Transcript Highlights:

• It does not add points to a driving record and can be resolved by paying the fine or requesting a hearing
• I do not know, sir. I'd have to get back with you. Okay. Any further questions? Okay.
• I do not know, sir. I'd have to get back with you. Okay. Any further questions? Okay.
• The overall initiative was 20 projects, many of them not funded.
• We have used this Moving Florida Forward Initiative to do some things that no other state DOT has done

Summary: The Committee on Transportation received a presentation from the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles on Florida’s camera-based traffic enforcement programs: red light cameras, school bus stop-arm cameras, and school zone speed cameras. The department explained how the programs work, including human review of recorded violations, issuance of civil notices to vehicle owners, and escalation to uniform traffic citations if unpaid or uncontested. Officials also outlined the fee structure and reported preliminary data showing 42 red light camera jurisdictions, 496 red light cameras, and more than 923,000 notices of violation in fiscal year 2024-2025, along with growth in school zone and school bus programs. Senators asked about camera placement, signage, review procedures, and whether reviewers or vendors receive revenue from citations; several questions were left for follow-up because the witness did not have all statutory or operational details. The committee then heard an update from FDOT Secretary Jared Perdue on the Moving Florida Forward Infrastructure Initiative, funded by a $4 billion general revenue investment leveraged into a $7 billion program for 20 major projects. He said the initiative is advancing high-priority congestion relief projects across the state, with 80% of the plan expected to be underway by the end of 2026 and the remaining projects in 2027. Perdue highlighted new delivery methods such as modified phased design-build, voluntary acceleration, and structured acceleration, along with workforce and supply-chain efforts, including regional hiring events and aggregate planning. He cited projects such as I-4 congestion relief lanes, Golden Glades, I-95 at US-1, I-75 auxiliary lanes, and I-275 improvements as examples of the program’s progress. Members questioned FDOT about traffic management during construction, subcontracting opportunities for small businesses, public transit planning, contractor safety and fatalities, bridge strikes, logistics access near ports and airports, aggregate supply, local government coordination, and federal funding uncertainty. Perdue said FDOT continuously reevaluates traffic control plans, works with local governments and industry partners, uses small business participation targets, and requires contractors to be in good standing with OSHA and to implement corrective action plans after incidents. He also said Florida’s transportation revenues are flat, the state remains largely state-funded, and additional resources are the main need for future transportation delivery. The committee adjourned after the chair requested FDOT staff provide senators with district-specific project information.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this ballot initiative does not contain a timeline for that.
• and sewer, which many one-acre lots actually do not, right?
• However, from my perspective, they do not require a new exception to Section 3.
• This initiative does not put any limitations on home size.
• But we did not elect to do so in the petition language itself.

Bills: H5009

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Keywords: collective bargaining, worker rights, labor relations, public counsel services, state employees

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-03, House Bill 5000, which would allow single-family homes on smaller lots in areas with public water and sewer service. The hearing began with committee members outlining the Article 48 initiative process and then hearing from two subject-matter experts. Under Secretary Chris Clutchman of Housing and Livable Communities explained how the proposal would amend Chapter 40A, noted that Boston would be excluded, and said municipalities would still be able to adopt reasonable regulations on setbacks, bulk, height, and short-term rentals. He also flagged unresolved implementation questions, including how to treat wetlands, infrastructure capacity, and pre-existing nonconforming situations. Attorney Susan Murphy said the measure would significantly alter local zoning, could create conflicts with existing zoning districts and Section 3A/MBTA Communities rules, and raised concerns about infrastructure capacity and the lack of any home-size or affordability limits. Supporters of the petition argued that Massachusetts faces a severe housing shortage and that large minimum lot sizes are a major barrier to building starter homes. Proponents said the measure would legalize single-family homes on lots as small as 5,000 square feet with 50 feet of frontage where public sewer and water are available, and they cited polling showing public support for lot-size reform. They said the proposal could produce thousands of additional homes per year, help young families and seniors, and expand housing choices in high-cost suburbs. Committee members pressed the proponents on how the measure would interact with affordability, home size, frontage requirements, 40B compliance, and whether the bill would actually produce starter homes rather than larger expensive houses. The Massachusetts Municipal Association testified in opposition, urging the committee to take no action. MMA representatives argued that zoning is fundamentally a local decision and that the proposal would preempt municipal authority with a one-size-fits-all mandate. They also said the bill is impractical because public water and sewer service does not guarantee available capacity, citing examples of communities facing water and wastewater limits and costly infrastructure upgrades. MMA further argued the measure lacks affordability requirements and could be counterproductive, and pointed to existing and pending state tools such as Chapter 40Y, 40R-related proposals, and other housing funding or zoning reforms as better approaches. No vote was taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, this bill gives criminals 75 more reasons not to pay child support, 75 more reasons not to pay
• child support, 75 more reasons not to pay legal financial obligations.
• So do not vote for this bill. Other further remarks. The member from the 41st, Representative Tai.
• I think the sponsor of the bill would say this is not a fix for everything. There's a lot to do.
• It does not, it does not change the amount that the employee is paying or the employer.

Bills: HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1065 , HB1795 , HB2107 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2245 , HB2253 , HB2283 , HB2343 , HB2406 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB1170 , HB1544 , HB1834 , HB2156 , HB2188 , HB2206 , HB2360 , HB2471 , HB2478 , HB2525 , HB2605 , HJM4012 , HB1104 , HB1152 , HB1254 , HB1443 , HB1710 , HB1750 , HB1903 , HB1941 , HB1974 , HB1982 , HB1983 , HB2006 , HB2034 , HB2105 , HB2179 , HB2203 , HB2215 , HB2223 , HB2239 , HB2247 , HB2297 , HB2303 , HB2322 , HB2329 , HB2334 , HB2338 , HB2345 , HB2348 , HB2350 , HB2353 , HB2355 , HB2363 , HB2367 , HB2379 , HB2388 , HB2399 , HB2418 , HB2420 , HB2428 , HB2441 , HB2462 , HB2464 , HB2467 , HB2495 , HB2505 , HB2534 , HB2539 , HB2544 , HB2551 , HB2554 , HB2557 , HB2575 , HB2577 , HB2588 , HB2594 , HB2604 , HB2636 , HB2714 , HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1065 , HB1795 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2245 , HB2253 , HB2283 , HB2343 , HB2406 , HB2501 , HB2574 , HB1170 , HB1544 , HB1834 , HB2156 , HB2188 , HB2206 , HB2471 , HB2478 , HB2605 , HJM4012 , HB1104 , HB1152 , HB1254 , HB1443 , HB1903 , HB1941 , HB1982 , HB2006 , HB2034 , HB2105 , HB2179 , HB2203 , HB2297 , HB2303 , HB2322 , HB2329 , HB2345 , HB2350 , HB2379 , HB2388 , HB2399 , HB2418 , HB2462 , HB2464 , HB2495 , HB2539 , HB2544 , HB2551 , HB2554 , HB2588 , HB2636 , HB1128 , HB1408 , HB1570 , HB1742 , HB1823 , HB2089 , HB2104 , HB2114 , HB2172 , HB2192 , HB2207 , HB2251 , HB2262 , HB2266 , HB2294 , HB2298 , HB2319 , HB2320 , HB2323 , HB2351 , HB2354 , HB2374 , HB2401 , HB2405 , HB2429 , HB2431 , HB2442 , HB2451 , HB2479 , HB2496 , HB2515 , HB2523 , HB2540 , HB2593 , HB2632 , HB2661 , HB1496 , HB1898 , HB2095 , HB2157 , HB2225 , HB2274 , HB2311 , HB2325 , HB2333 , HB2476 , HB2508 , HB2552

Keywords: design review, local government, land use, zoning, project permits, housing density, middle housing, affordable housing, parking minimums, single-family zoning, infill development, growth management, comprehensive plan, permit streamlining, objective development regulations, architectural review, administrative review, transit-oriented development, accessory dwelling units, ADU

Transcript Highlights:

• They do not have a COLA applied to their funding level.
• They do not have a COLA applied to their funding level.
• And I do have concerns that we’re not going to be able to do everything necessary to make sure that we
• We do recommend, however, not funding the program one year in arrears and instead returning to paying
• As I'm trying to remember, our own bargaining agreements, do classified employees pay differential pay

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the May Revision’s Proposition 98 changes for K-12 and community colleges. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee rises by $6.4 billion over the Governor’s Budget across the three-year window, with higher guarantees in each year, full payment of the prior settle-up, and larger deposits into the school rainy-day fund. The LAO said the revenue and LCFF updates were reasonable, but urged caution about the settle-up approach and recommended using more of the available funding to protect ongoing programs and build budget resilience. Members focused heavily on the size of the proposed $3.9 billion settle-up, the $10.3 billion reserve deposit, declining K-12 enrollment, and how much of the new funding should be ongoing versus one-time. The committee then reviewed the community colleges portion of the budget. Finance described the May Revision’s higher SCFF COLA, additional funding for enrollment growth, a student support block grant, apprenticeship adjustments, and continued funding for deferred maintenance, Calbright, Common Cloud, and credit for prior learning. The Chancellor’s Office supported the core investments but asked for more funding for enrollment growth, changes to the growth formula, and a COLA for Student Equity and Achievement. The LAO recommended prioritizing the statutory COLA increase, noted that more than half of districts are already above current-year growth targets, and said the new adult learner demonstration project should be rejected because districts already have tools to support similar services. Members also discussed a $52 million current-year apportionment shortfall, which Finance said was discovered too late for the May Revision and would need to be addressed later. Finally, the committee took up the proposed implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance proposed one-time funding for the California Student Aid Commission and Cradle to Career to build eligibility and data systems, along with trailer bill changes to set up state approval processes. CSAC said the program is promising but highly complex, that California lacks the needed infrastructure, and that the state will need emergency regulations, data linkages, and ongoing funding beyond the one-time proposal. The LAO agreed that some initial funding is needed but warned that the amounts and ongoing costs remain uncertain and that the Legislature should carefully draft the trailer bill language. Members asked about timing, other states’ actions, and how the state would ensure the program is ready for students and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Obviously, we've heard that we're not going to get hearings on either of the initiatives to the legislature
• These are very popular cross-partisan line initiatives, and in their responses, not only do they not
• It's possible we might not be able to do anything.
• Part of it also has to do with not opening this up to private rights of action and allowing every lawyer
• or not.

Summary: Republican legislative leaders used the availability to focus on affordability, budget pressures, and opposition to several Democratic tax proposals. They criticized a circulating draft income tax proposal as a de facto small-business tax, arguing it would hurt LLCs, S corporations, housing investment, and the broader economy. They also attacked a proposed tire fee, a possible cigarette tax increase, and other tax ideas as regressive or hidden from consumers, while saying Republicans would not support any tax increases and urging budget cuts and spending restraint instead. The leaders said they planned to raise these concerns in an upcoming meeting with Governor Ferguson, along with questions about his budget and how he reconciles prior opposition to a wealth tax with support for an income tax. They also discussed a bill to make it harder to qualify initiatives for the legislature, calling it anti-democratic, and said the majority was ignoring or undermining voter-driven policy efforts. On child welfare, they criticized DCYF oversight and supported stronger accountability, including a bill to fix the state’s “imminent harm” standard and another proposal to stop the state from collecting certain federal disability and survivor benefits from foster youth. Other topics included tort liability reform, where Republicans said the state’s repeated failures in child welfare and juvenile rehabilitation are the underlying problem, not just the cost of claims, though they were open to limited reforms such as disclosure of litigation financing. They also discussed the 340B drug pricing program, saying it is complicated and could affect hospitals, FQHCs, patients, and pharmaceutical innovation. On public safety and technology, they expressed cautious support for bills regulating kids’ social media and AI use, but stressed First Amendment concerns and the need to avoid private rights of action; they were more skeptical of a bill limiting police retention of automatic license plate reader data, saying law enforcement needs effective tools to solve crimes. No votes were taken, and the event ended with Republicans reiterating that affordability was their top priority.

Transcript Highlights:

• So there is a three-month period, July 1, 2024, to September 30, 2024, that we do not have the ability
• Do you want to give your version of it?” “Okay. Kayla, not Department of Finance.
• I do recognize these are emergency vehicles. I'm not taking away from the value of that.
• At this time, MSSA does not have the resources in order to conduct these initial activities.
• So with the arrears pass-through, those months do not untick because it's not recouped.

Summary: The hearing began with an overview of the California Health and Human Services Agency, which described its 2026-27 budget, major departments, and strategic priorities, including behavioral health, housing and human services integration, children and youth, and aging/disability services. The agency also explained a technical CalHHS/CalHires budget adjustment tied to HR1 compliance and eligibility system work. No LAO concerns were raised on that item. The committee then heard from the Office of Youth and Community Restoration on its budget, its SB 823 realignment report, and related issues. OYCR said county-based realignment has generally succeeded but outcomes and readiness vary widely, and it recommended more climate surveys, youth advisory councils, stronger behavioral management, better programming, improved transition planning, and integrated longitudinal data systems. Members pressed OYCR on “net widening,” county-by-county trends, and the gap between the detailed recommendations discussed in hearing and the more general recommendations in the public report. OYCR also described problems with federal Title II grant timing and a pending $14 million administrative funding adjustment, and discussed implementation of the juvenile justice realignment block grant formula. The Ombudsperson division separately requested two new positions due to rising complaints, site visits, and records-access disputes with counties; LAO noted the proposal would create ongoing General Fund costs. Several other departments presented budget change proposals. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities requested $730,000 General Fund ongoing to cover an interagency administrative support gap with DSS; LAO had no concerns. EMSA presented its department overview, said its AB 716 ambulance-rate report has been delayed after resources were reduced, and requested funding for disaster-response vehicle replacement, IT security assessment work, and additional HR/legal staff; members questioned delays, compliance, and the ongoing General Fund impact. The Department of Community Services and Development sought reappropriation of LIWIP funds and explained a new Proposition 4 process for continuing the farmworker housing component. The Department of Rehabilitation requested authority for $60 million in additional federal funds and 54 positions to meet growing vocational rehabilitation demand, with no General Fund impact. The Department of Child Support Services presented its budget and a supplemental report on full pass-through of child support collections. Members questioned why local agency funding was being restored despite declining caseloads, and staff explained that staffing costs have risen faster than caseload declines and that additional funding is needed to maintain service levels. The supplemental report estimated full pass-through would cost about $150 million General Fund annually, or about $80 million for a state-and-county portion, with $3 million to $5 million in automation costs. Finally, the Department of Public Health gave a broad overview of its $5.1 billion budget and its State of Public Health report, highlighting improved mortality and life expectancy, declining overdose deaths and STI rates, persistent racial and regional disparities, and increasing public health emergency demands. CDPH also warned that federal funding threats and policy changes are creating major uncertainty for state and local public health systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• The only one we currently do not have is Senator Lee.
• The only one we currently do not have is Senator Lee.
• And we do not have enough money because the previous estimate, And we do not have enough money because
• We're not paying to set those out from scratch.
• One of the If we do not stay on this construction schedule.

Committee: Joint Joint Oregon-Washington Legislative Action Committee

Summary: The Joint Committee on Interstate 5 Bridge met remotely with Washington legislative members to receive updates on the Interstate Bridge Replacement Program, including environmental review, cost and funding, tolling, and procurement for construction. Program staff said the final supplemental environmental impact statement was published in April 2026, with a federal record of decision expected in early summer. They described the recommended design as a single-level fixed-span bridge, centered I-5 alignment, C Street ramps, one auxiliary lane in each direction, and dispersed park-and-ride parking. Members raised concerns about transparency, the closed chat function, and the decision not to include two auxiliary lanes; staff said the one-lane option was recommended through consultation with partner agencies and analysis, but the final decision would come with the record of decision. Staff also said the diversion analysis projected less than 3% traffic diversion to I-205 in 2045, though members from Oregon and Washington expressed concern about impacts to their communities and asked for more detail on mitigation and decision-making. The committee also reviewed a major cost update. Staff said the full five-mile program is now estimated at $13.5 billion to $15.2 billion, with a likely cost of $14.4 billion, up from a 2022 estimate of $5 billion to $7.5 billion, citing inflation, schedule delays, scope changes, and more detailed risk modeling. They said the first funded phase has been reduced to a $5.68 billion package focused on the Columbia River bridge replacement, connections to I-5, Hayden Island and SR-14, bridge demolition, tolling infrastructure, and advancing light rail design. Funding for that phase was described as $5.69 billion, including $2.1 billion federal funds, $1 billion from each state, and $1.5 billion in projected toll revenue. Members asked what would happen if costs rise further; staff said the estimate includes substantial contingency, the project will use progressive design-build to manage risk, and the team will continue updating the finance plan annually. A separate tolling and traffic-revenue presentation explained that four toll scenarios were analyzed using regional travel demand modeling, a toll diversion model, and a post-processing review. All scenarios assume pre-completion tolling beginning July 1, 2028, a 50% low-income discount for eligible users, and exemptions for tribal preemptions, emergency vehicles, maintenance vehicles, and organized militia. Staff said the low-income discount would affect about 4% to 6% of annual transactions and reduce annual revenues by roughly 2% to 3%. They said Scenario 2 was used for the financial analysis and is sufficient to support the $1.5 billion toll contribution in the funded phase. Members asked about toll collection costs, revenue impacts of the discount, and how the scenarios differed; staff said collection costs are expected to be in line with other WSDOT toll facilities, but exact costs are not yet set because toll rates are not final. Finally, WSDOT staff outlined procurement and delivery steps for construction. They said WSDOT will be the lead contracting agency, using progressive design-build, with a request for qualifications targeted for early July 2026, a request for proposals in October, contractor selection in April 2027, construction starting in 2028, and tolling beginning in 2028. Staff said the approach is intended to consolidate scope, reduce interface risk, and allow transparent negotiation with an independent cost estimator, while preserving an off-ramp if a fair price cannot be reached. Members asked for more detail on timing, cost allocation, and the share of the first phase funded by tolls; staff estimated tolls account for about 26% of the first phase cost.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we don't want to encourage cognitive offloading, simply not paying attention to the development of
• The funding incentives do not achieve without the tools in order to accomplish them.
• They will not just do this and then stop doing it.
• They will not just do this and then stop doing it.
• We do not stop with research alone. ODI is also a delivery partner.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard a presentation on ongoing funding for the California Education Learning Lab. The Learning Lab described its intersegmental grant-making work with UC, CSU, and community college faculty, including projects on AI, math alignment, and open educational resources. The administration proposed moving the program’s administrative home from the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation to GovOps and restoring $4 million annually. The Department of Finance supported the proposal as a way to improve coordination, while the LAO recommended rejecting it, arguing the program is difficult to scale, overlaps with existing campus and segment-wide professional development, and could be wound down to save General Fund dollars. Senators split on the issue: some emphasized the program’s role in fostering innovation and cross-segment collaboration, while others questioned its measurable outcomes and whether it addresses problems rooted in K-12 preparation. The item was held open without a vote. The committee then considered funding for the new Office of Civil Rights within GovOps, created to implement AB 715 and SB 48. The proposal sought $3.5 million in 2026-27 and $2.8 million ongoing to staff the office, provide training and technical assistance to local educational agencies, and help track discrimination complaints through the Department of Education’s uniform complaint process. Finance said the office was being stood up administratively, but many positions were still unfilled; the LAO had no concerns and said the proposal simply implements recent legislation. Senators raised concerns about the office’s placement in GovOps, the lack of guidance while the office is not yet operational, the potential duplication with CDE processes, and whether staffing levels and coordinator roles match the volume and type of complaints. The department said it would adjust resources as workload becomes clearer and that first-year goals would include hiring staff, developing materials, and beginning outreach. The item was held open. After public comment and votes on several vote-only items, the committee heard from the Office of Data and Innovation on a request for five positions and $1.25 million in reimbursement authority. ODI said it uses data science, design, and engineering to improve state services, citing work on EBT theft detection and forecasting community water system outages. Finance had no comment, and the LAO supported the reimbursement model. Senators generally praised ODI’s small but high-impact role and asked about privacy safeguards for vendor AI tools; ODI said it uses state guardrails, enterprise contracts, and coordination with CDT to protect data. The item was held open. The Department of Technology then presented on the Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative, reporting progress on the 8,100-mile network, including 423 miles already complete and more than 70% permitted. CDT said it had selected Skyline Technology Solutions as operator and expected about 5,300 miles completed by December 2026, with some miles possibly slipping into 2027. The LAO noted most of the $3.8 billion appropriated has been encumbered, but raised concerns about the new three-party operating structure and long-term sustainability. Senators asked about accountability, the need for a two-year extension of liquidation authority, and whether revenues will cover operating costs. CDT said the extension is a precaution to allow for final reallocations if needed, that CDT retains ultimate responsibility, and that it expects the network to be self-sustaining over time through service revenues and lease arrangements. The department committed to continued reporting through annual reports, advisory committees, and briefings.

Transcript Highlights:

• Definitely do not want to give her a demotion.
• Do we know who the amendment sponsor was? I do not.
• By Representative Banderman, having to do with initiative petitions and referendums. We do pass.
• So the state of Missouri is not paying for this unless it's appropriated. Correct. Okay.
• So if you want to do this, it's fine. We're not even going to be against it.

Committee: House Rules - Legislative

Summary: The Missouri House Legislative Rules Committee met to consider a long hearing notice of bills and resolutions. Chair Cupps opened by explaining that the committee would proceed through all items on the notice, including a late-added House Committee Substitute for HB 3383, and announced an initial motion to recommit Senate Substitute for SB 889 back to its House committee of origin. He said the bill’s language appeared to be aimed at banning corporal punishment in public schools, and he wanted the originating committee to review it further before the Rules Committee advanced it. That recommit motion passed 9-2. The committee then took up and mostly advanced a large number of measures, including bills on tourism revenue, county health officers, library boards, soil erosion control, child maintenance after DWI fatalities, initiative petitions, foreign law, post-conviction relief, property development applications, local taxation, child care licensing, administrative rules, workforce training grants, water resources, judiciary offenses, water service line fees, hospital zones, prepaid wireless emergency charges, a commemorative day, disabled veterans’ property tax credits, unemployment administration, school district operations, military leave, health care provider networks, mobile food vendors, school emergency response devices, compensation for property owners in certain cities, young driver offenses, insurance regulations, tax credit cleanup, public water supply districts, downtown redevelopment incentives, workplace violence prevention in health care, pass-through entity taxation, county development disability resource board levies, county finances, and a civic recognition resolution. Most of these passed unanimously or with only a few dissenting votes; HB 1734 failed 5-6, and HB 2291, HB 2124, HB 2139/2175, HB 2254, HB 2693, HB 2699, HB 2767, HB 2933, HB 32110, and HB 3220 each drew some opposition or abstentions. Several bills prompted discussion. HB 2933, dealing with school district operations, was explained as banning seclusion rooms and restraints in response to a DOJ probe; it passed 10-1. HB 3174, on emergency responses in schools, would provide wearable panic buttons subject to appropriations, and members discussed funding and whether it created an unfunded mandate; it passed 11-0. HB 2877, on unemployment administration adjustments, was clarified as shifting existing unemployment tax money for administrative funding without adding cost to employers, and it passed 11-0. HB 3383, on nonprofit corporations’ hiring practices and signature gathering for initiative petitions, was described as requiring E-Verify for certain signature gatherers; after questions about burdens on employers and election process concerns, it passed 9-0 with two present. The committee also advanced HCR 52 encouraging participation in America 250 celebrations and HCR 31 creating a Seal of Civic Recognition Award. At the end, the committee took up House Committee Substitute for Senate Bills 1066 and 1088, a property taxation measure, and it was given a due pass recommendation. Chair Cupps thanked the sponsors who stayed through the lengthy hearing and said the committee might meet again later in the week, likely Thursday, before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do know the number of students that are not meeting their obligation and need to pay back their loan
• that they were not doing.
• So do not dilly-dally, but you can straight your legs, use your So do not dilly-dally, but you can stretch
• Are they just not doing this? What was going on? So that the state? Are they just not doing this?
• So we're not going to be able to do that.

Committee: House Budget

Summary: The committee heard the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services present its FY 2027 budget request, with Director Sarah Wilson and budget staff describing the department’s mission, major divisions, and the impact of federal funding shifts, especially the FMAP change that will shift costs to general revenue. Wilson emphasized prevention, public health infrastructure, workforce capacity, and data modernization, while several members praised the department’s responsiveness and cost-cutting efforts. The discussion repeatedly focused on lapses, excess authority, and the department’s stated practice of spending federal and other funds before general revenue where possible. Members asked detailed questions about local public health agency support, nutrition programs, rural health and primary care, newborn screening, the state public health lab, and the department’s use of flexibility and reallocations. There was extended discussion of substance use disorder funding: the department explained that some funding is being reduced in its own budget because transfer authority is being added for the Department of Mental Health and the Department of Corrections, while some other SUD-related lines are actual reductions. Members also questioned tobacco prevention and cessation cuts, maternal and infant health programs, fetal infant mortality review, and minority health initiatives, with staff explaining program purposes and noting that some reductions were tied to excess authority or to moving programs to other departments. The committee also reviewed specific operational items such as the Health Initiatives Fund transfer, debt offset escrow for loan repayment defaults, donated funds authority, emergency preparedness, environmental health, health informatics, HIV/STI/hepatitis services, local public health incentives, and the COVID/ARPA authority reductions. Several members requested follow-up information on vacancies, lapse trends, grant spending plans, and program details. No final vote or formal action was taken in the portion provided; the chair recessed briefly and the hearing continued with additional budget testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• and will do for people is a small price to pay.
• I've not spent a great deal of time on it, but I do have it in front of me.
• , seeing carriages, and cringing at horses who are clearly not healthy enough to be doing that.
• So we do not work.
• There are many times in the summer that we actually do not work for days at a time.

Bills: HB386 , HB1449 , HB1701 , HB2142 , HB2675 , HB2857 , HB3063 , HB3171 , HB3641 , HB3732 , HB4045 , HB4370 , HB4491 , HB4505 , HB4626 , HB5267 , HB5356

Committee: House Intergovernmental Affairs

Keywords: construction contracts, change orders, local government, budget limits, Texas legislation, HB 1449, mobile food vendors, food trucks, mobile food service establishments, permits, county health permit, municipal permitting, Health and Safety Code Chapter 437A, Chapter 437, inspection agreements, permit reciprocity, fee cap, preemption, large counties, population over one million

Transcript Highlights:

• This is not a pure apples-to-apples, but I looked at what we pay outside actuaries to do some of the
• We're not out trying to find other business. We're not doing work for other states.
• I'll do my best. We've spent over a month studying this, but I do not claim to be an expert in it.
• Spent over a month studying this, but I do not claim to be an expert in it.
• However, in Washington, the most common exceptions that do not pay into Social Security are police and

Committee: Joint Select Committee on Pension Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Florida does not do that. We do have a provider. We do Florida does not do that.
• not do not remain enrolled.
• this and essentially not doing out or not more expensive.
• What do you do? It that it and so not only did it cost them money of doing that asked.
• And it's not as as to be, you know, initially maybe certainly is to.

Transcript Highlights:

• do and I worked together to put numbers on to the people's initiative."
• 00:04:52.960><c> I</c><00:04:53.120><c> worked</c> initiative that the do and I worked initiative that
• So, I think as do people's initiative.
• Initiative and make sure we specify what existing relief won't be tied automatically to it, or do we
• </c><00:54:40.720><c> when</c><00:54:41.040><c> we</c><00:54:41.280><c> choose</c> is not going to pay

Committee: Joint Revenue

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not have that.
• Madam Chair, Senator Lopez, I do not believe so. Okay.
• Not because I don't want them to come to us—I do—but I want to do what we... we need to do.
• Do we need to increase the pay?
• landlords do not want to take HUD vouchers at all.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not a one-time thing. You've got to keep paying it every year.
• We've not forgotten you. Appreciate it. I do have a question.
• Do you own the material, or do you just pay for it? I believe we just access it and pay for it.
• I'm sure we do not own it. It's a national organization company.
• And I don't know if you're paying attention or if you're not paying attention.

Committee: House Oklahoma Education Commission

Summary: The meeting focused primarily on planning for an upcoming AI symposium and related commission work. Members reviewed nomination and registration timelines, attendance categories, site logistics, and microcredential requirements for participants. They discussed the symposium’s structure, including slots for K-12, higher education, career tech, libraries, tribal groups, and innovation grant recipients, and noted that the event would likely be held in early June with a follow-up planning meeting on April 2. The group also discussed launching a newsletter via Substack and publishing a monthly podcast to share updates and build public awareness. A major portion of the discussion centered on School AI and a proposed $45 million AI initiative. Members described School AI pilot activity at OCCC and broader plans to work with K-12, career tech, higher education, and libraries, while emphasizing privacy, data governance, and the need for local training and agency-level negotiation. The $45 million proposal, referenced as House Bill 1782, would create a revolving fund, an advisory council, and broad allowable uses including tools, professional development, curriculum, research, student programs, infrastructure, and public outreach. Representative Williams said the bill was moving through the House appropriations process and that the goal was to keep the funding intact. The group also raised concerns about other AI-related proposals and initiatives, including three bills by Representative Cody Maynard and the Oklahoma AI Roundtable, which some members viewed skeptically because of its paid membership model. A podcast episode on ethics and legal issues in AI was previewed, including a controversial example about using AI to survey students for safety risks; members agreed the example was hypothetical but potentially sensitive. The meeting ended with broader discussion of workforce needs, especially nursing and corrections education, including efforts to expand LPN/RN pathways, address certification costs, and connect training to rural health and reentry programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• So making that which you do not use.
• We're not going to do it by scaring businesses out.
• not realize that by doing it in the state of Minnesota that is best because we would do it cleaner and
• do more in a situation now we could not do more in a situation now where<00:35:34.240><c> uh</c><00:
• </c><00:38:19.599><c> not</c> decades if we do not decades if we do not change.<00:38:21.440><c> The<

Transcript Highlights:

• The point is that resilient projects are very expensive and the state does not have the money to pay
• The point is that resilient projects are very expensive and the state does not have the money to pay
• So we're not looking to do that, you know, that's not something that's going to happen in six months
• Many municipalities do not have an urban forest master plan.
• But if you are not low-income, if you are not a first-time home buyer, you're paying a full amount, and

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a hearing on S. 2542, the Mass Ready Act, the Healey-Driscoll administration’s environmental bond bill. Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Rebecca Tepper and Undersecretary Jen Sullivan described the bill as a $3 billion resilience package to protect drinking water, farms, fisheries, roads, bridges, parks, and communities from flooding, heat, drought, wildfires, and other climate impacts. They highlighted major authorizations for flood and coastal resilience, DCR infrastructure, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, open space and land protection, food security infrastructure, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund for low-cost loans to municipalities, tribes, and water districts. Committee members asked about project lifespans, flood and salt marsh permitting, wastewater and combined sewer overflow funding, parkway maintenance, land acquisition priorities, Quabbin stewardship, and how the revolving fund would be capitalized and administered. The administration said the fund would be modeled on the Clean Water Trust, use existing trust resources rather than new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds; they also said the bill would streamline certain permitting and improve flood-risk disclosure and climate-related building standards. Many witnesses urged the committee to strengthen the bill’s funding levels or add related policy provisions. Labor, contractor, and plumbing groups supported creating a water reuse and graywater recycling commission, saying it could conserve water, reduce stormwater and sewer burdens, and create skilled jobs. Boston Harbor Now asked for higher authorizations for the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program and resilient coast work, plus permitting reforms for nature-based and waterfront projects. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance backed the bill but also urged inclusion of drought-management legislation, a water reuse commission, a statewide flood buyout program, and more support for community resiliency. Environmental justice advocates from Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements in schools and public housing, while conservation and tree advocates sought larger investments in urban forestry, local nurseries, and workforce training, along with clearer language to ensure municipal reforestation funds go to cities and towns. Agricultural and food system witnesses emphasized the importance of the bill’s food security and farmland provisions. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative supported the $125 million food security infrastructure grant program, saying it has funded critical facilities and equipment for farmers, fishers, processors, and food access organizations, but warned that without the bill there could be a funding gap in fiscal year 2027. They also supported farmland protection and asked for more funding for agricultural capital programs, used-equipment eligibility in grant programs, and a next-generation farmer fund. Water utility representatives said the bill still falls short of the state’s long-term drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater needs, citing EPA estimates of nearly $37 billion in needed investments over 20 years and urging dedicated recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not know at this point.
• The Department of Health Care Access and Information, We do not know at this point.
• They're not going to pay it.
• Obviously, it's not a good time to do what we do. Subsidized health care.
• Obviously, it's not a good time to do what we do.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s Medi-Cal program and on community health effects from recent immigration enforcement actions. Committee leaders said H.R. 1 would sharply reduce federal funding, increase administrative burdens, and worsen access to care, especially for Medi-Cal enrollees, immigrant families, rural communities, and reproductive health patients. The second half of the hearing examined how ICE raids and related federal actions are creating fear, reducing clinic and emergency department use, and disrupting children’s access to schools and early childhood education. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined the main H.R. 1 provisions affecting Medi-Cal: work requirements, semiannual eligibility redeterminations, shorter retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal support for emergency and lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for prohibited abortion providers. She estimated millions could lose coverage, with tens of billions of dollars in federal funding at risk. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warned the defunding provision could force clinic closures, service reductions, and loss of access to family planning, STI testing, and cancer screenings. The California Hospital Association said the financing changes could cut hospital revenue by tens of billions over 10 years and threaten access, especially for rural and safety-net hospitals. The Western Center on Law and Poverty argued the law would increase churn, paperwork, and uninsured rates, disproportionately harming working adults and people experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation timelines, notification systems, administrative costs, the effect on immigrant eligibility, and whether California could delay or mitigate some provisions. Bass said the state was still assessing federal guidance, planning county and provider outreach, and exploring a possible delay for work requirements and a transition period for provider-tax changes. Members also discussed how state budget actions may need to be revisited in light of H.R. 1, and how California might preserve access through state-only funding or other policy changes. In the second panel, CHIRLA, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Children’s Partnership described the health consequences of immigration enforcement. Speakers said raids and data-sharing fears are causing anxiety, trauma, and avoidance of care, with Los Angeles County reporting declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits after enforcement actions. The Children’s Partnership said school and early childhood absences are rising in some communities and that enforcement is undermining children’s emotional well-being and access to education. Members asked for more data and discussed possible state protections, telehealth, mobile care, and legal and policy responses to reduce fear and preserve access to health and education services.

Transcript Highlights:

• But our transit agencies do not seem to be doing that very effectively, and I don't fully understand
• And I think that's just because it's not in the statute for them to go do those developments.
• And that's not on you. What taxpayers thought they were going to pay for in 2020.
• If it's not a problem, if you want to rebut that, you're welcome to do that.
• that be reflected in these documents and not having approval to do it?

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held an informational hearing on the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 2026 draft business plan, with testimony from the authority, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and the High-Speed Rail Inspector General. Chair Cortese framed the hearing around the project’s recent changes: a new CEO, revised delivery strategy, loss of federal funds, renewed interest in private financing and value capture, and proposed adjustments to the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment. He also raised concerns about statutory compliance, transparency, and whether the draft plan fully reflects required elements and true costs and timelines. Authority CEO Ian Chaudhry said the project has made substantial construction progress in the Central Valley and is moving toward track installation, with the state’s $1 billion annual cap-and-invest funding providing a stable base. He argued the plan uses design optimization, direct procurement of materials, and revised sequencing to reduce costs and support an early operating segment by about 2032-33. He also promoted broader commercialization of the corridor through real estate, energy, broadband, logistics, and public-private partnerships, saying private sector interest is now real. Several senators pressed him on station locations, tax increment financing, utility relocation authority, permitting delays, transparency, and whether the project can realistically reach Los Angeles and San Francisco on the current timeline and budget. The LAO and Inspector General were more skeptical. LAO analyst Helen Kirstine said the draft plan assumes major scope changes, including a shorter segment, a Merced station outside downtown, more single-tracking, and several statutory changes that have not yet been enacted. She warned that the plan may not comply with recent legislative requirements, that funding may still be insufficient even for the reduced segment, and that borrowing against future cap-and-invest revenues is risky because those revenues are uncertain and volatile. Inspector General Ben Belknap said the draft plan fails to comply with newer statutory requirements, especially regarding the Merced-to-Bakersfield scope, the funding plan, and missing procurement milestone dates. He said the presentation obscures cost increases and schedule delays and limits the Legislature’s ability to compare current estimates with prior reports. Committee members generally supported continued oversight and some form of project delivery reform, but several expressed concern that the plan relies on legislative changes that have not been approved and on private financing that may not materialize. Chaudhry said the authority would address the Inspector General’s findings in the final business plan and continue to pursue federal grants, private capital, and corridor commercialization. No vote was taken at the hearing.