Transcript Highlights:

• 10 days’ worth of cash left, and we allocated them $25 million.
• 10 days’ worth of cash left, and we allocated them $25 million.
• Let me move over to the Planned Parenthood allocation for $90 million.
• So there’s a $90 million allocation. Planned Parenthood allocation for $90 million.
• It would make more sense just to allocate less.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Bills: SCR 13, SCR 24, SB 1, SB 12, SB 15, SB 17, SB 24, SB 57, SB 65, SB 213, SB 371, SB 372, SB 378, SB 379, SB 388, SB 400, SB 402, SB 427, SB 495, SB 499, SB 502, SB 509, SB 535, SB 583, SB 610, SB 621, SB 650, SB 706, SB 740, SB 840, SB 854, SB 856, SB 875, SB 893, SB 918, SB 925, SB 974, SB 995, SB 1006, SB 1018, SB 1025, SB 1061, SB 1073, SB 1106, SB 1121, SB 1194, SB 1252, SB 1253, SB 1268, SB 1300, SB 1343, SB 1362, SB 1447, SJR 36, SJR 12, SJR 57, SCR 25, SCR 22, SCR 12, SCR 24, SCR 8, SB 565, SB 372, SB 765, SB 62, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 847, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 925, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 815, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1061, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SB 213, SB 681, SB 1172, SB 1252, SB 378, SB 610, SB 918, SB 1343, SB 608, SB 487, SB 955, SB 957, SB 988, SB 990, SB 1019, SB 1021, SB 1120, SB 251, SB 958, SB 535, SB 761, SB 1, SB 541, SB 315, SB 379, SB 1018, SB 1737, SB 266, SB 1415, SB 57, SB 499, SB 974, SB 1025, SB 1061, SB 1268, SR 302, SR 303, SR 304, SR 305, SB 30, SB 1333, SB 1666, SB 30, SB 1333, SB 1666

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas, Israel, trade, investment, partnership, economic ties, technological innovation, bilateral relations, appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 29, running from R23 to R24, would modify allocation of private activity bonds to set an alternative
• This has a housing infrastructure bonds.
• of the bonds expected to be 20 years. of the bonds expected to be 20 years.
• Housing infrastructure bonds will allow Housing infrastructure bonds will allow us<00:24:27.480> to
• These bonds are our housing needs.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The conference committee on the housing omnibus bill began with member introductions and a staff walk-through comparing House and Senate provisions. House Research staff reviewed major policy differences affecting Minnesota Housing Finance Agency operations, including limits on how much the agency may retain from state appropriations for administrative costs, new reporting requirements, restrictions on transfers between appropriated accounts, and House-only language requiring annual expenditure of investment income from state appropriations. Senate provisions were also summarized, including tighter rules on when appropriations may be placed into Housing Development Fund bookkeeping accounts, updated operating-cost reporting, and Senate-only changes to how investment earnings may be used. Staff also described shared and differing provisions on program-money transfers, a lived-experience earnings exemption, and a long list of Senate-only policy changes, including manufactured home park tenant protections, low-income housing tax credit and bond-related changes, a task force on housing taxes and fees, and repealers affecting Housing Development Fund authority and certain older programs. Fiscal staff then reviewed the budget impacts. The House side included one-time appropriations for workforce housing development, family homeless prevention and assistance, a Minnesota Nice Home Share pilot, and homebuyer education, along with debt service for $100 million in housing infrastructure bonds and transfers/cancellations that produced a net zero general fund impact across the budget window. The Senate side noted a fiscal note for the housing taxes and fees task force and a smaller housing infrastructure bond authorization, with corresponding debt service costs and a total Senate budget-window impact of about $1 million in general fund debt service. After the staff presentations, the committee moved to public testimony. Commissioner Jennifer Ho of Minnesota Housing said the bill’s housing infrastructure bonds and continued support for family homeless prevention were important, and she supported the lived-experience earnings exemption, while noting concerns about the interest-earnings provisions. Testifiers from Greater Minnesota groups praised the workforce housing investments and Senate updates to the state housing tax credit and infrastructure grant program, though they suggested changes to the geographic distribution language. HOME Line urged funding for statewide tenant hotline services, citing rising demand and asking for $1 million if additional money becomes available. The Minnesota Consortium of Community Developers supported the bill’s investments and emphasized the need to pair housing development with supportive services. Housing First Minnesota praised housing infrastructure bonds and other investments but criticized the omission of the Minnesota Starter Homes Act. The Minnesota Multi Housing Association began testimony opposing certain rent-control-related provisions in the House bill. No votes or final actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we we allocate our property reduction money to. exemptions.
• Well, again, I go back to. the terrible trio of rate hikes, bond elections, and CEOs.
• Now let's move on to bonds here quickly.
• In November 2022, Austin ISD proposed a $2.4 billion bond package.
• I'm not sure if that's the largest bond in the city's history but it's large by my measure.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the allocations are based on prior-year attendance.
• And so that is the initial allocation made to LEAs.
• It'll change next year, maybe for next year's allocation, but doesn't change for this year's allocation
• with the way the LCFF allocations are and the plan is a three-year plan.
• Obviously, the lower campuses... ...allocate funding to those campuses.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance heard testimony and took up three main budget areas: the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), differentiated assistance and the statewide system of support, and universal school meals with kitchen infrastructure grants. Public commenters and agency witnesses generally supported continued or increased funding for ELOP, with several groups urging stabilization of Tier 2 rates, more support for older youth, and preservation of equity guardrails and local flexibility. On school meals and kitchen infrastructure, testimony broadly supported universal meals and additional kitchen funding, while the LAO questioned the need for a fourth round of kitchen grants and recommended rejecting it until clearer unmet-need data are available. For ELOP, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to provide $4.7 billion ongoing for the program and $62.4 million ongoing to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended instead fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579 and tying future changes to program requirements. CDE said the program is showing positive results in attendance and math, but data on enrollment patterns, TK participation, and some overlap with other programs are still being collected. Members raised concerns about possible double-funding with ACEs and 21st Century programs, the lack of site-specific data, and whether the current structure best targets students most in need; the issue was left open. For differentiated assistance, CCEE outlined the current statewide system of support and the Governor’s proposal to shift to universal and targeted assistance with a three-year cycle. Finance said the proposal would provide more stable county office funding, broaden universal supports, and give the State Board more flexibility to revise eligibility criteria; it also proposed $131.9 million ongoing for universal and targeted assistance. The LAO objected to changing the system before the State Board finalizes the new performance criteria and recommended revisiting the proposal later, while several members worried that a three-year entry window and broader board authority could weaken subgroup-based equity protections. The committee also discussed school meal funding, with Finance proposing $1.8 billion for universal meals and $100 million ongoing plus $100 million one-time for kitchen infrastructure, while CDE emphasized ongoing needs, deferred maintenance, and the importance of flexibility for innovative strategies such as food pantries. The committee held the issues open and invited additional public comment before moving on.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:18.479> and competitive as possible for bonding and competitive as possible for bonding
• In article two, we'll see that there is a bond authorization, trunk highway bond authorization in the
• Um these are allocations<01:21:03.679> temporary<01:21:04.159> allocations<01:21:04.800
• > of allocations temporary allocations of allocations temporary allocations of money<01:21:05.440
• Article two is the $100 million authorization of trunk highway bonds and the bond sale expenses related

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the the dollars are allocated the the dollars are allocated and<00:36:44.800> I<00:36:45.040
• <00:59:24.880> It's<00:59:25.119> a to allocate those funds.
• It's a to allocate those funds. It's a dangerous<00:59:25.599> place.
• eligible for general obligation bonds eligible for general obligation bonds given<01:23:35.600><
• <01:23:39.440> are that uh general obligation bonds are that uh general obligation bonds are

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It would be allocated to the Diamond Library at UNH.
• Over the last 2 years, we have fallen just short of the 60% needed to pass our bond. 59%.
• It's not likely that we are going to be putting forward another bond.
• Going to be putting forward another bond request.
• The retail component will be able to pay off the debt service on the bond.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing reconvened with testimony from several agencies on their capital budget requests. The Department of Environmental Services requested a little over $38 million, with major emphasis on dam repairs and design work for aging state-owned dams, including a $5.25 million match for possible FEMA BRIC funding at Pawtuckaway/Tuckaway and other projects such as Milton Three Ponds, Murphy Dam, and Lakeport Gates. DES also requested funding for state revolving loan fund matches, a Superfund match for the Savage Well site, IT and air-monitoring upgrades, and a new $750,000 cybersecurity request for water and wastewater systems. Committee members asked about FEMA eligibility, the distinction between design and construction money, and the timing and risk of banking funds if federal grants do not materialize. The University System of New Hampshire requested $20 million in state support, primarily $15 million for a major Diamond Library renovation at UNH to create a student support hub and reduce/repurpose collection space, plus $2.5 million each for deferred maintenance at Plymouth State and Keene State. The Community College System requested about $16.6 million across seven projects, led by critical maintenance, campus safety/security upgrades, IT infrastructure, parking and site improvements, HVAC replacement at White Mountains Community College in Littleton, a building management/energy system, and modernization of NHTI’s dental clinic and radiology spaces. The Department of Education requested $29.5 million, including a $4.9 million internal management platform to replace paper-based and siloed systems, plus career and technical education capital projects; Milford’s CTE project was described as being revised after repeated failed bond votes, while ConVal said its revised project would focus on modernizing existing CTE space and adding a security vestibule. Fish and Game requested $1.075 million for three facilities: Sewall Falls in Concord, the Lancaster Armory, and the Bunker Lane Barn in Durham, focusing on structural repairs, security, reconfiguration, and in one case replacement of a failing barn with a new 40-by-60 building. The department also said hatchery work is ongoing but that it is taking a cautious approach because of the planned New Hampton Hatchery and future capital needs. The Department of Natural and Cultural Resources requested $9.26 million for eight projects, including campground electrical upgrades at Ellacoya and Lake Francis, White Lake water system replacement, Mount Washington fuel tank and safety work, Odiorne Point visitor center work funded through parks revenue, roofing and parking lot repairs, Fox Forest office safety upgrades, and historic site repairs at White Island and Fort Constitution. Members asked about revenue-based capital, the stability of the parks fund, and flexibility in choosing projects as bids come in. The Department of Transportation began its presentation at the end of the transcript, but its detailed requests were not yet discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• These were unspent bond proceeds reported as restricted investments.
• All bond proceeds were invested in CDs when the bond was issued at BND, and this was for the construction
• for bonds, all that gets used for debt service relief.
• So there isn't a state-specific allocation that's being paid to the Wonder Fund.
• It's the federal allocation that ultimately they're managing.

Summary: The committee met to receive a series of audit presentations, beginning with the statewide Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for fiscal year 2025. The State Auditor’s Office and OMB reported a clean, unmodified opinion for the state, with strong financial results including a $40.6 billion net position, $30.99 billion in assets, $1.81 billion in liabilities, and continued Legacy Fund growth. OMB also explained the new GASB 101 compensated-absences reporting change and discussed pension-liability fluctuations tied to discount-rate assumptions and investment performance. Members asked about how the state compares to others and about the effect of short-term commodity price swings, and OMB said the report reflects actual fiscal-year results rather than forecasts. The committee then heard the University System audit, which also received a clean opinion but included four findings: misreporting of Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund revenue, insufficient monitoring of service organizations at CTS, NDSU, and UND, improper bank reconciliations at Dakota College of Bottineau, Dickinson State, and Williston State, and investment/cash reconciliation problems at Bismarck State College related to bond proceeds. University officials agreed with the findings and said corrective actions were underway, including internal review of bank reconciliations. Members raised questions about NDSU’s use of certificates of deposit, and university staff explained that CDs are used to earn interest on funds being accumulated for future projects. Several other audits were presented, most with clean opinions and no findings, including the State Auditor’s Office, Workforce Safety and Insurance, Housing Finance Agency, Housing Incentive Fund, Job Service North Dakota, the Retirement and Investment Office, PERS, the Center for Distance Education, the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents, the Ethics Commission, and the Office of Administrative Hearings. Notable exceptions included a State Fair Association audit with an adverse opinion on the foundation component unit because its financial statements were not available for audit, and a Securities Department performance audit finding that performance-based pay increases and bonuses were issued without required evaluations. The committee also discussed the State Auditor’s future needs, including more staff capacity, data analytics, cybersecurity reviews, possible subpoena authority, independent legal counsel, and whether some audits—such as the Ethics Commission and State Fair—should be handled by independent third parties or under different statutory arrangements.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're gonna talk a little bit about bonding.
• How much do you think that bonding capacity is?
• Our entire bonding capacity is $3.7 million. That's the most that we can, we can bond.
• Yes, we, we are currently bonded at that capacity with existing bonds.
• For your meals and also on the bonding.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have $480-some million in bonding, almost a half a billion dollars.
• The bonding is a big deal, and I have kind of covered that.
• Otherwise, every time they add another acre, they'd have to redo their bond.
• But at the end of the day we do have some bonding.
• How are those expenses allocated and how is the consumer protected?

Summary: The committee met at the Coteau Freedom Mine in Mercer County, approved the June 2 minutes, and heard an overview of the mine from Coteau Properties president Andrew Hawbaker. He described the Freedom Mine as the largest lignite mine in the United States, supplying coal to Dakota Gasification, Antelope Valley Station, and Leland Olds Station. He emphasized the mine’s scale, safety record, reclamation work, workforce needs, community involvement, and economic impact, including payroll, taxes, royalties, scholarships, and local hiring. Members asked about how long land stays in production, how quickly it returns to agriculture after reclamation, labor shortages, and how mining affects groundwater and water wells. Hawbaker said most tracts are mined for about three to five years, reclamation is coordinated with landowners, and the company continues to struggle to find electricians, welders, mechanics, operators, and engineers. The committee then heard from Public Service Commission Chairman Randy Christman on coal mining reclamation and permitting. He reviewed North Dakota’s coal mining history, the state’s reclamation laws, federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act primacy, bonding, permit renewals and revisions, prohibited mining areas, inspection and enforcement, and contemporaneous reclamation requirements. Christman stressed that North Dakota’s program is professional and thorough, with frequent inspections, financial assurance, and a 10-year revegetation monitoring period before bond release. He also discussed federal coal ownership issues that can delay mine plans, the treatment of prime farmland, and how reclamation differs for wind and pipelines. In response to questions, he said one challenge is sometimes releasing land too soon before long-term compaction issues are fully understood, and he noted that data centers do not currently have a comparable reclamation model because they typically own the land. In the afternoon, the committee received an update from Lignite Energy Council president Jonathan Fortner on the lignite industry. He said North Dakota’s lignite sector supports five commercial power plants, four mines, about 12,000 direct and indirect jobs, and more than $5.5 billion in economic activity, while helping keep the state’s electricity rates among the lowest in the nation. Fortner reviewed coal severance and conversion tax revenues, the lignite research fund, federal regulatory rollbacks, carbon capture policy, and the industry’s legal costs fighting federal rules. He also highlighted a study on large-load development, saying new data centers and critical mineral processing facilities could create major local tax revenue and help justify new baseload generation. Members asked whether new gas pipelines would crowd out coal plant development and whether the economic study included jobs and broader local impacts; Fortner said the industry sees room for both and that the study did include construction, operations, jobs, and tax effects.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, with that caveat, a lot of this is funded with revenue bonds.
• Through a cost allocation model, I'm going to focus on explaining...
• Third, they have to meet bond conditions.
• Third, they have to meet bond conditions.
• They have to make sure that they're meeting their bond covenants.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Permission for one final follow-up related to bonding. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• or for bond obligations that they may have.
• Now, I will say... ...or bond obligations that they may have.
• . ...for them to not default on some of these loans or some of these bonds.
• We do know that it's going to have an impact on our bonds.

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, the proposed constitutional amendment on property tax relief, which would reduce assessment growth on non-homestead property, expand homestead exemptions, create a new exemption for new homesteaders, and direct counties, cities, and school districts to use property tax revenues for specified core services. Senator Avila presented the measure as the governor’s plan to provide historic relief and argued that local governments should tighten budgets and prioritize core functions. Senators raised concerns about the lack of fiscal scoring, the breadth and ambiguity of the permitted uses, the effect on special districts and local services, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. The committee adopted several amendments, including Avila’s amendment clarifying that ad valorem revenues could be used for county and municipal operations and administration and other expenditures not prohibited by law, and Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal. Other amendments failed, including proposals to allow user fees and non-ad valorem assessments, add a sunset, redirect tourism development taxes, narrow the small-business provision, and change the ballot title to reference local service reductions. Grall’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund requirement was adopted, while the committee also rejected Berman’s title-change amendment and Smith’s sunset and tourism-tax amendments. The committee then returned to the bill as amended for questions, including extended debate over whether the proposal would affect noncitizen residents, the impact on local government finances, and whether local governments would respond with higher fees or special assessments. The meeting ended with the bill still under discussion after the final round of questions, with Avila saying he would continue working with the governor’s office on the language before the next vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• This budget bill allocates $213 million for county Medi-Cal workload.
• The allocation details are to be worked out.
• And also appreciate the anticipation of a housing bond.
• And also appreciate the anticipation of a housing bond.
• And also appreciate the anticipation of a housing bond.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 109, the Budget Act of 2026, and related discussion of the legislative budget agreement. Committee staff and the Department of Finance described a two-year balanced plan with about $253 billion in General Fund spending, roughly $5.5 billion in higher assumed revenues than the May Revision, and about $36.5 billion in combined reserves. They said the package preserves or expands funding for schools and community colleges, child care, IHSS, Medi-Cal-related county administration, housing and homelessness programs, public hospitals, courthouse construction, and some criminal justice and prison-closure savings, while delaying or modifying several prior health care reductions and some Medi-Cal changes. Much of the member discussion focused on Medi-Cal, H.R. 1, and the impact on low-income and immigrant Californians. Several Democrats argued the budget protects vulnerable residents by delaying some cuts, funding county eligibility work, indigent care, public hospitals, and food banks, and rejecting the Governor’s IHSS cuts and asset-limit proposal. Republicans criticized the budget for assuming future revenues, relying on new taxes, and not doing enough to address the structural deficit or improve accountability. Members also raised concerns and support around homelessness funding, Prop. 36, judgeships and courthouse funding, transit and GGRF allocations, local journalism, Caltrans fleet spending, and a proposed “fair share” revenue measure that was not yet before the committee. Public testimony was largely supportive of the budget’s health and human services provisions, especially the rejection of IHSS cuts and the asset-limit proposal, and the inclusion of funding for child care, sickle cell centers, domestic violence services, trauma recovery centers, distressed hospitals, county eligibility work, and transit programs. Some witnesses representing hospitals and health plans cautioned about the effects of moving certain Medi-Cal populations to fee-for-service and about proposed tax changes affecting health care providers. The chair said revenue trailer bills were still being finalized and would likely come back later in the week; the committee then moved to public comment, with the chair limiting speakers to about one minute each.

Transcript Highlights:

• They can't have a bond here.
• bonded out, they could go outside of the jail.
• And, Then the correlating utilization rate for those allocated vouchers.
• That's what's been allocated.
• Our mortgage revenue bond program is supported by revenue bonds, not general obligation debt, secured

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Habitat for Humanity in the Florida Keys from the requirement to purchase construction performance bonds
• These bonds add roughly $10,000 to the cost of each home, and this bill makes the bond optional rather
• The state to release up to 825 new residential permit allocations, requiring a majority of these allocations
• The bill requires that new allocations be distributed gradually over a 10-year period to allow for balanced
• Department of Commerce has found in their study and also codifies how the cities and county will be allocated

Summary: The Agriculture and Natural Resources Budget Subcommittee met and first took up CS/HB 973, a broad special districts bill focused heavily on soil and water conservation districts. The bill would dissolve 35 soil and water districts effective December 31, 2025, based on an OPAGA review that found widespread problems such as lack of revenue, inactive boards, poor notice practices, public records issues, and late financial reporting. It also would let special districts use state contracts, authorize FDLE background checks for district employees, preserve fire district taxing/service authority after annexation, extend liability protections for outdoor recreation on certain district lands, tighten eligibility for soil and water supervisors, and shift complaint review to the Commission on Ethics. Supporters argued the districts are often inactive, duplicative, and costly to review, while opponents said many districts provide local conservation, water quality, outreach, and volunteer services and should be given more time to remediate. Public testimony on HB 973 was mixed. Several soil and water district chairs and related advocates opposed the bill, saying their districts provide local conservation, flood, invasive species, education, and coordination services at little or no taxpayer cost, and that abolishing them would remove local representation and collaboration. The bill’s proponent, the Florida Association of Special Districts, supported the measure as a limited-government and accountability reform, arguing that districts with no revenue or contracts should not continue. Members debated whether the bill was relying on the OPAGA report while also eliminating future performance reviews, whether the Department of Agriculture could absorb the added responsibilities, and whether the districts should have been given more time to correct deficiencies. The committee ultimately voted the bill favorably, with one no vote from Representative Hinson. The committee then considered CS/HB 995, which applies to Monroe County and the Florida Keys. The bill would exempt Habitat for Humanity in the Keys from construction performance bond requirements for affordable housing, extend the Florida Keys land acquisition/set-aside authority in Florida Forever for 10 more years, and extend the hurricane evacuation time frame from 24 hours to 24.5 hours to allow up to 825 additional residential permit allocations, phased in over 10 years and directed largely toward vacant buildable lots and workforce housing. An amendment was adopted to codify the 825-unit allocation and the distribution framework. With no opposition offered on the bill, the committee reported HB 995 favorably by unanimous vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• The initiative was in the funding allocation from the NEA to address the loneliness pandemic in the country
• from the NEA to address the allocation from the NEA to address the loneliness<00:14:01.519> pandemic
• <00:21:14.240> towards million was is is allocated towards million was is is allocated towards
• The glass supplier that we were going to purchase the glass from could not post bonds like that, which
• But in order to do that, we bonds. Okay.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Because right, the bond, the property taxpayers pay significant property taxes to fund what we build
• Because right, the bond, the property taxpayers pay significant property taxes to fund what we build
• significant bond fund every time. significant bond fund every time.
• for the bus you're currently allocating for the bus passes?
• . allocated. allocated.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1783, which would expand public-private partnership options for charter school facilities. The Department of Education offered comments, the Charter School Commission and SFA supported the bill, and Hawaii Technology Academy, Hawaii Kids, Hawaii Children’s Action Network, HGA, Aloha Project, and several individuals testified in support, while UPW opposed it. Supporters said charter schools need faster and more flexible ways to address severe facility shortages and high costs, and SFA described the bill as a pilot model that could leverage developer partnerships and state contributions, citing Maryland as an example. Members asked whether the bill was limited to charter schools; DOE said the language could be read to include other public school facilities, but if focused only on charter schools, DOE was less concerned. The Charter School Commission also described an existing public-private preschool model through Parkway Village Preschool and PACTED. The committee then took up HB 1778, which would establish a CIP database for school facilities. SFA supported the bill, saying it would create a more disciplined, transparent basis for funding decisions by documenting facility condition, needed repairs, classification, and timing. DOE initially said it rested on its comments, then responded to questions by saying it already maintains deferred maintenance lists, uses systems such as Maximo, CPT, GIS, and finance software, and sends legislators project-status letters twice a year. DOE said it is working on improving its outward-facing dashboard and integrating its systems, but questioned whether the bill would add value beyond existing tools. Members emphasized the need for a publicly accessible, real-time transparency tool, while DOE said it was still evaluating its current systems and was not yet seeking funding for a new IT program. For HB 2344, creating an Independent Public School Realignment and Closure Commission, DOE said it wants to remain part of any consolidation process to keep students and education central, while SFA said the bill is timely and framed it as a restructuring response to changing conditions and possible federal funding cuts. SFA compared the proposal to the federal BRAC process for military base closures and said Hawaii has the same enrollment as in 1961 but many more schools, arguing that the state needs a more deliberate approach to school closures and land reuse. The Attorney General’s office raised technical concerns about several sections, including unclear references to administrative support, a governor-approval sequence, a possible conflict with existing statutes governing closed-school disposition, and a missing section number. Testimony on HB 2345, which would establish a geographic CIP district, began with DOE in opposition; DOE said the bill would duplicate existing work, add confusion by creating two agencies doing the same thing, and spend money inefficiently because district project coordinators and project lists already exist.

Transcript Highlights:

• Commercial paper and revenue bond programs to try to take care of those drainage needs.
• companies that says we're not going to bond your projects because of these contractual provisions.
• And these are companies that can get billion-dollar bonds any day.
• You know, there's direct loans from the state versus them having to bond themselves.
• The funding was promptly allocated to high priority projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 1034 by Morales. two and two and three are allocations of building improvements to residents.
• Relating to the text of municipal ballot propositions on the issuance of bonds, refer to the committee
• HB 1119 by Gamma is relating to the manual report of the Regional Allocation of Mental Health Beds.
• Using a constitutional amendment appropriating certain surplus revenue to school district bond debt,
• I'm not concerned about new projects but that law has not been implemented yet. 315 bond for persons

Keywords: 1184, house, all