Transcript Highlights:

• what may be I think a record Surplus what may be I think a record Surplus right<04:41:30.840>
• <04:42:05.560> same largest sources of revenue Surplus same largest sources of revenue Surplus
• variety and a much smaller Surplus variety and a much smaller Surplus overall<04:42:10.160> right
• <04:43:04.798> in been a surplus in been a surplus in 24<04:43:06.638> so<04:43:06.840
• out in more detail interest on surplus out in more detail interest on surplus funds<04:43:21.920

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting was a Ways and Means briefing opened by the vice chair, who introduced Jason Wong of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston to discuss the national and regional economy. Wong focused on inflation, asking why it had fallen from about 9% in 2022 to the 2%–3% range, and what that meant for monetary policy and the risk of an economic downturn. He said the Fed’s target is 2%, noted that recent PCE inflation was about 2.4% and core PCE about 2.7%, and described the ongoing debate over whether interest rates should stay tight or be lowered further to protect the labor market. Wong explained that the improvement in inflation has been driven largely by goods prices, especially durable goods such as cars, appliances, and furniture, as well as non-durable goods like food. He said supply-chain disruptions during the pandemic caused major price spikes in 2022, but those pressures have eased and many goods prices are now at or below the Fed’s target. He also referenced the New York Fed’s Global Supply Chain Pressure Index, saying it showed extreme pandemic-era disruptions that have since receded. The main remaining inflation problem, he said, is in services, especially housing. Wong broke services into rent of shelter and all other services, explaining that shelter is a large share of household budgets and that housing inflation has a lag because rent measures often reflect older lease terms rather than current market rents. He said monthly Zillow data suggest market rents have cooled and may eventually feed through to official inflation measures. Members asked several questions about the chart’s time scale, the treatment of real estate, property taxes, and utilities, and Wong clarified that housing costs are counted in services and that the slides would be shared digitally. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have a question on the decamp process of surplus in property that we'll send over.
• prop, ...about two things: just weedy questions on the decam surplus property process and how that's
• address these massive challenges without sacrificing other priorities due to the availability of surplus
• address these massive challenges without sacrificing other priorities due to the availability of surplus
• land available or surplus buildings available on some of these campuses.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Higher Education held its second public hearing of the 194th General Court on capital investments in higher education, focusing primarily on H.54, the Bright Act, along with H.1426/S.949 on green and healthy public colleges and universities and deferred maintenance, and H.1424 on capital investment in Gateway Cities. Chairs and administration officials framed the hearing as a response to aging campus infrastructure, climate goals, workforce needs, and federal pressures on higher education, and explained that testimony would be taken from pre-registered speakers in person and virtually. University of Massachusetts leaders strongly supported the Bright Act, describing large deferred maintenance backlogs, aging buildings, and the need to decarbonize campuses while modernizing research and teaching facilities. UMass officials said the bill would help keep tuition and fees lower by reducing the need for campuses to finance capital work themselves, and argued that the investments would improve competitiveness, support research, and create construction jobs. Governor Healey, Lieutenant Governor Driscoll, Secretary of Education Tuttweiler, and Secretary of Administration and Finance Gorzkowicz also backed the bill, saying it would leverage Fair Share surtax revenues for a proposed $2.5 billion in campus investments plus additional targeted grants, and that it would support affordability, economic growth, and climate resilience. Committee members asked about the balance between deferred maintenance and decarbonization, the role of grant programs versus direct spending, the impact on tuition and fees, and how the plan would help campuses respond to federal cuts such as NIH and NSF funding. Administration officials said the proposal was designed to be phased in quickly, with some projects ready to start immediately and others taking longer, and that the grant programs would be structured to include all campuses equitably. They also said the plan would build on an existing financing model similar to the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and could help campuses avoid future tuition increases tied to capital costs. Additional testimony came from MassBay Community College, where President David Podell and recent nursing graduate Deanna Cavazos described the benefits of a new Framingham campus building and said community colleges need modern labs, better planning capacity, and deferred maintenance support to serve the enrollment growth from MassReconnect and MassEducate. State university leaders, including President Mary Grant, President Linda Thompson, and President John Keenan, said their campuses face outdated classrooms, insufficient electrical capacity, and aging facilities, and urged passage of the Bright Act as a long-overdue investment in student success and workforce preparation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the reason I say that is because we're acting like this is surplus money.
• By definition, a surplus is what remains when your needs and obligations have been met.
• So then we're going to turn around and say to them, "Sorry, we have all this surplus money, but we're
• So I think using the word "surplus" by Dr. Templin was really the right way to go.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee heard three measures focused on state finances. SB 1906 by Senator Brodeur would add a ninth element to the state debt reduction strategy report and create a program to transfer $250 million annually from the General Revenue Fund to accelerate retirement of outstanding state debt, while exempting the Department of Transportation and Florida Turnpike Enterprise. Members questioned the fiscal tradeoffs and flexibility, but the bill was supported in debate and reported favorably. The committee then considered SJR 1908 by Chair Hooper, which would amend the Constitution to raise the Budget Stabilization Fund cap from 10% to 25% of general revenue collections, require $750 million annual deposits until the cap is reached, and allow withdrawals for critical state needs by separate bill with a two-thirds vote, while keeping existing rules for emergencies and revenue shortfalls. Testimony and debate centered on whether Florida already has sufficient reserves, how “critical state need” would be defined, and whether the new requirement would reduce flexibility during recessions or federal funding cuts. Despite opposition from advocacy groups and several senators, the resolution was reported favorably. Finally, the committee took up HB 7031 as the vehicle for the tax package and adopted a delete-everything amendment to place it in the proper posture for conference. As amended, the bill was described as reducing the state sales tax by 0.75%, lowering the commercial rent tax from 2% to 1.25%, eliminating the business rent tax, and creating permanent sales tax exemptions while preserving sales tax holidays. The amended bill was reported favorably, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• TRACKING SYSTEM CONTAINS LAND DATA SUCH AS WHAT IS OWNED, LEASED, DISPOSED, OTHERWISE OCCUPIED, AND SURPLUS
• FACILITY INVENTORY PROVIDES A VIEW OF THE ENTIRE STATE TO SEE OWNED LANDS AND LANDS DESIGNATED AS SURPLUS
• THIS COMPONENT ALSO PROVIDES FACILITY LEASE INFORMATION AND SURPLUS PROPERTY DATA FOR STATE LANDS AND
• AND PROVIDES DETAILS ON FACILITY LEASES AND SURPLUS PROPERTY DATA FOR BOTH.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• one of the things that people don't realize, a couple years ago, during the period when we had a surplus
• where<00:14:46.639> we<00:14:46.800> had<00:14:47.440> a<00:14:47.720> surplus
• ,<00:14:48.720> we span of time where we had a surplus, we span of time where we had a surplus
• /c><00:14:50.720> that put a ton of money, a ton of that put a ton of money, a ton of that surplus
• went into building three new surplus went into building three new veterans<00:14:52.800> homes.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Eisen Trout said that she used her campaign surplus funds to hire a friend while, quote, working with
• Every legislator has the ability to donate their campaign surplus accounts.
• So our, uh, the conflict of interest was the use of campaign surplus funds, giving that to us with the
• , the campaign surplus funds.
• We should return it to the surplus, the campaign surplus funds.

Summary: The hearing opened in a Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings matter involving Legislative Ethics Board complaint 2025-5 against Representative Tara Simmons. The ALJ outlined the process, the issues on appeal, and the burden of proof, which centered on whether Simmons violated the Ethics Act by using her legislative position for others’ benefit and by holding outside employment that conflicted with her duties, and what sanction would be appropriate. Several exhibits were admitted by stipulation or without objection, while Exhibit 2 was initially held for later ruling but was ultimately admitted after testimony from the witness who prepared it. The board also granted a motion to sequester witnesses and took under advisement a motion to exclude three defense witnesses until after the staff case-in-chief. In opening statements, board staff alleged Simmons violated RCW 42.52.020 and RCW 42.52.070 by sponsoring a proviso that benefited her outside employer, Equity and Education Coalition (EEC), by using campaign surplus funds to help hire a friend, by intervening in a dispute over the proviso-funded work, and by sending text messages to influence others. Staff said it would seek penalties of up to $5,000 per violation plus costs. Defense counsel argued the allegations were technical ethics issues, denied Simmons profited personally, and contended the proviso funding her employer was permitted under prior board guidance; counsel also argued the campaign donation and later contract dispute were lawful and context-dependent. The first witness, Kimberly Gordon of American Equity and Justice Group (AEJG), testified that AEJG received state proviso funding and donations from Simmons, including $10,000 and later $40,000, which Gordon said were intended to fund the hiring of Antoine Coleman, Simmons’s romantic partner. Gordon said AEJG returned the donations and terminated Coleman after learning of the relationship and potential conflict of interest. She also testified about a later 2024 proviso involving EEC, a subcontract between AEJG and EEC, and a dispute over EEC’s performance under that subcontract. Gordon said AEJG raised concerns with the Administrative Office of the Courts, met with contract manager Chris Stanley, and ultimately rewrote the subcontract after Stanley, allegedly after speaking with Simmons, directed them to do so. The hearing then recessed for lunch, and cross-examination of Gordon was set to continue afterward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Can you give me an update on where we are on the intended elimination of the federal surplus program
• Can you give me an update on where we are on the intended elimination of the federal surplus program
• We are in the process of working through the closure of federal surplus property.
• Are we still the only state right now that is in process shutting down the federal surplus program?
• Throughout the years during disasters, federal surplus property personnel have helped us with storing

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• One reason for that, I'll get to in the surplus statement, is because of the lapse estimate.
• <00:25:54.480> So any surplus at the end of a bianium.
• So any surplus at the end of a bianium.
• This is called Schedule 2 of the surplus statement.
• Uh so for the general surplus statement.

Keywords: LBA Briefing on Budget, 928, house, all

Summary: The presentation was an LBA overview of Senate changes to the House-passed state budget, with Michael Kane explaining how Senate Finance updated revenue and spending estimates after April revenue figures and agency discussions. He said the Senate’s revenue outlook was higher than the House’s in some areas, but lower in others, especially video lottery terminal revenue, and that the biggest differences also came from changes to revenue splits between the general fund and education trust fund, lapse estimates, and several policy changes in House Bill 1 and House Bill 2. Kane highlighted several major revenue and policy differences: the Senate changed the business tax, tobacco tax, and real estate transfer tax splits; adjusted liquor revenue dedication; removed the House’s meals-and-rooms distribution cap; delayed the Lakes Region facility proceeds plan; altered the PECARD fund treatment; added a granite patron of the arts tax credit; and changed the treatment of unique funds and video lottery terminal revenue. On spending, he noted Senate changes to judicial, corrections, HHS, human rights commission, and other budgets, including additional settlement costs, higher lapse assumptions, and a different approach to Medicaid premium revenue and retirement savings. He also described Senate additions such as a nursing home bed fee, Hampstead Hospital transition funding, and changes to the YDC claims settlement fund. The presentation focused on comparing House and Senate surplus statements across fiscal years 2025 through 2027, including projected ending balances and rainy day fund transfers. Kane repeatedly emphasized that the numbers were still dependent on final revenues and lapse amounts, and that some balances would be carried forward and trued up later in the biennium. No committee vote or final action was described in the excerpt; it was an informational budget briefing and comparison of the two chambers’ proposals.

Transcript Highlights:

• USUALLY A SURPLUS IS THERE BUT IN THIS CASE IT SEEMS LIKE THE ENROLLMENT NUMBERS ARE LOWER THAN THE PROJECTIONS
• THE AGENCY IS REQUESTING THE REALIGNMENT OF THE GENERAL REVENUE AND TRUST FUND BUDGET TO PROJECT SURPLUS
• DEFICIT BASED ON THE CONFERENCE FROM MEDICAID SERVICES AND EXPENDITURES OF THE REALIGNMENT PROJECTS AS SURPLUS

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The only way they can do that is to hold reserves large enough, which would be surplus, to be able to
• And then anything that is above and beyond the reserves and the expenses, that's considered surplus.
• to lower down to back return of surplus to lower down to that<01:40:46.560> 20%<01:40:47.199>
• That red line is the return of surplus that we were required to give back.
• And it requires earnings and surplus.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There was a surplus that was built up. Under current law, that surplus was required to be returned.
• against us if we do not return surplus against us if we do not return surplus back<01:38:09.199>
• can retain large amounts of surplus. can retain large amounts of surplus.
• Profit just means surplus, which is controlled by competition and rivalry to keep that surplus down and
• Profit just means surplus, which is controlled by competition and rivalry to keep that surplus down and

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee continued work on Senate Bill 297 and a new amendment dealing with pooled risk management programs and whether they should be regulated under the insurance department. Lisa Duket, executive director of SchoolCare, testified at length that the draft language could allow co-mingling of public entity risk funds, could trigger producer-licensing requirements for staff who are not actually brokers, and may not fit public entity risk pools because they are not insurance companies. She also raised concerns about the March 1 reporting deadline, the proposed uniform accounting language, aggregate excess insurance, examination costs being charged to the program, and confidentiality provisions that she argued may conflict with right-to-know principles for public entities. She urged the committee to slow down and consider a study committee or more time for review, saying the regulated entities were not adequately involved in drafting the proposal. Chairman Hunt and the department responded that the bill is intended to create a licensure-based regulatory model, similar to other licensed industries, and that the pooled risk management program would be exempt from producer licensing while anyone else selling or negotiating such coverage would need a producer license. The department said failure to comply would be handled through an administrative licensing process, with denial or nonrenewal of a license and appeal through the department process. On the reporting deadline, the department said March 1 is a standard filing date used for financial analysis and that the filing can be the most recent annual report, regardless of fiscal year end. They also explained that the confidentiality language was taken from existing RSA 5B, that aggregate excess insurance was included as a solvency measure, and that the draft was intended to preserve familiar language while adapting it for pooled risk programs. The discussion did not include a final vote or formal action on the bill in the portion provided. The committee appeared to be compiling follow-up questions for the insurance department and considering whether additional revisions or a slower process would be needed before moving the bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• I’m here today in support of H. 3391, an act relative to government surplus supply.
• When a town or other government body disposes of surplus, it is obliged to realize fair value for surplus
• When a town or other government body disposes of surplus, it is obliged to realize fair value for surplus
• An associated issue that can cause further confusion is whether surplus items need to be aggregated to
• to determine for itself if they consider it to be in the public interest to destroy a category of surplus

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight heard testimony on several procurement-related bills. Senator Lovely and steel industry witnesses supported S. 2167/H. 3411, which would require preference for U.S. manufacturers on public construction projects using steel and other materials. They argued that Canadian and other foreign fabricators underbid Massachusetts firms because of exchange rates, subsidies, and different labor-cost structures, causing local job losses and economic leakage. Committee members asked about tariffs, market share, and whether the bill should be folded into broader municipal legislation; the witnesses said public work should stay in Massachusetts and that the bill would help preserve local industry and jobs. The committee also heard strong support for S. 2107, a bill to increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities in state and municipal contracting. Work Inc. testified that a preference for contractors employing people with disabilities would expand competitive employment, reduce reliance on public assistance, and generate net savings for taxpayers. Members asked about the estimated savings and whether recent federal changes to benefits would affect the numbers; the witness said the figures may need updating but that the underlying employment opportunity remains important. Another bill, H. 3339/S. 2187, would prohibit state and municipal contracts for new artificial turf fields containing zinc, plastic, or intentionally added PFAS. Sponsors and supporters cited health risks, heat retention, injuries, and PFAS contamination, while committee members discussed local bans, disposal problems, and whether indoor facilities or alternative materials could be used. Inspector General Jeffrey Shapiro testified in favor of H. 12 and H. 13, which would update Chapter 30B procurement thresholds and allow municipalities to bundle snow hauling and removal with plowing contracts. He said the changes would give local governments more flexibility, reduce confusion between school and municipal procurement rules, and make snow contracts more attractive to vendors. Members questioned whether quasi-public agencies and state entities should also be subject to 30B, and Shapiro said many public entities have their own procedures but that transparency and fairness should apply across the board. The committee also heard support for S. 2150, a software licensing bill aimed at preventing vendor lock-in by ensuring state agencies can run purchased software in the infrastructure that best fits their needs; the witness said restrictive licensing can drive up costs and create cybersecurity and modernization problems, and that similar laws have already passed in several other states.

Transcript Highlights:

• It includes the constitutionally required deposit of $144.3 million of the fiscal year 2025 surplus into
• the... ...required deposit of $144.3 million of the fiscal year 2025 surplus into the Budget Stabilization
• It has the deposit of surplus dollars into the rainy day fund as required by the Constitution.

Bills: HB1, HB2, HB3, HB312, HB313, HB314, HB383, HB983, HB1126, HCR3

Keywords: state budget, appropriations, education funding, public health, social services, government operations, state institutions, capital outlay, budget, infrastructure, appropriation, general obligation bonds, bond authorization, capital improvement, financial management, state treasury, funding, state general fund, local government, fiscal year

Transcript Highlights:

• And so campaign surplus funds are definitely not something that is legislative-related because people
• And so I felt donating out of my campaign surplus to my friend to help his organization and help... .
• ..out of my campaign surplus to my friend to help his organization and help another friend.
• Actually, let me go back and just ask you one brief question about the surplus funds, donations.
• I don't—I've never given surplus funds to EEC. I'm sorry, to AEJG. Specifically to AEJG, no.

Summary: The hearing resumed in the Legislative Ethics Board matter involving Tara Simmons after the board confirmed no ex parte communications had occurred overnight. Respondent’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 violated ethics rules by combining legislative support for AEJG with a personal donation to the organization. Board staff opposed the motion, arguing the evidence showed Simmons’s legislative and personal dealings were intertwined. After a recess for deliberation, the board denied the motion to dismiss, and the hearing moved into the defense case. The first defense witness was Sharon Navas, executive director of the Equity and Education Coalition (EEC). Navas testified that she met Simmons in 2018, later hired her, and took steps to separate Simmons’s legislative duties from her work for EEC. She said Simmons was never paid for lobbying or legislative acts, that her compensation came from unrestricted funds, and that the organization used written ethics-compliance language and a formal scope of work. Navas also described the proviso-funded dashboard project involving Anthony Powers and Chris Stanley, testifying that Simmons was not involved in the project’s day-to-day work, did not attend the meetings about the dispute, and was not part of the alleged contract disagreement. On cross-examination, staff focused on the contract documents, the dashboard work, and whether the scope of work matched the parties’ understanding. Tara Simmons then testified in her own defense. She described her background, legislative career, disability accommodations, and extensive efforts to seek ethics guidance from House counsel and board-related materials before taking outside employment or supporting provisos. She said she relied on prior ethics advice when separating her legislative role from outside work and when seeking provisos for AEJG and EEC. Simmons also addressed her relationship with Anthony Powers, describing it as a friendship rooted in criminal justice reform work and prior collaboration. The hearing was still in the middle of Simmons’s direct testimony when the transcript excerpt ended, with no final ruling on the merits or disposition of the allegations.

Transcript Highlights:

• committee then discussed passing the bill and tabling it, with concern raised about a $10 million surplus
• capital surplus amount and uncertainty about where that money would go.
• nice bag of $10 million of surplus nice bag of $10 million of surplus capital<00:41:27.480> surplus
• capital surplus dollars. capital surplus dollars.
• In which case, we haven't figured out what the surplus is all for the year.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Starting with land availability, the housing element, the arena process, the amendments to the Surplus
• Where is the master plan in surplus property with school districts and then creating the financing?
• Where is the master plan in surplus property with school?
• where is the master plan in surplus property with school districts and then creating the financing?
• And so I think exploring that space in addition to the surplus land the state might have and working

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• agency changes vehicles or sells Vehicles do they not go through you before they're considered a surplus
• There are some agencies That have exemptions, but the vast majority of all vehicles would go through surplus
• , but it doesn't necessarily mean that they're coming to our Surplus facility, especially in a vehicle
• Some kind of check-off to make sure that this geo tab is removed before it goes to an auction for surplus

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House Republicans were very dug in in the fact that we know $18 billion of surplus was spent over the
• c><00:09:27.920> $18<00:09:28.320> billion<00:09:28.880> of<00:09:29.040> surplus
• <00:09:29.519> was that we know $18 billion of surplus was that we know $18 billion of surplus

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And LBA will carry it as a surplus statement on the Schedule Two for us to know what bills are pending
• So it all came off the surplus statement. It's just a big negative number.
• So it all came off the surplus statement. It's just a big negative number.
• So it all came off the surplus statement. It's just a big negative number.
• So it all came off the surplus statement. It's just a big negative number.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill creates a restated Left 1 fund, which I'll refer to as the RLF, and the pension surplus holding
• potential decrease in membership, based on life expectancy... ...based on life expectancy, and with a surplus
• —the money, let me rephrase that—the money is not put into the surplus holding account until June 30,
• We have plenty of surplus already allocated over that period of time, broken down into eighths.
• funds should be used for pension issues, and that's why it makes logical sense to use this excess surplus

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Select Committee on Pension Policy approved its minutes by roll call vote, then postponed an OSA annual update due to a family emergency. The committee received an Open Public Meetings Act refresher from Assistant Attorney General Kate Adams, who reviewed key compliance points including quorum and serial meetings, notice and agenda rules, executive session limits, public comment requirements, and the consequences of violations. She also noted a litigation hold notice sent to members and provided resources for further guidance. Staff then briefed the committee on E2 Second Substitute House Bill 2034, which restates and terminates LEOFF 1 on June 30, 2029, creates a restated LEOFF 1 funded by transferred assets, and places excess assets into a pension surplus holding account that could later be used by the state. The bill requires DRS to seek IRS guidance, directs OSA to calculate the transfer amount and assess any future unfunded liability, assigns implementation duties to DRS, OSA, the Pension Funding Council, the State Investment Board, and the Treasurer, and requires two SCPP studies on LEOFF 1 medical benefits and policy oversight. OSA’s actuary estimated the transfer to the surplus holding account at about $3.9 billion under current assumptions and said the bill increases the modeled chance of future state contributions if the restated plan falls below 100% funded; members asked about IRS timing, the 2029 transfer date, and whether the 110% buffer is sufficient. The committee also received an update on the LEOFF 1 medical benefits study required by the bill. Staff said the study will examine the administration of pension boards and medical liabilities, likely focusing on medical benefits, and will gather anonymized data from local boards, cities, counties, and related agencies over the next three years. Members and public commenters discussed the number and structure of local boards, whether spouses receive medical benefits, and the possibility of regionalizing or consolidating administration. No action was taken, but staff said they would return with milestones and further updates. Finally, staff outlined a possible Plan 3 study, prompted by DRS, to evaluate whether the original goals of Plan 3 have been met after 30 years. The proposed study would review historical context, member choice outcomes, policy questions, and possible recommendations over a two-year period. The committee also heard an update on new correspondence procedures, including a new online web form, a correspondence log in meeting packets, and removal of correspondence from the public website. During public comment, retiree groups urged the committee to pursue an ongoing COLA for PERS and TRS Plan 1, with interim ad hoc COLAs until then, while LEOFF 1 retirees urged caution about changing the current board structure and emphasized the complexity of medical benefit administration.