace an older “shares” approach that distributed funds based largely on prior-year allocations, and argued the new system better aligns funding with student success and the state’s long-term educational attainment goals. Council for Postsecondary Education President Aaron Thompson and CPE staff then explained the model in more detail. They said the system was designed to address long-standing funding disparities among institutions, reward outcomes such as degrees, credit-hour progression, and completion in high-demand fields, and support the state’s “60 by 30” goal of having 60% of Kentuckians hold a postsecondary credential by 2030. Thompson said Kentucky is now at 56.2% attainment, above the national average, and highlighted gains in graduation and retention rates, lower student borrowing, and improved completion outcomes. He also emphasized that the model is part of a broader strategy that includes affordability, adult learners, low-income students, and wrap-around support services. CPE staff described the work group process that developed and periodically revises the model, noting that the General Assembly created the framework in House Bill 303 and later enacted Senate Bill 153 and Senate Bill 191 to codify changes. They explained that in 2016 the legislature carved out about 5% of institutional budgets, roughly $43 million, to be redistributed through the new model, and that the model has been reviewed every three years with changes made each time. Recent revisions included increasing the student-success weight, adding a premium for low-income students, creating a premium for adult learners, and redefining underrepresented students as first-generation college students. No votes were taken at this meeting, and the committee adjourned after the informational presentation and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Political performance increases from 57.24% for Trump to 59.41% for Trump.
• Cruz also shows high performance.
• The CD 14 Republican political performance remains very strong at 61%.
• The Republican political performance increases from 59.97% to 60.09%.
• Republican political performance remains strong over 60%.

Keywords: 997, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• of these 9 Republican performing districts, 289, 1722, 38.
• CD 19 were increasing Republican performance.
• The Republican political performance remains strong. Trump at 61.75%, Cruz both high performance.
• The Republican political performance increases from 59.97 to 60.09.
• It increases Republican performance.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the Assistant Director of Performance Audit at the State Auditor's Office.
• We were using performance management standards for conducting a project.
• Fourth, Commerce did not manage or monitor grantee performance using consistent performance measures
• SAO Performance Audits, is adjourned.
• The Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits is adjourned.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee held a hybrid hearing to receive three State Auditor’s Office performance audits. The first audit examined implementation of the Law Enforcement Training and Community Safety Act. Auditors said the Criminal Justice Training Commission had developed most required training, but six community/cultural topics were still unfinished, the patrol tactics curriculum was incomplete in one area, and the agency lacked a systematic project management approach. They reported that most officers had not completed the 40 required hours, with low participation in patrol tactics training, weak communication, limited data to track compliance, and ineffective incentives or consequences. Committee members questioned staffing, liability, and enforcement, and the Commission said it generally agreed with the findings and had begun implementing recommendations, including improving training development and communication. The second audit reviewed Washington’s digital equity planning. Auditors concluded the state lacked a comprehensive, unified digital equity strategy, a designated lead, and reliable funding. They said the existing PEAR/Impact Plan, BEAD five-year plan, and NTIA-approved digital equity plan each addressed parts of the issue but none provided a full statewide framework with clear authority across agencies. The Department of Commerce’s Broadband Office and the Office of Equity said they agreed with the findings and were open to working with the legislature and the Digital Equity Forum on a more structured approach. A public witness described local and regional digital equity planning efforts and emphasized the importance of coordination and community-based work. The third audit focused on Commerce’s management of the Digital Navigator Program. Auditors said Commerce did not consistently use a competitive process, did not adequately vet grantees and subgrantees, wrote contracts that lacked clear deliverables and monitoring requirements, failed to enforce reporting, and paid $10.7 million without sufficient documentation to verify reimbursement eligibility. They said agency staff had raised concerns that were ignored and that some payments and contract expansions occurred despite warnings. Commerce officials said new leadership had already begun major contract-management reforms, including centralized oversight, risk assessments, clearer documentation standards, and staff training, and they said they would pursue recapture where appropriate. Committee members expressed strong concern about accountability, and the hearing ended after public testimony and committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Auditing and reporting tools, obviously, performance...
• We use those performance measures pretty aggressively.
• They have to perform per the terms of the contract. Okay. Perform per the terms of the contract.
• The performance standards are the outcome.
• And it says they're performing an autopsy.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Hope in a school that's Not a low performing school.
• So I'm trying to understand clarity regarding what is enrollment performance, how long does performance
• I'm not sure if you're talking about the previously mentioned performance-based agreement, but the performance-based
• How long do the Public schools have, when they are not performing, to be characterized as a low performing
• We have the performance-based agreement to make sure they are meeting that performance, and if If they

Bills: HJR 138, HB 42, HB 104, HB 129, HB 677, HB 426, HB 668, HB 1699, HB 2017, HB 2128, HB 2038, HB 3783, HB 3717, HB 2316, HB 3686, HB 2563, HB 3883, HB 4021, HB 2788, HB 2663, HB 3305, HB 3173, HB 3474, HB 1105, HB 3531, HB 3490, HB 3597, HB 1295, HB 3512, HB 3010, HB 3112, HB 4215, HB 3223, HB 3464, HB 3120, HB 4214, HB 4511, HB 3704, HB 4081, HB 4783, HB 4063, HB 2783, HB 4937, HB 5085, HB 2510, HB 3426, HB 4361, HB 1169, HB 2516, HB 2347, HB 4034, HB 4700, HB 3560, HB 5150, HB 3860, HB 3146, HB 3924, HCR 98, HCR 92, HB 1520, HB 1545, HB 5265, HB 1887, HB 1914, HB 2402, HB 2306, HB 2350, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 3211, HB 1056, HB 2081, HB 2187, HB 3092, HB 3308, HB 3526, HB 3750, HB 4219, HB 4230, HB 4290, HB 5238, HB 4804, HB 4749, HB 245, HB 1465, HB 294, HB 793, HB 809, HB 3928, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 1973, HB 285, HB 4341, HB 1043, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 1729, HB 2498, HB 1314, HB 1353, HB 3960, HB 3923, HB 2221, HB 2517, HB 2518, HB 2213, HB 5092, HB 3748, HB 5246, HB 4344, HB 1482, HB 4044, HB 2702, HB 4264, HB 2807, HB 2898, HB 3181, HB 3250, HB 2091, HB 2115, HB 2542, HB 2768, HB 3349, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 3133, HB 3133, HB 4960, HB 3214, HB 2145, HB 1201, HB 5061, SB 29, SB 879, SB 65, SB 1745, SB 412, SB 412, SB 1746, SB 1238, SB 1341, SB 522, SB 1532, SB 1378, SB 1062, SB 2066, SB 1963, SB 2204, SB 1366, SB 2077, SB 1967, SB 1151, HB 1618, HB 2156, HB 2615, HB 2615, HB 2349, HB 1926, HB 569, HB 1762, HB 38, HJR 138, HB 42, HB 104, HB 104, HB 129, HB 677, HB 426, HB 668, HB 1699, HB 2017, HB 2128, HB 2038, HB 3783, HB 3717, HB 2316, HB 3686, HB 2563, HB 3883, HB 4021, HB 2788, HB 2663, HB 2663, HB 3305, HB 3173, HB 3474, HB 1105, HB 3531, HB 3531, HB 3490, HB 3490, HB 3597, HB 1295, HB 3512, HB 3010, HB 3112, HB 4215, HB 3223, HB 3223, HB 3464, HB 3120, HB 4214, HB 4511, HB 3704, HB 4081, HB 4783, HB 4063, HB 2783, HB 4937, HB 5085, HB 2510, HB 3426, HB 4361, HB 1169, HB 2516, HB 2347, HB 4034, HB 4700, HB 3560, HB 5150, HB 3860, HB 3146, HB 3924, HCR 98, HCR 92

Keywords: carbon tax, carbon emissions, greenhouse gas, climate policy, fuel tax, emissions tax, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, tax limitation, environmental tax, fossil fuels, energy policy, legislative taxing authority, ballot proposition, constitutional amendment, higher education, funding, financial allocation, state budget, Texas A&M University

Transcript Highlights:

• You mentioned the enrollment specification or enrollment performance.
• How long do the public schools have when they're not performing to be characterized as low-performing
• Speaker, how long do the public schools have when they're not performing to be characterized as a low-performing
• So, like I said, we have that performance-based agreement to make sure that they're meeting that performance-based
• Like I said, we have that performance-based agreement to make sure that they're meeting that performance-based

Summary: The House took up a series of Senate messages and concurred in several amendments before passing multiple bills. Early actions included unanimous passage of CS/CS/HB 1299 on Department of Health matters, CS/HB 1549 on financial institutions after removing a Senate-added trust-account provision, and CS/CS/SB 768 on foreign ties in business ownership after trimming registration requirements. The chamber also insisted on its housing amendment to CS/CS/CS/SB 184 after the Senate refused to concur. A major portion of the meeting focused on CS/CS/HB 875 on educator preparation. The House adopted an amendment restoring two teacher-prep courses, preserving the Florida Center for Teaching Excellence at Miami-Dade College in partnership with USF, and modifying the teacher candidate testing framework and mentor qualifications. Supporters said it reduced barriers while keeping standards; opponents raised concerns about the remaining “identity politics” language and other provisions. The bill then passed 91-22. The House also passed HB 1101 on out-of-network providers after adopting a House amendment that kept the original bill’s notice and referral provisions with a good-cause exemption, despite objections that it placed too much responsibility on doctors. Later, the chamber approved CS/CS/SB 180 on emergency preparedness and response, with members highlighting debris management, emergency planning, crane safety, and hurricane recovery provisions; it passed unanimously. The House then rejected concurrence in a Senate amendment to HB 1609 on waste incineration, and later spent substantial time debating CS/CS/HB 1115 on education, especially Schools of Hope, expanded co-location authority, funding, transportation, and school-district agreement terms. Critics argued the language was added late and could disadvantage traditional public schools, while supporters said it would expand options for students; the debate continued with the bill still under consideration at the end of the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• penalties for subpar performance. penalties for subpar performance.
• into a true performance paradigm. into a true performance paradigm.
• performance based on other utilities. performance based on other utilities.
• <01:22:13.120> not<01:22:13.280> just perform well not have performed not just perform
• performance-based paradigm. performance-based paradigm.

Bills: HB1617

Keywords: carbon emissions, tax credit, fossil fuel, agriculture, food security, environmental tax, greenhouse gas, 910, house, all

Summary: The committees heard testimony on HB 1949, which would create a public dashboard for the green fee to improve transparency and accountability. Testimony from the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, and many community and conservation groups was generally supportive, with several speakers urging that the governor’s project recommendations remain largely intact and that community-driven projects continue to guide spending. One amendment was suggested to place the dashboard at the Department of Budget and Finance for fiscal expertise, while other testimony favored keeping it with the commission. Members asked about procurement, ETS involvement, recurring hosting costs, and whether the dashboard could be funded from green fee revenues; the commission said it could work with ETS and that green fee funds could reasonably be used. The committees then voted to pass HB 1949 with amendments. The committees also heard HB 2618, which would require the governor to submit a separate bill for amounts tied to any increase in the transient accommodations tax and, in later discussion, was expanded into a broader restructuring of future green fee allocations. Testimony from the Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission, Hawaii Reef and Ocean Coalition, and others supported the bill and emphasized the value of more predictable, dedicated funding for conservation and climate-related work. During decision-making, the chair described amendments creating several special funds under DLNR, including a watershed biodiversity and wildfire risk reduction fund, an aquatic resources conservation fund, a coastal restoration fund, a cesspool conversion revolving loan fund, and a green fee special fund for remaining revenues, with recommended amounts discussed for some of the funds. The committees voted to pass HB 2618 with amendments. The hearing then moved to HB 1644, a consumer protection measure for residential solar sales that would require compliance with consumer protection laws, licensing or contractor affiliation for sellers, and a standardized disclosure form. Testimony in support came from the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority, DCCA’s Office of Consumer Protection, Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, the Hawaii Solar Energy Association, and several solar companies and individuals. Supporters said the bill would address complaints about third-party sales practices and improve disclosure, especially around financing. The committee then began hearing HB 2243, which would require electric utilities to provide public, electronic customer bill impact analyses and annual reports to the Public Utilities Commission; the Division of Consumer Advocacy and the PUC offered comments supporting the measure’s intent.

Transcript Highlights:

• To assist our lowest-performing schools across the state of Florida, we do have...
• that our schools do not return to that status of low-performing.
• not return to that status of low-performing.
• We don't want to see those schools return to being a low-performing status.
• districts perform.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Pre-K-12 Education met with a quorum and first heard a Department of Education program review on three district support programs: assistance to low-performing schools, the Florida Partnership program, and regional literacy teams (RAISE). Dr. Paul Burns described how the Bureau of School Improvement supports schools with D/F grades through regional teams, classroom observations, professional learning, and targeted funding, noting that 104 of 168 low-performing schools improved after 2022-23 and that the share of failing schools fell from 6% to 4%. He also outlined the Florida Partnership’s $4 million annual appropriation for advanced-course teacher training and student access, and the RAISE literacy program’s $5 million funding, universal/targeted/intensive supports, and progress monitoring results. Senators asked about rural participation, post-COVID reading data, parent support, and how long schools remain under monitoring after improving; Burns said rural districts can participate statewide, parents can access school and department support, and schools continue to receive monitoring after exiting low-performing status to prevent recidivism. The committee then received a presentation on the school district education foundation matching grants program from Suzanne Pridgen, who explained that the Consortium of the Florida Education Foundations administers the grants, which require private matching funds and support tutoring, literacy, STEM, career education, professional learning, books, and supplies. She said the program leverages about $1.44 in private support for every state dollar. The committee then moved to the regional education consortia, where representatives from PAEC, NEFEC, and Heartland, along with several rural superintendents, described the consortia as member-led organizations that provide economies of scale, professional learning, HR, risk management, purchasing, legal and operational support, crisis assistance, and leadership development for small and fiscally constrained districts. Superintendents from Lafayette, Holmes, Calhoun, Union, DeSoto, and Hendry counties testified that the consortia are essential because rural districts often have very small staffs, multiple-duty administrators, and limited in-house expertise. They cited support with insurance and hurricane recovery, training for new finance and HR staff, instructional coaching, CTE and leadership programs, and help with turnaround schools. Members emphasized that these districts can be high-performing despite limited resources, and several senators praised the consortia’s value. Senator Gaetz asked about additional back-office collaboration, possible regulatory relief, and FEFP issues tied to scholarship-related enrollment swings; rural superintendents responded that more local control would help. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, which was adopted without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• They are generally not performing even as well as ISDs, except for those higher-performing charters that
• In Texas, we want to study the low-performing schools.
• That have different performance levels.
• There are high-performing ESCs and low-performing ESCs, but that is a reason. ...that in our mind is
• Your LBB already does school performance reviews.

Bills: HB1540, HB3837, HB5571, SB370, SB2425

Keywords: government review, Texas Sunset Act, regulatory oversight, agencies, sunset provisions, autonomous vehicles, regulation, safety, criminal offense, Autonomous Vehicle Commission, registration, regulations, Level 4 automation, Level 5 automation, self-driving technology, traffic laws, permit system, collision reporting, safety standards, Automated Vehicle Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the Assistant Director of Performance Audit at the State Auditor's Office.
• We were using performance management standards for conducting a project.
• Fourth, Commerce did not manage or monitor grantee performance using consistent performance measures
• SAO Performance Audits, is adjourned.
• The Committee to Hear SAO Performance Audits is adjourned.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee subcommittee heard three State Auditor’s Office performance audits: implementation of the Law Enforcement Training and Community Safety Act, Washington’s digital equity planning, and the Department of Commerce’s Digital Navigator Program. In the law enforcement training audit, the State Auditor found the Criminal Justice Training Commission had developed most required training content but had not developed all required topics, lacked a systematic project management approach, and had weak tools to ensure participation and compliance. Auditors said most officers had not completed the required 40 hours, patrol tactics training was a major bottleneck, and the Commission’s reporting did not clearly show statewide compliance. The Commission said it generally agreed with the recommendations and had begun implementing some changes. Committee members raised concerns about staffing, liability, incentives, and whether the law had enough enforcement “teeth.” In the digital equity audit, auditors said Washington lacked a comprehensive, unified statewide plan, a designated leader, and reliable funding for digital equity efforts. They said existing plans were fragmented, with the NTIA-approved plan the most complete but no longer fully funded after federal changes. The State Auditor recommended the legislature establish oversight authority and require a lead organization to coordinate and evaluate statewide digital equity efforts and develop a unified plan. The Department of Commerce and Office of Equity agreed with the need for clearer leadership and coordination, and a public witness described ongoing coalition and local planning work. Committee members asked about best practices from other states and whether the auditor could provide additional research on coordination models. In the Digital Navigator Program audit, the State Auditor concluded Commerce did not consistently follow core grant-management practices, including competitive award processes, vetting of grantees, clear contracts, performance monitoring, and reimbursement controls. Auditors said Commerce expanded grants without a new competition, lacked adequate documentation and reporting, and paid out millions without sufficient support; they also cited management decisions that overrode staff concerns. Commerce said it had already begun major contract-management reforms, created a new contracts and compliance structure, and was working on risk assessments, documentation standards, and staff training. Members pressed Commerce on accountability, possible recoupment of improper payments, ethics issues, and whether the agency had clear performance metrics for the program. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended after public testimony and committee discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will also be adding a definition for Performing Arts and outlining granting standards.
• We will also be adding a definition for Performing Arts and outlining granting standards.
• We will also be adding a definition for Performing Arts and outlining granting standards.
• treasury a once again uh the Performing treasury a once again uh the Performing Art<00:25:17.880
• marketing and execution of Performing marketing and execution of Performing Arts<00:25:44.720>

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Culture and the Arts heard testimony on HB 547 HD1, which would create a spay-neuter special fund to reduce pet overpopulation and support spay/neuter services, funded in part through a tax return check-off and other sources. The Department of Taxation said it could implement the check-off; the Attorney General and Budget and Finance raised drafting and placement concerns about which department should house the fund; and the Hawaii Humane Society strongly supported the bill, emphasizing statewide need and the importance of distributing funds to areas of greatest need, including neighbor islands. The Tax Foundation opposed the measure on special-fund grounds, arguing there was no sufficient nexus between the bill’s purpose and the proposed revenue source. The committee later recommended HB 547 HD1 with technical amendments and sent it to Finance, with members voting aye and no objections noted. The committee also heard HB 925 HD1, relating to arts funding, which would impose a 1% fee on ticket sales from concerts at state venues and direct the proceeds to a dedicated arts fund. The State Foundation on Culture and the Arts supported the measure, while the Attorney General suggested defining “concerts” for clarity and Budget and Finance was available with comments. In discussion, the committee chair asked about how other states fund arts programs, and Director Ewald said many states use dedicated funding sources such as concert fees, bond funding, cultural trusts, and hotel lodging taxes. The committee recommended HB 925 HD1 with amendments, including a preamble, a new Performing Arts special fund, a definition of “concerts,” and a defective date, and the recommendation was adopted. Finally, the committee considered HB 1378, also related to the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts. Based on the Attorney General’s testimony, the committee proposed deleting a section of the bill, creating a Performing Arts special fund, specifying revenue sources such as legislative appropriations, foundation charges, grants, gifts, and interest, and using the fund for coordination, planning, promotion, marketing, and execution of performing arts events. The amendments also added a definition of Performing Arts, granting standards, and a defective date, while blanking out the appropriation amount for the committee report. The committee voted to adopt the recommendation on HB 1378 with amendments, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Nine of the 12 districts affected are Republican-performing districts.
• Six of which improved their Republican performance in the House substitute.
• performance for Democrats, but will still strongly perform for Democrats.
• Nine of the 12 districts affected are Republican performing districts.
• performance for Democrats, but will still strongly perform for Democrats.

Summary: The Senate Special Committee on Congressional Redistricting met to lay out House Bill 4, the House companion to Senate Bill 4, and no public testimony was taken at this hearing. Senator King explained that HB 4 was based on the House’s revised congressional map, which he said made only minor changes from SB 4 while aiming to comply with law, improve Republican political performance, and keep districts compact. He noted changes affecting several districts, including moving Fort Bliss into CD 16, placing all of Navarro County into CD 6, and moving Liberty County into CD 9, and said counsel had reviewed the map and found it legally compliant. Several senators criticized the process and the substance of the map. Senators Alvarado, Miles, and Hinojosa objected that the House substitute had not been subject to a public hearing and argued that communities in Houston, El Paso, the Rio Grande Valley, and South Texas were being split or paired with unrelated areas. They also questioned the compactness of the districts and raised concerns about racial effects, including changes in Black voting-age population in CD 9 and CD 18. Senator King responded that the committee had already heard extensive testimony on redistricting, that the Senate was following its usual companion-bill process, and that he had not relied on racial data but on historical voting patterns and legal review. After debate, Senator Parker moved to report HB 4 favorably to the full Senate with the recommendation that it do pass and be ordered not printed. The committee approved the motion by a 5-3 vote, with one absent, and then recessed subject to the call of the chair.

Transcript Highlights:

• A performance audit would be whoever conducts the performance audit; it would still be a performance
• <00:32:47.360> audit auditor to conduct a performance audit auditor to conduct a performance
• A performance audit, yeah. Can you define performance in terms of what you're referring to?
• A performance audit, yeah. Can you define performance in terms of what you're referring to?
• conduct a management and performance conduct a management and performance audit<01:16:58.960>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The meeting covered several Senate resolutions related to the University of Hawaiʻi system, the East-West Center, and related education and workforce issues. On SCR 178 and SR 48, testifiers strongly supported the East-West Center, describing it as an important Hawaii asset that promotes cultural exchange, global citizenship, diplomacy, and ties to the University of Hawaiʻi. Speakers said the Center has helped train leaders and bring international connections and investment to Hawaii, and they urged continued funding despite federal cuts. The chairs then recommended passage with technical amendments, and both resolutions were adopted by the committees. The committee also heard testimony on resolutions calling for audits of University of Hawaiʻi operations. On SR 32 and SCR 50, the University of Hawaiʻi said it supported the resolution and had already begun work on establishing a Bachelor of Science in nursing at the UH Maui campus, with additional staff available on Zoom to answer questions. On SR 160 and SCR 142, which sought a financial and performance audit of UH Mānoa facilities, UH Athletics said it already undergoes annual financial audits required by NCAA bylaws but not performance audits, and discussed its internal evaluations, contingency planning, and efforts to address concerns raised by student athletes and staff. The committee then took up SCR 138 and SR 55, requesting a management and performance audit of the UH Office of the Vice President for Academic Strategy. Vice President Deborah Halbert and P20 Director Steve Shotz said they did not oppose the audit and believed it could provide clarity, while explaining that the office is relatively new and works collaboratively across campuses on articulation, transfer, grants, and workforce alignment. They described grant programs including Perkins, GEAR UP, preschool development, and data-sharing efforts, and said they are focusing more resources on teaching, health care, and skilled trades. The discussion also touched on SR 54, a proposed performance audit of the UH Foundation, where foundation representatives said they already undergo annual financial audits, acknowledged some donor communication issues, but emphasized improved stewardship and growth in fundraising over recent years.

Transcript Highlights:

• They are generally not performing even as well as ISDs except for those higher performing charters that
• Well, we should be studying the high-performing schools.
• Why are the high-performing school districts regulated exactly the same as the low-performing districts
• So there are high-performing ESCs and low-performing ESCs, but that is a resource that in our mind is
• schools and poor performing ISDs, I'm all for.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've also noted that they don't always perform periodic reviews.
• We've also noted that they don't always perform periodic reviews.
• where the reconciliations are not performed at all.
• where the reconciliations are not performed at all. in those instances when they do not perform.
• Moving on to personnel, FAMU didn't always perform personnel evaluations.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee received a presentation from Auditor General staff on recurring findings from audits of district school boards, colleges, and universities. For school districts, the main issues discussed included missing or outdated safe-school officer training documentation, weak purchasing-card controls, vendor banking-change fraud risks, incomplete background screenings and disqualification-list procedures, missing website budget disclosures, excessive or untimely IT access, late deactivation of former employees’ access, missed emergency drill deadlines, inaccurate capital outlay and resiliency education records, weak tangible property inventories, adult education reporting errors, untimely bank reconciliations, and improper use of workforce development funds. The auditors said many of these issues are repeated from prior years and are summarized in their annual report on significant findings and financial trends. For universities and colleges, the auditors highlighted similar control weaknesses, including vendor information change controls, IT access issues, cash and investment reconciliation problems, purchasing and procurement deficiencies, personnel and compensation issues, and student fee compliance concerns. Specific examples included a UF consulting contract totaling about $6 million, FAU underreporting carry-forward balances by about $77 million, UCF’s payment loss of about $107,000 from an email scam tied to vendor changes, and a North Florida College unauthorized transfer involving a few hundred thousand dollars. The committee asked questions about the UF consulting work, the FAU carry-forward issue, and whether the listed findings meant every named entity had every issue; auditors clarified that the lists reflected entities with findings in those categories, not necessarily each specific problem. The committee then turned to enforcement for entities with long-standing uncorrected audit findings. Staff reported 144 entities with 197 findings repeated in three or more successive audit reports and recommended sending letters requesting updated corrective-action status, including for late-filed 2022-2023 reports where appropriate. The committee approved the staff recommendation and directed letters to be sent. The meeting ended with members emphasizing the importance of audit oversight and taxpayer accountability.