Transcript Highlights:

• So you have listed that completion rates, job placement rates, earnings—how is this data going to be
• , job placement rates.
• Completion rates, that one's pretty easy to do.
• The programs also have to ensure a 70% completion rate and a 70% job placement rate.
• , completion rates, etc.

Committee: House Higher Education and Workforce Development

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2510, sponsored by Rep. Steinmeier, which would create a coordinated state framework for critical minerals involving the Departments of Natural Resources, Economic Development, and Higher Education and Workforce Development. The sponsor said Missouri is well positioned because it contains 36 of 60 minerals deemed critical to national security and manufacturing, and argued the bill would help Missouri pursue federal funding, build a workforce pipeline, and support advanced manufacturing with a five-year sunset. Committee members questioned the need for a new state structure and fund, the cost to Missouri, the role of universities, and whether the task force was too narrowly written around the University of Missouri system and mistakenly included DESE instead of higher education. A Missouri Chamber witness supported the bill for its economic and national security benefits, while an environmental witness urged adding an environmental professional to the task force and a mining permitting framework, citing health and water concerns and suggesting a separate mining-regulation bill as an amendment. The committee then took up House Bill 2585, sponsored by Rep. Castile, which updates Missouri workforce development statutes to align with federal law and implement the new Workforce Pell Grant program. The sponsor said the bill would allow short-term, high-value training programs in fields like welding, public safety academies, health technology, and trucking to qualify for Pell support, while preserving oversight and tying eligibility to outcomes such as completion, job placement, and earnings. Members asked about the number and makeup of the workforce board, whether the bill’s staffing references still pointed to the wrong department, how the 150% poverty-level threshold and reporting metrics would work, and whether the board could move quickly enough to meet federal timelines. A Missouri Community College Association witness said all 12 community colleges have programs likely to qualify and explained the federal eligibility standards, including a 70% completion rate, 70% job placement rate, and three-year rolling data review; a FGA Action witness and the Missouri Chamber also supported the bill as a way to expand access to skills training and draw down federal funds. After the bill hearings, the committee received an informational presentation from the Midwestern Higher Education Compact. The presenter described the compact’s regional cost-saving work, including reciprocity for distance education, technology contracts, grants, and efforts on dual credit and FAFSA support. She also shared Missouri-specific data on educational attainment, enrollment trends, student migration, and net price, noting that Missouri lags slightly behind the U.S. in attainment, has projected declines in high school graduates, retains most in-state students, and has higher net prices for low-income students than the Midwest average. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Right now, the solar arrays, the land is assessed at an agricultural rate.
• You mentioned a tax rate so your county did not lose money, right?
• So obviously that tax rate is at least $6,000. Yes, it is.
• tax rate.
• That's just unfair. fair share, not a cut rate down to the 12% that's been proposed.

Summary: The House Utilities Committee resumed hearing on House Bills 2402 and 2816, which address utility-scale solar development. The chair asked witnesses to keep comments to informational purposes, and testimony focused on setbacks, taxation, land conversion caps, county authority, decommissioning, and impacts on neighboring landowners and rural communities. Several witnesses said they supported solar in limited settings such as rooftops or industrial sites, but opposed or wanted changes to the bills’ treatment of agricultural land, especially the proposed 4% cap on cropland conversion and the 500-foot setback from homes. Testimony from landowners and farm groups emphasized concerns about property rights, viewshed impacts, fire risk, drainage and floodplain issues, and the loss of agricultural tax base and local economic activity. They argued the proposed $2,500 per megawatt tax was too low and suggested higher rates, with some recommending $6,000 per megawatt or more, along with decommissioning requirements and stronger county-level protections. A Renew Missouri representative supported much of the bill but preferred a smaller setback and raised constitutional concerns about changing solar land from agricultural to commercial assessment. Other witnesses, including a county commissioner, described local regulations already in place in some counties and asked for clearer statewide standards. Industry and utility representatives said the legislation was generally workable but needed further discussion on setbacks and property tax treatment. Clean Grid Alliance and related witnesses argued that tax comparisons with other states should account for total tax burden, not just nameplate taxes, and said higher taxes would raise electricity costs for consumers. Ameren Missouri said it was acceptable with most provisions, but cautioned against overly aggressive real-property assessments and noted its current and planned solar buildout. The hearing ended without a vote; the committee adjourned after taking testimony on both bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• They have interest rates that are, one of them is $130,000.
• So there is no interest rate in there.
• You've got a very high rate of return, right? If you can get it.
• Over time, that rate goes down just by the expansion of time.
• We have an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau. We are good people doing good work.

Bills: HB 12 , HB149 , SB229 , SB1361 , SB1749 , SB1897 , SB2113 , SB2566 , SB2677 , SB1652 , SB2327 , SB2344 , SB2696 , HB12 , HB149

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• Legislature through the years that have looked at the rate of return and the interest rates on the ESF
• The idea of being able to take a portion of these funds and to actually earn. a competitive market rate
• A $5 billion investment at that rate earns about $210 million.
• Their average rate of return has been 8% on that fund, but also how you can use that funding to bring
• What's the rate of return on that?

Bills: HB 104 , HB2054 , HB3459 , HB3745 , HB4486 , HB4488 , HB4601 , HB104

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• House File 4 opens up the dialogue to discuss Minnesota's notoriously high tax rates, and as we have
• go into effect, or even bracket consolidations to cut rates.
• go into effect, or even bracket consolidations to cut rates.
• go into effect, or even bracket consolidations to cut rates.
• effect, or even bracket consolidations to cut rates.

Summary: The committee took up House File 4, first adopting the H004A1 amendment without objection. The author described the bill as a constitutional amendment intended to create a tax relief account funded from projected budget surpluses, defined as revenues exceeding 105% of projected expenditures based on the November forecast. Supporters framed the proposal as a way to return excess taxpayer money to families, homeowners, and seniors rather than allowing the state to retain or redirect it. Testimony in support came from Ranna Lee of Americans for Prosperity, who praised the bill’s clarity and argued that taxpayers are overburdened and should receive surplus funds back; she also suggested broader tax and budget reforms, including rate reductions and tighter spending limits. Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project testified in opposition, saying the legislature already has authority to use surpluses for rebates or tax cuts and warning that constitutionalizing tax policy would reduce flexibility, weaken accountability, and make it harder to respond to changing conditions, emergencies, or recessions. Members then briefly commented, with Republicans expressing support for returning money to taxpayers and citing cost-of-living pressures and fixed incomes. The committee did not hear a formal department position. At the end of the hearing, Representative Johnson renewed the motion that House File 4, as amended, be recommended to pass and sent to the Ways and Means Committee; the motion prevailed on a voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• A very specific revenue stream, and so it's treated separately in the eyes of the credit rating agencies
• is paid through the operating budget and it's secured by the Fair Share you know kind of by bond rating
• And so the amount is relatively small, and rating agencies will take that into consideration.
• the day, being able to lever some of this money, this dedicated revenue stream, at a very good bond rate
• the day, being able to lever some of this money, this dedicated revenue stream, at a very good bond rate

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, State Assets, and Capital Expenditures held its first public hearing on House Bill 4257, a transportation bonding bill. The administration testified in support, describing the bill as a $1.185 billion authorization: $300 million for Chapter 90 municipal road funding and $885 million for statewide transportation capital programs. Officials said the bill would increase municipal aid by 50%, with $200 million distributed under the traditional Chapter 90 formula and $100 million based solely on road mileage to better help rural communities. They also highlighted $500 million for bridge and pavement lifecycle asset management, $200 million for culverts and small bridges, and $185 million for congestion, safety, ADA, sidewalk, and multimodal improvements. Committee members asked about how municipalities would apply, how the road-mile formula would affect rural towns, and how the bill would interact with federal funding uncertainty and debt financing. Administration witnesses explained that projects would be administered through MassDOT district offices and Grant Central, that the bill would not backfill rescinded federal funds, and that the proposal would likely use special obligation bonds backed by Fair Share revenues to reduce pressure on the Commonwealth’s general obligation debt limit. Members also pressed the administration on the shift from general obligation to special obligation financing and on whether the Chapter 90 increase keeps pace with inflation. Administration officials said the special obligation structure would be credit-rated separately and was intended to expand available capital without affecting the GO bond cap, while acknowledging that the Commonwealth’s debt portfolio would grow. They said the Chapter 90 increase would roughly restore purchasing power lost since 2012, though construction inflation has outpaced general inflation. Several members and witnesses emphasized the importance of the road-mile formula for rural communities and the need for technical assistance for small towns. The Massachusetts Municipal Association testified in strong support of the bill, calling Chapter 90 and the new infrastructure authorizations critical for cities and towns facing federal uncertainty and rising costs. The Massachusetts Aggregate and Asphalt Pavement Association also supported the bill, citing the importance of the funding for road and bridge work, the construction season, and the industry’s economic impact. A committee member asked about asphalt price inflation, and the witness said liquid asphalt costs rose sharply after COVID, including increases of around 20% in some years. At the end of the hearing, the chair said members would receive a poll by email to move the bill out quickly, and the committee then voted to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• And those reimbursement rates could be different if it were a physician. Yes, it would. Okay.
• So no matter how much advanced training someone has, the reimbursement rates would be the same across
• And those reimbursement rates could be different if it were a physician. Yes, it would. Okay.
• else, well, that's definitely not fair to those other institutions who have guaranteed us a better rate
• ... ...that's definitely not fair to those other institutions who have guaranteed us a better rate for

Committee: House Insurance and Banking

Summary: The Committee for Insurance met with a quorum and first took up three bills in executive session. House Bill 2902 was amended with a committee substitute that removed the commission language while keeping provisions on software and key-emulating devices, and members confirmed it still included a Class D felony penalty. The committee adopted the substitute and voted the bill do pass, with one member voting no. House Bill 1789, dealing with delivery network companies and insurance coverage during the delivery availability period, was also amended and adopted; the substitute clarified that the availability period is not commercial activity and that auto insurance applies until a driver is actually engaged in delivery. The committee then voted the bill do pass, with one no vote and one present. House Bill 1647 was amended to remove it from the collateral source rule section and clarify that it applies only to civil actions for damages and property claims; the substitute was adopted and the bill voted do pass, with several no votes recorded. The committee then held a public hearing on House Bill 1894, which would implement federal nondiscrimination requirements for licensed health care providers in Missouri insurance law. The sponsor said the bill is about patient choice, fairness, and access, especially in rural areas, and does not expand scope of practice or require coverage of new services. Supporters from chiropractic, nursing, occupational therapy, podiatry, and nurse anesthetist groups said the bill would ensure equal reimbursement for the same covered services and improve access to local providers. Opponents from the insurance industry argued the bill would interfere with network design, reduce negotiating leverage, and require equal payment regardless of provider type or credentials; they also said current federal law already governs network adequacy and that the bill’s rulemaking language was standard but the reimbursement mandate was the main concern. The committee also heard House Bill 3314, which updates Missouri’s insurance guaranty association laws. The sponsor and supporters explained that the bill would clarify coverage for cyber policies, ensure coverage follows the policyholder in insurance business transfer or corporate division transactions, and allow limited pre-liquidation information sharing from the Department of Commerce and Insurance to guaranty associations so claims can be handled faster after insolvency. Witnesses said the bill is technical and intended to modernize the system without expanding coverage or increasing taxpayer exposure. Members asked about the $300,000 property and casualty claims cap, the definition of high-net-worth individual, oversight of guaranty associations, and confidentiality concerns; supporters said the cap is longstanding, high-net-worth means over $25 million, and the department’s existing oversight and confidentiality protections are sufficient. The hearing closed after a final supportive statement from the Missouri Insurance Coalition, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it makes market-rate or luxury higher-end housing, for instance, very difficult to do.
• Adaptive reuse is expensive and complicated, and market-rate developers just have not been attracted
• This is the opposite of market-rate housing, where the pressure is to force the rents up.
• They’re not being put on residential customers and increasing their utility rates.
• And then for a small modular reactor-specific... ...data centers driving up their rates, and then for

Committee: House House Rural Economic Development Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee began with short video presentations highlighting historic sites in Prescott, including the Arizona Pioneer Home and the Charlotte Hall Museum/First Territorial Governor’s Mansion, with members discussing the value of showcasing district landmarks and rural history. The committee then took up HB 2804, a bill to create a state rural development and housing tax credit tied to the federal low-income housing tax credit for projects in counties under 800,000 population. Supporters, including the Flagstaff mayor and several affordable-housing developers, said the bill would help finance rural and workforce housing, especially for seniors, veterans, and low-income residents, while opponents from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club argued the program is inefficient, hard to police, and benefits intermediaries more than residents. Members debated the policy at length, but the bill was ultimately passed on a 7-0 vote with a due pass recommendation. The committee then considered HB 2388, which would appropriate unspecified funds to the Arizona Commerce Authority to study the economic benefits of small modular reactors and data centers for the state and local governments. The sponsor described it as a study bill to gather information on a topic already drawing significant attention, and a representative from the Libre Initiative supported it as a way to assess workforce and economic opportunities. Members discussed possible amendments, including adding data on utility-rate impacts and other costs, and the sponsor said she was open to that conversation. The bill passed on a 6-1 vote, with one member opposed and others expressing support contingent on possible amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because the disaster allowed them to use the old rollback rate prior to 2019.
• We had a rollback rate of 8%, and that changed after 38 years as part of the landmark legislation of
• and the procedure for adoption of a tax rate by a taxing unit.
• and the procedure for adoption of a tax rate by a taxing unit.
• At this rate, no one can catch Dean Zaffirini. Senator Parker, you're recognized on the committee.

Bills: HB 11 , HB 12 , HB21 , HB26 , HB30 , HB33 , HB37 , HB45 , HB210 , HB303 , HB630 , HB879 , HB 1041 , HB 1188 , HB 1261 , HB1318 , HB1465 , HB1535 , HB1593 , HB1778 , HB2559 , HB2596 , HB2692 , HB2703 , HB2712 , HB2742 , HB2809 , HB2890 , HB3012 , HB3526 , HB5061 , HB5092 , HB5238 , HCR92 , SB203 , SB317 , SB393 , SB397 , SB644 , SB731 , SB801 , SB867 , SB913 , SB1071 , SB1073 , SB1086 , SB1087 , SB1250 , SB1310 , SB1359 , SB1444 , SB1483 , SB1705 , SB1782 , SB1861 , SB1897 , SB1944 , SB2023 , SB2043 , SB2082 , SB2133 , SB2215 , SB2309 , SB2497 , SB2532 , SB2549 , SB2566 , SB2617 , SB2639 , SB2696 , SB2717 , SB2747 , SB2751 , SB2790 , SB2797 , SB2799 , SB2841 , SB2850 , SB2857 , SB2891 , SB2919 , SB2928 , SB2994 , SB3051 , SJR34 , SB529 , SB541 , SB693 , SB963 , SB1968 , SB2308 , SB2544 , SB1173 , SB1646 , SB1734 , SB1833 , SB1 , SB17 , SB260 , SB509 , SB1506 , SB1637 , HB1393 , HB2559 , HB26 , HB3012 , HB1593 , HB2607 , HB3526 , HB3810 , HB388 , HB879 , HB 12 , HB2703 , HB30 , HB2712 , HB2692 , HB1633 , HB1318 , HB685 , HB630 , HB4753 , HB2742 , HB303 , HB198 , HB1535 , HB762 , HB148 , HB1520 , HB5061 , HB2286 , HB1606 , HB 1041 , HB132 , HB 11 , HB45 , HB48 , HB 1261 , HB1465 , HB1778 , HB2596 , HB5238 , HB33 , HB 1188 , HB210 , HB 1022 , HB1458 , HB5560 , HB 1240 , HB1950 , HB2027 , HB2768 , HB2788 , HB2791 , HB3146 , HB3698 , HB3699 , HB1893 , HB3700 , HB4850 , HB4187 , HB1397 , HB4885 , HB4804 , HB3751 , HB3611 , HB2775 , HB2061 , HB2003 , HB1729 , HB 1242 , HB791 , HB2029 , HB647 , HB2522 , HB4738 , HB3033 , HB3594 , HB3474 , HB2563 , HB2802 , HCR90 , SJR36 , SJR50 , SJR63 , SCR12 , SCR39 , SB2023 , SB128 , SB2043 , SB62 , SB666 , SB847 , SB284 , SB854 , SB810 , SB1505 , SB583 , SB507 , SB1434 , SB1772 , SB2016 , SB1122 , SB731 , SB397 , SB508 , SB1436 , SB287 , SB1882 , SB393 , SB1791 , SB209 , SB2429 , SB511 , SB2309 , SB1085 , SB1975 , SB2717 , SB1262 , SB636 , SB2056 , SB884 , SB1200 , SB1845 , SB2458 , SB801 , SB3014 , SB3013 , SB758 , SB2797 , SB2076 , SB2876 , SB1640 , SB1449 , SB1181 , SB1234 , SB2926 , SB2841 , SB1528 , SB2891 , SB1854 , SB317 , SB1250 , SB2082 , SB1237 , SB2819 , SB629 , SB2608 , SB1602 , SB2009 , SB867 , SB640 , SB1698 , SB2680 , SB2994 , SB913 , SB1071 , SB1086 , SB1087 , SB1483 , SB1444 , SB1553 , SB1556 , SB1703 , SB2133 , SB2297 , SB2298 , SB2622 , SB2955 , SB2334 , SB1861 , SB1367 , SB2044 , SB2363 , SB2565 , SB1888 , SB3036 , SB3057 , SB3043 , SB3063 , SB3035 , SB203 , SB2799 , SB2688 , SB2522 , SB2639 , SB2459 , SB2655 , SB2251 , SB1884 , SB2617 , SB2928 , SB2566 , SB1897 , SB1749 , SB2549 , SB2553 , SB2919 , SB1782 , SB1705 , SB2696 , SB1944 , SB2215 , SB1232 , SB2850 , SB2969 , SB2497 , SB1798 , SB2603 , SB2607 , SB781 , HB34 , HB 128 , HB 130 , HB581 , HB668 , HB677 , HB766 , HB2259 , HB2960 , HB2358 , HB2894 , HB4384 , HB2663 , HB748 , HB793 , HB 1193 , HB1734 , HB2340 , HB2350 , HB3104 , HB5180 , HB4739 , HB1584 , HB4344 , HB4238 , HB4219 , HB3806 , HB3805 , HB3804 , HB3803 , HB3229 , HB3228 , HB1922 , HB1522 , HB431 , HB3597 , HB1612 , HB4224 , HB754 , HB1314 , HB2254 , HB2789 , HB3560 , HB4643 , HB 1237 , HCR98 , SB3070 , SB835 , SB524 , SB2233 , SB2683

Transcript Highlights:

• that no one involved in the program can have an insurance fraud conviction and that the insurer's rates
• and the timeline to inform Commerce of any deviation from rates previously approved.
• Anyway, their unemployment rate went from 0.10, okay, to 40, I think 40 or 45.
• Anyway, but<00:09:49.760><c> their</c><00:09:50.000><c> unemployment</c><00:09:50.640><c> rate</c><00
• rate went from 0.10,<00:09:53.080><c> okay,</c><00:09:54.120><c> to</c><00:09:55.120><c> 40,</c><00:

Committee: Senate Labor

Transcript Highlights:

• Rate.
• CDSS has been working to measure take-up rates of CalWORKs and CalFresh as standalone programs, and we
• With this growth, we're still able to hit the 92% saturation rate between the programs.
• The way that our participation rates are now, we don't actually distinguish between CalFresh and CFAP
• You know, we do see that other states are having higher participation rates than we do.

Transcript Highlights:

• others on how asset smoothing works, along with the way it impacts funded ratios and contribution rates
• We heard about the rate adoption.
• be paid for by rate changes.
• So asset smoothing has been a methodology for ensuring that our rates are also stable.
• Instead of having these rates, even though we have minimum rates language, asset smoothing is another

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Pension Policy

Summary: The Executive Committee of the State Committee on Pension Policy approved the June minutes and received updates from staff and counsel. The attorney reported on two class action matters: the Fowler/Probst Fowler teacher interest case, where a court ordered the state to pay $118 million and the state has appealed and sought a stay, and the Dawson case challenging last year’s HB 2034 related to the LEOFF 1 plan, where the complaint was amended and the state plans to move to dismiss. The actuary also provided a brief update on asset smoothing and offered to provide additional education on the topic. The committee then focused on interim work planning and the September agenda. Members discussed an ad hoc COLA for PERS and TRS Plan 1 retirees, with staff explaining options for making a COLA part of the base budget or otherwise structuring it. The committee agreed to move forward with a bill for a Plan 1 ad hoc COLA and to have it considered in October, with a request for fiscal analysis. The committee also heard from a Washington State Patrol Troopers Association representative about survivor medical benefits, and staff said a cost estimate could be prepared for October if the proposal included retroactive coverage. For September, the committee set the agenda to include PERS eligibility for animal control officers, a LEOFF 1 medical study update with possible action, and the Plan 1 ad hoc COLA item. Staff said the work plan would also add the ongoing Plan 1 COLA and survivor medical topics to October, along with preliminary 2027 meeting dates. The meeting ended with informal approval of the September agenda and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• And vacancy rates among the grantees dropped substantially. This was a two-year grant program.
• Vacancy rates dropped from 22% to 12% on average over the course of the period, indicating real gains
• Chia plays a role in rates, rates and rehab rates.
• The rate-setting process.
• , workforce rates for this space, you know, the specific DDS space versus health care and whatever.

Summary: The subcommittee met to approve the April and May minutes, welcome a new member, and hear an update from Gina Frey of EOHHS on statewide health and human services workforce development efforts. Frey described cross-secretariat initiatives under the Workforce Skills Cabinet, including MA Repay loan repayment awards, expanded community college and tuition supports, ESOL/work-readiness programming for immigrants, and efforts to build career pathways and reduce attrition in nursing, behavioral health, direct care, and primary care. She also reviewed a $46 million ARPA-funded home and community-based services grant program that supported 82 grantees, led to hiring 8,752 new staff, over 1,000 interns, 2,000 new certifications, and a drop in vacancy rates from 22% to 12%. Members raised concerns about the impact of immigration policy changes on the direct care workforce, including losses of trained workers in provider agencies, and asked whether any exemption or other relief efforts were underway. Frey said EOHHS is tracking the issue closely but did not identify a specific exemption effort. The discussion also touched on Medicaid and related program changes, with Frey noting the administration is focused on understanding potential impacts to eligibility and work requirements. Rep. Howard asked about initiatives for direct support professionals and wraparound supports, and Frey said those efforts are often led by individual agencies such as MassAbility and DDS, with EOHHS coordinating across them. The latter part of the meeting shifted to planning FY26 subcommittee goals and possible events. Members discussed using the Health Policy Commission’s Behavioral Health Workforce Center and possibly asking for a study comparing compensation in DDS and related direct care roles against health care and education jobs. They also discussed a possible cross-state public event on immigration’s impact on the workforce, especially for people with disabilities and direct support services, and agreed to continue refining goals and event ideas by email and at the next meeting. Frey provided a website link and contact information for Amy Doyle at the Health Policy Commission to facilitate future presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our poverty rate stays the same. It's the highest in the country.
• Our child poverty rate stays the same. It's the second highest in the country.
• Our poverty rate stays the same. It's the highest in the different results.
• Our poverty rate stays the same. It's the highest in the country.
• It says that you shall pay that rate.

Summary: The Committee on Local and Municipal Affairs met on May 21, 2012, with a quorum present and first approved the minutes from the prior meeting. The committee then heard Senate Bill 230 by Senator Barrow, a proposed constitutional amendment to let voters decide whether Louisiana should establish a state livable/minimum wage starting at $10.25 per hour in 2027, with future increases tied to the Consumer Price Index. Senator Barrow and several supporters framed the bill as a response to stagnant wages, rising housing and living costs, poverty, and related social problems, including crime, family instability, and child care barriers. A technical amendment was adopted to correct the bill’s language after questions were raised about whether it improperly required all employers to pay the stated wage rather than setting a minimum wage floor. Public testimony was largely in favor. Supporters included Mother Pearl Porter, who described decades of wage stagnation compared with sharply rising costs of rent, food, and gas; Angela Adkins of 10,000 Women Louisiana, who said workers should be able to cover basic expenses and that indexing wages to inflation would prevent future erosion; Jan Moeller of Invest in Louisiana, who argued the bill would help the ALICE population and noted Louisiana’s high poverty and inequality rates; Julie Schwamm Harris, who linked low wages to broader economic and social harms; Tom Costanza of the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops, who cited Catholic social teaching and the common good; and Tyler Phillips, who spoke about the impact of low wages on students and low-income communities. The Louisiana Restaurant Association opposed the bill, arguing it did not account for tipped workers and would increase costs for restaurants and consumers. After debate, Senator Boudreaux moved to report SB 230 as amended. The motion failed on a roll call vote, 2 yeas and 3 nays, so the bill was not reported from committee. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And currently, a veteran rated at 100% disability by the VA with a spouse is awarded around $50,000 annually
• This bill is about recognizing the difference between being rated 100% disabled and being rated both
• California has approximately 83,000 veterans rated at 100% disabled through the Department of Veterans
• Total means the veteran is disabled at the 100% level and compensated at the maximum VA rate.
• Maria is a veteran rated 100% permanent and total due to military sexual trauma.

Committee: Senate Military and Veterans Affairs

Summary: The committee heard several veterans-related bills. SB 888 would exclude VA service-connected disability compensation from household income when determining eligibility for the low-income disabled veterans’ property tax exemption. Support came from veterans organizations, county veterans services groups, and local officials; there was no opposition, and the bill was approved and sent to Appropriations. SB 1040 would create a state-local matching program for veterans’ cemetery maintenance endowments, with the state matching private or local deposits up to $250,000 per cemetery per year. It drew support from veterans groups and county representatives and was also approved and sent to Appropriations. The committee also considered SB 1407, which would exempt military retirement pay and surviving spouse military retirement benefits from state income tax. The author and supporters argued it would help retain military retirees in California and support the workforce and economy. The bill received broad support from veterans organizations, county officials, and labor representatives, with no opposition, and was moved to Appropriations, with the roll held open and later completed. SB 1034 would streamline access to disabled veteran parking placards for veterans rated 100% permanent and total, and SB 1201, the No Hungry Heroes Act, would seek federal waivers and other changes to protect vulnerable veterans from CalFresh/SNAP cuts and ensure referrals to county veterans service officers. Both bills had support from veterans advocates and food banks, no opposition, and were approved to Appropriations. Finally, SB 1354 would prohibit out-of-state military personnel from entering California to perform military or law enforcement functions without the governor’s permission, while preserving Title 10 activations and mutual aid arrangements. The author and the California Public Defenders Association framed it as a safeguard for state authority and civil rights; there was no opposition, and it was sent to Public Safety. After the main votes, the committee later completed the held rolls and reported the bills out, then adjourned after thanking veterans and attendees.

Transcript Highlights:

• And currently, a veteran rated at 100% disability by the VA with a spouse is awarded around $50,000 annually
• This bill is about recognizing the difference between being rated 100% disabled and being rated both
• California has approximately 83,000 veterans rated at 100% disabled through the Department of Veterans
• Total means the veteran is disabled at the 100% level and compensated at the maximum VA rate.
• Maria is a veteran rated 100% permanent and total due to military sexual trauma.

Summary: The Senate Military and Veterans Affairs Committee heard several veterans-related bills, beginning as a subcommittee until a quorum was established. SB 888 would exclude VA service-connected disability compensation from household income when determining eligibility for the low-income disabled veterans’ property tax exemption. Support came from veterans organizations, county veterans services officers, and local government representatives; there was no opposition. The bill was moved to Appropriations and later recorded as passing 4-0. SB 1040 would create a state-local matching program for maintenance endowments for veterans’ cemeteries, with the state matching private or local contributions up to $250,000 per cemetery per year. Supporters emphasized the need for sustainable perpetual care funding for state and county cemeteries, and there was no opposition. SB 1407, the chair’s bill, would exempt military retirement pay and surviving spouse benefits from state income tax; supporters argued it would help retain military retirees in California and support the economy, while members noted similar bills had previously stalled in Appropriations. SB 1034 would streamline disabled veteran parking placard eligibility for certain 100% permanent and total veterans, and SB 1201, the No Hungry Heroes Act, would seek federal waivers and related changes to protect vulnerable veterans from CalFresh/SNAP cuts and connect applicants to county veterans service officers. All of these bills received support from veterans groups and related organizations, with no opposition heard. SB 1354 would prohibit out-of-state military personnel not operating under Title 10 from entering California to perform military or law enforcement functions without the governor’s permission, with supporters framing it as a safeguard for state authority and civil liberties. The committee asked about legal testing of the proposal, and the author said it had not yet been tested in court. After roll calls and a brief recess to regain members, the committee recorded 4-0 votes to pass the bills and consent calendar items, and the meeting adjourned after thanking veterans for their service.

Transcript Highlights:

• And currently, a veteran rated at 100% disability by the VA with a spouse is awarded around $50,000 annually
• This bill is about recognizing the difference between being rated 100% disabled and being rated both
• California has approximately 83,000 veterans rated at 100% disabled through the Department of Veterans
• Total means the veteran is disabled at the 100% level and compensated at the maximum VA rate.
• Maria is a veteran rated 100% permanent and total due to military sexual trauma.

Committee: Senate Military and Veterans Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• When I have an accident, what happens to my rates? Well, often your rates will increase.
• What happens to my rates? Well, often your rates will increase. Okay.
• And my rates are going to go up. So, yeah, I think this does affect me.
• Then my rates don't go up because I paid it back. That's correct.
• the cost of service that any of us receive in our rates.

Committee: House Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• In other words, their methodology assumes that the admission rate for Prop. 36 for the first six months
• If I could respond to just one of the comments that LAO made regarding our Prop. 36 assumed rate, Kathy
• And these salary savings, given vacancy rates, do fluctuate as the LAO notes, especially for a department
• The vacancy rates can be influenced by the rate of prison admissions, the composition.
• The vacancy rates can be influenced by the rate of prison admissions, the composition of them, broader

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 6 on Public Safety heard updates on CDCR’s population projections and the preliminary fiscal impacts of Proposition 36. CDCR said its fall 2025 projections show continued declines in the institution and parole populations through June 2030, while noting Prop. 36 admissions are increasing but remain uncertain. The LAO said the administration’s Prop. 36 estimates may be somewhat low because they were based on only six months of implementation data, and the Department of Finance agreed the methodology is still developing. Committee members asked about the offenses driving admissions and the sentence-length impacts, and CDCR identified the main qualifying offenses and enhancements it is tracking. No votes were taken. The committee then discussed CDCR’s request for $91 million ongoing for lump-sum leave cashouts for correctional officers and nurses. CDCR said vacancy reductions and prison closures have reduced the salary savings historically used to cover these costs. The LAO supported the funding only on a limited-term basis and urged more oversight and reporting on CDCR’s structural shortfall, while the Department of Finance argued ongoing funding is needed because leave liabilities are mandatory and salary savings are less stable. Members raised concerns about transparency, asked about leave buyback practices and accrued leave balances, and requested more information before the May Revision. Members also heard CDCR’s proposals for $10 million for the final two statewide video surveillance projects and $15.2 million for Fire Watch coverage and related fire alarm work. The LAO supported the Fire Watch request as a one-time health and safety cost, while CDCR explained the aging prison infrastructure and the need for interim safety measures while longer-term replacement planning is developed. The committee then reviewed CDCR’s proposal to close the California Rehabilitation Center, which would produce a net General Fund reduction of $99.6 million in 2026-27 and ongoing savings of more than $150 million starting in 2027-28. CDCR said the closure is driven by sustained population declines and will include retention and realignment funding; the LAO recommended approval. Public comment focused on county funding for Prop. 36 implementation, opposition to using Prop. 36 as a reason to keep prisons open, and support for community-based rehabilitation programs. The hearing adjourned without any votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• has to be to maintain the current credit rating that we have.
• The rating agency looks at a number of different things.
• the current credit rating that we have.
• The rating agency looks at a number of different things.
• And so when that happened, we had passed the bill to increase royalty rates.

Bills: SB190 , HB247 , HB8

Committee: Senate Senate Finance