Transcript Highlights:

• pay off debt—that we can pay off the best debt.
• It's for sites where they don't have money to pay for it, or they're unable or unwilling to pay for the
• They're going to come back.
• They're going to come back.
• Now it's coming back to my mind.

Bills: HB27, HB143, HB205, HB308, HB311, HB417, HB430, HB562, HB812, HB1129

Keywords: inmates, department of public safety, per diem, local correctional facilities, jail funding, insurance premiums, Municipal Fire and Police, dedicated fund, assessments, Louisiana legislation, hazardous waste, cleanup fund, environmental protection, state treasury, Consumer Price Index, law enforcement, firefighters, health insurance, survivors benefits, Lafayette

Transcript Highlights:

• back on it. back on it.
• taxes they pay. taxes they pay.
• that we pay now will be coming back to us as a state and 25% is coming back specifically to Carbon County
• now will be of the money that we pay now will be coming<02:33:21.520> back<02:33:21.680> to
• We'll be back here at 1:30. I for lunch. We'll be back here at 1:30.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We were initially able to get them to agree to pay Cynthia the higher wage with back pay.
• She was able to collect over $3,000 in back pay.
• We were initially able to get them to agree to pay Cynthia the higher wage with back pay.
• She was able to collect over $3,000 in back pay.
• Go ahead, get back to work. exonerated. Go ahead, get back to work.

Bills: HF3797, HF3780, HF4068, HF3935

Keywords: long-term care, insurance policy, healthcare, partnership policy, Minnesota, human services, wage increase, support workers, shared services, community first services, medical assistance, sanctions, healthcare services, monetary recovery, government accountability, assisted living, training, unlicensed personnel, resident rights, safety regulations

Transcript Highlights:

• Let's go back to which... Back to which that is on page three, I believe, or slide three.
• A three-year look back.
• Let's say 90% pay to take advantage of the early pay discount, but 10% don't, or 5% don't.
• will pay the full tax amount.
• Well, welcome back, everybody.

Summary: The subcommittee of the Tax Reform and Relief Committee met to begin its study of the feasibility and desirability of revising the content of the real estate tax statement to improve property tax transparency. Legislative Council staff reviewed the study directive under House Bill 1176 and the statutory requirements for tax statements, including required line items such as true and full value, mill levy, legislative tax relief, primary residence credit, and the Legacy Fund portion of that credit. The Tax Department then explained how the current uniform statement is prescribed and approved, and noted that changes are typically driven by statute and implemented collaboratively with counties and vendors. County officials from the North Dakota Association of Counties described the full annual tax cycle, from county budgeting and valuation notices to budget hearing notices, levy certification, cap calculations, and final tax statement mailing. They emphasized that counties and auditors do extensive coordination with taxing districts and neighboring counties, and that the process is labor-intensive and often manual. Members discussed the limited public response to budget notices and tax statements, the difficulty of explaining the legislative tax relief line, the 3% cap and valuation issues, and whether more frequent assessments or different timing would improve understanding. Several members and witnesses noted that many taxpayers only engage when they receive their final bill, and that clarity may be more important than adding more detail. NDACO also presented a rough cost survey from eight counties, estimating an average tax statement cost of about 74 cents and a statewide total near $600,000 for printing and mailing tax statements alone, with outsourcing generally cheaper than in-house printing. Witnesses noted that House Bill 1176 added other mailings and notices, increasing county workload and cost beyond the statement itself. The committee then heard from software vendors, who explained how their systems handle tax billing, budget notices, valuation notices, primary residence credit processing, and tax levy calculations, and they identified the 1600/1685 primary residence credit and discount interaction as a current programming challenge. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and focused on gathering testimony and identifying issues for possible future recommendations or bill drafts.

Transcript Highlights:

• I yield<00:42:29.920> back. yield back. yield back.
• pay, we pay<00:49:33.440> them.
• and yield back. and yield back.
• I yield back. Pay for gas and groceries.
• I yield<01:11:40.080> back. yield back. yield back.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Friday, March 27, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:34:22.720> And pay taxes, they pay politicians. And pay taxes, they pay politicians.
• their pay. their pay.
• It's<03:09:13.520> paying<03:09:14.080> them. It's paying them. It's paying them.
• . pay. pay.
• We are back to the bill. We are back to the bill.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, approved the journal, and then spent much of the early portion of the meeting on recognitions and announcements. Members welcomed the Sikh community of Colorado for Baisakhi and Sikh Awareness and Appreciation Month, noted a langar lunch at the Capitol, and announced a governor’s proclamation later in the day. Other tributes highlighted Jackie Robinson Day, Golf Day at the Capitol, an upcoming Colorado Religious Freedom Day event, and an Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority legislative day and youth leadership program. After announcements, the chamber moved to business and adopted a motion making Senate Bill 109, Senate Bill 104, House Bill 1245, and Senate Bill 121 special orders for April 15. The House then began consideration of Senate Bill 109, concerning building code standards for accessible housing supported by public money. The committee report was adopted, and debate focused on an amendment offered by Representative Soper to exempt counties that have not adopted international building codes. Supporters argued the amendment would protect rural counties, preserve local control, and avoid higher housing costs and budget strain; opponents said it would undermine uniformity. Several members spoke in favor, and the amendment was still under discussion when the transcript ended. Committee announcements also noted that Judiciary would hear Senate Bill 1283 and Senate Bill 85, Education would hear Senate Bill 153, and Health and Human Services would hear Senate Bill 60, House Bill 1347, and House Bill 1314 for action only. The House also heard that House Bill 1250 would be pushed to the following week.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then you can turn around, go back and charge it back up at a location down the road there.
• around, go back and charge it back turn around, go back and charge it back up<00:07:37.199> uh
• Don't have to do that no more, but sales tax we pay, property tax we pay.
• Don't have to do that no more, but sales tax we pay, property tax we pay.
• Uh, and you property tax we pay.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Transportation met with a quorum, approved the June 3, 2026 minutes, and then heard a presentation from Mike Proctor of Evolve Kentucky on electric vehicles and charging infrastructure. Proctor described Evolve Kentucky as a nonprofit formed in 2016 to promote EV adoption and charger deployment, said the group has helped place more than 135 chargers at 65 locations, and reported that Kentucky EV registrations have grown rapidly but still represent about 1% of the state’s roughly 3 million vehicles. He also outlined the group’s view that EV drivers and charger operators already contribute to state revenue through annual vehicle fees, charger taxes, utility taxes, and related business taxes, and cited figures showing rising revenue collections as EV adoption increases. A major theme of the presentation was that EV owners are paying their “fair share” rather than being overcharged. Proctor said the current $126 annual EV fee is roughly comparable to the fuel tax a typical gasoline vehicle would pay, and noted that public charging can add additional tax burdens for drivers who cannot charge at home, such as those living in apartments or condos. He also argued that EVs provide broader benefits, including lower noise and air pollution, grid-stabilizing nighttime charging, tourism spending at destination chargers, and reduced road wear for passenger EVs compared with much heavier vehicles. Members questioned Proctor about whether EV owners are paying more than their fair share, how the fee compares with gasoline taxes, and whether apartment and condo residents are disproportionately affected because they rely on public chargers. Proctor responded that the fee was intended to bring EV owners into parity with gas vehicles, not to overcharge them, and said some public chargers are free while others are used by drivers who cannot charge at home. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond the minutes approval.

Transcript Highlights:

• Instead of paying back in 2046, we would pay off our debt in 2045.
• back in 2017. I know it was a lot. back in 2017. I know it was a lot.
• So that's already water under the bridge, and so that was what we will use to pay back on the debt service
• <01:19:34.560> back<01:19:35.040> on that was what we will use to pay back on that
• was what we will use to pay back on the<01:19:35.360> debt<01:19:35.679> service.

Keywords: Reuploaded tor restore the roll call and minutes approval 0:00:01 Call to Order and Roll Call 0:00:20 Approval of Minutes 0:00:50 Information Items 0:01:39 Project Rpt from Eastern KY University 0:06:54 Lease Rpt from University of KY 0:11:33 Project Rpt from Finance and Admin Cabinet 0:18:50 Lease Rpt from Finance and Admin Cabinet 0:29:33 OFM – KY Infrastructure Authority 0:38:27 OFM – Debt Issues 0:46:27 Louisville Arena Authority 1:24:30 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the November minutes and received information items on University of Kentucky medical and research equipment purchases, five school districts reporting upcoming bond issues with no additional tax levies needed, and a School Facilities Construction Commission list of prior debt issues for fiscal year 2026. It then considered an appropriation increase for a University of Kentucky project at the Central Kentucky Regional Airport in Richmond. University officials said the project is 100% federally funded and will construct a terminal building tied to EKU’s airport operations and planned flight school. Members asked about the relationship to aviation expansion and whether the flight school would be publicly operated; the witnesses said EKU would operate it, public appropriations had already been applied, and student revenue would help offset costs. The committee approved the item by roll call vote. Next, the committee approved a University of Kentucky lease purchase for property at 415 West Sun Street in Morehead, Rowan County, for $6.4 million. UK said the property, which includes an 85,000-square-foot facility on 9.6 acres, is directly across from UK St. Clair and was offered by the Rowan County Board of Education after it moved to a new location. Members questioned why the payment schedule was structured as quarterly installments and why the price was below two appraisals; UK said the board requested the arrangement and did not want the full amount upfront, and there was no interest on the purchase price. The committee also approved this item. The deputy state budget director then reported three appropriation increases in the Tourism, Arts and Heritage Cabinet: a Ballard Wildlife Management Area pump station project, Lake Barkley State Resort Park emergency repairs, and Lake Barkley lodge wing exterior repairs. After questions, staff explained the Lake Barkley increases were mainly to cover construction contingencies because bids came in close to available funding. The committee approved the action items, then heard four no-action pool projects: HVAC upgrades at the FFA leadership training center in Hardinsburg, Kentucky School for the Blind’s McDaniel Scoggin building, KSD’s Brett Brady Hall, and a Kentucky State University Shanty Hall renovation for the School of Engineering Technology. Finally, the committee heard two real property items: a new CHFS lease in Wayne County and a Transportation Cabinet lease modification in Christian County. The Wayne County lease drew the most discussion, with members questioning the high per-square-foot cost and whether another county location could be used; CHFS said it maintains offices in every county seat, this lease would replace an existing 1977 office, and the new construction was negotiated down from a higher initial bid. The Christian County item was described as a replacement site for driver licensing space, with renovation costs partly absorbed by the lessor and the remainder amortized over the lease term.

Transcript Highlights:

• We were initially able to get them to agree to pay Cynthia the higher wage with back pay.
• She was able to collect over $3,000 in back pay.
• > back<00:06:58.160> pay.
• <00:07:04.000> More collect over $3,000 in back pay.
• More collect over $3,000 in back pay.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• to enroll in the program, meaning that the program is likely to pay for many private-pay families with
• And it would create equality across the board for people to pay or not pay for child care.
• And I heard that they didn't have to pay—Mr. Chair, I heard that they didn't have to pay.
• I'm not going to back off on that comment to just say that a parent doesn't have to pay GRT on their
• If you come back in 10 minutes, we'll go. If you don't come back, we're all going to go home.

Summary: The committee heard first from LFC staff on a brief about New Mexico’s universal child care expansion. Staff said child care assistance has clear benefits for parents and families, but LFC has not found evidence in New Mexico that it improves children’s educational outcomes; they argued pre-K is the better tool for that goal. The brief highlighted four concerns with universal access: an estimated annual cost of about $849.7 million, a sharp decline in registered homes, possible crowding out of lower-income families, and reduced access for children under age two. Staff also suggested possible mitigations such as prioritizing slots for low-income and at-risk families, reinstating sliding-scale co-pays, and tying quality improvements to workforce wages. Members raised questions about the cost estimate, funding sources, provider quality, and whether the data showed actual crowding out. Several lawmakers expressed support for child care generally but concern about the fiscal impact and whether universal access would divert resources from the families most in need. Others emphasized the importance of child care for workforce participation, rural communities, and family stability, and questioned how registered homes are counted and regulated. LFC staff clarified that the cost estimate was for child care assistance only, not the entire ECECD budget, and that the data showed declines in the share of lowest-income children and infants/toddlers served, though not causation. The ECECD secretary then presented the department’s response, saying universal child care is intended to complete a cradle-to-career system and that the department has already seen strong uptake, increased capacity, and rising workforce participation. She said 6,206 families were found eligible in the first month, the share of infants and toddlers served rose, and new provider applications and licensed slots increased after the November rollout. The department also emphasized wage increases, quality improvements, and a new wage scale/career lattice, while projecting a lower near-term cost than LFC’s estimate and requesting additional funding for child care, early pre-K, home visiting, workforce systems, and capacity-building. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided; the discussion was informational and focused on questions and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you go back and look at this line, this data back in the 70s and 80s for public pension plans, there
• We are paying, and the other states I believe Are paying what their statutes say they must, but their
• What we pay in, and what the state pays in on our behalf, isn't enough to fund the benefit that you all
• So, fire and police do not pay in.
• We have some food in the back, and we will be back at one o'clock.

Transcript Highlights:

• Who pays for it and how does it work?
• So couldn't a new developer just pay the old developer?
• upgrade is the one who ends up paying upgrade is the one who ends up paying the<00:31:18.320>
• So couldn't a new developer just pay the old developer?
• So, is take back some of the control.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And not long after, many of our hours were cut back.
• And less pay for families means that we have to cut corners in order to pay our bills and make ends meet
• And less pay for families means that we have to cut corners in order to pay our bills and make ends meet
• And that backs up everybody else behind you.
• SB 642 also revises the definition of pay scale.

Summary: The Assembly Labor and Employment Committee heard several bills focused on worker rights, workplace technology, pay equity, and retail/self-checkout standards. SB 703 would require ports to collect and report information on trucking companies to help identify worker misclassification in the port trucking industry; supporters, including Teamsters and the California Labor Federation, said better data is needed for enforcement, while trucking and retail groups said they were working with the author and expected to remove opposition after amendments. The bill passed 5-0 and was re-referred to Transportation. The committee also approved a consent calendar of other measures. SB 294, the Workplace Know Your Rights Act, would require the Labor Commissioner to create a template for annual employer notices about workers’ labor and civil rights, including emergency contact notification if a worker is detained or arrested. Supporters said the bill would help workers understand their rights amid federal rollbacks and weak enforcement; the California Restaurant Association opposed it. SB 7 would require notice and human review before employers use automated decision-making systems for discipline or termination, and would bar predictive use of such systems for employment actions. Labor groups supported the bill as a safeguard against biased or opaque algorithmic management, while HR, chamber, retail, and local government groups raised concerns about breadth, notice burdens, and small-business impacts. Both bills passed 5-0 to their next committees. The committee also advanced SB 238, which would require disclosure about workplace surveillance and AI monitoring tools, and SB 442, which sets staffing and operational standards for self-checkout, including at least one staffed lane, one employee dedicated to monitoring self-checkout, item restrictions, and a 15-item limit sign. Supporters argued both bills improve transparency, safety, and worker protections; opponents warned SB 238 could expose security practices and SB 442 could raise costs and create preemption issues. SB 464 would expand state pay-data reporting to better capture public-sector workforce demographics in line with reparations and pay-equity goals, and SB 642 would strengthen the Equal Pay Act by extending recovery periods, clarifying wage definitions, and updating pay-scale language. SB 464 and SB 642 also passed, with some opposition from county and business groups over scope and retroactivity. All measures taken up in the hearing were approved by committee, generally on 5-0 votes, and re-referred to the appropriate policy or fiscal committees.

Transcript Highlights:

• and say, I need a higher price because I pay more for water or I pay more for energy or I'm paying more
• I do agree with Senator Cortese that we do not want to set a precedent of rolling back overtime pay.
• paying $500 a month.
• So I pay about $75 more per month to pay for the brand instead of doing the compound.
• I won back pay, enough to pay back my sister.

Summary: The committee heard SB 921, which would create a tax credit to help agricultural employers offset overtime premium costs for farmworkers. Senator Grove and supporters, including farmworkers, the California Farm Bureau, and agricultural groups, argued the bill would restore lost hours and take-home pay after California’s agricultural overtime law reduced schedules. Opponents, including the California Federation of Labor Unions and CRLA Foundation, argued the proposal would subsidize employers with taxpayer dollars and undermine the principle that employers should pay overtime themselves. The bill was held in subcommittee until more members arrived. The committee then took up SB 1083, a cleanup bill to the prior year’s school employee misconduct database law. The author and supporters said it would add due process protections for classified school employees, require an administrative law judge review before placement in the database, and improve notice and vetting rules for contractors and non-permanent staff. School employer groups and other opponents warned the bill could slow investigations and weaken child-safety protections. The committee approved the bill 3-0 and sent it to Senate Appropriations. Members also considered SB 1089, which would require CalPERS health plans to cover GLP-1 medications and expand access through CalRX for chronic weight management and related health conditions. The author and supporters, including the American Diabetes Association and medical groups, said the drugs can prevent diabetes and improve health outcomes but remain unaffordable for many. Pharma representatives expressed concerns about the bill as drafted but said they were open to continued discussions. The bill passed 4-0 to Appropriations. The committee also approved the consent calendar 4-0. Later, the committee heard SB 954, which would narrow and add guardrails to last year’s CEQA exemption for advanced manufacturing, including environmental review near disadvantaged communities and labor standards such as prevailing wage and skilled-and-trained workforce requirements. Labor, environmental, and community groups supported the bill as a cleanup of an overly broad exemption, while business and manufacturing groups opposed it, warning it would discourage investment and worsen California’s competitiveness. The bill passed 3-1 to Appropriations. Finally, SB 1299, a fire sprinkler fitter certification bill, was heard and passed 3-0 to Appropriations with support from the sprinkler fitters and building trades and no recorded opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, if we move back to Slide 6, going back to this concept of the restoration of purchasing power for
• So, what that means is essentially we would need an additional 3.39% of pay in contributions to pay for
• I also want to go back to Senate Bill 77.
• Also, the ability for PARA to go after and pay them back and recollect that amount from somebody who
• Montoya, that related back to firefighters.

Transcript Highlights:

• You pay attorney's fees, and you pay professional fees. It's already in the statute.
• He had to pay attorney fees that he didn't get back for that, so he actually came out less than he would
• If you don't pay for it in one place, you pay for it in another.
• to be paying property taxes.
• I just, again, I bring it all back.

Bills: HB5489, HB5695, HB5699, SB291, SB292

Keywords: impact fee, moratorium, local government, Texas legislation, infrastructure funding, municipal utility district, eminent domain, bonds, assessments, infrastructure, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Harris County, Municipal Utility District, territory exclusion, debt service taxes, property taxation, condemnation, property acquisition, real property, appraisal reports

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill also contains a clawback provision that would require any property owner to pay back the refund
• if property owner to pay back the refund if property owner to pay back the refund if they<00:01:34.080
• pay property taxes through their rents. pay property taxes through their rents.
• I would love to get some tax money back, but the truth is, in fact, I had to pay in.
• Everybody pays property taxes.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 4906, adopted the H4906A1 amendment, and heard a staff explanation that the bill would create a one-time property tax refund in calendar year 2026 for residential homesteads and the house/garage/1-acre portion of agricultural homesteads. As amended, the bill would appropriate $4 billion in fiscal year 2027, distribute payments based on 2026 property tax due, include a clawback for delinquent taxpayers, and coordinate with existing property tax refund programs so recipients would not receive more than they paid in taxes. House Research also discussed a disagreement with the Department of Revenue over whether the refund would be taxable federally, with House Research suggesting it would likely be treated as a non-taxable recovery of prior taxes. Public testimony was largely opposed. Eric Bernstein of We Make Minnesota argued the proposal was too large, would create a deficit and force future service cuts, and would disproportionately benefit higher-income homeowners. Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project said the bill would create a major budget hole, threaten funding for health care, food support, schools, and other services, and exclude renters and lower-income Minnesotans. Members echoed those concerns, citing impacts on public safety, rural EMS, hospitals, education funding, and equity, while noting that renters and many seniors would receive nothing. Representative Howard questioned whether the bill was a cautious use of state resources, and Representative Norris said it missed the mark for struggling renters. Chair Davids defended the concept as a way to put money back in people’s pockets and said the proposal was scalable and intended to start a discussion. Representative Wiener strongly supported the bill, saying many homeowners and farmers in his district are not wealthy and need relief from property taxes; he said the bill should be even bigger. No vote on final passage was taken in the portion of the meeting provided, and the committee moved on after testimony and member discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• , are paying that wage.
• And I knew I had to pay my electrician's $80 an hour there, where I was paying them $25 here.
• And actually, let me go back.
• I’ll go back.
• I take that back.

Summary: The committee held a study on the potential effects of living wage or minimum wage laws in Oklahoma, with the chair emphasizing that the discussion was not intended to advocate for or against State Question 832. The first panel focused on economic and workforce impacts. An Oklahoma Department of Commerce representative argued that living wage calculations vary by region and household type, that Oklahoma’s average wages are already near or above many living-wage estimates, and that higher mandated wages could lead employers to cut hours, reduce hiring, automate, or avoid expansion, especially in rural areas where childcare, healthcare, broadband, and infrastructure constraints also affect labor participation. Committee members asked about wage distributions, rural cost differences, training pathways, and whether higher wages might draw workers or businesses out of state; the witness said many low-wage workers move up over time and that Oklahoma has seen net in-migration. A State Chamber Research Foundation witness then testified that a $15 statewide wage floor would raise payroll costs substantially, especially for small rural employers, and cited examples from California and Seattle to argue that higher wages can reduce hours, jobs, and benefits while increasing consumer prices. She suggested alternatives such as expanding the state earned income tax credit and promoting upskilling through existing education and training programs. A Missouri Chamber of Commerce and Industry representative described Missouri’s recent voter-approved minimum wage increase to $13.75, rising to $15, along with paid sick leave provisions. She said the chamber opposed the measure because it would raise business costs, hurt rural communities and youth employment, and force some employers to cut hours, reduce hiring, or close. She cited examples from Missouri businesses facing significant added costs and warned that a future ballot initiative could create a patchwork of local minimum wages. In response to questions, she said Missouri’s law did not distinguish by age or industry, that businesses had raised concerns about union contracts and compliance, and that the chamber viewed the measure as harmful to competitiveness. Peter Hansen of NFIB presented the final major testimony, summarizing an NFIB study projecting that a higher Oklahoma minimum wage would produce some short-term GDP gains but longer-term losses, with GDP turning negative by the early 2030s and job losses growing over time. He said businesses respond to higher wage mandates by raising prices, trimming jobs, converting full-time positions to part-time, reducing benefits, and shifting investment toward automation or other capital. He argued that the burden falls most heavily on vulnerable workers such as young or marginal employees, who are less likely to be hired when labor costs rise. In questioning, he acknowledged that higher wages can improve pay for some workers and may have some short-term positive effects, but maintained that the long-term employment and investment effects are negative. No votes or formal actions were taken in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• They go back to Border Patrol.
• They don't come back to the bridge, The real challenge is that they come back.
• They don't come back to the bridge, but they come back through different parts along the river.
• I can go back in those days.
• So in the last, if you go back to 2022, you have paid given a 31% pay increase to correctional officers

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee heard a presentation from the Legislative Budget Board on the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Article 5 budget. LBB recommended $3.7 billion in all funds for 2026-27, a 5.2 percent decrease from the base, while FTEs would rise by 856.7. Major items included funding for driver license services, DPS facilities, troopers and recruit schools, crime labs, vehicle and aircraft operations, border security, and rider changes. The committee also reviewed DPS exceptional items not included in the recommendation, including additional staffing, technology, and facility requests. Members focused heavily on driver license operations, criticizing long wait times, call abandonment, and repeated staffing increases without clear process improvements. LBB said the agency’s call-answer rate was about 9 percent in fiscal 2024, with average hold times around 34 minutes, later reduced to roughly 22-25 minutes. Senators questioned whether more FTEs alone would solve the problem and urged a broader efficiency study and better use of technology. DPS officials said they were pursuing process changes, including appointment-system upgrades, online pre-population of forms, and remote issuance options, while noting that Real ID requirements and population growth continue to drive demand. DPS leadership then outlined the agency’s priorities: completion of the Williamson County training academy, recruitment and retention of troopers, capital needs for vehicles and aircraft, and expanded responsibilities at the Capitol complex and the Alamo. Officials said the new trooper funding would help address staffing shortages, public safety, and border operations, and that overtime and deployment patterns had been adjusted to reduce burnout and improve flexibility. They also discussed Operation Lone Star, saying DPS spending is largely overtime, travel, and fuel, and that the agency continues to coordinate with federal partners while awaiting clarity on possible federal reimbursement for border security costs. Senators also raised concerns about oilfield theft, cartel activity, high-speed pursuits, bilingual pay, and the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame and Museum, and DPS said it would follow up on some of those issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• The buyer pays the sales tax on a retail transaction. The seller pays...
• The customer pays to the store the $9.80. The customer pays to the store the $9.80.
• They still pay her $200 to speak.
• We're paying—they're paying a sales tax.
• So, can we go back to... B2. I'll let you handle that one. So, can we go back to 4B1? Okay.

Summary: The committee first received a presentation from Dr. Reich on the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council (ERFC), including how the council’s joint executive-legislative forecasting process works, the main state revenue sources, and recent economic conditions. He said Washington’s economy is slowing, with weak employment growth, softer taxable sales, and uncertainty from tariffs, federal spending, and the federal shutdown. He also noted that the September forecast was reduced, mainly because of lower sales tax and real estate excise tax collections, and that the state still expects modest growth rather than a recession. Members asked about whether Washington tends to lag national downturns and how forecast information should affect budgeting; Dr. Reich said the forecast is a revenue tool, not a budgeting decision, and that spending choices remain with elected officials. The Department of Revenue then presented on Washington’s sales and use tax structure and the implementation of Senate Bill 5814, which expands retail sales tax to several services effective October 1, 2025. Steve Ewing explained how sales and use tax are sourced, how reseller permits and the multiple points of use exemption work, and how the new law applies to live presentations, temporary staffing, investigations and security services, IT services, custom website development, advertising services, and custom software. He said DOR held listening sessions, issued interim guidance, and set up a centralized landing page and outreach efforts to help taxpayers understand the changes. He also described a six-month grace period for certain pre-existing contracts through March 31, 2026, but said penalties and interest still apply under the statute. Committee members raised concerns about how businesses and individuals will know when a service is taxable, who is responsible for collecting and remitting tax, and how sourcing will work for services delivered across multiple locations or online. DOR staff walked through examples involving accounting services, live lectures, virtual events, advertising campaigns, and search engine marketing, including the use of reasonable allocation and pool codes when exact sourcing data is unavailable. Members also questioned the administrative burden on small businesses and professionals newly subject to tax, and whether additional legislative fixes or relief from penalties and interest may be needed. No votes or formal actions were taken in the work session.