Transcript Highlights:

• general license for DEP Chapter 91 waterways projects, and we're going to streamline the approval process
• these some of these projects and say you know 30 before this bonds even paid for will we be refunding
• Could you just say a few more words about how you're going to expedite the process? Thank you.
• At the same time, too, we've looked at sort of every aspect... ...a quicker process.
• What would be the better process? ...close to the Merrimack River.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a hearing on S.2542, the Mass Ready Act, a $3 billion environmental bond bill aimed at climate resilience, water infrastructure, conservation, and related permitting reforms. Secretary Rebecca Tepper and administration officials described the bill’s major investments in flood control, coastal resilience, DCR roads/bridges/dams and parks, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, land conservation, food security infrastructure, and expanded Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness funding. They also explained proposed streamlining measures for environmental permitting, flood risk disclosures, a Connecticut River Resilient Commission, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund to provide low-cost financing for municipal resilience projects. Committee members asked about affordability, useful life of projects, how the revolving fund would be capitalized, and how the bill would help communities such as Lawrence, Methuen, and coastal towns; officials said the fund would initially use existing trust resources, not new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds once it has a track record. Several witnesses supported the bill but urged larger authorizations or additional provisions. Boston Harbor Now asked for more funding for MVP and the state’s resilient coast plan, and supported permitting reforms for nature-based and hybrid solutions. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance urged inclusion of drought-management language from separate bills, plus a statewide flood buyout program and a water reuse commission. Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements, especially in environmental justice communities affected by traffic and airport pollution. Conservation and forestry advocates requested more funding for urban tree canopy, local nurseries, and workforce training, while also raising concerns about PFAS impacts and the need for clearer municipal reforestation language. Agriculture and water infrastructure groups focused on food security and drinking water needs. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative backed the food security infrastructure grant program and farmland protection funding, warning that the program needs continued support in fiscal 2027 and that farmland loss is accelerating. The Massachusetts Waterworks Association said the bill does not go far enough on drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure, citing large statewide capital needs and PFAS compliance costs, and asked for recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. A Product Stewardship Council representative also urged funding for a waste reduction needs assessment, citing growing landfill constraints and rising disposal costs. No votes were taken during the hearing."}{

Transcript Highlights:

• And so it just kind of puts some guardrails in place so that we don't get into the process of making

Bills: HB227, HB454, SB323, HB266, SB52, SB53, SB296, HB37, HB429, HB93, HB249, HB328, HB111, HB132, HB26, SB261, HB227, HB454, SB323, HB266, SB52, SB53, SB296, HB37, HB429, HB93, HB249, HB328, HB111, HB132, HB26, SB261

Keywords: firefighter benefits, occupational disease, line of duty, disability pension, death benefits, retirement benefits, hypertension, heart disease, respiratory disease, cancer presumption, HIV, hepatitis, municipal firefighters, state firefighters, fire districts, workers' compensation, public safety employees, post-retirement benefits, benefit eligibility cutoff, occupational illness

Transcript Highlights:

• , this come up for funding or refunding, this come up for funding or refunding, we've<00:36:59.599
• So area agencies find individuals eligible for service in the DD system through that process.
• But um from what I a processing side.
• <01:06:22.039> to NSHA have gone through a process to NSHA have gone through a process to
• <01:26:05.520> or process or process or outcome<01:26:07.400> goals.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first handled roll call and approved the prior meeting minutes. Members discussed attendance and substitutions, then moved to the DHS commissioner’s update, which focused on New Hampshire’s Medicaid 1115 waiver and the new community re-entry initiative for people leaving correctional facilities. The presenter explained that the waiver lets the state cover certain services not normally covered under Medicaid, including substance use disorder treatment, serious mental illness services, adult dental benefits, and the new community re-entry component. She also noted that a separate youth re-entry component is federally required, with youth defined up to age 21 and foster-care-related coverage extending to age 26. The update described how the adult re-entry program works for incarcerated individuals with behavioral health needs, providing up to 45 days of pre-release services, care coordination with managed care organizations and DOC staff, telemedicine assessments, discharge prescriptions, insurance cards, and connections to community mental health, primary care, and substance use providers. For youth, the program includes more intensive case management, 30 days of pre-release services, and 30 days of post-release care coordination, with a stronger emphasis on screening, diagnosis, and holistic assessment. The presenter said New Hampshire received the adult waiver in July 2024, has implemented the program in state correctional facilities, and is beginning work at the youth center. Members and the presenter discussed why the program is structured as a waiver rather than a standard Medicaid benefit, with the explanation that CMS is allowing this as a newer policy area and that states generally pursue waivers for certain services. The chair and others emphasized the need for real cost and outcome data, and the presenter said an independent evaluator and evaluation plan are required under the 1115 waiver. Early results cited included 30 adults enrolled so far, 10 released, five youth enrolled with one released, and anecdotal early successes such as housing, employment, and better continuity of medication and treatment. The committee did not take any additional votes or formal actions beyond approving the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• And in the legislative process, they probably learned that you introduce a bill.
• Legislative process. And in the legislative process, they probably learn that you introduce a bill.
• And that's mainly because of the process. The process for a bill: we write a bill, I introduce it.
• But again, that's the process that's got to work for bills to get signed, at least for me.
• When you have to explain the process, you've already lost.

Keywords: 970, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the refund dollars, I had shown the refund dollar slide.
• They play a very valuable part of that process.
• They play a very valuable part of that process.
• So can you just speak to how that process works?
• So that is the process on the individual application front.

Summary: The committee met to receive updates from the Tax Commissioner’s office on property tax relief programs and related compliance work. Commissioner Brian Croshys reviewed the Homestead Property Tax Credit, Disabled Veteran Credit, and Primary Residence Credit, noting that the Homestead program expanded significantly after HB 1158, that some households are “adjusting out” of eligibility as incomes rise, and that the committee may want to consider indexing income thresholds. Members asked for additional data on bracket breakdowns, possible costs of eliminating income limits for seniors, and how many households are zeroed out by the combined programs. Croshys also discussed the simpler administration of the disabled veteran credit, the growth in participation, and the heavy workload and auditing safeguards built into the new primary residence credit system. He said the department found no material compliance findings and that the program is designed to be digital-first, with county auditors and the Tax Commissioner’s office both involved in review and notification. The committee recessed for lunch and later reconvened, with the chair noting that more detailed PRC information would likely be available at a September meeting. Shelly Myers then presented the statewide property tax increase, or “zero growth,” report and the 2025 statistical report. She explained how county auditors report levy and valuation data, how increases and decreases are counted, and which jurisdictions showed the largest percentage changes in countywide, citywide, school district, and park district levies. In the statistical report, she summarized recent trends in assessed values: agricultural values remained relatively flat, while residential, commercial, and centrally assessed property values increased over the past five years. She also reviewed statewide tax levies by property class and clarified that centrally assessed growth figures were annual averages. Members discussed how shifts in land use and annexation can make it appear that tax burdens are moving from ag to residential/commercial property. Myers then summarized the interim study on the 3% levy limitation under HB 1176, saying most counties complied without budget changes, while some used hiring freezes, deferred purchases, or reserve funds; 23% of counties had to reduce levies, and the affected funds were mainly general, road and bridge, and weed control. She said 12 counties reported zero new growth in the data and that 35 counties reported not using all of their cap. The committee also received an oil tax presentation from Croshys on the stripper well extraction tax exemption. He outlined the number of active stripper wells, the production and revenue implications of the exemption, and projections for future biennia under different tax scenarios. He said the exemption represents substantial savings to operators but also corresponds to production tax revenue that would otherwise be collected, and he emphasized that future outcomes depend on oil prices, well counts, and technology such as CO2 enhanced oil recovery. Nathan Anderson of the Department of Mineral Resources briefly answered a question about why Red River wells have a different production threshold than Bakken wells, explaining it was tied to completion costs and lateral length. The committee then heard from Charlie Gorecki of the EERC, who presented an analysis of typical Bakken well decline curves and argued that most oil is produced before a well reaches stripper status, but that keeping wells open and investing in refracturing or other interventions can recover additional production. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting; the main actions were receiving reports, asking for follow-up data, and scheduling further discussion for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:30:19.919> Both<00:30:20.240> loans<00:30:20.640> were treatment process
• Both loans were treatment process.
• Uh, we refunded $42.955 million of the TAK 2015 Series A bonds.
• <00:43:41.040> Uh<00:43:41.359> we<00:43:41.599> refunded of Kentucky.
• Uh we refunded of Kentucky.

Keywords: 00:05 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:34 Approval of Minutes 00:56 Information Items 05:40 Project Rpt from Postsecondary Institutions 14:00 Project Rpt from Finance and Administration Cabinet 20:40 Lease Rpt from Finance and Administration Cabinet 24:53 Rpt from OFM – Ky Infrastructure Authority 40:38 Office of Financial Management 47:39 Remaining 2025 Meeting Dates 48:05 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The meeting began with routine business, including a quorum call, approval of the April minutes, and several informational reports. Those information items covered upcoming general obligation debt for Bullitt, Jefferson, and Warren counties; Kentucky Communications Network Authority updates tied to House Bill 6; Eastern Kentucky University asset preservation reallocations under House Bill 1; and School Facilities Construction Commission debt activity, including 20 prior debt issues totaling about $386 million with roughly 85% locally supported debt service and 15% SFCC participation. Members then discussed concerns about a Kentucky Communications Network Authority project, focusing on a reported discrepancy between an appropriation of $12.927 million and an apparent payment of about $8.532 million on a project with a cost estimate of $12.449 million. Several members asked for more detailed written information before the next Capital Projects meeting, noting that a lawsuit is pending and that they wanted to better understand the basis for the request and the spending to date. The committee also heard and unanimously approved a donor-funded Northern Kentucky University project to renovate tennis courts, with possible pickleball additions, after questions about why approval was needed, the project’s estimated $3 million cost, and its expected minimal ongoing operating costs. The committee next received Kentucky State University pool allocation reports for three projects: a $2 million McCullen Hall renovation, a $1.75 million walkway and miscellaneous repairs project, and a $2 million academic services building roof-and-window project. A member asked specifically about curb cuts and accessibility in the walkway project, and Kentucky State said existing curb cuts would be repaired and additional accessibility issues would be reviewed by engineers. The lease report from the Finance and Administration Cabinet included one lease modification requiring approval for the Attorney General’s office in Franklin County and one no-action modification for the Board of Cosmetology; the Attorney General lease was approved by roll call vote. Finally, the Kentucky Infrastructure Authority presented five loans and 37 grants, with action taken on the loan and grant items. The loans included a Hodgenville wastewater treatment plant increase, a Grant County sewer district treatment plant loan, a Mount Sterling dam rehabilitation loan, and two Morganfield drinking water loans for granular activated carbon treatment, one with full principal forgiveness. Members asked about the Morganfield project’s purpose and were told it was a remediation effort for a water-quality concern, and they also raised questions about engineering fees, which KIA said are compared against a U.S. Rural Development fee schedule that is industry accepted. The committee also reviewed cleaner water program grant reallocations from county allocation pools.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the refund dollars—I had shown the refund dollar slide. Then we've got the number of recipients.
• They play a very valuable part of that process.
• So can you just speak to how that process works?
• So that is the process on the individual application front.
• So that is the process on the individual application front.

Summary: The Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee met with a quorum, approved the March 17, 2026 minutes, and heard a lengthy update from Tax Commissioner Brian Croshys on property tax relief programs. He reviewed the Homestead Property Tax Credit, Disabled Veteran Credit, and Primary Residence Credit, noting increased relief after House Bill 1158 and House Bill 1176, but also discussing how some households “income adjust out” of eligibility over time. Members asked about indexing income thresholds, expanding eligibility by age alone, simplifying administration, county-level notices, and whether the county and state systems could be streamlined. Croshys said the programs are heavily used, largely administered at the county level, and that the department is still refining compliance and reporting; he also said there were no material findings or overarching concerns in the latest review. The committee agreed more detailed PRC information would likely come back in a September meeting, and the chair announced an afternoon recess for lunch before later reconvening. Shelly Myers then presented the statewide property tax increase report, the zero-growth report, and a statistical report on property values and tax levies by class. She explained how county auditors report levy and valuation data, how increases and decreases are counted, and identified counties and cities with the largest percentage changes in growth or decline. She also summarized recent trends: agricultural values remain relatively flat, while residential, commercial, and centrally assessed values have risen over the last five years; in 2025, residential property accounted for the largest share of statewide property tax levies, followed by commercial, agriculture, and centrally assessed property. Committee members asked about unusual zero-growth figures, the effect of annexation and land-use changes, and whether the 3% levy cap was forcing political subdivisions to use reserves or defer spending. Myers said many counties complied by using reserves, delaying capital projects, or limiting increases, and that some counties had not used their full cap. The committee then moved to the stripper oil extraction tax exemption. Commissioner Croshys reviewed the state’s oil tax structure and estimated the revenue impact of keeping stripper wells exempt from extraction tax while still paying production tax. He said the exemption saves operators hundreds of millions of dollars over a biennium, while the state still collects production tax on those wells. He also discussed projected impacts if the exemption were changed for future wells and noted that future outcomes depend on oil prices, production declines, and technology such as CO2 enhanced oil recovery. Nathan Anderson of the Department of Mineral Resources briefly explained the historical difference between the 35-barrel and 30-barrel thresholds for certain wells, citing differences in completion costs and lateral lengths. The committee then heard from EERC CEO Charles Gorecki, who presented an analysis of oil well life cycles and said most oil is produced before wells reach stripper status, but that refracturing or other reinvestment can significantly extend production and keep wells above the threshold for years.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was just wondering, on page three of the bill, refundable credit is in not bold, so that's already
• just wondering on page three of the just wondering on page three of the bill,<00:10:03.520> refundable
• <00:10:04.320> credit<00:10:04.920> is<00:10:05.360> in bill, refundable credit
• is in bill, refundable credit is in not<00:10:06.880> bold.
• Um, yes, so right now Senate Bill 1 funded this incentive program that was a refundable tax credit, which

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Roll Call: 00:32 SB 261 Discussion: 01:40 SB 261 Voting: 05:37 SB 324 Discussion: 06:23 SB 324 Voting: 12:56, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, the whole process.
• And then you have the DPH complaint process to use as well as your community complaint process.
• And I do know the DPH process and I've seen it happen.
• I don't think it's so much around the process of closing.
• I don't think it's so much around the process of closing.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Continuing Care Retirement Communities met for its third meeting, focused on regulations, oversight, and enforcement. Staff and agency presenters reviewed the current framework: the Executive Office of Aging and Independence explained that assisted living regulations generally do not apply to CCRCs unless an assisted living component markets itself separately, and that CCRCs must submit marketing materials, contracts, and disclosure statements for public posting. The Attorney General’s office described Chapter 93A consumer protection standards and noted it is working on draft assisted living-specific regulations. DPH outlined its oversight of licensed nursing facilities associated with some CCRCs, including routine surveys, complaint investigations, and enforcement tools such as admissions freezes, fines, receivership, and license actions, along with federal CMS sanctions for certified facilities. Commission members and presenters then discussed gaps and ambiguities in how CCRCs are defined and regulated, especially whether communities without on-site skilled nursing should still be treated as CCRCs, how assisted living-like services within CCRCs are classified, and whether residents have enough clarity about the services they are buying. A major theme was disclosure: members raised concerns about entrance fees, refund timing and conditions, whether skilled nursing is on-site or provided by contract, and how residents can compare communities. Several participants suggested more standardized disclosure and possibly broader consumer protection rules, while others cautioned that overly rigid requirements could affect community finances and development. The commission also explored enforcement and resident protections. Some members argued that independent living residents are already covered by landlord-tenant law and that existing complaint systems and community education may be sufficient, while others said residents in supported or assisted settings within CCRCs should have clearer access to ombudsman services and oversight. The discussion turned to closure and ownership transfer, with members citing recent national examples of sales and bankruptcies that changed resident terms. DPH explained its closure process for licensed nursing facilities, and members noted that Chapter 197 of 2024 adds oversight for facility transfers and financial disclosures. The meeting ended with logistics for the next session at Brookhaven at Lexington on June 2, a public hearing on June 16, and a request to circulate the hearing notice broadly to residents and stakeholder organizations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because normally some gift card companies do not offer refunds. Okay. Unfortunately. All right.
• And a lot of times they only get a non-refundable deposit ahead of time, 10%.
• Be engaged and remain in discussion with them throughout the process to ensure that they aren't falling
• Please send the refund to me, and I'll send it back to him.'
• Representative Tosh, I think, has since left, but he asked a question about the investigative process

Summary: A joint House-Senate Insurance and Commerce meeting focused on the growing threat of financial fraud in Arkansas, with members and witnesses describing scams targeting seniors, small businesses, and working families. The committee first approved the November 3, 2025 minutes, then heard from the Arkansas Bankers Association, the American Bankers Association, banks, the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division, the Arkansas Mortgage Bankers Association, the State Bank and Securities Department, the Insurance Department, and AARP. Witnesses described common schemes including spoofed bank calls and texts, government imposter scams, romance and investment scams, business email compromise, fake job postings, gift card scams, check fraud, wire fraud, reverse mortgage scams, identity theft, and insurance fraud. Several witnesses emphasized that cryptocurrency kiosks and crypto transfers make recovery difficult or impossible, and that artificial intelligence is making scams more convincing and scalable. Witnesses repeatedly stressed education, verification, and coordination among banks, law enforcement, regulators, and consumers. Bank and mortgage representatives urged consumers to slow down, independently verify wire instructions, avoid clicking unexpected links, use tap-to-pay rather than chip or swipe when possible, and never share account credentials or one-time codes. The Attorney General’s office said it investigates consumer complaints, mediates disputes, works with social media platforms to remove scam ads, and recently created a Financial Fraud Task Force with bankers and other stakeholders. The State Bank and Securities Commissioner highlighted the Safe AR Act, the state’s crypto kiosk framework, and fraud education efforts such as “fraud bingo,” while the Insurance Department described its law-enforcement role and a range of insurance-related fraud schemes it prosecutes. AARP said fraud is widespread and underreported, especially among older adults. Members asked about reporting scams, how losses are handled, whether tap is safer than chip, how crypto fraud works, whether Arkansas has model legislation to address telecom and social media impersonation, and how local law enforcement and state agencies coordinate investigations. Witnesses said banks generally absorb much of the financial loss under federal rules, while consumers bear the inconvenience and account changes. Several witnesses said Arkansas should consider additional legislation to hold telecom companies and social media platforms accountable for spoofed caller IDs and impersonation ads, and one witness said a federal Scam Act is moving in Congress. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approval of the minutes, but witnesses agreed to share consumer education materials and model legislation with committee staff.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've been looking at this, and it doesn't seem to address refunds.
• So right now, during the certification process, we require a refund policy to be included in their financial
• It's a smaller part of this process, but it could be a part of the policy that they are refunded.
• If they continue, then yes, you have to go through the legal process.
• I'm unaware of this process. Sure.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing on a broad set of mental health, substance use, recovery, and patients’ rights bills. Early testimony focused on H. 2227, which would replace stigmatizing substance use terminology in the General Laws, and H. 3950, which would support parents in recovery involved with DCF by requiring more individualized recovery plans, clearer benchmarks for parenting time, access to recovery coaches or counselors, family counseling after sustained recovery, and staff training on addiction and lived experience. Speakers described the bills as ways to reduce stigma, increase accountability, and improve reunification outcomes for families. A major portion of the hearing centered on S. 1386, which would transfer Bridgewater State Hospital from the Department of Correction to the Department of Mental Health. Advocates, family members, and disability groups testified that Bridgewater functions like a prison rather than a hospital, with excessive restraint, seclusion, involuntary medication, poor conditions, and racial disparities, and argued DMH should oversee a treatment setting. One DMH occupational therapist and MNA member opposed the transfer, saying the real issue is mixing forensic and continuing-care patients and that DMH should instead create designated forensic units under bills H. 228/S. 1408. Committee members asked about Bridgewater’s population, the history of DOC control, capacity, staffing, and how a transfer might be implemented. The committee also heard testimony on modernizing the six fundamental rights for psychiatric inpatients, including expanding communication options, clarifying visitation and advocacy definitions, and improving access to gender-appropriate and culturally relevant items. Another bill, H. 2216, would require stronger oversight before antipsychotic medication is prescribed in nursing homes, prompted by concerns about inappropriate use. Finally, testimony supported H. 2240 and H. 2239 on sober homes, with supporters saying discharge and relocation policies are needed when a resident returns to active use or becomes unsafe, while preserving the recovery environment and resident rights. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We fully endorse proud of the process.
• of the divorce process does just that. of the divorce process does just that.
• And then, um, refunds from the city.
• ,<01:25:49.440> it does not mandate rand refunds, it does not mandate rand refunds, it introduces
• So, a lot to the legislative process.

Bills: SF0099, SF0116, SJ0006

Keywords: easement, electricity delivery, public utility, prescriptive easement, landowner rights, surface water, drainage utilities, municipality, elections, environmental management, shared parenting, family law, joint custody, child well-being, parental rights, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And at the end of the year, we do a true-up of those expenses and refund any unexpended monies back to
• Refund any unexpended monies back to the boards. Thank you.
• The fees for the individual boards for the regulations process would go through the Legislative Commission
• additional income from the specific boards, then that would go through the Interim Finance Committee process
• And at the end of the year, when we do a refund, we true up the expenses of what it costs to run the

Bills: SB507

Keywords: SB507, Nevada, governmental administration, Office of Nevada Boards Commissions and Councils Standards, Department of Business and Industry, professional licensing boards, occupational licensing, regulatory fees, state account, nonreverting fund, Commission on Postsecondary Education, taxicab, taxi technology fee, Nevada Transportation Authority, Taxicab Authority, transportation network company, TNC, rideshare, Uber, Lyft

Transcript Highlights:

• sustainable aviation fuel bill that we've heard, a one-time increase in the homestead credit property tax refunds
• in the homestead um credit<00:02:26.760> property<00:02:27.120> tax<00:02:27.440> refunds
• <00:02:27.959> That's<00:02:28.280> a credit property tax refunds.
• That's a credit property tax refunds. That's a $125<00:02:29.280> million.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House considered the conference committee report on House File 2438, the 2026 tax bill. Representative Gomez outlined the main provisions, saying most fiscal changes were tied to federal tax conformity. He also described several other items in the report, including a two-year extension of the pass-through entity tax workaround, a sustainable aviation fuel provision, a one-time $125 million increase in homestead credit property tax refunds, a one-year removal of the cap on the beginning farmer tax credit, a four-year tax exemption for PGA tickets, permanent aid to certain school districts, a direct file program, changes related to homestead resort classification thresholds, local property tax and income tax provisions, local government aid for the new city of Northern, a four-year extension of local homeless prevention aid, and Department of Revenue policy, technical, TIF, local, and public finance items. After the report was presented, the House adopted the conference committee report and ordered the bill repassed as amended by conference. The clerk then gave the bill its third reading as amended. Following third reading, Representative Niska moved to lay House File 2438 on the table. The motion prevailed, and the bill was tabled.

Transcript Highlights:

• Making the best beans in the state, not only do they grow in Artesia, they also process and ship around
• Only do they grow in Artesia, they also process and ship around the country.
• by taxpayers who have an ownership interest in certain business entities, and making the credits refundable
• by taxpayers who have an ownership interest in certain business entities, and making the credits refundable
• Article 8 of the Constitution of New Mexico to add a new section requiring a municipality or county to refund

Bills: HM19

Keywords: New Mexico Aviation and Aerospace Day, aviation, aerospace, space industry, missile programs, Spaceport America, White Sands Missile Range, White Sands Test Facility, Kirtland Air Force Base, drone, unmanned aircraft systems, commercial space transportation, NASA, aircraft, STEM education, research laboratories, Sandia National Laboratories, Los Alamos National Laboratory, flight testing, medical evacuation

Transcript Highlights:

• This change unnecessarily complicates and lengthens the removal process.
• The proposed process is cumbersome and undermines the executive's ability to uphold the integrity of
• Rather than tie our hands with a lengthy and complex legal process, We should continue to allow the person
• Campos that this is a process that we could certainly stand to improve. Thank you, sir.
• This establishes a refund tax credit for search and rescue volunteers with a $1.5 million cap.

Transcript Highlights:

• The exemption is only available via refund of sales tax paid on such items and is limited to a total
• of $500 in refund and that is the bill Mr.
• I appreciate the public commentary and I guess my thought process is there are pending - for the benefit
• This is a federal process and just so you know that when you get a passport stamped, you come from a
• If you are 18 and you had a car and now you're 25 and you're homeless, that verification process has

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:42:08.160> of process of process of increasing<00:42:10.319> yes<00:42:10.520> Mr
• Chair, Mass is in the process.
• She works with the agencies throughout the process, okay?
• She works with the agencies throughout the process, okay?
• The Senate would start that process all over again, except for the 2023 budget.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee received a Department of Revenue Administration update from Commissioner Lindsay Stepp focused on revenue estimates for fiscal years 2025, 2026, and 2027. She explained the department’s forecasting method, which uses five scenarios based on the first seven months of actual collections and different assumptions for the remaining months, then selects a reasonable high and low range for FY 25 and applies projected growth rates for FY 26 and FY 27. Members asked several clarifying questions about how the scenarios are chosen and how the estimates relate to economic growth and taxpayer behavior. For business taxes, Stepp reported FY 25 year-to-date collections of $110.3 million, 18.2% below plan and 17.2% below prior year. She said the shortfall reflects both economic conditions and a resetting of estimated payments after unusually strong pandemic-era profits, and noted that the department cannot fully separate changes in taxpayer liability from changes in estimated payment behavior. She said approximately just under $72 million was refunded in FY 24 due to the CCO cap, and that FY 25 year-to-date refunds are at 41.7%. For business taxes, the department’s FY 25 range was based on either continued underperformance versus plan or a return to prior-year levels, with FY 26 and FY 27 growth projected at 3% to 8%. The committee also reviewed meals and rooms tax, tobacco tax, and related trends. Meals and rooms revenue was $6.9 million, or 3.3%, ahead of plan and prior year; the FY 25 gross estimate was $475.894 million, with a net range of about $331.82 million to $335.259 million after municipal transfers and school building aid. Stepp said recent monthly results suggest some fluctuation tied to disposable income, weather, and travel patterns, but no clear sustained decline. Tobacco tax was $18.1 million, 14% below plan and 4.8% below prior year; she said cigarette stamp sales are declining while e-cigarettes and other tobacco products are growing, with FY 25 tobacco revenue projected at $182.5 million to $185.3 million and FY 26-FY 27 growth ranging from -5% to flat. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• We pray that you'll guide our hearts, minds, and our thoughts as we go through this process.
• We pray that you'll guide us so process.
• Um, we learned through KPA once the money goes into the system, it cannot be refunded.
• be refunded back to the employer, right? be refunded back to the employer, right?
• into the system, it cannot be refunded. into the system, it cannot be refunded.

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:00:17 Approval of Minutes: 00:02:09 Legislative Proposals: HB 213: 00:02:13 HB 516: 00:25:00 HB 589: 00:39:30 Kentucky Public Pension Authority: 00:44:52 Adjournment: 01:14:07, 958, all

Summary: The Public Pension Oversight Board met on February 13 and approved the minutes after establishing a quorum. The committee then took up three pension-related bills, beginning with Rep. Callaway’s proposal to allow certain retired police officers with 15 to 19 years of service to be rehired by local law enforcement agencies. Callaway and Brandon Lincoln of the FOP said the bill is intended to help recruitment and retention, especially for departments facing staffing shortages, and emphasized that it would be optional and would not allow double-dipping. Committee members raised concerns that lowering the service threshold from 20 to 15 years could create an unfunded liability and weaken the pension system, and several members said they did not yet fully understand how the pension and insurance provisions would work. The sponsor said she was open to working on the bill, and the chair noted the committee would continue to examine it with help from KPA staff. The second bill, presented by Rep. Lewis with Brandon Lincoln and Jeff Taylor, addressed probationary employees in CS agencies, including firefighters and police officers. The bill would let certain former probationary employees purchase service credit for time spent in probation, and would extend line-of-duty death and disability protections to employees who are injured or killed during probationary service. Testimony said the measure is optional for employers, could be used as a recruitment tool, and would allow employees within six months of the probationary period to buy back the time themselves if they choose. Members generally supported the concept, noted a negligible fiscal note, and discussed whether current employees could buy back older probationary periods; the sponsor said the bill did not appear to allow that, though he was open to further discussion. Throughout both bills, members focused on whether the proposals would create new pension costs or liabilities and how they would interact with existing retirement tiers and contribution rules. Several members asked for clarification on whether rehired workers would contribute to the pension system, whether employers would pay normal cost or any contribution at all, and whether the bills would affect future retirement benefits. The sponsors and witnesses repeatedly said the measures were limited, optional, and intended to address staffing and fairness issues without changing the core retirement system, but the committee did not take final action on the bills during the discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's something that will have to be determined through the budget-making process. Okay.
• That point was made several times through this process that it's an American-made vehicle.
• That point was made several times through this process that it's a number.
• That point was made several times through this process that it's an American-made vehicle.
• The average refund, according to the Treasury Department, is going to increase by over 11%.

Bills: HB4138, HB4139, HB4140, HB4141, HB4142, HB4143, HB4144, HB4145, HB4146, HB4147, HB4148, HB4149, HB4150, HB4151, HB4152, HB4153, SB1831, SB1832, SB1833, SB1834, SB1835, SB1836, SB1837, SB1838, SB1839, SB1840, SB1841, SB1842, SB1843, SB1844, SB1845, SB1846

Keywords: appropriations, education funding, health care, general fund, state budget, local funding, gaming, pari-mutuel, horse racing, regulatory assessment, first-time starters, budget implementation, federal funds, government services, budget stabilization, financial reporting, capital outlay, infrastructure, veterans services, highway construction

Summary: The committee met in a special joint appropriations session to review the FY 2027 budget package, including House Bill 4138 and Senate Bill 1831, the general appropriations or “feed” bills. Staff described the budget as including a one-time transfer of state funds, a 5% lump-sum reduction to most agencies’ discretionary general-fund budgets, continued funding for the state health insurance plan and school facilities, and various one-time restorations or reversions of prior appropriations. Members spent much of the meeting clarifying how the 5% reductions would work, noting that formula and mandatory funding such as K-12 basic aid are excluded, while the governor’s executive branch would decide how to implement the cuts within agencies. The chair repeatedly emphasized that the committee was not specifying line-item cuts and that agencies would have discretion over implementation. A large portion of the discussion focused on the practical effects of the budget on universities, public safety, health care, rural programs, and fund sweeps. Arizona Board of Regents and university representatives said the proposed reductions would amount to more than $85 million statewide and could affect programs such as the Arizona Promise Program, Teachers Academy, and tuition freezes, though no specific program cuts were written into the bill. Other testimony raised concerns about fund sweeps from encumbered balances, including university research funds, housing trust funds, utility regulation funds, and ADOT-related accounts, with some members warning about possible impacts on rural infrastructure and federal matching dollars. The committee also discussed the state employee health plan, including a $228 million general-fund infusion and proposed employee premium increases over three years, as well as questions about corrections, forestry and fire management, and rural critical access hospitals. Public testimony was largely opposed to the budget. Speakers from Opportunity Arizona, the Arizona Board of Regents, health care, and local government argued that the package would reduce support for education, housing, SNAP, health care access, and rural communities while preserving tax benefits for data centers and wealthy taxpayers. A mayor from Globe described severe flood damage and asked for state help for a flood relief fund, while a motorcycle safety advocate questioned a proposed transfer from the motorcycle safety fund. Committee members debated whether the budget’s effects should be described as speculative or as likely consequences of the broad cuts, and several exchanges became contentious over comparisons to the Great Recession and references to federal tax policy. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote taken in the portion provided, though leadership had earlier said the committee planned a mass roll-call vote on all the bills at the end.