Transcript Highlights:

• Again, it comes back to the statute. It, again, it comes back to the statutes.
• I’d have to get back to you.
• Did the money get paid back?
• Did the money get paid back?
• people back within 24 hours.

Summary: The committee first considered the confirmation of Dr. John Lattell to the Board of Medicine. In questioning, senators focused heavily on his views about abortion, vaccines, ivermectin, and the role of CDC/FDA guidance in board discipline cases. Dr. Lattell said the board applies Florida statutes and works through probable cause panels and legal counsel, but he also expressed strong pro-life views, skepticism of federal health guidance, and criticism of vaccines and some medical practices. Supporters praised his long medical career, military service, and family medicine background, while opponents argued his views could prevent him from being objective in disciplinary matters. The committee voted to recommend him for confirmation to the full Senate, with Senators Polsky and Ruson voting no. The committee then took up the confirmation of Taylor Hatch as Secretary of the Department of Children and Families. Hatch described her background in state human services and outlined priorities centered on accountability, data, lived experience, and improving service delivery. Senators asked about SNAP error rates, Hope Florida, legislative analyses, staffing, and the department’s handling of child welfare and medically complex cases. Hatch said the department was reducing SNAP error rates, that Hope Florida uses navigators to connect people with community resources and self-sufficiency supports, and that DCF is working with the Department of Health and other partners to improve investigations and accountability in child welfare. She also said the agency is reviewing medically complex cases and strengthening oversight of community-based care providers through contracts, audits, and proposed funding-model changes. A substantial portion of the Hatch discussion centered on whether the department had been responsive to legislative requests and whether it had provided timely bill analyses. Senators also pressed her on Hope Florida staffing, the number of participants served, and the Hope Florida Foundation’s compliance and legal oversight. Hatch said the foundation is undergoing a financial audit and that the department is relying on required reports and ongoing investigations. The transcript ends amid continued questioning about a community-based care contractor’s finances, related-party transactions, and whether further forensic audits or repayments are needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> when you have a moment, may we go back >> when you have a moment, may we go back
• We'll go back to 718. Reservations. So ordered. 719.
• And if I could go back to >> Reservations.
• So ordered. when we have time, can we go back to when we have time, can we go back to 7:27?
• We'll go back to 727. 728. We'll go back to 727. Representative<00:56:23.440> Moroka.

Bills: HB1952, HB1951, HB1929, HB2497, HB2208, HB2572, HB1953, HB2551, HB2549, HB1737, HB1628, HB1769, HB2493, HB2264, HB1997, HB2168, HB2427, HB1805, HB2180, HB2184, HB2219, HB2469, HB2233, HB2519, HB2141, HB1904, HB2201, HB2410, HB2007, HB2385, HB2444, HB2349, HB2235, HB1872, HB2416, HB2291, HB2292, HB2263, HB2359, HB2455, HB1509, HB1514, HB1515, HB1648, HB2164, HB2323, HB1825, HB2172, HB1888, HB2005, HB2387, HB2358, HB2119, HB2276, HB2472, HB1714, HB2325, HB1541, HB1960, HB2140, HB2315, HB2367, HB2388, HB1696, HB2333, HB2138, HB2332, HB2283, HB2059, HB2057, HB2589, HB2417, HB2337, HB1588, HB2217, HB2020, HB1915, HB1742, HB2026, HB1965, HB1546, HB2360, HB1563, HB1749, HB2614, HB1511, HB1753, HB1849, HB1641, HB2161, HB2194, HB1721, HB2284, HB2188, HB1897, HB1880, HB1573, HB1876, HB20, HB2137

Keywords: HB1952, Hawaii agriculture, University of Hawaii, CTAHR, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resilience, Kauai, agricultural research station, extension station, capital improvements, general obligation bonds, GO bonds, appropriation, ADA compliance, Americans with Disabilities Act, certified kitchen, greenhouse, laboratory, field research, cesspool decommissioning, invasive species

Transcript Highlights:

• Economic impact back, and this goes back a little bit about the missed opportunities.
• A net return back to the farm is $13.98 million in value added back on those acres.
• reflect back on this.
• So looking for some research to back it up. So looking for some research to back it up.
• Thank you for having us back here today.

Summary: The committee met in Fargo and approved the minutes from the March 31 meeting before hearing a series of informational presentations focused on North Dakota agriculture, water, and research. NDSU President David Cook opened with remarks about NDSU’s land-grant mission, emphasizing statewide service through research, teaching, and extension, and highlighting examples such as the Lilac Agriculture startup and the university’s role in applying research to real-world problems. He said he intends to spend time listening across the state to better understand local needs. The committee then received a detailed presentation on a state irrigation and drainage study from Tom Bodine on behalf of Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring. The study projected significant potential for expanded irrigation acreage, especially in counties such as McLean, Williams, Sargent, Burleigh, Mountrail, McKenzie, McIntosh, Dunn, and Bottineau, and estimated major economic gains from irrigation, including higher farm returns and support for value-added agriculture. Members discussed water permits, surface water versus aquifers, infrastructure, drought resilience, and the role of legal drains in improving productivity and generating economic activity. The presenters also noted that the full report is available online. Dr. Greg Lardy followed with NDSU’s required interim report, outlining the university’s agricultural research and extension system, including the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, seven research-extension centers, and the economic importance of agriculture to the state. He highlighted recent research impacts such as new crop varieties, potato breeding successes, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, weather-network tools, and 4-H programming. He also described NDSU’s budget priorities: restoring the governor’s proposed 10% cuts, additional operating support, and deferred maintenance funding. Committee members asked about the new agricultural field lab, storage sheds, and NDSU’s partnership with Grand Farm. The committee also heard from the North Dakota Water Resources Research Institute and a professor presenting water-related research, including data center cooling, water reuse, smart irrigation, and a feasibility study on co-locating data centers with greenhouse and aquaculture production. Members asked about water use, ownership, and whether the concepts were operational or still speculative. Finally, North Dakota AgTech presented its NSF-funded innovation engine work, describing startup commercialization, on-farm trials, workforce development, and partnerships with NDSU, UND, tribal colleges, and other land-grant institutions. No formal votes were taken beyond approval of the prior meeting minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• back into the other colleges. back into the other colleges.
• It goes back to where you were at.
• It goes back to where you were at.
• Second, back to jumping.
• ><00:48:05.599> uh do right now is go back to go back to uh do right now is go back to go back

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The committee met to consider amendments to House Bill 111. It first adopted amendment number one without objection. Members then discussed a Senate amendment related to a $750,000 state match for the Central Wyoming College Jackson project, with Senator Laursen explaining the request as a way to leverage local fundraising for the final phase of the project. He said the project had been underway since 2018, that the building was nearing completion, and that the amendment was intended to encourage a local fundraising campaign rather than wait for a later appropriation. Representative Lien questioned whether the funding had gone through the usual approval process, and other members raised concerns about bypassing standard procedures, while Laursen argued the request was consistent with prior late-stage project adjustments and reflected local skin in the game. The discussion also covered a Senate amendment concerning University of Wyoming land use, specifically whether language should remain requiring open space or allow trustees more flexibility to decide between open space and parking. One member moved to delete the Senate amendment and reinsert the stricken language, but after discussion the motion was withdrawn so the committee could consider all amendments together. Members noted that the university had already been discussing the plan and that the language change would not necessarily alter the trustees’ authority, though it might protect the university. The committee then turned to a Gillette College/Enzi building amendment. Senator Driscoll said the proposal was his own and not requested by the college, and Janelle Overberlander, founding president of Gillette Community College District, testified about the history of the project, including the 2021 separation from the Northern Wyoming Community College District, prior planning for a STEM building, and the later decision to revive the project as an academic building honoring Senator Enzi. She said the building is intended to address lab space needs and support industry partners, including companies expected to bring jobs to Campbell County. Driscoll explained that the amendment would provide a dollar-for-dollar match for non-state money and require Gillette College to move to a four-mill levy, which he said would eventually make the college a net contributor to the system. The committee continued discussing the amendment and its long-term fiscal effects, but no final vote on the later amendments is shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• And very quickly knocked it back in about 4 or 5 years.
• And now it's creeping back north.
• And to me that's, you know, back there again back in the 60s and 70s, those all those areas were actually
• Back to, back to your question. The original facility in the 60s were built in 12 months.
• to the federal government, rented back to the.

Transcript Highlights:

• What I do like is taking money back when we know it's stolen from a senior citizen and putting it back
• OK, so I'm going to say this back.
• Let me go back even before that.
• This bill takes us, it doesn't take us all the way back, but it takes us about half of the way back.
• Back in many moons ago, we cannot...

Bills: HB867, HB1347, HB1801, HB1820, HB2197, HB2617, HB3110, HB3166, HB3330, HB4237, HB4342, HB4629, HB4933, HJR148

Keywords: criminal case dismissal, attorney discretion, law enforcement misconduct, judicial approval, evidence, judicial consent, transparency, healthcare, Medicare, insurance, elderly, retired, benefits, access, cost, criminal justice, case dismissal, prosecutorial discretion, law enforcement oversight, criminal procedure

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome back, ladies and gentlemen, after lunch.
• Body, welcome back for lunch.
• We are back on the bill. Mr.
• We are back on the one has been adopted. We are back on the bill.
• We don't need to stand back. We bill. We don't need to stand back.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, and I yield back. back. back.
• Speaker, I yield back. back. back.
• And I yield<01:57:29.599> back. yield back. yield back.
• And I yield<02:00:07.360> back. yield back. yield back.
• Airborne, I yield back. back. back.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, January 15, 2026, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Back on the bill as amended, are there... Questions?
• Let's go back to Tab 14, please. We're going to take up SP 114.
• We will now go back and take up Tab 18, SB 1825.
• Back on the bill as amended, any questions?
• They can use any of that to pay it back, so this just clarifies that.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Back to the ringer. No. Okay. Back to the ringer.
• <00:39:36.800> He's Back to the bringer. He's happy. He's Back to the bringer.
• Oh, we did push one back. Three now. Oh, we did push one back.
• Clarissa, bring her back or the reader. Clarissa, bring her back or the reader.
• So we went back to going back to issues.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I yield back.
• I yield back. three repeat next year. I yield back.
• and I yield back. and I yield back.
• Speaker, I yield back. Speaker, I yield back.
• Speaker, I yield back. back. back.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Friday, December 12, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They were more likely to come back to work.
• They were more likely to come back to work.
• So let me go back and get with Dr.
• And how we can get that information back out.
• It doesn't tie back to individual students, right?

Summary: The committee first approved the prior meeting minutes, then heard a presentation from Maddie San Juan of the Women’s Foundation of Arkansas on the report “Holding It All Together: Working Moms and Child Care in Arkansas.” She said the report found that Arkansas moms want to work, but child care costs, inflexible schedules, inadequate paid leave, and the mental load of caregiving are major barriers. She cited survey and focus group findings showing most mothers want full-time work, 69% identified child care costs as a barrier, and many said flexible hours were the most important workplace support. She also described county-level dashboard data, the high cost of infant and toddler care, and examples from working mothers about spending most or all of their paychecks on child care. Members asked questions about labor force participation trends, the meaning of the child care cost figures, and how flexibility could be implemented across industries. The presenter and members also discussed the broader economic-development impact of child care shortages and the need for public-private partnerships. The Department of Education then gave an update on early childhood programs. Officials said they are building internal dashboards to improve transparency and data access for school readiness assistance, including enrollment, application, and provider participation monitoring. They reported that the state is still moving forward with the CLASS transition and expects to release transition funding to providers in the coming weeks using Preschool Development Grant funds. They also clarified that OEP awards based on CLASS scores are separate from OEC’s work and that the data is FOIA-able. Officials warned providers about a temporary payment delay during the transition to a new system, saying payments will stop June 30 and resume around July 14, with any owed funds processed then. Members raised additional concerns about early childhood special education funding, overpayment recovery from a child care center, audit requirements for Head Start and SRA funds, the market rate survey, and the status of local leads after a recompete. Department staff said they would follow up on special education funding levels and audit rules, noted that the overpayment case is under appeal, and said the market rate survey is still in procurement. They also reported that 23 local leads will cover all counties starting July 1, with no major job-description changes, and described a new PDG Partners stakeholder group and an upcoming June 23 QRIS webinar to gather provider and parent input. The meeting ended with no further business and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• We must fight back.
• We can either fight back or we can potentially permanently lose the ability ever to fight back again
• Wish we had that technology back in 2011. I wish we had that technology back in 2011.
• The question is, is that going back to that, is that going to protect us from... ...is it going back
• Back in 32, we're going to go back to the commission. And I will happily, Mr.

Summary: The Assembly Elections Committee met on August 19, 2025, to consider ACA 8, SB 280, and an informational hearing on AB 604. The meeting began with several failed motions to adjourn, to read public comments into the record, and to recess so members could review the roughly 16,000 public comments submitted through the committee portal. The chair emphasized the hearing’s expedited format, transparency measures, and rules limiting witness testimony, and noted a letter from Speaker Rivas authorizing Assemblymember Berman to present ACA 8. ACA 8, described by supporters as the “Election Rigging Response Act,” would place before voters a temporary congressional redistricting plan tied to AB 604 and triggered only if another state, especially Texas, adopts a partisan mid-decade redistricting. Supporters, including Assemblymember Berman, labor groups, CTA, Planned Parenthood affiliates, SEIU, and other allied organizations, argued the measure was a response to partisan gerrymandering elsewhere and a defense of democracy, with voters having the final say in a November 4, 2025 special election. Opponents, including current and former redistricting commissioners, good-government groups, business and taxpayer organizations, and many members of the public, argued the proposal undermines California’s independent redistricting model, was rushed without adequate public review, could cost roughly $200 million or more, and would invite litigation and partisan manipulation. The committee also debated a proposed amendment that would bar legislators who voted for ACA 8 from later running for Congress in districts adopted under the measure. After extended procedural disputes, the committee voted to lay the amendment on the table. The hearing then continued with extensive public testimony, overwhelmingly divided between strong support and strong opposition, but the transcript provided does not show a final committee vote on ACA 8 or SB 280 before the excerpt ends.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was sold for back taxes in 2009, is that correct?
• I believe we determined that cards, basically certified mail receipts back.
• The money that we send back through excess proceeds does not go to schools.
• No one received instructions as to what to do when the land was sold for back taxes.
• Oh my goodness, my grandparents' property got sold for back taxes. I did not know.

Summary: The Joint Budget Committee’s Claims Review and Litigation Oversight Subcommittee met to consider two proposed litigation settlements from the Department of Corrections and one appealed claim from the Claims Commission. In the first settlement, Caroline Arnett v. Larry Norris, et al., members asked about the underlying sexual assault allegations, whether policies had changed, and whether PREA audits and other safeguards were in place. The department said audits were underway and that steps had been taken to prevent similar conduct. The committee approved the settlement by voice vote. In the second settlement, Latasha Ridgel v. Arkansas Department of Corrections, members raised concerns about the length of the case and the fact that it involved similar allegations. The department cited attorney turnover, COVID-related delays, and scheduling difficulties; the settlement was approved by voice vote. The committee then reviewed Sharon Greer and Deanna Hayes v. Commissioner of State Lands, an appeal of a Claims Commission dismissal involving a 2009 tax sale of family property in Crittenden County. The claimants said they did not learn of the sale or the $4,200 in excess proceeds until 2025, and argued that notice was inadequate and that the overage should not have gone to the county. The Commissioner of State Lands’ office responded that notice was sent to addresses on file, certified mail receipts were returned, and a post-sale notice explained the process for contesting the sale and claiming excess proceeds. The office also argued the claim was untimely, that the commission lacked jurisdiction, and that state law bars monetary damages against the commissioner for actions related to tax-delinquent land sales. Members discussed broader concerns about the tax-sale and excess-proceeds process, including whether excess proceeds should be held longer or routed differently, but noted those issues would require legislative changes rather than action in this case. The committee then voted to affirm the Claims Commission’s dismissal of the claim. The meeting adjourned after the motion passed.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then when we get back to it, we will look and see if it needs to be actually audited.
• <00:52:44.000> and uh Matt have shared a lot of back and uh Matt have shared a lot of back
• there and work back from it that's<01:15:12.159> the<01:15:12.360> policy Mr.
• the rules committee labor committee back the rules committee labor committee back to<01:38:22.960
• <01:51:01.320> before the time to bring the bill back before the time to bring the bill back

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Before CMS sent it back? Yes, sir. Well, what about the waiver? Is that a viable? “Sent it back?”
• Go back to DHS.
• Welcome back.
• I'll be right back. I'm going to go ahead. I'll be right back. I'm going to go ahead.
• I'll be right back. I'm going to go ahead. I'll be right back. I'm going to go ahead.

Summary: The Administrative Rules Subcommittee of the Arkansas Legislative Council reviewed several agency rules and requests. It approved without objection an Insurance Department amendment implementing Act 261’s holding company system requirements, two State Board of Election Commissioners rules on poll watchers/provisional voting and certified election monitors, and a Treasurer of State rule removing DEI-related membership requirements to comply with Act 938. The committee also held over for a month a Department of Education request related to excluding a rule from reporting requirements so it could be discussed further with the Department of Commerce. A major portion of the meeting focused on the Department of Human Services’ request to be excluded from rulemaking for Acts 567, 568, 967, and 1025. DHS said federal CMS guidance created comparability and other issues for the Medicaid-related dental and diagnostic lab provisions, making it difficult to implement the acts as written by their effective dates. DHS outlined possible paths, including broader adult dental coverage, waivers, or splitting the dental rate increase from the special-needs cap increase. The Arkansas State Dental Association disputed DHS’s approach, arguing Act 1025 is workable, that the pediatric rate increase should move forward separately, and that DHS should continue pursuing the law rather than stop rulemaking. Committee members questioned both sides extensively about CMS correspondence, waiver timelines, fiscal impact, and whether the acts could be severed. After testimony from DHS, the Dental Association, and a public commenter, the committee adopted a motion not to exclude DHS from reporting requirements for Acts 567, 568, 967, and 1025, meaning DHS must continue the normal rulemaking/reporting process. The committee then accepted the Division of Higher Education’s report, which recommended repealing three of its 32 rules and keeping the remaining 29 in effect. It also received routine written updates on older and newer rulemaking items and filed the monthly updates without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:36:00.760> to change the laws again to go back to change the laws again to go back to saying
• He said the state would have to come back and make it more robust.
• He said the state would have to come back and make it more robust.
• We do need to come back and fix the board next year.
• <00:43:10.480> to would hope you would take it back to would hope you would take it back to

Keywords: Call to Order 00:00 Roll Call 16:20 HB 90 Discussion 17:00 HB 90 Vote 25:40 HB 398 Discussion 30:55 HB 398 Vote 38:52 HB 580 Discussion 40:10 HB 580 Vote 42:10 HB 87 Discussion 44:12 HB 87 Vote 44:54 HB 422 Discussion 46:00 HB 422 Vote 46:43 Adjournment 47:20, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Licensing and Occupations met on March 12, 2025, after waiting for the Senate to adjourn so the committee could officially convene. The committee first took up House Bill 90, which concerned freestanding birthing centers and related medical language. Testimony from Representative Jason Nemes, Dr. Jeffrey Goldberg of ACOG Kentucky, and a representative from Kentucky Right to Life focused on clarifying what medical procedures are not abortions under Kentucky law, including miscarriage management, ectopic pregnancy, molar pregnancy, sepsis, hemorrhage, and stillbirth. Supporters said the committee substitute was intended to reduce confusion and barriers to care for physicians and patients, while Senator Armstrong and Senator Berg raised concerns about the late-arriving substitute, terminology, and whether the bill was being accurately described as supported by ACOG. The committee substitute and title amendment were adopted, and House Bill 90 passed with favorable expression. The committee then considered House Bill 398, relating to occupational safety and health. Representative Walker Thomas said the bill would prevent Kentucky from adopting or enforcing regulations stricter than federal OSHA standards, arguing it would create uniformity for businesses operating in multiple states while preserving worker safety. Senator Armstrong questioned what would happen if federal OSHA were eliminated and argued the bill could reduce Kentucky’s ability to address state-specific workplace hazards; Representative Thomas responded that Kentucky is a state-plan state and would retain the ability to act if needed, and that the measure was about administrative regulation rather than legislation. After a committee substitute was adopted, the bill passed 8-1, with Senator Armstrong voting no. House Bill 580, concerning alcohol and drug counselors and peer support specialists, was presented next. Representative Kim Moore and Elena Sweezy explained that the bill would add structure, training, and supervision requirements for peer support specialists, limit group settings to eight patients, shorten temporary peer support status to nine months, and require additional supervision hours so trainees can complete required training. The bill passed with favorable expression, with Senator Nemes voting no. House Bill 87, relating to employment and occupational licensing, followed; Representative Emily Callaway said it would reduce barriers for people with felony records and help “second chance” citizens enter the workforce. Several senators supported the goal but Senator McDaniel noted caution about substance-use billing and oversight, and the bill passed with favorable expression. Finally, House Bill 422, relating to administrative regulations, was described by Representative Derrick Lewis as a streamlining measure that would reduce paperwork and simplify the regulatory process. It also passed with favorable expression, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's nice to be back.
• To bounce back.
• And then we have to come back and we have to continue to work on that until we get it established back
• Chair, no back, Dr. Elmoudi.
• I don't know off the top of my head, but I will get back to you right after I get back to Senator Van

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Energy Development and Transmission Committee met in interim session and approved the November 6 minutes. Chair Novak outlined the committee’s study agenda, including large energy users such as data centers, geothermal, landowner relations, wind and solar, and other energy topics across the state. The meeting was framed as informational only, with no bills or formal legislative action taken beyond the minutes approval. Testimony focused first on landowner relations. Oliver County Commissioner Dave Berger described the county’s energy history and local support for coal and related development. North Dakota Farmers Union President Matt Perdue emphasized proactive, face-to-face communication with landowners, respect for property rights, and the need for developers to be transparent about tradeoffs; he also discussed insurance and liability concerns tied to easements. Committee members asked about eminent domain, local versus state authority, and how communities can better understand the revenue and infrastructure implications of energy development. Department of Agriculture Deputy Commissioner Tom Bodine then described the department’s ombudsman programs for pipeline restoration and reclamation, wind restoration, and royalty oversight. He said the programs provide confidential, third-party assistance on reclamation and royalty disputes, but do not provide legal advice. Senators raised concerns about post-production deductions in royalty leases and whether the ombudsman can explain them; Bodine said the program can clarify statements and deductions but cannot resolve legal disputes. He also said the department has not received requests related to fiber lines. Representatives from Grid United and One Oak described their project development and landowner engagement practices. Grid United’s Brent Johnson discussed the North Plains Connector transmission project, its route selection process, voluntary acquisition approach, and efforts to avoid eminent domain by working closely with regulators, counties, townships, and landowners. One Oak’s Danette Welsh and Tom Giltner described the company’s midstream operations, extensive North Dakota footprint, and emphasis on direct landowner communication, consistent local regulation, careful construction practices, and post-construction reclamation. Members asked about setbacks, zoning consistency, invasive species prevention, outside advocacy groups, and eminent domain use; One Oak said it has not used eminent domain on its North Dakota projects, largely because most gathering lines are negotiated easements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Speaker, I yield back. Madam Speaker, I yield back.
• I yield back.
• I yield back.
• I yield back.
• I yield back.

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Tuesday, January 7, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll bring those dates back again later in a future slide.
• We'll bring those dates back again later in a future slide.
• <00:25:35.760> all 2015 debt that may have gone back all 2015 debt that may have gone back
• We wouldn't have debt, you know, that may have gone as far back as 2006.
• <00:32:09.159> as know that may have gone as far back as know that may have gone as far back

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee approved the January 16, 2024 minutes without objection. Members then heard a presentation from the Office of the Legislative Auditor on its December 2024 performance audit of the Department of Human Services’ outstanding provider debt in Minnesota’s Medicaid fee-for-service program. Legislative Auditor Judy Randall said the audit was launched after the office noticed a large accounts receivable balance during the state financial statement audit and became concerned that DHS did not understand the extent of the overpayments, had poor data, and planned to forgo recovery of some recoverable balances. Deputy Legislative Auditor Lori Lyson explained that DHS had reported $51.7 million in provider debt across about 2,500 providers in fiscal year 2023, with testing focused on long-term care facilities and the largest balances. The audit concluded DHS did not comply with legal requirements and lacked adequate internal controls. Findings included that DHS had not attempted to recover more than $40 million since collection notices were last sent in 2015 and 2019; that the department planned to write off some balances under $1,000 and some older than six years despite the auditors’ view that at least some of that debt may still be recoverable; that DHS overstated accounts receivable in its financial reporting because it had not updated its allowance calculation since 2019; and that MMIS data were insufficient to verify balances, with 20 of 59 sampled providers not reconciling and many dates inaccurate. In response to member questions, the auditors said the overpayments appeared to be routine program adjustments rather than fraud, but the department could not explain many of them because detailed data are only retained for about three years. They also said they did not know which specific DHS leader approved not collecting the debt, and that responsibility for recovery appeared split between program and finance staff, with each pointing to the other. The auditors recommended DHS recover the debt where possible, improve internal controls, retain better documentation, ensure accurate financial reporting, and work with the legislature if needed to clarify recovery authority.