Transcript Highlights:

• of five or more DUIs in a 10-year period.
• They even struggle to hold sheriffs to the limitations set by the county budget.
• In that 12-hour period, they made 505 DUI arrests statewide. That's 42 an hour.
• What we're talking about here seems to be public employment, period.
• So if you want to be a janitor at a city hall... ...employment, period.

Committee: Senate Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• Pauses the 60-day permit review period under certain circumstances. Sunset 6/30/2030.
• You did mention the 30-foot limitation, right? Could you repeat?
• That is limited to structures under 30 ft.
• Limited to under 30 ft. to be clear. Yeah.
• Limited to under sure it was in there.

Transcript Highlights:

• Really, they should over long periods of time.
• But I will say that there is a limit to that, and that limit is if your pacing requires for a certain
• number of dollars in each year over the period of time and the size of the program... ...over the period
• stay at the current limits.
• I mean, you can stay within the minority ownership limits if you want.

Summary: The committee met to approve prior minutes and receive updates on the Legacy Fund transparency website and fund performance. Staff reported the website procurement was in contract negotiations, with a planned go-live around November 1, and that the site would provide downloadable, more transparent information on fund holdings, allocations, history, and legislative appropriations while protecting confidential data. The investment office then reviewed performance through January 2026, describing strong returns relative to benchmarks, noting real estate and fixed income as weaker areas, and explaining that the fund’s diversification and internal management had helped offset market volatility, including recent geopolitical impacts. Members also discussed the in-state investment program, especially the Bank of North Dakota’s CD-match allocation. Several members questioned whether the program had been static for years and whether the uncommitted balance should remain parked there if it was not being used. The committee voted to pause further transfers into the program until the Bank provides a report and the committee can consider possible statutory changes; the motion also requested a cost-benefit analysis from RVK, and it passed by roll call vote. In the afternoon, RVK presented its review of the investment policy statement as it relates to the in-state investment program. The consultant said it found no major policy impediments, and that implementers and stakeholders generally felt the program was proceeding as intended. RVK emphasized best practices such as third-party due diligence, competitive risk-adjusted returns, diversification, pacing, and exit strategies, while cautioning that required lower-return investments or spending commitments can create pressure on the fund’s long-term real value. The consultant also raised ancillary concerns about state-level concentration risk, the need to distinguish between public and commercial infrastructure, and the lack of a central repository for all state funding commitments to the same projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• This has really accelerated starting in the period as you can see on the chart around 2015 onwards.
• Investors typically have a short time horizon, generally investing for a period of 3 to 7 years, and
• There are very limited requirements on ownership structures, financing, or performance.
• of 3 to seven years, and they period of 3 to seven years, and they often<00:02:13.599><c> seek</c><00
• </c> capital that is raised from limited capital that is raised from limited partners,<00:03:38.959><

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> deduction uh which would be limited deduction uh which would be limited under<00:07:56.400><c> the
• </c><00:34:12.000><c> on</c> modification of how the limit on modification of how the limit on business
• </c><00:34:30.000><c> by</c> uh increase the amount of the limit by uh increase the amount of the limit
• </c> three, uh, we do not want to limit three, uh, we do not want to limit questions<00:36:32.240><c>
• </c> 30% limit on business interest. 30% limit on business interest.

Bills: HF3127 , HF3816 , HF3814 , HF3815 , HF3817

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> each year during that 25-y year period. each year during that 25-y year period.
• </c><00:21:13.919><c> now</c> that cost over a 30-year period now that cost over a 30-year period now
• </c> to CI if we kept the projection period to CI if we kept the projection period at<00:30:42.559><c
• </c> at the 30-year period. at the 30-year period.
• It also limits deemed collectible.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 2294, which would require condominium associations, boards, and managing agents to comply with declarations, bylaws, county ordinances, and state and federal laws, including mortgage lending requirements. The Community Associations Institute opposed the bill as redundant, arguing existing law already requires compliance and provides penalties. Supporters, including condominium owners and board members, said the measure would clarify that associations are not “self-governing” in a way that exempts them from outside laws, and cited examples where local officials or police told residents to take issues back to their boards. Several supporters said the bill would reinforce board responsibility for permits, safety, and legal compliance. The committee noted 27 pieces of testimony, with 10 in support and 17 in opposition, and then moved on without taking a vote on the measure in the transcript provided. The committee also took up SB 2298, which would require common interest community proxy forms to include additional language explaining proxy selection options. The Community Associations Institute opposed the bill, saying the proposed language was inaccurate and would not improve consumer clarity unless significantly revised. Supporters argued that proxy forms are confusing and that clearer instructions would help homeowners understand how their votes are being used. Opponents said the added language would make the forms longer and more confusing, and suggested a separate instruction sheet or other educational material instead. Testimony also raised broader concerns about proxy voting being misused in some associations, with one witness urging that proxy voting be eliminated altogether. The committee reported 29 written testimonies, including seven in support, 19 in opposition, and three with comments, and again did not record a final vote in the excerpt. For SB 2300, which would shorten condominium reserve cash-flow projections from 30 years to 25 years, the Community Associations Institute opposed the bill, saying it would not make housing more affordable, would reduce transparency, and would increase the annual burden by giving associations less time to save for long-life components. The group suggested that if affordability is the goal, lawmakers should consider allowing future loans or special assessments with guardrails. Supporters of the bill said the shorter projection period would better reflect practical budgeting and help associations plan more realistically, though some supporters also warned against relying too heavily on loans and emphasized accountability and fiduciary responsibility. Other testimony stressed that the impact of changing the projection period would vary by association and that many owners are already struggling with rising fees. The discussion remained focused on testimony and policy concerns, with no final action on SB 2300 shown in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Should access to free meals be limited to families earning $150,000 or less a year?
• However, under certain conditions, cities and counties can limit the maximum number of eligible cannabis
• Most states' mandatory waiting period varies between 6 months and two years.
• </c> Should access to free meals be limited Should access to free meals be limited to<00:03:37.120><c
• the maximum number of counties can limit the maximum number of eligible<00:04:44.560><c> cannabis</c

Summary: The segment presented the results of the 2025 Minnesota House legislative opinion poll, which asked fairgoers about a range of policy issues tied to recent or possible future legislative action. Topics included school calendar flexibility before Labor Day, state funding for sports stadiums and arenas, undocumented immigrants’ access to state programs, unemployment benefits for hourly school workers in the summer, banning guns in the Capitol, budget-balancing options for a projected 2028-29 deficit, removing party labels from legislative ballots, limiting free school meals by income, free fishing licenses for residents age 65 and older, local control over cannabis businesses, a post-employment lobbying ban for legislators, and a higher income tax rate for the highest earners. For several questions, the segment noted the underlying legislative context. It referenced the 2023 law making undocumented immigrants eligible for MinnesotaCare and the 2025 law ending adult eligibility at year’s end, the school meals program’s higher-than-expected costs, and a 2025 proposal to remove party designations from legislative ballots that did not receive a committee hearing. It also mentioned the projected nearly $6 billion budget shortfall for the 2028-29 biennium, the Xcel Energy Center renovation funding request, and the recent killings of House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband and the shooting of Senator John Hoffman and his wife as part of the discussion about Capitol gun restrictions. The poll itself was presented as a public opinion survey rather than a legislative vote, so no formal committee action or roll call occurred. The segment closed by thanking participants and saying the poll would return next year at the fair.

Transcript Highlights:

• So just again, to reemphasize, three minutes, limited to testimony.
• But these two, one after another, it was like a 10-day period.
• But there's still so much that needs to be done in a very short time limit.
• It's a seven-bill limit. Think about it.
• Some states limit the number of bills their members can drop.

Committees: House Government , House House Government Committee of Reference

Transcript Highlights:

• It was pretty limited. Now it’s just me and my husband.
• It was pretty limited in how we could try to find insurance.
• And typically there's a 30-day waiting period. Typically, there's a 30-day waiting period.
• So just to say there's oftentimes a shorter waiting period...
• Because of the limited time, they focused on the four categories they could study.

Summary: The Consumer Protection and Business Committee held public hearings on three bills and then moved into a work session on insurance-related topics. House Bill 2428 would require life insurers to send advance written notice of an impending lapse or cancellation, including notice to a designated third party, and to provide proof of delivery; it would also require applicants to be told they may designate such a third party. The prime sponsor and the Office of the Insurance Commissioner supported the bill as a consumer protection measure for older or vulnerable policyholders, while the life insurance industry supported the concept but requested a delayed implementation date and a small technical amendment. The committee then heard House Bill 2399, which would prohibit post-loss assignments of benefits in property insurance. Staff and the prime sponsor described the practice as allowing contractors to step into the policyholder’s shoes and potentially take control of claims, litigation, and settlement, often to the consumer’s detriment. The Office of the Insurance Commissioner, the Washington State Association for Justice, PEMCO, and the National Insurance Crime Bureau all supported the bill, emphasizing consumer vulnerability after disasters and the risk of fraud or inflated claims. Members asked about steering by adjusters, alternative ways for homeowners to authorize others to help with claims, and the $50,000 per-violation penalty, which would go to the general fund. House Bill 2087 would enact a Washington Travel Insurance Act based on the NAIC model, creating a more detailed statutory framework for travel insurance licensing, travel retailers, travel administrators, disclosures, and prohibited sales practices. The sponsor and industry witnesses said the bill would expand consumer choice and standardize rules, while the Office of the Insurance Commissioner supported the compromise language but raised a remaining concern about claims being adjusted by unlicensed adjusters. The Attorney General’s Office testified that the bill should not be read to supersede Washington’s anti-discrimination and consumer protection laws, and the sponsor said amendments were being worked on to address that concern. In the work session, OIC and Department of Natural Resources staff presented the wildfire mitigation and resiliency work group report. They said the group reached consensus on several areas, including the importance of community-level mitigation, better data sharing, improved transparency around wildfire-related nonrenewals and cancellations, and a voluntary grant program to help homeowners retrofit to IBHS wildfire-prepared standards. Members asked about leadership for the recommendations, overlap with existing programs, privacy concerns in data sharing, and how the proposals would fit with broader statewide wildfire planning. The committee also received a briefing on flood insurance markets and claims after the December atmospheric flooding event, with staff noting that private flood policies generally offer broader coverage than the federal NFIP, and that Washington had seen about 700 federal claims and roughly $18 million paid out so far.

Transcript Highlights:

• moratorium period during...
• You're limiting money as speech to a group of people.
• Period. Well, the problem with that is this, is that...
• Each lobbyist is under the $133 limit.
• Limit the ballot as far as what elections it covers.

Bills: HB18 , SB 54 , SB 10 , HR76 , HR77 , HR78 , HR82 , HR83 , HR88 , HR89 , HR93 , HR94 , HR95 , HR98 , HR101 , HR102 , HR104 , HR105 , HR107 , HR108 , HR109 , HR110 , HR111 , HR112 , HR113 , HR123 , HR125 , HR79 , HR80 , HR81 , HR84 , HR85 , HR86 , HR87 , HR90 , HR91 , HR92 , HR96 , HR97 , HR100 , HR103 , HR106 , HR114 , HR115 , HR116 , HR117 , HR118 , HR119 , HR120 , HR121 , HR122 , HR124 , HB18 , SB54 , SB10 , HB8

Transcript Highlights:

• The period for which a person arrested by certain crimes involving family violence may be held after
• criminal record information for certain misdemeanor defendants following successful completion of a period
• working closely with the Department of Education and the Department of Health to provide the base period
• by Lauterbach designating Matagora County as the official birding capital of Texas for a 10-year period
• Injury Awareness Day for a 10-year period ending in 2035, refer to the Committee on Public Health.

Transcript Highlights:

• You can see in Virginia, similarly, a five-year rolling period.
• So they looked at the number of graduates for that five-year period.
• And that's for the two-year period. $2,000 per completed degree, and that's for the two-year period.
• Now, there are some that just don't go, period.
• Now, there are some that just don't go, period.

Committee: Joint Higher Education Funding Review Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• The options are limited out there.
• now is our average policy limit.
• We, again, have limited staff.
• During that same time period, our average policy limit has gone from $684,000 up to just over a million
• We advanced 50% of the personal property limits, or the full personal property limits if they were...

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Fair Plan, focused on the plan’s rapid growth, its financial stability after the January Southern California wildfires, and its role as the insurer of last resort. Fair Plan officials explained that the plan was created in 1968, is a not-for-profit involuntary association of licensed property insurers, and is intended to be a temporary safety net until policyholders can return to the admitted market. They emphasized that the plan is not a state agency or taxpayer-funded, but is regulated by the Department of Insurance and supported by member-company assessments if claims exceed available funds. Victoria Roach and Armand Feliciano said the Fair Plan has grown sharply since 2018 and especially after market pullbacks by major insurers, reaching about 575,000 policies and roughly $600 billion in exposure by spring 2025. They noted that growth is increasingly occurring in lower wildfire-risk areas, where the plan can sometimes be cheaper than the voluntary market, and said this undermines depopulation back into the private market. They also discussed recent policy expansions, including coverage for farms, higher residential and commercial limits, and pending or proposed changes such as AB 290, SB 525, and AB 226, which would add tools like a line of credit and bond access. A major portion of the hearing addressed the January wildfire losses and the plan’s financial response. Fair Plan officials said they assessed member insurers for $1 billion after determining claims and cash flow would exceed available resources, and that the process was approved quickly and paid smoothly, with more than 80% of the assessment collected within 10 days. They also described the reinsurance tower, the plan’s limited surplus, and the need for actuarially sound rates to reduce future reliance on assessments. On claims handling, they said the plan has received over 5,500 claims from the fires, has paid more than $2.9 billion so far, expects total payments near $4 billion, and has focused on advancing payments quickly for total losses and other urgent needs. Members questioned the plan’s solvency, the growth in non-wildfire areas, claim denials, smoke-loss coverage, and how depopulation works. Roach said most closed claims without payment were duplicates rather than denials, and that smoke claims require direct physical loss under the policy, with coverage determined case by case. Public commenters from the California Building Industry Association and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California said the Fair Plan’s growth reflects a weak voluntary market, inadequate rates, and insurer fear of future assessments, and urged support for rate increases and AB 226. The hearing concluded with no vote, but with a commitment from Fair Plan officials to follow up on unanswered questions and continue providing more transparency through public data and website disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a limit on what we can charge.
• That might not be an appropriate limit.
• This is much, much more limited.
• to exceed the local height limit by 210 feet.
• to exceed the local height limit by 210 feet.

Summary: The committee first heard SB 753, which would modernize California’s shopping cart recovery rules by allowing cities and counties to return abandoned carts directly to retailers, recover documented retrieval costs, and avoid the current impound-and-wait process. The author and supporters, including San Jose officials and the League of California Cities, said the bill would help clear streets, sidewalks, and waterways and reduce local costs. Grocers and retailers opposed the measure unless amended, arguing it would turn cart retrieval into a new cost burden and could create incentives for cities to charge too much for stolen property. After extensive discussion about notice periods, cost caps, and local ordinances, the committee adopted amendments and passed the bill 6-0 as amended. The committee then took up SB 445, which would speed up permitting and approvals needed for high-speed rail by requiring early engagement, setting rules for third-party coordination, and creating a dispute-resolution process. The author said the bill was narrowed from an earlier, broader transit proposal and was intended to reduce delays caused by utilities, local governments, and other entities. Supporters said permitting bottlenecks add major costs and delays to infrastructure projects, while opponents from utilities, cities, counties, telecoms, and special districts raised concerns about safety, reliability, affordability, and the need to review the pending amendments. The bill passed 8-1 to the Utilities and Energy Committee. The committee also heard SB 9, a narrower housing bill focused on accessory dwelling units. The author explained that it would require local ADU ordinances to be submitted to HCD for review and would make state standards control if a local agency fails to submit a compliant ordinance or respond to HCD findings. Supporters from housing and YIMBY groups said the bill would improve enforcement of state ADU law and prevent local barriers from slowing housing production. There was no opposition, and the bill passed 6-0. The committee then began hearing SB 79, which would allow more housing near major transit stops; the author and supporters framed it as a response to the housing shortage and transit underuse, and the hearing continued with extensive support testimony as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is limited to eight semesters or 16 quarters with a cap of $3,000 per academic period.
• Well, it's limited to eight semesters or 16 quarters. ...limited to eight semesters or 16 quarters with
• a cap of $3,000 per academic period.
• One of those is, as you know, we've limited the amount our budget can grow. We...
• We put a measure in a couple of years ago that limited budget growth to 6.25%.

Bills: HB188 , HB52

Committee: House Ways and Means Education

Keywords: healthcare, insurance, patient rights, medical treatment, access, affordability, income tax, CHOOSE Act, education funding, ABLE account, tax credits, poverty threshold, legislative funding

Transcript Highlights:

• employer accountability by reducing fine amounts with limited explanation.
• With respect to timeliness over a five-year audit period, we noted late on-site inspections.
• It's Appendix A, Table A-5, over a five-year period.
• Our case file reviews were limited to a sample of 60 items, 60 cases.
• Our case file reviews were limited to a sample of 60 items, 60 cases.

Summary: The hearing focused on a state audit of Cal/OSHA titled “The Division of Occupational Safety and Health: Process Deficiencies and Staffing Shortages Limit Its Ability to Protect Workers.” Committee leaders and the audit team described serious workplace tragedies, argued that California’s worker protections are not being adequately enforced, and said the audit was prompted by concerns that Cal/OSHA was too often relying on letters instead of inspections, delaying investigations, and closing cases without enough documentation. Members repeatedly emphasized that the issue was not just staffing, but also outdated policies, weak oversight, and inconsistent enforcement. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found a 32% vacancy rate in 2023-24, heavy reliance on hard-copy files, outdated or unclear policies, and inconsistent decision-making in complaints, accidents, citations, and fine reductions. He said Cal/OSHA conducted on-site inspections in only about 20% of complaints, used letter investigations more than 80% of the time, often lacked evidence that hazards were corrected, and sometimes failed to inspect serious injury cases on time. The audit also found weak documentation for fine calculations and settlement reductions, with some penalties reduced substantially without clear explanations. Parks said the agency had accepted the findings and would provide progress updates later in the year. Committee members pressed the auditor on vacancy rates, the use of letter investigations, the low rate of criminal referrals, and whether fines were being reduced too often. Cal/OSHA and DIR officials responded that the vacancy rate had fallen to 12% partly because 66 vacant positions were eliminated in a statewide budget reduction and partly because of hiring; they said 126 people had been hired in the first half of the year. They also said they had hired a policy writer, were updating several policies, were planning periodic internal audits, and were developing a new data management system expected to go live in late 2026 or early 2027. On fines, officials said Title 8 sets base penalties and allows adjustments based on factors like employer size, history, and good faith, with appeals and informal conferences also affecting final amounts. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> being issued um over a 5-year period being issued um over a 5-year period Minnesota<00:14:03.959
• Chair, is the time period looked at?
• </c><00:43:17.160><c> who</c> five this section would would limit who five this section would would limit
• </c><01:37:47.360><c> of</c> you know or it's an extended period of you know or it's an extended period
• </c> belongs to people why are you limiting belongs to people why are you limiting their<01:53:24.400

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• And one year after a periodic update adoption isn't feasible.
• A periodic update takes us two years to do.
• A periodic update takes us two years to do.
• It gets complicated when you get into the 590 limit.
• It gets complicated when you get into the 590 limit.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several local government bills. HB 2006 would extend the deadline for certain rural counties that collect a sales and use tax for economic development to designate industrial land banks under the Growth Management Act. Supporters, including the sponsor and Kittitas County representatives, said the bill would help counties identify industrial land for job growth and economic development; Futurewise opposed it, citing concerns about large industrial land banks and impacts to agricultural lands. HB 2244 would let a city that forms a fire protection district after July 1, 2026, keep its levy rate without reducing it by the district’s levy, and would also allow online notice and interlocal contracting for fire services. City and fire officials supported it as a practical tool to fund fire service, while one witness opposed the broader trend of appointed taxing authorities. The committee also heard extensive testimony on HB 2316, which would limit shrub-step vegetation inside urban growth areas from being treated as wildlife habitat, critical area, or conservation area, and would bar related mitigation or replacement requirements. Tri-Cities officials, builders, housing advocates, and the sponsor argued the bill would reduce delays and costs for housing and development on already designated urban land, while conservation groups, tribal representatives, and some individuals opposed it as a broad rollback of habitat protections and a harmful precedent for ecosystems and wildlife. No vote was taken on the bills during the hearing. HB 2103 would expand public utility contracting authority so cities, utilities, and joint operating agencies could enter “capability” contracts for renewable or non-emitting generation projects, including nuclear, renewable hydrogen, and fusion, and repeal certain price-limit restrictions. Supporters said it would align older contracting law with the Clean Energy Transformation Act and help utilities plan for future power needs; opponents warned it would shift risk to ratepayers and revive concerns tied to the WPPSS nuclear debacle. The committee also heard HB 2388, which would classify pivot-corner solar and agrovoltaic facilities on agricultural land as distributed energy resources and accessory uses; the sponsor and supporters said it would help meet energy needs without harming productive farmland, while Futurewise asked for clarification to avoid unintended loss of agricultural land. The hearing then returned to HB 2103 for additional testimony, with the same basic split between utility and clean-energy supporters and ratepayer or anti-nuclear opponents.

Transcript Highlights:

• It also revises the period for remission of forfeiture to 37 months.
• Period. They solve problems in our society. They do it daily in our community.
• And if somebody... ...except in very, very limited situations under Florida law.
• This treats unlicensed driving the same as those who are to three times in a five-year period.
• So the limitations are very narrow in this circumstance.

Committee: Senate Rules

Summary: The committee first confirmed six appointees in a single vote, then took up a series of bills, most of them reported favorably. The early debate centered on SB 208, a land-use bill by Sen. McLean that would require development fees to reflect review costs and create more objective compatibility standards for residential development denials. An amendment adding housing-related provisions, including an OPAGA study of urban development boundaries, drew extended discussion over the Everglades and local control; it was adopted, while a late-filed amendment on rural boundaries was withdrawn. The bill was then reported favorably after supporters and opponents, including Miami-Dade and housing groups, weighed in. The committee also favorably reported SB 686 on agricultural enclaves after amendments adding conservation, wildlife corridor, and Everglades-related protections, with one amendment specifically preserving stronger protections in counties covered by the Northern Everglades/Indian River Lagoon plan. Several criminal justice and public records measures also advanced. SB 436 would add resisting an officer with violence as a qualifying prior offense for battery enhancement and include certain felony battery offenses in prison release reoffender status. SB 830 would extend public-records protections to county and city administrators and related family information. SB 990 would authorize protected cell captive insurers in Florida. SB 600, on bail bonds, drew the most debate: an amendment by Sen. Rouson preserved the current treatment of charitable bail organizations’ deposits, with supporters arguing nonprofits help low-income defendants and critics saying the bill should distinguish commercial and nonprofit bonding; the amendment was adopted and the bill reported favorably. SB 914 on dry needling and SB 1434 on infill redevelopment also passed, the latter with an amendment removing a 10% markup requirement for buyback provisions. The committee then moved through a large education and health agenda. SB 1504 would let high school students who complete an insurance/personal finance elective qualify later for a customer service representative license. SB 1718 would expand educator preparation and temporary certification options. SB 7038 was a broad education package covering tuition waivers for Florida State Guard members, residency rules, consumer protections, dual enrollment, grading, and college funding; amendments clarified workforce licensure and exempted certain dental training from new licensure rules. SB 1092 on podiatric medicine added definitions and restrictions for cellular/tissue-based products. SB 1138 on qualified contractors created a pre-application review program for certain local governments, with historic-preservation carveouts. SB 186 on student health and safety required seizure-training and action plans in schools, and SB 560 on child welfare streamlined psychotropic-medication procedures for children in state care while adding youth advisory meetings and insurance-data review. SB 902, a broad Department of Health bill, addressed medical marijuana facility setbacks, practitioner discipline, autism microcredentials, marriage and family therapy licensure, a neurofibromatosis grant program, and family home health aide delegation; it passed after two amendments. Finally, SB 218 on land-use regulations limited hurricane-recovery restrictions to affected counties, SB 1002 expanded child-neglect definitions tied to parental drug abuse, SB 1474 tightened biosolids land-application rules, SB 1708 eased out-of-state veterinary licensure by endorsement, and SB 314 established a Florida regulatory framework for payment stablecoins aligned with federal law. Most measures were reported favorably by committee vote after brief testimony or no debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Each presentation will be followed by a period for questions from the members.
• Trim key terms and some millage limitations that are both in the Trim key terms and some millage limitations
• So let's talk a little bit about millage limitations.
• period.
• It begins at a different time period. And before October 9th, all taxing authorities Period.

Summary: The Select Committee on Property Taxes met for an educational session focused on how Florida funds public schools and how property taxes are assessed and levied. Dr. Jim Zengali of the Department of Revenue explained the FEFP school funding formula, noting that it is built on weighted student counts, a base student allocation, and programmatic add-ons such as transportation, exceptional student education, school safety, and mental health. He said school funding is roughly split between state general revenue and local property taxes through required local effort, with additional discretionary and capital outlay millages contributing to total school funding. He also described the Department of Revenue’s role in certifying property rolls at fair market value and reviewing them for substantial compliance, including the so-called “nuclear option” if a roll is not approved. Members asked about trends in millage rates, county-by-county funding differences, the effect of growth and enrollment changes, and how property appraisals are reviewed. Zengali said aggregate millage for school funding has declined over the last decade while revenues have still increased, and he agreed to provide additional data on county trends, parcel strata, student growth, and enrollment impacts. He also clarified that school funding is equalized so students receive similar resources regardless of county wealth, and that federal funding plays only a small role in the FEFP. Amy Baker of the Joint Legislative Office of Economic and Demographic Research then discussed existing homestead benefits. She said about half of Florida’s parcels are homestead properties, most fall in the $250,000 to $500,000 value range, and many seniors without mortgages pay property taxes in lump sums rather than through escrow. Baker explained that Florida’s homestead tax burden is middle-of-the-pack nationally and that the main benefits are Save Our Homes and portability on the differential side, plus the $25,000 homestead exemption and related exemptions on the exemption side. She said these benefits reduce taxable value substantially, with homestead properties receiving a large share of the reductions, and noted that the committee requested follow-up data on exemption usage, portability timing, senior exemptions, and county-level patterns. The final presentation, by Lizette Kelly of the Department of Revenue, covered millage rates and the TRIM process. She reviewed the history of truth-in-millage notices, required taxpayer mailings, public hearing notices, and later changes that tied local millage resets to rollback and majority-vote rates. Kelly explained the difference between proposed and adopted millage, the rollback rate, and the majority-vote rate, and described how taxing authorities include counties, cities, special districts, and MSTUs. She also outlined how county taxable value is calculated from just value through assessment differentials and exemptions, and how certain exemptions, such as the additional senior exemption, apply only to the taxing authority that adopted them. No votes were taken during the meeting, but members requested several follow-up data reports for later discussion.