Transcript Highlights:

• As you said, there's a contract.
• . contract. contract.
• accountability built into the contract. accountability built into the contract.
• As you said, there's a contract.
• <00:29:18.880> for school districts already contract for school districts already contract

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Education met with a quorum, approved the August 20, 2025 minutes, and then heard a discussion tied to Constitution Day and Kentucky’s constitutional duty to provide an efficient system of common schools. Chairman James Tipton reviewed the history of Kentucky’s model laboratory schools, postsecondary academy programs such as Gatton and Craft, magnet schools, virtual learning, and computer science opportunities, arguing that Kentucky has long expanded educational opportunity through different school models. He described model schools and academy programs as hybrid or innovative approaches that serve specialized student needs and noted that some of these programs receive state appropriations and, in some cases, tuition. Senator Steve West then gave a retrospective on school choice in Kentucky, beginning with the 2017 charter school law and explaining that Kentucky’s charter framework was designed as public-only to comply with the state constitution. He said charter schools have remained largely dormant in Kentucky and used that as context for Senate Bill 207, the School Innovation Act, which he said was modeled on a South Carolina approach. Under SB 207, a local school board can contract with a third-party entity to manage an existing school, receive SEEK funding, and seek waivers from certain state regulations in order to innovate, while retaining limits on items such as school safety and attendance rules. Members asked about how the new model differs from charter schools, whether schools could cherry-pick students, and whether teachers would remain district employees. West and Tipton said the bill is intended to keep the school within the public system, with the local district initiating the process and maintaining accountability through a time-limited contract that can be ended if the school fails to perform. They emphasized that the school would serve the existing student population rather than select students, and that teachers would remain district employees with their pensions and related contributions unchanged. Representative Brown raised concerns that exceptions and charters could leave lower-income children behind, while West responded that the bill is meant to expand choice for families who otherwise lack access and cited examples from other states where outside management and parental involvement helped turn around low-performing schools. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• The dollar amounts that we have invested in our contracts.
• So good active contract management. So good active contract management.
• that we work with the contracts division to do.
• that we work with the contracts division to do.
• on our providers through our contracted on our providers through our contracted or<00:44:34.839>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee convened an informational Division 3 Finance hearing focused on DHHS programmatic issues rather than budget line items. The chair emphasized that members should avoid questions requiring dollar figures and noted that the coming budget cycle would likely be difficult because revenues are expected to be tighter. Commissioner Lori Weaver said the department wanted to use the session to explain its functions at a high level, with more detailed presentations to follow, and to collect questions for later responses. Weaver outlined DHHS’s mission of supporting optimal health for state residents and described the department’s three main responsibilities: protection and prevention, client service delivery, and regulatory oversight. She said DHHS has eight divisions, a $3.6 billion total budget, about $1.217 billion in general funds, roughly a quarter of state positions, and personnel costs that are less than 11% of the budget. She also noted a recent hiring freeze, explained that the department did not request new positions except where required by law, and said vacancy rates had improved from 22% to 14% over the last two years but could rise again because of attrition and the hiring freeze. Weaver and CFO Nathan White then discussed why the DHHS budget is complex, explaining that it is built from multiple funding sources and is shaped by assumptions made months before the fiscal year begins, actual service demand, and cost allocation rules used to draw down federal funds. White highlighted maintenance-of-effort requirements, including TANF, where state spending is needed to secure federal matching funds and shortfalls can trigger penalties. At the committee’s request, DHHS agreed to provide a simplified historical accounting of TANF contributions to show how the match is assembled across positions, contracts, and other factors. The department also reviewed its roadmap, which Weaver described as a framework developed with staff and stakeholders around three themes: culture, community, and customer service. She highlighted priorities such as Mission Zero to end emergency department boarding, expanding access to community-based and residential behavioral health services, reducing reliance on institutional care, improving contract management with nonprofit and provider partners, using data dashboards to guide decisions, and investing in workforce stability and culture. No votes were taken; the main action was DHHS’s commitment to provide additional follow-up materials, including the TANF contribution breakdown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Contracting with private vendors to complete the standard...
• And so they contract these services out.
• When DOT contracts with a When DOT contracts with a construction company to repave a road, right?
• contract.
• And this two-year contract, or whatever it is, or long-term contract, is pretty high considering the

Keywords: 970, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the rest are independent contracts with IC.
• Well, no, we did not have a contract at that location.
• It was completely empty to expedite their contract.
• It was originally a US Marshal contract, and then it dovetailed into an ICE contract, but we have nothing
• We don't, we don't have a contract. Monitor out there.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Humana began the new statewide contract.
• Everyone has a different contract with all of the different plans.
• Do you feel is that something you can contract for?
• Reports required is contract deliverables, annual Emmy monitoring by the department's contract oversight
• The contract also strengthens the grievous resolution process.

Transcript Highlights:

• In the near term, this could include common-sense reforms to state grant making and contracting with
• flexibility in emergencies for the many, many grants and contracts that nonprofits... ...and contract
• We had to stop operating this contract as the payments had been delayed.
• You're operating a contract for two or three months and not being paid.
• Per the contract, you're supposed to be paid after the work is done.

Summary: The joint Senate and Assembly select committee hearing focused on the challenges facing California nonprofits in 2025 and possible state responses. Opening remarks emphasized the sector’s size and importance, the impact of federal funding disruptions and tax policy changes, and the need for stronger public-private partnerships, especially in disaster response and recovery. Witnesses from community foundations, food banks, Cal OES, long-term recovery groups, CalNonprofits, and nonprofit finance organizations described funding uncertainty, delayed reimbursements, reduced indirect cost coverage, staffing strain, and the effects of climate disasters and immigration-related fear on service delivery. Testimony highlighted several policy ideas, including advance payments for state grants and contracts, prompt payment standards, sustainable indirect cost rates, contract flexibility in emergencies, streamlined registration and reporting, and a possible new Office of Nonprofit Empowerment to serve as a central point of contact and coordination within state government. Speakers also described how nonprofits and VOAD networks support wildfire response and long-term recovery, but noted that recovery groups often lack stable operating funding even when they are recognized as best practice. A food bank leader described federal food aid cuts and disruptions to deliveries, while other witnesses stressed that nonprofits are increasingly forced to use reserves, loans, or service reductions to manage cash flow gaps. Committee members generally expressed support for the sector and asked how the state could better partner with nonprofits during both disasters and budget crises. Several members raised the possibility of incremental steps if full legislative changes are not immediately feasible, and witnesses suggested pilots, better sharing of best practices, and stronger state leadership on payment timelines. Public commenters echoed the need for better contracting practices, support for community-based organizations, and attention to nonprofit worker compensation and protections. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the hearing, which concluded with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to repeat that: eight years for a new contract.
• But to reiterate, this bill does not stop contracting out.
• It does not limit employers' ability to contract out.
• These issues with contracting out physicians, It was 46%.
• Contracting out was an issue back then. It remains an issue.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement met for its first hearing of the session, adopted committee rules, and heard several labor-related bills. The chair reviewed hearing procedures, including limits on testimony and expectations for orderly conduct. Members then took up measures affecting public employee bargaining, contracting, confidentiality, school employee benefits, pay stub information, and state correctional health staffing. AB 672 would require public employers to notify PERB when filing court actions involving statutes PERB administers and allow PERB to intervene; it drew support from SEIU, AFSCME, school employees, labor groups, and no opposition, and was passed out of committee. AB 283 would move IHSS bargaining from the county to the state level; providers and recipients testified about low wages, long delays in bargaining, and care access concerns, while counties and public authorities raised cost, scope, and implementation issues. The bill passed 7-0 after members discussed family care worker concerns and the author said he would continue working on the issue. AB 339 would require local governments to give unions 120 days’ notice before contracting out bargaining-unit work. Labor supporters said the bill would make existing meet-and-confer rights meaningful and protect jobs, while counties, cities, special districts, chambers of commerce, and staffing groups argued it would burden local agencies and interfere with existing MMBA procedures. The committee also heard AB 340, which would make communications between employees and union representatives confidential for PERB purposes; supporters said it codified existing case law, while school administrators, special districts, counties, and business groups warned it could hinder investigations. AB 378 would extend the classified school employees summer assistance program to JPA employees, and AB 374 would require more detailed pay stubs for classified school employees; both had labor support and some education-sector opposition over implementation and cost concerns, and both advanced. AB 393 would require cost analyses before contracting out physician work at CDCR and the Department of State Hospitals; supporters argued the state was overpaying contractors amid high vacancy rates, and the bill also advanced. At the end of the hearing, the committee recorded final votes showing AB 283, AB 340, AB 374, AB 378, AB 393, and AB 672 all passing out of committee, while AB 339 remained on hold with a 4-0 vote and some members not voting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Has she repudiated the contract there?
• I met him through our contracting process. Thank you. I met him through our contracting process.
• This is another contract between AOC and AEJG. This is another contract between AOC and AEJG.
• We made a deal to do a contract amendment that encapsulated the understanding. ...to a contract amendment
• to the contract between AOC and AEJG.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The hearing concerned a Legislative Ethics Board complaint against Representative Tara Simmons in Washington State OAH Docket 401-645. The judge outlined the process, the two issues on appeal—whether Simmons violated RCW 42.52.020 and RCW 42.52.070, and, if so, what penalty should apply—and admitted a number of exhibits by stipulation or prior ruling, while taking one exhibit under advisement pending an offer of proof. The board also moved to sequester witnesses, which was granted, and the judge deferred ruling on a motion to exclude three defense witnesses until after hearing the board staff’s case. Opening statements followed, with staff alleging Simmons used her position to benefit an outside organization and to secure special privileges, and the defense arguing the conduct was lawful, technical in nature, and consistent with prior ethics guidance. Board staff then called Kimberly Gordon, an attorney and founding board member/treasurer of American Equity and Justice Group (AEJG), as its first witness. Gordon testified that AEJG used data dashboards to make justice-system data more accessible, received state proviso funding sponsored by Simmons, and also received two donations from Simmons—$10,000 and $40,000. She said the first donation was intended to help hire Antoine Coleman, whom Simmons had recommended and who was later identified as Simmons’s romantic partner, and that AEJG returned the $10,000 and declined the $40,000 after concluding there was a potential conflict of interest. Gordon also testified that AEJG believed Simmons’s involvement in the organization and her communications about Coleman created ethical concerns. Gordon further testified about a second proviso intended to expand AEJG’s work into education data and its subcontract with Equity in Education Coalition (EEC). She said EEC did not perform the expected deliverables, prompting repeated communications with the Administrative Office of the Courts and a meeting involving Chris Stanley, where AEJG raised concerns that EEC was not complying and that Simmons had intervened in the dispute. According to Gordon, Stanley ultimately directed the parties to rewrite the subcontract and continue, but AEJG later moved forward largely without EEC’s assistance. The board staff introduced AEJG’s complaint and related timeline exhibits during her testimony. After direct examination, the hearing recessed for lunch, and cross-examination by Simmons’s counsel began when the hearing resumed.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have Senator Van. >> So why are we removing legal contracts from contract review?
• for legal service contracts.
• does not come before contract review. I does not come before contract review.
• contracts through aidt through contract contracts through aidt through contract review?
• exception for legal service contracts. exception for legal service contracts.

Bills: HB303, SB360, SB325, HB477, SB329, HB381, SB330

Keywords: 923, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Members will now take up HB 427, Public Adjuster Contracts, by Rep. Melo.
• The public adjuster knocks on the door and this man signs a contract with the public adjuster.
• The guardian finds out after the fact that you have to be able to terminate the contract.
• The public adjuster knocks on 395 the door and this 396 man signs a contract signs, the contract to the
• You work with a client and enter into a contract.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and heard several insurance and banking bills. HB 1399, relating to property insurance affiliates, would increase Office of Insurance Regulation oversight of transactions between property insurers and affiliates, require fair-and-reasonable documentation, review of dividends and asset pledges, contract termination clauses, affiliate registration, and penalties for violations. Members from both parties generally supported the goal of transparency and accountability, though some raised concerns about costs and whether the bill would actually return money to insureds. The bill was reported favorably. HB 427, on public adjuster contracts, would allow vulnerable adults or their legal representatives to rescind public adjuster contracts without penalty, reflecting the sponsor’s personal concerns about protecting elderly and otherwise vulnerable family members from predatory contracting. Public testimony included support from several industry and elder-law groups, while the public adjuster association warned the bill could unfairly target one profession and urged broader language. Members debated whether the bill should be expanded to cover other solicitations and whether legal representatives should be treated differently, but the bill was ultimately reported favorably. The committee also approved HB 893, which aligns bank handling of law-firm trust accounts with Florida Supreme Court rules and supports legal aid funding, and HB 767, a transparency bill requiring insurers to provide consumers with plain-language explanations of rate increases and related factors. Members emphasized consumer education and clearer disclosures, and HB 767 passed 2-0. Later, HB 381, the Office of Financial Regulation agency bill, was amended and reported favorably; it updates financial regulation provisions including cybersecurity-related requirements, money services business rules, credit union and financial institution provisions, and fee timing. HB 777, a related public-records bill protecting nonpublic personal information submitted to OFR, was also heard and moved forward without opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• And was there a formal written contract for that? There was a formal written contract.
• I got A chance to read the contract. I'm really uncomfortable with what the contract now says.
• There's an employment contract.
• -E.C. contract dispute.
• -E.C. contract dispute.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The hearing resumed on day two of the Legislative Ethics Board fact-finding matter involving Representative Tara Simmons. After opening remarks and confirmation that board members had not engaged in outside research or ex parte communications, Simmons’s counsel moved to dismiss two allegations at the close of the board staff’s case: that Simmons pressured the Administrative Office of the Courts to alter a contract in favor of her employer, and that she improperly combined a legislative proviso for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and private conduct were intertwined and that the board had enough evidence to require a defense. After deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss and proceeded to hear defense testimony. The first defense witness, Sharon Navas, testified that she met Simmons through advocacy work, later hired her at the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), and maintained written employment policies intended to separate Simmons’s legislative role from her work for EEC. Navas said Simmons was never compensated for lobbying or legislative acts, that EEC paid her from unrestricted funds, and that Simmons did not work on the AEJG dashboard project or participate in the contract dispute with Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley. Navas described the proviso request and later contract issues as separate from Simmons’s legislative duties, and said she continued to pay invoices while the project was being completed. Simmons then testified about her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics advice before taking outside employment or pursuing provisos. She said she repeatedly consulted House ethics counsel and reviewed prior board decisions to ensure her outside work and legislative actions were separated. Simmons described her relationship with Anthony Powers, the dashboard project, the proviso process, and her understanding that the work was distinct from her legislative role. The hearing paused for lunch after part of Simmons’s direct examination, with testimony set to continue after the break.

Transcript Highlights:

• amount which may be increased or decreased through contract amendments and supplementary contracts.
• contract to the contractor to ensure that the proper performance of the contract, provided that the
• to read as follows any public contract to read as follows any public contract may<00:20:38.120><
• /c><00:20:44.480> to under the contract to the contractor to under the contract to the contractor
• any contract contract including any contract Amendment<00:21:29.159> or<00:21:29.360> supplementary

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee met for joint decision-making on several measures related to elections, telework, procurement, hiring, public records, and public meetings. On Senate Bill 444, testimony was largely opposed or in comment, and the chairs said the bill raised real issues that needed more time; they deferred it for the year. Senate Bill 1091 on telework and space allocation drew support and discussion about DAGS’ role versus the Department of Human Resources; the committee agreed to amend it in a Senate Draft 1 to remove reference to OE, add a DAGS management analyst position, change “positions” to “allocations,” limit the assessment to executive branch departments in DAGS-managed or DAGS-leased facilities, and add a defective date, then passed it with amendments. Senate Bill 1057 on apprenticeship-related bid incentives received mixed testimony, including support from labor and opposition from some contractor groups, and was passed as a Senate Draft 1 with technical amendments and a defective date. Senate Bill 1065 on skills-based hiring, which would bar bachelor’s degree requirements for most state jobs with exemptions, had support from the Comptroller and outside groups and was passed with technical amendments and a defective date. The committee also took up several procurement and accountability measures. Senate Bill 92 on emergency medical response/defibrillators was deferred indefinitely because a pilot project is already underway in the Capitol building and the committee wants to use that information before expanding. Senate Bill 1175 on a past-performance procurement database was amended to add general fund appropriations and committee-report language about funding needs, then passed. Senate Bill 1587 on retainage was heavily amended to define total project budget, revise retainage language, leave key percentage and day limits blank for further review, limit application to contracts executed after January 1, 2026, and add a defective date; it passed as amended. Senate Bill 1543 on government accountability was amended to incorporate procurement officer changes and add language ensuring inherent government functions are not delegated to contractors, then passed. Senate Bill 1255 on government records was amended to clarify that records used in performing a government function are public records subject to UIPA, add contractor recordkeeping/access requirements, protect certain confidential contract information, and add a defective date; it passed. Additional measures were either deferred or advanced with amendments. Senate Bill 1513 on appropriations was deferred to a time certain on February 11. Senate Bill 1616 on care centers was converted into a feasibility study and passed with a defective date. Senate Bill 74 on state construction projects was deferred indefinitely due to concerns it could slow projects and duplicate another measure. Senate Bill 125 on state organizations and administrations was amended to codify Administrative Directive 19-02, with a note about a possible title issue, and passed. Senate Bill 786 on government records was deferred to February 11 for further amendment work. Senate Bill 1611 on government positions was amended by removing section two and passed. Senate Bill 1637 was deferred for the year after testimony indicated the action could already be done. Senate Bill 1651 on public meetings was amended to require board packets by the third business day before a meeting, remove the word “full,” and adjust notice language, then passed. Senate Bill 1617 on public meetings was deferred because the Office of Information Practices reported no complaints. Senate Bill 1253 on boards and commissions was deferred indefinitely due to no testimony. Senate Bill 1031 on advisory referendums was deferred to February 11 for possible amendments. Senate Bill 1306 on a procurement automation special fund was amended to align procurement statutes and add the School Facilities Authority executive director as a chief procurement officer, then passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• When their five-year contract ran out, they did not renew those contracts.
• When their five-year contract ran out, they did not renew those contracts.
• When their five-year contract ran out, they did not renew those contracts.
• When their five-year contract ran out, they did not renew those contracts.
• When their five-year contract ran out, they did not renew those contracts.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Primary and Secondary Education Committee met and first considered Senate Concurrent Resolution 43, a proposal tied to the Southern Regional Education Board’s crisis recovery network. Senator West and Dr. Puit explained that, for an additional $10,000 in dues, Kentucky would help create a network of 40 trained counselors in each of the 16 Southern states to provide post-crisis stabilization and psychological first aid after events such as the Marshall County shooting. They emphasized that the effort would be complementary to local and state response, would run through the school district, would not replace therapeutic services, and would allow districts to coordinate parent notifications and other protocols as usual. Members asked about parent involvement and whether pastoral counselors could participate; the presenters said local districts would remain in charge and that pastors could be included if properly credentialed. The committee then voted, and SCR 43 passed with the expression of opinion that it should pass. The committee next took up Senate Bill 207, the School of Innovation Act, with a committee substitute. Senator West described the bill as creating an optional path for districts to contract with an outside education service provider for a three-year school-of-innovation model, aimed at turning around low-performing schools or supporting other schools that want to innovate. He said the model would preserve core district functions such as transportation, facilities, and SEEK funding, while allowing waivers from certain statutes and regulations inside the school building. The committee substitute also added a high-quality instructional materials component, creating a vendor-supported repository of vetted instructional materials that KDE would still control, with testing data used to evaluate whether the materials were improving outcomes. Members questioned how the proposal differed from existing district-of-innovation law and what safeguards would exist for students. Senator West said the bill would repeal the unused district-of-innovation framework and replace it with a clearer process and guardrails, including KDE oversight, attendance rules, and authority to shut down a school arrangement for financial malfeasance. He also said the model could work with local partners, including superintendents’ associations, and could be used by magnet or other schools, not only low-performing ones. The discussion also touched on whether the bill would allow more flexibility in choosing third-party providers and whether it could support longer-term recovery and even philanthropy in schools. The transcript ends during the discussion of SB 207, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• What is the value of that contract?
• <01:29:38.800> for people yeah so we have a contract for people yeah so we have a contract
• Services that is um we have contracts Services that is um we have contracts for<01:37:00.679>
• This is a general question on contracts: are these typically multi-year contracts or one-year contracts
• We use it in about 30 contracts.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The House Finance Committee’s Division 3 held a public work session on the Behavioral Health budget on February 27, 2025. The chair opened by explaining the schedule, materials, and deadlines for the budget process, and noted there would be no motions or votes in the division that day. Division of Behavioral Health Director Ktia Fox and DHHS CFO Nathan White then walked the committee through the division’s mission, structure, and budget materials, describing the division’s four bureaus: Mental Health Services, Children’s Behavioral Health, Drug and Alcohol Services, and Homeless Services, along with the policy unit. They emphasized the division’s role in oversight, technical assistance, quality assurance, contracting, and the continuum of care from prevention and early intervention through crisis and residential services. Much of the discussion focused on major programs and funding lines, including the 988 Lifeline contract with Headrest, a technical assistance contract with UNH, Medicaid pass-through payments to New Hampshire Hospital and Glencliff, crisis response services, cold-weather homeless responses, housing supports, and the children’s system of care. Members asked about the UNH contract, the 988 program, crisis stabilization centers, and the peer certification program; Fox explained that the peer certification is a training-and-credentialing pathway for people with lived experience to enter community-based behavioral health work, not a volunteer program. The committee also discussed the “Choose Love” program, which Fox said was created after the Sandy Hook tragedy to build resilience and strength-based emotional regulation in schools and communities. On the children’s side, Fox described the system of care account as the place where many contracted services are budgeted, including community mental health centers, care management entities, rapid response services, and residential programs. Members asked about temporary staffing, and Fox said roughly $500,000 in temporary staff costs shown in the current year would not be spent next year because the money came from a nonlapsing appropriation in HB 1573 for oversight of children’s residential services. She also said provider rate increases were a prioritized need but were not funded in the governor’s current budget, and that the Children’s Behavioral Health Resource Center was not funded, resulting in about a $1 million reduction. The session ended while the division was still moving through the children’s behavioral health slides, including questions about the Fast Forward high-fidelity wraparound program and medication management.

Transcript Highlights:

• of the contracting licensing board. of the contracting licensing board.
• , about the length of the contract, about the length of the contract, failure<00:37:54.400> to
• >> There's no there's no private contract >> There's no there's no private contract
• portion of our services and contracts. portion of our services and contracts.
• ><01:07:34.960> um know there are many contracts that um know there are many contracts that um

Bills: HB1946, HB1515, HB1514, HB1648, HB1644, HB1619, HB1571, HB1810, HB2475, HB1645, HB2301, HB1889, HB1840

Keywords: time shares, registration, renewal, real estate, Hawaii, Director of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, workers' compensation, functional capacity examination, occupational therapy, physical therapy, employer responsibilities, injured workers, medical stabilization, vocational rehabilitation, injury recovery, employment services, return to work, nonprescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, healthcare providers

Summary: The committee on Consumer Protection and Commerce met on February 26, 2026, and heard several bills, mostly in the areas of workers’ compensation and consumer protection. HB 1946 HD1 on timeshare registration renewal drew support from DCCA’s timeshare program and major industry groups including Hilton Grand Vacations, the American Resort Development Association, and Marriott Vacations Worldwide, with no opposition noted. HB 1515 HD1, which would allow an attending physician to request a functional capacity examination without employer permission, was supported by DLIR and the Department of Human Resources Development and had no other in-person testimony; the bill was then moved on without questions. The committee spent substantial time on HB 1514 HD1, which would streamline workers’ compensation vocational rehabilitation by clarifying provider selection and requiring vocational plans within 90 days. DLIR supported the intent but asked for amendments, saying the 90-day deadline was too rigid given case-by-case complexity, limited staffing, and the need for coordination among injured workers, employers, and counselors; members discussed possible extensions and whether a 120-day timeline or other flexibility would be better. Testimony on the bill included one individual in support and seven in opposition. HB 1648 HD1, concerning workers’ compensation and physician dispensing of non-prescription drugs, drew support from DHRD and comments from DLIR and industry witnesses. DLIR said the bill should be narrowed so it does not restrict medically necessary over-the-counter medications or oral guidance from providers, while Aloha Billing Company and Solera Integrated Medical Solutions urged tighter limits on physician dispensing and raised concerns about pricing abuse through average wholesale price. Members discussed clarifying the bill’s language so it targets written prescriptions rather than oral advice. HB 1644 HD1, requiring a standardized disclosure form for residential solar contracts, received support from the Hawaii Solar Energy Association and Kauaʻi Island Utility Cooperative, while DCCA’s Office of Consumer Protection supported the consumer-protection goal but proposed stronger remedies, including a three-day cancellation right, voidability for missing disclosures, and possible lender liability; members questioned how those remedies should apply to lenders, and no vote was taken on the measures in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• They are not the only onerous contracts.
• , but there's no restrictions around the price of a particular contract.
• , but there's no restrictions around the price of a particular contract.
• , but there's no restrictions around the price of a particular contract.
• , but there's no restrictions around the price of a particular contract.

Bills: HF4456, HF4544, HF3698

Keywords: data broker, data brokerage, consumer privacy, personal data, data privacy, Minnesota attorney general, registration, public registry, civil penalties, enforcement, special revenue fund, privacy rights, data sales, data collection, consumer protection, chapter 325M, controller, processor, data broker registry, transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• Restrictions on this contract pharmacy use.
• from that contract pharmacy and from their in-house.
• us the data from the contract pharmacy.
• So we contract with pharmacies.
• Contract pharmacies is a new development since 2010.

Transcript Highlights:

• A concessions contract may be entered by negotiation of adequate compensation.
• It's an adhesive contract. And the process that we added, We have no choice.
• It's an adhesive contract.
• Because, you know, when a state employee clicks through, that's a contract.
• It's an adhesive contract, but it's still a contract.

Summary: The task force first approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, including a correction removing language that suggested the auditor’s office would contract with a security vendor. Members then moved to a bill draft on concessions (LC 27.0161.00000), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, clarify that proceeds go to the entity’s operating fund or general fund, and make other technical updates. OMB explained the draft and answered questions about scope, fragmentation, vendor restrictions, school districts, and whether concession proceeds could be directed to nonprofits; OMB said the draft could be refined further, including clarifying covered entities and contract length. No vote was taken on the draft during the discussion. OMB also reported on other survey items. It said a proposal to broadly allow agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering/land surveying vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is working well for the agencies that already have it. On legal notices, OMB said it has been working with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernization, including an ADA-compliant online notice system and possible statutory updates to reflect changing technology and notice definitions. On click-through agreements for routine IT purchases, OMB and the Attorney General’s office said policy clarification—not statutory change—was enough, and the $20,000 threshold was intended to distinguish low-dollar adhesive contracts from purchases where terms can be negotiated. The committee also heard that OMB and the Center for Distance Education had resolved questions about alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures through existing policy, so no statutory changes were needed there. North Dakota University System representatives gave a brief update on ongoing collaboration with OMB on statutory efficiency ideas, including concessions and surplus property. Finally, the task force discussed a draft on requirements for new or expanded spending programs, which would require agencies to identify purpose, expected benefits, alternatives, success measures, and full implementation costs, and would require reporting on outcomes over time. Members debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how to use the new program evaluators, whether real-time dashboards should be used, and how to choose which programs to evaluate; staff from Legislative Council said they would work with OMB and the auditor’s office to revise the draft and process.

Transcript Highlights:

• response to um what the Contracting response to um what the Contracting Provisions<01:04:04.039>
• with government entities, do take some time to contract.
• <01:19:07.760> this been talking about Contracting this been talking about Contracting this
• <01:21:01.679> back to wait for them to get a contract back to wait for them to get a contract
• to us I don't think this is a contract to us I don't think this is a contract that<01:21:04.000>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• audit rights based on however the contract is laid out.
• It prohibits PBMs from imposing discriminatory contract terms...
• Today, only 9 cents of every dollar of savings comes from our contract pharmacies.
• Other states already require manufacturers to honor contract pharmacy arrangements.
• However, wholesale distributors operate under contract with manufacturers.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a lengthy hearing on a large docket of pharmacy and drug-pricing bills, with most testimony focused on PBM reform, 340B drug discount program protections, specialty medication access, and medication adherence. Chair James Murphy and Senator Paul Feeney opened the hearing and took testimony from legislators, patient advocates, pharmacists, health center leaders, industry representatives, and policy groups. Several speakers described delays, denials, high out-of-pocket costs, and pharmacy closures tied to PBM practices, while others emphasized the importance of community health centers and independent pharmacies in serving patients. On the 340B program, supporters including Senator Eldridge, Senator Payano, Community Care Cooperative, Fenway Health, the Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers, and several community health center leaders argued that bills such as H. 1107 and S. 819 would stop discriminatory PBM and manufacturer practices, preserve contract pharmacy access, and protect safety-net providers that say they reinvest savings into care, pharmacy expansion, interpreter services, behavioral health, and other services. Opponents including PhRMA, the Community Liver Alliance, and a public policy analyst argued the program lacks transparency and accountability, has grown beyond its original purpose, and may benefit large hospitals and for-profit entities more than low-income patients. They urged more reporting and oversight rather than expanding protections. On PBM reform, testimony supported bills including H. 1157, H. 1234, S. 724, S. 831, and related measures that would require rebate pass-through, ban spread pricing, limit steering to PBM-owned pharmacies, and improve reimbursement for community pharmacies. Independent pharmacists and patients said current PBM practices raise costs, create administrative burdens, and threaten access to local pharmacies. PCMA, representing PBMs, opposed the reforms, arguing PBMs lower costs, that plan sponsors choose to contract with them, and that the Health Policy Commission and CHIA should complete their ongoing study before new mandates are adopted. The committee also heard support for H. 1322 and S. 734 on specialty medications, and for H. 781 and H. 1305 on medication synchronization to improve adherence. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.