Transcript Highlights:

• The language was removed because it is unnecessary as DFA and CBC placements are required to be safe.
• And we're going to have more placements. Well, we were under court order, as you all know.
• CWOP placements, that there is no therapeutic value.
• We have done out-of-state placement because it was the best place for them to go.
• Let's find that kinship placement, let's find these other placements and not send them to a hotel room

Bills: SB437 , SB528 , SB626 , SB636 , SB884 , SB968 , SB1044 , SB1608 , SB2336

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• to staff is not necessarily worth the placement.
• </c><00:25:50.000><c> for</c> for maybe an outofstate placement for for maybe an outofstate placement
• </c><00:27:20.720><c> facilities</c> have lead to uh the placement facilities have lead to uh the placement
• So they're not all dried up, placement.
• </c><00:33:17.120><c> and</c> that could have used uh placement and that could have used uh placement

Summary: The committee met to hear updates from the Department of Juvenile Justice and the Department of Corrections on two related issues: a proposed high-acuity juvenile mental health treatment facility and medical services contracts, including the impact of Wellpath’s bankruptcy proceedings. At the start, the chair agreed to hear the Department of Corrections first so members could get context on the medical contract before turning to DJJ’s proposal. DOC officials said Wellpath, the department’s comprehensive medical and mental health provider since 2013, was awarded its current contract through a 2021 procurement process. They reported that Wellpath’s Chapter 11 reorganization plan had been confirmed and that the company had transitioned ownership to lenders, but had not yet fully completed the bankruptcy process. DOC said there had been no service lapses, no reduction in care, and no known impact on Kentucky vendors or hospitals, and that DOC staff meet with Wellpath almost weekly. Members asked whether the committee had been kept informed and whether the bankruptcy could affect future services or subcontractors. DJJ then presented its concept for a high-acuity facility, explaining that the project is still in the preliminary programming and conceptual stage and has not yet entered the formal design phase with DECA. Officials said the proposal in the capital plan would create a 24-bed facility, with 16 clinical beds and 8 assessment/stabilization beds, to serve justice-involved youth with serious mental health needs. They said the facility would need to separate males and females and high- and low-risk youth, and that current placements often require sending youth out of state to places such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Arkansas, and Texas. Staff said the goal is to centralize treatment, improve safety, and reduce the need for fragmented or out-of-state placements. Committee members questioned the cost estimates, staffing needs, and whether the facility was justified given the small number of youth currently placed out of state. DJJ said the operational estimate includes an unknown medical-contract component and that the number of youth needing the facility can fluctuate because of surges in the juvenile population. Officials also said they had consulted with South Carolina, which is developing a similar facility, and noted that renovating existing facilities was considered but could be more expensive or impractical than building a separate site. No votes or formal actions were taken during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Their staff are the first line of work with our population in terms of helping with placements in the
• placement, so when we talk about placement...
• Placements in the sheriff's department.
• It's a lot of placement and a lot of investment in giving people opportunities.
• And housing placement, if you have that number.

Summary: The Special Commission on Criminal Justice Reform 3.0 heard a presentation from the Massachusetts Parole Board focused on how parole works with the Department of Correction, county houses of correction, sheriffs, probation, and community providers to support reentry and public safety. Chair Angela Gomez described the board’s mission, organizational structure, and 2024 activity, including institutional release hearings, life-sentence hearings, victim-notification events, pardons, commutations, and the supervision of nearly 3,000 committed parolees. She emphasized that the board is increasingly using evidence-based practices, risk assessment tools, and individualized conditions, including more structured GPS use and graduated sanctions, rather than relying on a purely punitive model. Commission members and sheriffs asked for more detailed breakdowns of parole and supervision data, including the difference between releases from Massachusetts custody and all releases under supervision, the average length of supervision, the share of lifers, revocations, and how many people are on dual supervision with probation. The board said it would provide follow-up data on length of stay, housing, employment, treatment participation, and outcomes. Members also discussed why some people refuse parole, noting that refusals can be driven by pending cases, a desire to avoid supervision, or a preference for a shorter custodial sentence over a longer supervised release or treatment placement. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on collaboration and shared resources across agencies, including MASH housing, community justice support centers, CRJ beds, sheriff-run programs such as HOPE and Rocky Hill, and UMass partnerships on risk assessment and community pathways. Speakers said the main gaps are not duplication but limited housing, treatment, and mental health capacity, especially for older people, people with substance use needs, and difficult-to-place populations such as sex offenders and arson offenders. The commission also received an update on the Matus decision: 210 individuals were identified as affected, 144 were immediately parole-eligible, 100 hearings had been completed, 10 were scheduled, and the rest were being processed as eligibility dates were confirmed. The meeting ended with plans for a March 9 public hearing and a request that members who have not toured facilities do so before future votes on correctional policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• 13.280><c> that</c><00:04:13.879><c> their</c><00:04:14.879><c> uh</c><00:04:15.120><c> path</c> placement
• to ensure that their uh path placement to ensure that their uh path in<00:04:15.599><c> this</c><00:
• Career job placement is significant, with a three-year total of 134 people.
• </c><00:04:48.680><c> is</c><00:04:48.919><c> sign</c> graduates career job placement is sign graduates
• career job placement is sign is<00:04:49.759><c> significant</c><00:04:50.560><c> with</c><00:04:50.680

Transcript Highlights:

• YOU ALSO STAY IN DETENTION, POST ADJUDICATION UNTIL THEY HAVE AN APPROPRIATE PLACEMENT IN A RESIDENTIAL
• LIKE WHAT IS THE BEST PLACEMENT TO MEET THOSE NEEDS THAT WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS.
• WE ARE INFORMING PLACEMENT.
• OPTIMAL PLACEMENT AND PROPER PLACEMENT YOU WILL SEE A RANGE OF 19 TO 20% RECIDIVISM MEANING IT IS IMPORTANT
• LOOK AT ADVANCED PLACEMENT, MIDDLE SCHOOL ACCELERATION.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll now renew my motion that Senate File 1959 as amended be recommended for placement on the general
• I will move Senate File 2298 to be recommended for placement on the general register.
• I'll now renew my motion that Senate File 2298 as amended be recommended for placement on the general
• recommended for placement on the general<00:03:47.080><c> register.
• The motion prevails and House File 2130 is recommended for placement in the general register.

Bills: SF1959 , HF2444 , SF2298 , HF2445 , SF2216 , HF2443 , HF2130 , HF1943 , HF2436 , HF2442

Committee: House Ways and Means

Keywords: veterans, military affairs, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Military Affairs, omnibus veterans bill, appropriations, National Guard, state active service, armory, State Armory Building Commission, veterans homes, veterans cemeteries, county veterans service office, Minnesota GI Bill, Gold Star families, Blue Star families, Secret War in Laos, Hmong veterans, Laos veterans, special guerrilla units

Transcript Highlights:

• Their staff are the first line of work with our population in terms of helping with placements in the
• So when we start talking about placements, you walk Hill, the sheriff's department.
• So when we talk about placement... Placements in the Sheriff's Department.
• It's a lot of placement and a lot of investment and giving people opportunities.
• And housing placement, if you have that number.

Summary: The Special Commission on Criminal Justice Reform 3.0 heard a presentation from the Massachusetts Parole Board focused on consolidation, cooperation, and evidence-based supervision across the correctional system. Parole Board Chair Angela Gomez-June described the board’s mission, its coordination with the Department of Correction, houses of correction, courts, probation, law enforcement, victim services, and UMass partners, and outlined 2024 activity including 2,810 institutional release hearings, 18,238 victim notifications, 53 pardon petitions, 70 commutation petitions, 41 early termination applications, and supervision of 2,993 parolees. She emphasized the board’s shift toward individualized, data-driven decision-making, including revised GPS use, graduated sanctions, and more service-oriented community supervision. Members and sheriffs pressed for clearer breakdowns of the board’s data, including the difference between releases, hearings, and active supervision; average length of supervision; the share of lifers in the caseload; and how many people are placed in housing, employment, and treatment. The board said its active supervised population fluctuates around 1,600 to 1,800, with more than 400 lifers, and that about 30 to 36 percent of its population is housed through programs such as MASH, community justice resource centers, and sheriff-run residential programs like Rocky Hill and HOPE. Members also discussed parole refusals, noting that some individuals decline parole to avoid supervision or to serve time inside instead, and asked for a more detailed breakdown of those cases. The board and commission also discussed collaboration with DOC and UMass on risk assessment, reentry planning, and community pathways, including a tablet video explaining the parole process and pharmacist support for medication-related drug test issues. The board reported that after the SJC’s Matus decision, 210 individuals were identified as affected, 144 were immediately eligible for hearings, 100 hearings had been completed, and 10 more were scheduled; it also said clemency and commutation work had been slowed by staffing and Matus-related demands. The meeting ended with a request for follow-up data on outcomes, supervision lengths, housing and employment placements, and other consolidated statistics, and the commission announced its next public hearing for March 9 at 10 a.m. before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• And section 2 states that we're looking at the placements of the child, stating that each placement shall
• And you'll see that in placement system.
• of the child, looking at the placements of the child, hope<00:11:08.160><c> uh</c><00:11:08.520><c>
• stating</c><00:11:08.920><c> that</c><00:11:09.640><c> each</c><00:11:09.839><c> placement</c> hope uh
• stating that each placement hope uh stating that each placement shall<00:11:10.440><c> meet</c><00:11

Committee: Senate Families & Children

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:46:35.640><c> and</c> classification and housing placement and classification and housing placement
• So, request as to a housing placement.
• And there are procedures that placement.
• Uh and a placement for these folks.
• So, there's no out-of-state placement.

Transcript Highlights:

• for Minnesotans receiving cash assistance during a crisis, and prevents unnecessary foster care placements
• /c><00:01:54.600><c> care</c> prevents unnecessary foster care prevents unnecessary foster care placements
• of children away from their placements of children away from their homes<00:01:57.000><c> and</c> homes
• Slide 14 is supporting relative foster care and permanency placements.
• prevention and family re placement prevention and family re reunification<00:14:19.720><c> services<

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> disincentive for certain placement disincentive for certain placement decisions<00:26:30.159><c>
• </c><00:29:11.080><c> because</c> need not on the placement because need not on the placement because
• </c> a little off from our placement a little off from our placement Continuum<00:45:24.200><c> in</c
• </c> restrictive environment placement restrictive environment placement Continuum<00:45:38.280><c> that
• So we deal with a lot of those cases for parents seeking out placements.

Summary: The hearing focused on HB 563, which would revise the education funding formula for pupils receiving special education services by replacing the current single special education amount with three differentiated categories. Representative Rick Ladd, the prime sponsor, said the bill largely tracks a House-passed version from the prior session with minor figure adjustments, and explained that the proposal uses projected FY26 amounts for three categories based on time in general education versus more intensive placements. He also noted that the bill does not address catastrophic aid directly, but that special education aid, CAT aid, and proration all remain issues for later work sessions. Ladd and supporters argued that weighted categories better reflect actual costs and are more sustainable than treating all IEPs the same. Representative Margaret Drye said the approach was one of the best ideas from the education funding subcommittee and urged the committee to support differentiated aid. Representative Ames asked how the category amounts were derived, and Ladd said Category A follows the FY26 base, Category B is a higher weight, and Category C is a still higher weight for more intensive services, though he acknowledged the exact multipliers were developed earlier and could be revisited. He also said the committee would continue discussing whether the weights are appropriate and how they interact with CAT aid. Testimony from Bonnie Dunham strongly opposed the bill. She argued that funding based on placement rather than actual service need would create incentives to move students into more restrictive settings, could stigmatize children with labels such as "Category C," and would undermine the least restrictive environment requirements under federal special education law. She described her son’s experience in inclusive settings as beneficial and said the bill would have penalized the district for serving him there. In response to questions, she said schools and parents should base funding on the child’s actual needs and costs, not on placement, and urged the committee to recommend the bill inexpedient to legislate.

Transcript Highlights:

• are actually safe, that they're appropriate, and they're supported by the necessary Those placements
• It's a mismatch between placement decisions and local capacity.
• We all share the goal of helping high-needs youth, but when placements out... Access to care.
• of out-of-state placements following serious safety failures.
• Most notably through the elimination of out-of-state placements following serious safety failures.

Committee: Senate Human Services

Summary: The committee adopted the consent calendar and then heard several bills on child care, aging, child welfare, food access, and youth services. SB 1200 by Sen. Menjivar would redefine infant and toddler age categories in child care licensing to allow providers to serve children beginning at 18 months in the toddler category, with supporters saying it would increase capacity and help family child care businesses stay open; it passed 4-0 to Appropriations. SB 971 by Sen. Choi would authorize counties to offer optional adult education and technology training programs for adults 55 and older through local partnerships; supporters said it would reduce isolation and improve digital literacy, and it passed 4-0 to the floor. SB 1234 by Sen. Alvarado-Gil would require fentanyl to be included in court-ordered drug testing in dependency cases, with testimony from an angel family and law enforcement about child deaths and exposure risks; it passed 4-0 to the floor. The committee also heard SB 1109 by Sen. Alvarado-Gil, which would require additional state review for short-term residential therapeutic programs in very small rural counties or facilities with repeated serious citations. The author and county officials from Alpine County argued that rural counties lack the hospitals, schools, and 24-hour emergency response needed to safely support these placements, while providers opposed the bill as overly broad and potentially destabilizing to STRTP capacity. After the author accepted committee amendments, members voted 4-0 to send the bill to Appropriations as amended. SB 961 by Sen. Ashby would require students applying for financial aid to be notified that they may also be eligible for CalFresh; student and advocacy witnesses described widespread food insecurity on campuses, and the bill passed 4-0 to Appropriations. The committee then heard SB 1099 by Sen. Gomez Reyes, which clarifies local governments’ authority to provide state or local public benefits to all residents under PRWORA-related exemptions; supporters said it would reduce legal uncertainty for local safety-net services, and the bill was voted 2-0 with the remaining members absent, leaving it on call. SB 1190 by Sen. Grove would create a licensing and regulatory framework for youth transport companies that move minors to out-of-state residential facilities; survivors testified about traumatic transports, supporters called for basic guardrails, and the bill passed 4-0 to Public Safety. Finally, SB 1325 by Sen. Jones would create a narrow pathway for Feeding San Diego to participate in CalFood, with supporters saying it would expand hunger relief in San Diego County and opponents warning it could divert limited food bank resources; the discussion focused on broader funding concerns, and no final vote was recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• When confinement is chosen, the court must clearly explain why community placement would not be safe.
• Only a few states have specified sentence lengths for institutional placement.
• Most states combine a juvenile's risk needs for placement using a more complex actuarial system than
• The national average stay in juvenile placement after disposition is thus around five to six months.
• Third, a periodic review of placement is valuable.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2456, which would create a juvenile firearm early intervention alternative for youth charged in juvenile court with unlawful possession of a firearm in the second degree. Staff explained that the program would require prosecutor agreement, intensive community supervision, random suspicionless searches, therapy and mentoring services, periodic court review, and dismissal of the charge upon successful completion. The bill would also raise concealed pistol license fees by $100 each and dedicate the revenue to a new account funding the alternative. Representative Davis said the bill is intended to fill the gap between firearm possession charges and later juvenile sentencing, and to fund evidence-based services; one member questioned whether the fee increase functions more like a tax than a fee. The chair then paused testimony on HB 2456 to return to the other bill. The bulk of the hearing focused on House Bill 2389, which would expand suspended disposition alternatives, reduce some juvenile robbery sentencing ranges, add a midpoint review for certain youth committed to DCYF, and create new rules for juvenile rehabilitation capacity and emergency transfers. Supporters, including youth currently or formerly in juvenile facilities, defense advocates, restorative justice providers, and some judges, argued the bill would reduce overcrowding, improve rehabilitation, address racial disparities, and give judges more individualized options. Several testified that youth need treatment, family connection, and incentives for progress rather than long confinement, and that current sentencing practices are outdated and underuse suspended dispositions. Opponents, including sheriffs, prosecutors, county officials, victim advocates, and some judges, argued the bill would shift costs and responsibility to counties, require resources that do not exist, and weaken accountability for serious offenses such as robbery, assault, and trafficking. They raised concerns about expanded appeals, added court workload, the need for more staffing and programming, and the impact on victims and public safety. DCYF said it supports reducing overcrowding but wants clearer emergency transfer authority for Green Hill; facility staff described improved conditions as population has fallen, but said overcrowding still creates safety and programming problems. No vote was taken in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• With that said, the chair moves that Senate File 1832 be recommended for placement on the general register
• 1832 be chair moves that Senate file 1832 be recommended<00:00:52.239><c> for</c><00:00:52.480><c> placement
• c><00:00:52.879><c> on</c><00:00:53.039><c> the</c><00:00:53.120><c> general</c> recommended for placement
• on the general recommended for placement on the general register.<00:00:54.719><c> And</c><00:00:54.879
• on the general recommended for placement on the general register<00:08:12.479><c> with</c><00:08:12.720

Bills: SF1832 , HF2440

Committee: House Ways and Means

Keywords: economic development, small business, workforce training, grants, entrepreneurship, equity, community support, labor market, employment, funding, data analysis

Transcript Highlights:

• So, the bill sets up pathways for these people to get into placements.
• , um, and any additional civil commitments and enhanced protective placements.
• , um, and any additional civil commitments and enhanced protective placements.
• </c><01:12:17.800><c> So,</c> enhanced protective placements. So, enhanced protective placements.
• People we're going to end up needing these, um, placements for.

Transcript Highlights:

• They have one person that is out looking for kinship or family placements.
• Do they get that money in placement of families? They do not.
• But you alluded to a placement of your child.
• They put her in the placement center. She ran away.
• Chair, final one: do you know why that placement was made for the open bed space?

Committees: House Government , House House Government Committee of Reference

Transcript Highlights:

• Next up is a supplemental request for the county and out-of-state placement division.
• Just as a reminder, the county and out-of-state placement program is the cost to pay for individuals
• I move for fiscal year 2026 for the Department of Correction in the county and out-of-state placement
• Next up: County and out-of-state placement. Next up: County and out-of-state placement. Mr.
• This is the fiscal year 2027 request for the County and Out-of-State Placement Division.

Summary: The committee took up a series of Idaho Department of Corrections budget supplementals and FY 2027 enhancement requests. Members approved supplemental or ongoing funding for Hepatitis C treatment authority, county and out-of-state placement costs, medical services, management services replacement items and IT hardware, state prisons replacement items, and community corrections replacement items, with several motions passing by due pass recommendation after roll calls. In community corrections, the committee approved a reduced amount that excluded some vehicle replacements. The committee also approved a technical correction to the college and university budget to restore four FTP that had been omitted from yesterday’s motion. The committee then considered several Department of Health and Welfare items. It approved a budget-neutral fund source change for substance abuse treatment and prevention, moving $650,000 from the Liquor Control Fund to the Cooperative Welfare Dedicated Fund. In the Division of Welfare, members discussed SNAP administrative cost changes tied to H.R. 1, Medicaid expansion work requirements, and Medicaid eligibility system changes; the motion to fund all three items failed in the House committee, so no language advanced. The committee also approved psychiatric hospitalization supplemental funding to shift Idaho Behavioral Health Plan revenue from federal funds to dedicated funds. For FY 2027 mental health services, the committee approved a compromise package that reduced funding for a juvenile corrections clinical transfer and restored some mental health services staffing and Idaho Behavioral Health Plan costs, while adding Allenbaugh House funding through opioid settlement dollars. It also adopted language allowing certain transfers under state law and requiring separate reporting for children’s and adult mental health spending under the Idaho Behavioral Health Plan. For psychiatric hospitalization, the committee approved ongoing fund shifts for employee benefits, the Idaho Behavioral Health Plan, replacement items, and endowment fund adjustments. The meeting ended with notice of upcoming budget-setting work and a reminder for members to get any new motions to staff by early afternoon.

Transcript Highlights:

• Governor Walz's budget recommendation, where he basically recommends eliminating the sunset of the drug formulary
• Governor Walz's budget recommendation, where he basically recommends eliminating the sunset of the drug formulary

Committee: Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection

Transcript Highlights:

• distinct areas: child welfare workforce issues, increased acuity of the children in child welfare and placement
• With regard to increased acuity and placement array, in recent years there has been a decrease in the
• Unfortunately, there are simply not enough placements that can adequately serve children with Unfortunately
• , there are simply not enough placements that can adequately serve children with high acuity, particularly
• bill requires DCF to create a treatment foster care pilot program that will increase family-like placements

Committee: Senate Fiscal Policy

Summary: The Committee on Fiscal Policy met and first considered CS/SB 7012 on child welfare, presented by Senator Graal. The bill addressed three areas: child welfare workforce shortages, higher-acuity children in out-of-home care, and services/data for commercially sexually exploited children. It would create a CPI and case manager recruitment program aimed at former public safety and service workers, convene a workforce work group, establish a four-year treatment foster care pilot in two judicial circuits identified by DCF based on removal and placement data, and require more detailed, extractable child-level data on commercially sexually exploited children along with a bed capacity study and service gap analysis. Two amendments were adopted: one clarified record retention for redacted assessments, and another attached the appropriation. The committee then heard CS/SB 110 on rural communities from Senator Simon. The bill proposed a broad rural development package, including a state office of rural prosperity, a Renaissance grant program for counties with declining populations, increased housing support, major rural road funding, school consortium funding, and additional health care resources for rural facilities and training. A delete-all amendment was adopted that expanded and refined several provisions, including local sales tax trust fund distributions, county connectivity projects, agritourism marketing support, disaster-impacted rural infrastructure eligibility, insurance and provider eligibility changes, and increased funding for critical access hospitals and rural medical education reimbursement. Both bills drew broad support from local government, education, health care, housing, and rural advocacy representatives. Supporters said the rural bill was especially comprehensive and would help small counties, schools, roads, housing, and health care, while one witness cautioned that road expansion should be balanced with protection of agricultural and natural lands. Senator Bradley and Senator Simon emphasized local control and the importance of strengthening rural Florida without imposing mandates. CS/SB 7012 and CS/SB 110 were both reported favorably, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Their staff are the first line of work with our population in terms of helping with placements in the
• So when we start talking about placements, you walk through the sheriff's department.
• So when we talk about placement... Placements in the sheriff's department.
• It's a lot of placement and a lot of investment in giving people opportunities.
• And housing placement, if you have that number.

Summary: The Special Commission on Criminal Justice Reform 3.0 heard a presentation from the Massachusetts Parole Board focused on how parole, probation, the Department of Correction, sheriffs, and community providers coordinate reentry and supervision. Chair Angela Gomez described the board’s mission, its discretionary parole process, and the work of its transitional services, life sentence, victim services, and field services divisions. She highlighted 2024 activity including 2,810 institutional release hearings, 141 life-sentence hearings, 100 victim access release hearings, 18,238 victim notifications, 53 pardon petitions, 70 commutation petitions, 41 early termination applications, and supervision of about 2,993 committed parolees. She also emphasized the board’s shift toward evidence-based practices, individualized conditions, graduated sanctions, and more service-oriented supervision, including GPS guidelines and community-based interventions. Members focused heavily on data questions and the practical overlap among agencies. Senator Brownsberger and others asked for clearer breakdowns of releases, active supervision, average length of supervision, and distinctions between parole, mandatory release, revocations, and interstate compact cases. The board explained that some figures combine in-state and out-of-state cases, that roughly 400-plus people on supervision are lifers, and that annual revocations can remain technically supervised until final hearings. Members also asked for more detailed outcome data on employment, housing, treatment, and program retention, as well as a clearer breakdown of people who refuse parole versus those who decline after a grant. The board said it could provide follow-up data and noted that many refusals are driven by pending cases, desire to avoid supervision, or preference for serving time inside. The discussion also covered collaboration with UMass, including risk assessment research, training on best practices, and real-time support for medication and drug-testing issues through community pathways. The board and commissioners described shared housing and reentry resources such as MASH, community justice resource centers, sheriff-run programs like Rocky Hill and HOPE, and other placements that help stabilize people after release. Several speakers stressed that housing is the biggest gap and that agencies are trying to keep people in the community with employment, benefits, treatment, and safe housing. The commission also received an update on the Mattis-related clemency/parole cohort: 210 individuals were identified, 144 were immediately eligible for hearings, 100 hearings had been completed, 10 were scheduled, and some had postponed or were still being calculated for eligibility. The meeting ended with plans for a March 9 public hearing and a request for follow-up data and continued site visits before the commission moves into recommendations.