Video & Transcript Research : 'fiscal transparency'

Page 3 of 500
OK

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

Public Safety Apr 7th, 2026 at 09:00 am

Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:
  • I was curious, and so I Have we listed at least in the information that this is a million-dollar fiscal
  • It's simply a forward-looking bill creating a revolving fund for the future, which would provide transparency
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Intergovernmental Affairs Apr 8th, 2025

Intergovernmental Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • The fiscal note indicated that there would not be an impact to the state for this.
  • I do not show that we received any fiscal note for this.
  • Yeah, so the fiscal note is really—should be on the back, but I do have.
  • So for fiscal year 2026, you have $9,000, $26,204, for a total of $27,934.55.
  • We've passed bills that had fiscal notes in them.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Intergovernmental Affairs Apr 8th, 2025

Intergovernmental Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • large, agreed to under mysterious circumstances, and awarded at a time when the district was under fiscal
  • Instances like this illustrate the lack of transparency and prudence in the current system and demonstrate
TX

Texas 89th 2nd C.S.

Intergovernmental Affairs Mar 18th, 2025

Intergovernmental Affairs

Transcript Highlights:
  • In addition to limiting the traveling HFC, the city also supports the transparency provisions and tenant
  • The lack of transparency and accountability means local taxpayers bear the burden of the lost revenue
  • They'll tell you this is about fiscal responsibility. That is a lie. This is about control.
  • HB 323 ensures that Texas remains proactive in maintaining a transparent and legally compliant hiring
  • Hoetze, was over arguments around taxpayer transparency and how the city charter interacted with that
Bills: HB21, HB211, HB223
MN

Minnesota 2025 1st Special Session

House State Government Finance and Policy Committee 3/6/25

State Government Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:
  • year uh we've now uh previous fiscal year uh we've now uh submitted<00:02:26.480> that<00:02:
  • Appropriations at the end of a fiscal Appropriations at the end of a fiscal year<00:09:15.720>
  • note, we are not going to be moving this bill out of committee until there is a fiscal note.
  • <00:30:26.480> note this given that there is no fiscal note this given that there is no fiscal
  • out of committee until there is a fiscal out of committee until there is a fiscal note<00:30:30.360
Bills: HF1, HF1754, HF1809, HF1478
ND

North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Senate Appropriations - Education and Environment Division Apr 10th, 2025 at 02:30 pm

Appropriations - Education and Environment Division

Transcript Highlights:
  • So as the means test that's already in this bill, is there a new fiscal note going to be suggested?
  • Chairman, members of the committee, we can't request a new fiscal note through our system until the full
  • So you have to adopt the amendments before we can actually ask for a fiscal note on the amendments.
  • Well, and the rationale behind that is, I mean, the fiscal note never changed, but we're totally limiting
  • So obviously the fiscal note's going to be less.
Bills: HB1329
Summary: The division first discussed Senate Bill 1540 and related amendments involving implementation mechanics, procurement exemptions, and an emergency clause. Bank of North Dakota representatives explained that, based on a timeline review with DPI, the project would be very difficult to implement for the 2026-27 school year without exemptions from state purchasing and IT oversight rules and without an emergency clause; they said the normal procurement process could take about 240 days and that a 15-month implementation window would likely push the start to 2027-28 if those changes were not adopted. Members also raised a separate policy question about a criminal penalty placeholder in the bill, and the committee agreed that the sentence was unnecessary and should be removed. The committee deferred means-testing questions and fiscal-note issues to the next morning, with the understanding that the bill would be drafted in a way that made it workable if it advanced. The committee then turned to the water budget bill and reviewed the latest amended version, which included changes to the Water Topics process, Southwest Pipeline line of credit provisions, Red River supply funding, Mouse River project amounts, general water funding, studies on Missouri River intakes and water governance/finance, and a carryover/transfer adjustment. Chris Cattermas of the Department of Water Resources said most of the carryover funds were already obligated, with the largest unobligated amount in flood control. After review, Senator Thomas moved a do-pass recommendation on the bill as amended, the motion was seconded, and the committee approved it unanimously. The chair noted that other bills would be taken up the next morning, including 1013, 1014, and 1540.
ND

North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Senate Appropriations - Education and Environment Division Apr 10th, 2025 at 09:30 am

Appropriations - Education and Environment Division

Transcript Highlights:
  • So I think transparency is always a good thing. They can see where spending's going.
  • So I appreciate getting more of this information out, more transparent.
  • And I guess, you know, we didn't have time to really adjust the fiscal note.
  • And I guess, you know, we didn't have time to really adjust the fiscal note.
  • And so it lowers the fiscal note, I guess I could say.
Bills: HB1329
Summary: The Education Division met with all members present and first took up House Bill 1329, which would create a transparency database and website for school spending information. Senator Schaible offered Amendment 0204 to turn the bill into a study, citing concerns that the proposal would impose major data-collection burdens on 168 school districts, require new data standards and privacy protections, and likely cost far more than the $500,000 in the bill. Several members supported transparency but agreed the implementation costs and technical feasibility were unclear. The committee adopted the amendment 4-1, then passed HB 1329 as amended on a 5-0 vote, with Senator Shively to carry the bill. The committee then discussed House Bill 1540, the education savings account/voucher bill. Representatives from the Bank of North Dakota and the Department of Public Instruction explained that they had not been consulted on the original drafting and outlined needed administrative changes, including clarifying the Bank as administrator, using a third-party program manager, involving DPI in rulemaking, adding audit and appeal procedures, and adjusting language on eligible purchases and school disqualification. They also said the current timeline was likely too aggressive to launch by the 2026-27 school year and estimated the program would require about 15 months to implement, with a fiscal note now around $5.1 million. Members also discussed policy-related amendments on means testing and application timing. Senator Shively proposed a 300% of poverty-level means test and a sign-up period to reduce costs and limit open-ended enrollment, while Senator Axman proposed a tiered approach that would keep all students technically eligible but phase in funding levels by income, preserving access for students who qualify for other federal supports. DPI said it could not currently disaggregate some data by family income and that the appeal process and procurement timeline still needed work. The committee did not move HB 1540 out that morning and instead recessed to continue discussion later after members had time to review the administrative and fiscal issues separately from the means-testing proposals.
AL

Alabama 2026 1st Special Session

Alabama Senate Healthcare Committee Mar 17th, 2026

Healthcare

Transcript Highlights:
  • We have two separate bills because it's going to transcend two separate fiscal years, and we won't be
  • transcend monies because it's going to transcend two<00:14:02.079> separate<00:14:03.120> fiscal
  • years<00:14:05.279> and<00:14:05.519> and<00:14:05.920> we two separate fiscal
  • years and and we two separate fiscal years and and we won't<00:14:06.399> be<00:14:06.560>
Bills: SB367, SB368, SB350, SB351
LA

Louisiana 2026 Regular Session

Health and Welfare May 26th, 2026

Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:
  • So there would still be a fiscal note of roughly $500,000 to this.
  • So there would still be a fiscal note of roughly $500,000 to this.
  • And just so everyone realizes, too, there is a fiscal note.
  • The department absolutely is behind transparency, accountability.
  • I'm all for transparency as well.
Bills: HR290, HR298, SB405, SCR61, HR318
MN

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Judiciary Committee Meeting - 2026-04-09

Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:
  • Let's restore transparency.
  • Let's<00:08:38.240> restore<00:08:38.640> transparency. Let's restore transparency.
  • Let's restore transparency.
  • Transparency isn't reactionary, it's proactive.
  • at the state level is transparent. at the state level is transparent.
Summary: The Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee approved the minutes from March 25 and March 26, then took up House File 4077, a bipartisan bill authored by Representatives Greenman and Roach. The bill would prohibit municipalities from entering into non-disclosure agreements with private entities that restrict disclosure about land development, economic development, or publicly funded projects, while preserving existing Chapter 13 data practices rules and trade secret protections. The authors argued the bill is needed to prevent secret agreements and backroom decision-making that undermine public transparency, and they moved that the bill be re-referred to the general register. Several local officials and residents testified in support, including a St. Louis County commissioner, the mayor of Lonsdale, and residents from Farmington and Hermantown. Supporters said NDAs had been used in connection with data center and other development projects to keep elected officials and the public in the dark, eroding trust and limiting community input. They described the bill as a common-sense transparency measure and said existing law already protects legitimate trade secrets. Opposition came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Business Partnership, which argued that NDAs are often necessary in early-stage economic development discussions to protect sensitive business information and remain competitive with other states. They warned the bill could discourage investment, jobs, and tax growth, and said it would impose a one-size-fits-all state mandate that limits local discretion. Committee members then debated whether the bill was too broad and whether it should be narrowed to data centers; supporters responded that the issue extends beyond data centers to other forms of economic development. A roll call vote was requested on the motion to re-refer the bill to the general register, but the final vote result was not stated in the transcript excerpt.