Transcript Highlights:

• We always levy in dollars needed to cover expenditures after we’ve used up our cash reserves.
• So anyway, I think reserving that, I think There was some heartburn for sure.
• So anyway, I think reserving that, I think getting rid of that line would be something beneficial, but
• Do we want to reserve that spot to put something back in programming-wise, or are we just going to try

Summary: The subcommittee of the Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee met to begin its study of whether the content of the real estate tax statement should be revised to improve transparency. Legislative Council staff reviewed the study directive from HB 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, legacy fund share, discounts for early payment, and special assessments. The Tax Department then explained how the current uniform statewide statement is prescribed and approved, and noted that changes are typically driven by statute and implemented collaboratively with counties and vendors. County officials from NDACO, including auditors from McKenzie and Richland counties, described the full annual property tax timeline from budgeting through mailing final statements. They explained how counties gather budgets, calculate levies, verify taxable values, handle centrally assessed property, and prepare required notices and statements. They also said public attendance at budget hearings is generally very low, though the notices and statements generate some calls, mostly about whether attendance is required or why taxes are changing. Several members questioned the usefulness of the legislative tax relief line and the complexity of the 5% discount calculation, and county officials said the current process can be confusing and depends on manual data entry and coordination among counties, vendors, and taxing districts. The committee also discussed assessment frequency, valuation equalization, the 3% cap, and whether more frequent reassessment would reduce large jumps in taxable value. County officials said they try to use rotating reassessments and sales-ratio reviews to keep values within statutory tolerance, but staffing, training, and local market changes make the work difficult. NDACO staff estimated, based on a small county survey, that tax statement preparation and mailing costs average about 74 cents per statement, with outsourcing generally cheaper than in-house printing, and said HB 1176 added some mailing and administrative costs even if the tax statement itself did not change dramatically. Software vendors from CPT and Tyler then began presentations showing how their systems handle budgeting, valuation notices, tax statement generation, primary residence credit processing, and levy worksheets, emphasizing that many of the required calculations and reports are still manually entered or verified by county staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• We always levy in dollars needed to cover expenditures after we've used up our cash reserves.
• So anyway, I think reserving that, I think— There was some heartburn for sure.
• So anyway, I think reserving that, I think getting rid of that line would be something beneficial, but
• Do we want to reserve that spot to put something back in programming-wise, or are we just going to try

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:

• So, I have reservations about taking that out.
• So, I'm I have<01:05:44.160><c> reservations</c><01:05:44.720><c> about</c><01:05:44.960><c> taking</
• </c> have reservations about taking that out. have reservations about taking that out.

Keywords: 9:00am HB 158 9:10am HB 281 9:20am HB 317 9:30am HB 340 9:40am HB 1062 9:50am HB 1187 10:00am HB 1234 10:10am HB 1300 10:20am HB 1306 10:30am HB 1381 10:40am HB 1541, 928, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference first resolved House Bill 158, which concerns public inspection of absentee ballot lists. The Senate explained a revised approach that removed the broader bill language and instead directed the Secretary of State to review absentee ballot data after each general election for patterns such as common addresses and to report findings to the committees of jurisdiction. The House agreed to the Senate position, and the conference committee voted unanimously to concur. The committee then took up House Bill 281, dealing with a sortable electronic voter checklist. Members debated the Senate’s removal of language that would have included the absentee ballot mailing address when different from the voter’s registration address. Concerns were raised that releasing mailing addresses could expose where voters are not home and could affect overseas and military voters. The committee also discussed a related form for election officials who personally know a voter, including how long the form would be retained and whether it would be subject to public records law. After further discussion, the House agreed to the Senate changes with an additional requirement that the form be signed, and the committee voted to proceed with the amended Senate position. House Bill 317, concerning verification of a person’s identity by a supervisor of the checklist without identification, was also discussed at length. The Senate’s version preserved the ability for election officials to identify people they know, but required a signed form under penalty of perjury and added a nursing home-related provision. Members described the measure as balancing community-based identification with tighter documentation, and a House witness described local problems with inconsistent ID checks and concerns about voting in nursing homes. The House sought one additional change requiring the nursing home verification form to be signed, and the Senate accepted that addition; the committee then voted to move the bill forward on the consent calendar. The conference committee next considered House Bill 340 on electioneering by public employees. The chair presented a replace-all amendment that tied the definition of electioneering to existing law, added a prohibition on expressly or primarily political surveys, and created a civil penalty of up to $1,000 alongside the misdemeanor penalty. Members discussed clarifying when the misdemeanor versus civil penalty would apply and which categories of public employees were covered. After caucus, the Senate agreed to the House’s replace-all approach with the clarifying changes, and the bill was closed. The committee also resolved House Bill 1062 by agreeing to strike a sunset clause from the Senate version authorizing random audits of citizenship qualifications, and it began discussion of House Bill 1187 on the filing window for special-election candidates, where the House proposed requiring local election officials to arrange a filing time on the same day or next business day after being contacted.

Transcript Highlights:

• And these oil and gas reserves aren't feasible now to produce at these rates.
• But eventually, we're going to use up those reserves. The price is going to go up.
• Then the technology is going to come about that's going to make these oil and gas reserves important
• So... ...to make these oil and gas reserves important to this country and to our future generation.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• President, I have severe reservations about extending this moratorium.
• to be responsible for some positions of Authority are basically doing some actions that had been reserved
• Is it not true that when you get out at 20, you transfer into reserve units and do not start drawing
• When they retired from the reserve unit, they would still get their active duty retirement, which would

Bills: HB2268, HB3000, HB3043, HB3066, HB3078, HB3143, HB3144, HB3244, HB3298, HB3320, HB3467, HB3321, HB3329, HB3431, HB3464, HB3499, HB3500, HB3586, HB3590, HB3650, HB3671, HB3695, HB3700, HB3701, HB3764, HB3767, HB3834, HB3931, HB3934, HB3940, HB3944, HB3979, HB3985, HB4113, HB4294, HB4302, HB4317, HB4324, HB4359, HB4426, HB4427, HB4430, HB4431, HB4434, HJR1077, SR42, SR35, HJR1023, HB1225, HB1374, HB1381, HB1590, HB1675, HB2153

Keywords: HB2268, Oklahoma Health Care Authority, OHCA, appropriation, General Revenue Fund, PACE, Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly, elderly care, aging Oklahomans, long-term care, Medicaid, health care funding, provider reimbursement, rate increase, low-income seniors, senior services, integrated care, emergency measure, cosmetology, barbering

Transcript Highlights:

• Most developers automatically add that type of housing onto it without reservation, without qualm, because
• , to the point where with the ARPA funding and the federal funding, we had $2 billion in the cash reserve
• again now here, where we are at two years of a budget deficit, and we have $546 million in the cash reserve
• the great honor and responsibility of conducting international trade and holding their national reserves

Bills: LR509, LR510, LR511

Keywords: congratulations, Nebraska Sandhills Cowboy Hall of Fame, Deloris Marshall Adamson, recognition, achievement, service, retirement, Nebraska Legislature, public service, legislature, Nebraska, 956, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We will continue monitoring reserves and prepare for future fee adjustments. Thank you.
• However, because there are actually no funds right now in the reserves, these increases will not be implemented
• So we can't ask for one just... just because you want more reserves. Exactly. Okay.
• Just because you want more reserves. Exactly. Okay.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We will continue monitoring reserves and prepare for future fee adjustments. Thank you.
• However, because there are actually no funds right now in the reserves, these increases will not be implemented
• Just because you want more reserves. Exactly. Okay. Just because you want more reserves. Exactly.

Summary: The hearing began with testimony from Let California Kids Hear and supporters urging action on pediatric hearing aid coverage. Advocates said California has repeatedly failed to enact a workable solution over the past eight years and argued that children need early access to sound to support development. The proposal discussed would limit the coverage mandate to the large-group market, which advocates said would cover roughly 70% to 80% of affected children and avoid the exchange-related cost issue that contributed to prior vetoes. Supporters, including parents, audiologists, and children’s health groups, backed the proposal, and the chair expressed sympathy and support while noting hope for a federal solution for exchange plans. The Department of Finance then gave opening remarks about the state’s structural deficit and the need to balance new investments against projected out-year shortfalls. HCAI followed with a broad overview of its programs, including CalRx insulin and naloxone initiatives, reproductive health grants, the Office of Health Care Affordability, hospital seismic compliance, workforce programs, and the diaper access initiative. Members asked about geographic targeting of workforce funds, the behavioral health workforce pipeline, and the status of the 21st Century Nursing Initiative, which HCAI said had reverted funds. The committee also discussed a proposed transfer of the Data Exchange Framework and Office of the Patient Advocate to HCAI, new reporting on long-term care staffing and health coverage waiting periods, and a Behavioral Health Services Act workforce proposal that would use BHSA funds to support training, stipends, and technical assistance while offsetting $100 million in General Fund spending; members and LAO questioned the offset and asked for more detail, and the item was held open. HCAI also presented the Rural Health Transformation Program, explaining that California received $233.6 million in federal funds for the first year and had to revise its proposal so that $35 million in provider payments would be tied to specific transformative activities rather than general financial relief. The program will fund rural care model redesign, workforce development, and technology/infrastructure improvements, with grants to be rolled out on a tight timeline and subject to CMS approval. Members asked about the size of California’s award, the use of funds for maternity care, labor and delivery access, dialysis, tribal set-asides, and the role of a technical assistance contractor. The department said the program will use supply-and-demand workforce modeling to target funding and that all funds must be obligated by October 30. Finally, the Department of Managed Health Care outlined its budget and two major bill-related proposals: SB 41 on PBM reform and SB 306 on prior authorization transparency. DMHC said SB 41 would require PBM licensure, ban spread pricing, require rebate pass-through, and regulate pharmacy network practices, while SB 306 would require reporting on prior authorization and create a list of services exempt from prior authorization. DMHC requested additional positions and funding to implement both measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• When I started teaching 27 years ago, PSEO was reserved for high-achieving, highly motivated students
• c><00:19:55.520><c> ago,</c><00:19:56.200><c> PSEO</c><00:19:56.760><c> was</c><00:19:56.880><c> reserved
• </c><00:19:57.320><c> for</c> 27 years ago, PSEO was reserved for 27 years ago, PSEO was reserved for

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• holiday that we can all celebrate a new holiday that we can all celebrate without<00:11:48.880><c> reservation
• ><c> Thank</c><00:11:50.440><c> you</c><00:11:50.680><c> and</c><00:11:50.800><c> I</c> without reservation
• Thank you and I without reservation.
• for the announcements of Senate interest, especially if you get into any policy, because this is reserved

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• To that extent, you know that Northstar Promise Act will also see diminished reserves in the process.
• 50.080><c> uh</c> promise act will also see diminished uh promise act will also see diminished uh reserves
• </c> reserves um in the process. reserves um in the process.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Carlos Apache Tribe and having actually grown up on the reservation and graduated from public high school
• on the reservation, I do agree her logic is correct. ...reservation and graduated from public high school
• on the reservation.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Their question to me was, 'Well, don't you have reserved workforce?' No, it doesn't work that way.
• ><00:34:37.440><c> don't</c><00:34:37.599><c> you</c><00:34:37.679><c> have</c><00:34:37.839><c> reserved
• </c> was, 'Well, don't you have reserved was, 'Well, don't you have reserved workforce?'

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> So perhaps if we could reserve a response to that unless there's any more questions for these presenters
• So perhaps if we could reserve<00:39:28.320><c> a</c><00:39:28.560><c> response</c><00:39:28.960><c>
• to</c><00:39:29.200><c> that</c><00:39:29.520><c> unless</c> reserve a response to that unless reserve

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill had the exemption that public schools located within the reservation of a federally recognized
• located exemption that public schools located within<00:41:46.440><c> the</c><00:41:46.599><c> reservation
• </c><00:41:47.119><c> of</c><00:41:47.240><c> a</c><00:41:47.359><c> federally</c> within the reservation
• of a federally within the reservation of a federally recognized<00:41:48.359><c> tribal</c><00:41:48.720

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I have reservations in this legislation because of that factor, and I'm curious as to what my colleagues
• criteria criteria criteria so<00:02:35.599><c> I</c><00:02:35.800><c> have</c> so I have so I have reservations
• <00:02:38.239><c> in</c> reservations in reservations in this<00:02:40.360><c> legislation</c><00:02:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee hearing focused on House Bill 271, which would remove the exam requirement for licensure as a Licensed Social Work Associate (LSWA). The chair and several members expressed reservations about repealing a requirement that was only created in 2021, arguing that licensure should include some measurable demonstration of competency and that it is too early to judge whether the current standard is working. Members also raised concerns about the social work compact and the lack of uniformity across states, saying that changing the requirement now could undermine the standards New Hampshire agreed to at the outset. Testimony in support of the bill argued that the LSWA exam is a barrier for applicants because the level is intended for people without formal social work education, and the exam is the same national exam used for licensed social workers. The witness said there is only one LSWA in New Hampshire, so there is little pass/fail data, but noted that the Association of Social Worker Boards reported 78% of its membership favored retaining the exam. Supporters also emphasized that LSWA holders complete 30 hours of training and extensive supervised hours, and that they are not intended to work independently. Opponents or skeptics questioned whether the exam is the right measure for this role and asked for data showing actual failures or barriers. The discussion turned to possible alternatives, including a different exam, a practical skills assessment, or broader rulemaking authority for the board to set LSWA criteria. One suggestion was to amend the law to give the board authority to develop appropriate standards in rulemaking, rather than naming a specific exam in statute. Members also discussed whether the board could create a more suitable assessment and noted that the current law requires a national proctored examination approved by the board, but there is no national exam specifically for LSWA. No final vote or action was taken in the excerpt, and the subcommittee indicated it would gather more information, including the existing rule language, before moving the bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Or are these being built in code and forest areas? That's the other concern I have.
• That's great, but what happens when they build these manufacturing facilities in a non-code and forest

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Any reservations? Any no votes? 23 ayes. Thank you.

Bills: HB20, HB463, HB469, HB649, HB963, HB1163, HB1334, HB1481, HB1509, HB1511, HB1514, HB1515, HB1516, HB1518, HB1519, HB1523, HB1524, HB1546, HB1548, HB1550, HB1553, HB1573, HB1574, HB1576, HB1588, HB1591, HB1618, HB1619, HB1628, HB1642, HB1643, HB1656, HB1658, HB1664, HB1667, HB1679, HB1682, HB1688, HB1692, HB1696, HB1700, HB1705, HB1707, HB1710, HB1711, HB1713, HB1716, HB1718, HB1721, HB1728, HB1737, HB1740, HB1741, HB1749, HB1752, HB1753, HB1768, HB1782, HB1800, HB1804, HB1810, HB1823, HB1839, HB1842, HB1854, HB1858, HB1864, HB1870, HB1875, HB1881, HB1886, HB1888, HB1890, HB1894, HB1897, HB1898, HB1920, HB1929, HB1946, HB1959, HB1961, HB1962, HB1973, HB1974, HB2001, HB2005, HB2020, HB2021, HB2022, HB2023, HB2062, HB2078, HB2093, HB2095, HB2096, HB2097, HB2101, HB2137, HB2152, HB2207, HCR137, HCR181

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, eviction, housing access, tenant rights, judicial reporting, disassociation, disability, parking, travel placard, accessibility, mobility, small boat harbors, moorage, harbor permits, commercial use permit, commercial fishing

Transcript Highlights:

• I had my reservations going the direction with the MCO.

Summary: The Senate Health and Welfare Committee heard House Bill 777, which updates Idaho’s Controlled Substances Act. Testimony from the Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses explained that the bill adds several substances to Schedule I and two opioids to Schedule II, makes clarifying and cleanup changes, updates registration to biennial registration, and expands limited prescription drug monitoring program access for certain federal and tribal investigators. The bill was described as having no expected fiscal impact and no public opposition was reported. The committee voted to send HB 777 to the floor with a do pass recommendation. The committee also approved the minutes from February 11, 2026. It then took up House Concurrent Resolution 30, which seeks legislative authorization to hire an independent consultant to assist the Medicaid Legislative Review Panel as Idaho moves toward comprehensive managed care under House Bill 345. Senator Van Orden said the panel is facing a large volume of contract and RFP material tied to a roughly $5.5 billion Medicaid budget and needs help meeting an October deadline. Supporters argued an independent consultant would provide needed oversight on a complex contract, while opponents questioned whether the work would duplicate the Department of Health and Welfare’s consultant and raised concerns about added spending and the broader direction of Medicaid managed care. After debate, the committee voted by roll call 6-3 to send HCR 30 to the floor with a do pass recommendation. The meeting ended with notice that the committee would meet again the next day on additional bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• I had my reservations going the direction with the MCO.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 777, presented by Sen. Brandon Shippy and Nicky Chopski of the Division of Occupational and Professional Licenses. The bill updates Idaho’s Controlled Substances Act by adding several substances to Schedule I and two opiates to Schedule II, while making cleanup and clarification changes to the scheduling lists, registration provisions, and prescription drug monitoring program access. Chopski said the bill was developed with stakeholders, had been discussed in open meetings, had no public feedback, and would have no expected fiscal impact to the general fund. After no questions, the committee voted to send HB 777 to the Senate floor with a do pass recommendation. The committee then approved the minutes from February 11, 2026. The committee next heard House Concurrent Resolution 30 from Sen. Julie Van Orden regarding legislative oversight of Idaho’s move to comprehensive Medicaid managed care under House Bill 345. Van Orden explained that the Medicaid Legislative Review Panel is reviewing a large and complex request-for-proposal process for a contract tied to the state’s roughly $5.5 billion Medicaid budget, and the resolution would authorize hiring an independent consultant to assist the panel. Supporters said the consultant would help the legislature independently review the contract; opponents questioned whether the role would duplicate the Department of Health and Welfare’s consultant and raised concerns about cost and the broader direction of Medicaid policy. The committee voted 6-3 to send HCR 30 to the floor with a due pass recommendation, then adjourned after noting a meeting scheduled for the next day.