Transcript Highlights:

• And the best way we could think of is, well, you should apply for the bio incentive grant.
• um you know with the bio incentive um you know with the bio incentive program<01:31:48.600> that
• bio incentive grant program was specifically, you know, it is not earmarking.
• bio incentive grant program was specifically, you know, it is not earmarking.
• <01:38:36.800> work the same way the bio incentives work the same way the bio incentives work

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• lawsuit, it was noted that because of the teacher evaluation system at the time, there was a huge incentive
• And also the value of that incentive has decreased a lot.
• credit, similar to rural jobs, provides a tax credit to businesses eligible for the Job Training Incentive
• And so when, as we're creating these, as we've created and Representative Luhan: amended this incentive
• Given the job training incentive program requirements that eligibility can be found online, one of the

Transcript Highlights:

• committee, there are so many, we received so many requests for good nonprofits seeking the tax incentives
• committee, there are so many, we received so many requests for good nonprofits seeking the tax incentives
• And most of the time, The tax incentives, and most of the time the sales tax exemption.
• we'll be able to put those good organizations back in line so that they might receive another tax incentive

Summary: The committee considered and advanced a series of bills, beginning with House Bill 3834, which creates a revolving fund at the Department of Health for ibogaine research. The author said the measure is limited to clinical trials, has support from several tribal nations, and would not have an immediate fiscal impact, though retirement-related costs were discussed as roughly $1 million based on prior estimates. HB 3834 passed 20-0. House Bill 3940, updating Oklahoma Military Department provisions, National Guard retirement benefits, and some Uniform Code of Military Justice language, also passed after questions about the same estimated retirement cost and the effect of changing the date for implementation; it passed 21-1. Members then approved House Bill 4346, with an amendment aimed at addressing fraud concerns in agricultural sales tax exemptions. The bill would extend reciprocity to holders of ag sales tax exemption cards from Texas and other surrounding states, allowing them to use those exemptions in Oklahoma border communities. Opponents argued the change would place too much burden on retailers to verify out-of-state cards and could increase liability, but supporters said it would help rural businesses. The bill passed 17-4. House Bill 2947, allowing clinical interns and accredited behavioral health graduate programs to bill Medicaid for supervised services, passed 21-0, and House Bill 3257, extending state benefits for 100% disabled veterans to those similarly disabled due to negligence at a VA hospital, also passed 21-0. The committee next passed House Bill 3264, which adds domestic abuse by strangulation to the list of 85% crimes. Supporters emphasized the seriousness of strangulation and its connection to later homicide risk, while questions focused on prison population growth and costs; the bill passed 21-0. House Bill 4326, dealing with Oklahoma Promise homeschool language and the definition of certified classroom personnel, was amended to remove unrelated T-SET restructuring language and then passed 19-2. House Bill 4421, “Leo’s Law,” which requires fentanyl testing in child welfare drug screens when fentanyl use is suspected, drew emotional testimony about a child’s death and had its fiscal estimate discussed as dropping from $125 million to about $16 million; it passed 22-0. Finally, the committee approved House Bill 3944, a State Finance Act cleanup and modernization measure, after questions about reporting dates and public finance oversight, and House Bill 3979, which raises financing caps under the Oklahoma Economic Development Finance Pool, after an amendment to add an effective date and emergency clause; both passed 21-0. House Bill 4118, updating the family caregiver tax credit and raising the maximum credit while keeping the annual cap unchanged, passed 20-1. The meeting ended with thanks to members and staff and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, it's an incentive and it's a way for uh for us to improve the water quality.
• program.<00:04:07.280> So,<00:04:07.439> it's<00:04:07.599> an<00:04:07.760> incentive
• So, it's an incentive and it's program.
• So, it's an incentive and it's a<00:04:09.920> way<00:04:10.000> for<00:04:10.720> uh

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 3486 creates a sales and use tax incentive for restaurants that purchase Texas farm-raised
• The incentive applies per million.
• So, HB 3486 gives us, gives restaurateurs an incentive to put this on their menus and to help educate
• House Bill 3487 creates a sales and use tax incentive for restaurants participating in the Oyster Shell

Bills: HB104, HB2434, HB2529, HB2688, HB3161, HB3486, HB3487, HB3745, HB4044, HB4226, HB4945, HB104

Keywords: Texas Future Fund, investment review board, economic stabilization, innovative technology, national defense, retirement, service credit, Employees Retirement System of Texas, employee benefits, pension reform, salary supplement, county judges, judicial functions, state law, government compensation, public retirement systems, municipality pensions, firefighters, police officers, retirement age

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, House Bill 3486 creates a sales and use tax incentive for restaurants to purchase Texas farm-raised
• The incentive applies per per per permitted food service establishment, allowing businesses with multiple
• So HB 3486 gives us, gives restaurateurs an incentive to put this on their menus and to help educate
• Uh, House Bill 3487 creates a sales and use tax incentive for restaurants participating in the oyster

Bills: HB104

Keywords: property tax, ad valorem tax, tax rate election, voter-approval tax rate, no-new-revenue tax rate, de minimis rate, local government, special district, tax increase, tax notice, public hearing, tax code, Health and Safety Code, Texas property taxes, taxing unit, election threshold, two-thirds vote, majority vote, budget approval

Transcript Highlights:

• So that would be an incentive to it.
• I'm not sure how much of an incentive the loan would provide.
• So that would be an incentive to it.
• I'm not sure how much of an incentive the loan would provide.

Bills: SB2015

Keywords: corrections, rehabilitation, prison budget, department of corrections, adult services, youth services, correctional facilities, Heart River correctional center, Missouri River correctional center, James River correctional center, minimum security facility, county jails, regional jails, deferred maintenance, capital construction, strategic investment and improvements fund, Bank of North Dakota, line of credit, tasers, body cameras

Summary: The committee first discussed a wastewater infrastructure bill, centered on whether state support should be provided as a grant or through the existing Clean Water State Revolving Fund as a low-interest loan program. Department of Environmental Quality official David Brushwine explained that the SRF already finances wastewater projects, can leverage federal funds with state bond proceeds, and could accommodate the Washburn, Lincoln, and Peasant projects if they are ready to proceed. Members noted that losing federal grant support would make projects harder for local residents to afford because costs would be recovered through utility rates or special assessments, but the projects would still be eligible for loans. Senator Magrum indicated he would likely concur with the budget after this discussion, and the bill was set aside for later consideration. The committee then turned to a proposed amendment for a four-plex housing project for people with disabilities or other special needs. Senator Mathern described Sections 7 and 8 as creating a design consultation appropriation and a revolving loan fund modeled on existing hospital and nursing home loan programs, while Section 9 would transfer $3.3 million from the state infrastructure fund. Members debated ownership, rent subsidies, repayment terms, and whether the state should finance the project directly or leave it to a private developer with Department of Human Services oversight. Concerns were raised that the state should not own the housing and that the proposal needed more work to be workable, but the committee ultimately reached consensus to adopt Sections 7 and 8 and leave out Section 9 for further conference committee discussion. The committee also reviewed provider inflation and long-term care rate issues, with members discussing whether to support a 2% and 1.5% inflation adjustment and how to handle the $5-per-day basic care rate. Staff explained that the $5 payment was already in the base budget, but members debated whether it should remain ongoing or be treated as one-time funding and paired with a study of rate rebasing. The committee agreed to have draft language prepared to remove the $5 from the base budget and add study language, then moved the bill forward for drafting.

Transcript Highlights:

• that drug manufacturers shall provide the aggregate of any rebates, discounts, or other financial incentives
• , a drug manufacturer shall provide in the aggregate any rebates, discounts, or other financial incentives
• And number seven, a drug manufacturer shall report any government subsidies, tax incentives, and grants
• received for each drug approved... ...government subsidies, tax incentives, and grants received for

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first addressed Senate Bill 2387, which had previously included language expanding the definition of a sexual assault victim advocate to include advocates from organizations serving victims of sexual trafficking or other sexual violence. After concerns were raised that the language could broaden participation in forensic interviews beyond appropriately credentialed organizations, the parties agreed to remove that added language. The committee then reconsidered its prior action, adopted the amendment striking the new language, and passed SB 2387 as amended on a 12-0-1 roll call vote. The bulk of the meeting focused on Representative Nelson’s proposed changes to a 340B-related bill, centered on expanding reporting and transparency requirements. His draft would require hospitals to report how 340B savings are used, and would also add reporting by drug manufacturers, pharmacy benefit managers, and health insurers on rebates, pricing, ownership interests, 340B savings, premiums, claims, and related data. Nelson argued the reporting was needed to give lawmakers better information about how the 340B program affects hospitals, insurers, pharmacies, and public costs, and noted the Department of Corrections also benefits from the program. Testimony was mixed but generally supportive of more transparency. Sanford Health Plan said it needed more time to review carrier impacts and had concerns about employer-related language and rebate reporting. The North Dakota Hospital Association supported hospital transparency and said the broader approach was appropriate because hospitals are only one part of the 340B system. Several members raised procedural concerns about the scope of the proposal and the lack of a drafted LC amendment. The committee decided not to take final action on the 340B proposal that day, instead forming a subcommittee led by Representative Hendricks, with Representatives Dobervich and Bolinske, to work with LC and return with drafted language for further review on Monday.

Transcript Highlights:

• for are providing greater incentives for are providing greater incentives for them to come there and
• that will help them for incentives that will help them for incentives that will help them manage their
• Incentives down on student loan debt. Incentives down on student loan debt.
• And this one is to really incent them to earn that to really incent them to earn that to really incent
• students, adult try to in incent students, adult try to in incent students, adult learners that are

Bills: HJR 4, HJR 6, HB 195, HB 13, HB 143, HB 135

Keywords: occupation tax, securities, financial regulation, tax exemption, legislative amendment, capital gains tax, realized gains, unrealized gains, investment income, asset sale, capital assets, wealth tax, estate tax, trust tax, tax limitation, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, property tax, sales tax

Transcript Highlights:

• of what comes in through net metering or, if you're a qualifying facility, your energy and your incentives
• That's where the greatest growth has been, and I think that's what we're trying to incent here, too,
• This is a change from the current structure in letting clients choose their incentive program.
• If they want to continue having an incentive program, they will have this additional cost of the SMART
• It's consistent with the federal incentives, the federal regulations for geothermal incentives, and for

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 4144, the Governor’s Energy Affordability, Independence, and Innovation Act, with the administration arguing the bill would lower bills in the short and long term while expanding clean energy supply and innovation. The Governor and Secretary said the bill would reduce or restructure charges on customer bills, reform Mass Save, expand securitization as a financing tool, speed interconnection, create energy-ready zones, strengthen consumer protections in competitive supply, and allow broader state procurement of energy resources. They said the package could save consumers billions over time and would help address high energy costs, especially during extreme heat and winter spikes. Committee members pressed the administration on several provisions, especially securitization, asking whether the bill requires an apples-to-apples comparison of total costs over time, including interest and lost tax revenue, versus paying through rates. Administration witnesses said DPU review and public comment would be required and said they would work to clarify the language if needed. Members also questioned the bill’s solar and procurement provisions, including reduced net metering compensation for some large facilities, the scope of all-resource procurements, and whether hydro, solar, and nuclear would be included; the administration said those resources were contemplated and that procurement would still be reviewed by DPU. Other questions focused on the short-term relief from bill changes, the treatment of low- and moderate-income discounts, and whether the bill’s heat pump and Mass Save reforms would help customers who cannot afford upfront costs. Several witnesses and committee members discussed Mass Save reforms, including securitization of program costs, on-bill financing, pre-approval of rebates, and shifting program administration away from gas utilities. Administration witnesses said the changes were intended to reduce volatility, lower administrative costs, and better align costs with long-term savings. Questions also touched on geothermal permitting, municipal participation in offshore wind procurement, and the proposed repeal of the ballot requirement for nuclear power, which the administration defended as preserving future options under heavy review. No votes were taken during the hearing portion described. Supportive testimony came from labor, environmental, business, planning, and development groups. The AFL-CIO, NECA, and the Environmental League of Massachusetts backed the bill, emphasizing lower bills, job creation, labor standards, just transition protections, and cleaner energy. NAIOP, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, and MAPC supported provisions on energy-ready zones, interconnection reform, microgrids, extreme-heat shutoff protections, and Mass Save improvements. A HEET representative praised the bill’s use of securitization, geothermal, and utility financing tools but urged guardrails and workforce protections. Overall, testimony was broadly favorable, with most witnesses calling for refinements rather than opposing the bill outright.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's a real incentive for them to play by the rules.
• <03:46:14.279> for brought up about having an incentive for brought up about having an incentive
• I believe they have a financial incentive that creates a conflict of interest.
• I believe they have a financial incentive that creates a conflict of interest.
• <04:57:29.558> are<04:57:29.680> all incentives are all incentives are all there<04:57:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first held a public hearing and then an executive session on HB 650, a housekeeping-style bill from the Joint Committee on Dedicated Funds. Testimony explained that the bill would remove references to two already-repealed dedicated funds, split the state parks dedicated fund so Cannon Mountain winter activities would be tracked separately from the rest of the parks system, and place a $1 million cap on the robotics education fund so excess money would revert to the general fund. Supporters said the changes were mainly administrative but would improve accounting and avoid timing issues; committee members asked about a typographical error in the bill text and whether the measure was more than housekeeping. The committee later voted 16-0 to recommend HB 650 ought to pass, and then placed it on the consent calendar. The committee also opened a public hearing on HB 585, which would revise the property tax exemption for religious organizations. Representative John Janigian, the sponsor, said the bill was intended to help small churches and other religious groups that own parsonages or worship buildings but no longer have a resident pastor, allowing them to rent space or use property for church purposes without losing the exemption so long as the money is used for church operations, maintenance, or outreach. He described his Salem church’s parsonage being taxed after it was no longer occupied by a pastor, and said the bill would prevent similar burdens on small congregations. Former Representative Betty Gay testified in support, describing prior assessor actions in Salem that taxed church land and buildings very aggressively, while a Municipal Association representative testified in opposition. Committee members raised questions about how terms such as “regularly recognized and constituted denomination” would be defined, whether the bill could be applied consistently to larger denominations with multiple parishes, and whether legislative research should review past treatment of similar cases.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 721 by Hall relating to prohibiting the disbursement of economic and tax incentives to entities
• business and commerce. 727 by Johnson relaying the creation of a small non-road engine purchase incentive
• Senate Bill 728 by Johnson relating to an incentive program to promote beverage container recycling to

Bills: SJR1, SJR2, SJR5, SJR33, SJR34, SJR35, SJR37, SJR38, SJR39, SCR12, SB4, SB40, SB701, SB702, SB703, SB704, SB705, SB706, SB707, SB708, SB709, SB710, SB711, SB712, SB713, SB714, SB715, SB716, SB717, SB718, SB719, SB720, SB721, SB722, SB723, SB724, SB725, SB726, SB727, SB728, SB729, SB730, SB731, SB732, SB733, SB734, SB735, SB736, SB737, SB738, SB739, SB740, SB741, SB742, SB743, SB744, SB745, SB746, SB747, SB748, SB749, SB750, SB751, SB752, SB753, SB754, SB755, SB756, SB757, SB758, SB759, SB760, SB761, SB762, SB763, SB764, SB765, SB766, SB767, SB768, SB769, SB770, SB771, SB772, SB773, SB774, SB775, SB776, SB777, SB778, SB779, SB780, SB781, SB782, SB783, SB784, SB785, SB786, SB787, SB788, SB789, SB790, SB791, SB792, SB793, SB794, SB795, SB796, SB797, SB798, SB799, SB800, SB801, SB802, SB803, SB804, SB805, SB806, SB807, SB808, SB809, SB810, SB811, SB812, SB813, SB814, SB815, SB816, SB817, SB818, SB819, SB820, SB821, SB822, SB823, SB824, SB825, SJR1, SJR2, SJR5, SJR33, SJR34, SJR35, SJR37, SJR38, SJR39, SCR12, SB4, SB40, SB701, SB702, SB703, SB704, SB705, SB706, SB707, SB708, SB709, SB710, SB711, SB712, SB713, SB714, SB715, SB716, SB717, SB718, SB719, SB720, SB721, SB722, SB723, SB724, SB725, SB726, SB727, SB728, SB729, SB730, SB731, SB732, SB733, SB734, SB735, SB736, SB737, SB738, SB739, SB740, SB741, SB742, SB743, SB744, SB745, SB746, SB747, SB748, SB749, SB750, SB751, SB752, SB753, SB754, SB755, SB756, SB757, SB758, SB759, SB760, SB761, SB762, SB763, SB764, SB765, SB766, SB767, SB768, SB769, SB770, SB771, SB772, SB773, SB774, SB775, SB776, SB777, SB778, SB779, SB780, SB781, SB782, SB783, SB784, SB785, SB786, SB787, SB788, SB789, SB790, SB791, SB792, SB793, SB794, SB795, SB796, SB797, SB798, SB799, SB800, SB801, SB802, SB803, SB804, SB805, SB806, SB807, SB808, SB809, SB810, SB811, SB812, SB813, SB814, SB815, SB816, SB817, SB818, SB819, SB820, SB821, SB822, SB823, SB824, SB825

Keywords: bail denial, illegal aliens, felony offenses, constitutional amendment, law enforcement, SJR 2, Senate Joint Resolution 2, homestead exemption, property tax relief, school property tax, ad valorem tax, residence homestead, school district taxes, Texas Constitution Article VIII, public school finance, homeowner exemption, elderly exemption, senior tax relief, disabled exemption, tax year 2025

Transcript Highlights:

• Cineville. 721 by Hall relating to prohibiting the disbursement of certain economic and tax incentives
• Senate Bill 727 by Johnson relating to the creation of a small non-road engine purchase incentive program
• Senate Bill 728 by Johnson relating to an incentive program to promote beverage container recycling to

Transcript Highlights:

• Third, are state-supported financial incentives necessary to advance nuclear energy in Texas?
• This is the best state to build in, and if we can provide them a little bit of incentive, then we will
• For a multi-billion-dollar project like ours, the opportunity to seek incentives on the order of $100
• Are the feds giving any incentives like they do for solar, such as tax credits?
• I leave it to this body to figure out what those incentives look like, but I do think the state of Texas

Bills: SB1468, SB1612, SB1789, SB2530, SB2571, SB2717, SB2967

Keywords: utility systems, Texas A&M, regents authority, construction, improvement, construction contracts, trust funds, property rights, mechanics lien, contractors, trustee liability, mechanic's lien, liability, attorney's fees, windstorm insurance, Texas Windstorm Insurance Association, insurance regulation, administrative penalties, coastal counties, catastrophe year

Transcript Highlights:

• providers it stabilizes<00:03:53.640> existing<00:03:54.200> capacity<00:03:54.879> incentive
• stabilizes existing capacity incentive stabilizes existing capacity incentive and<00:03:55.519><
• it as a way, once again, I think it's a common-sense approach to try to bolster and provide that incentive
• <00:17:53.400> um<00:17:53.520> do<00:17:53.640> I provide that that incentive
• um do I provide that that incentive um do I think<00:17:53.960> that<00:17:54.120> a<00

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 633, which would provide property tax relief for in-home family child care providers. An amendment was adopted first that converted the bill from a state-paid credit into a 50% market value exclusion. The author explained the bill as a way to reduce property tax burdens on family child care homes, stabilize a shrinking sector, and help preserve child care capacity, especially in rural areas. He cited declining numbers of licensed providers, rising costs, and long-term losses in family child care slots. Public testimony was generally supportive. A family child care provider’s relief provider described rising costs for utilities, insurance, and taxes, and said home-based care remains important for families who do not want center-based care. A representative from Leading Care Public Policy said family child care is in crisis, emphasized the continuity and community connection of home-based care, and supported the bill as a way to equalize support for providers. Members also discussed the policy choice between a credit and an exclusion, with some arguing a credit would be more targeted and equitable, while the author said the exclusion was the most practical way to move the bill forward. House Research explained that because the bill is structured as an exclusion, most of the benefit would be shifted to other local taxpayers rather than paid by the state, though there could be a small state cost through increased property tax refunds. Members raised concerns that the exclusion would interact with homestead exclusions and might favor higher-value homes, while supporters argued it would directly lower costs for child care providers and could help expand capacity. The committee closed testimony and voted to re-refer House File 633, as amended, to the Committee on Taxes, where the motion prevailed.

Transcript Highlights:

• , including decarceration, increased visitation, racial diversity among the staff, and positive incentives
• /c> racial diversity among the staff racial diversity among the staff positive<00:23:14.320> incentives
• <00:23:15.320> there's<00:23:15.720> no<00:23:16.360> incentive positive incentives
• there's no incentive positive incentives there's no incentive in<00:23:17.880> in<00:23:18.640

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Public Safety and Military Affairs met on January 29, 2025, and first took up deferred SB 259 on record keeping. The chair said Honu Police Department had submitted support, and the committee recommended passage with amendments, including a technical change to the effective date on page 4, line 6 to July 1, 2077. Vice Chair Elefante voted yes; Senators Fevella and Rhoads were excused; the recommendation was adopted. The committee then heard SB 603 and SB 608, both relating to veterans benefits consulting and compensation. The Attorney General’s office recommended amendments to address First Amendment, Contracts Clause, and savings-clause issues, and testimony was mixed, with several supporters from veterans-related organizations and several opponents, including some testifiers from the public and industry groups. The committee later adopted chair recommendations to pass both bills with amendments, including preambles about protecting veteran consumers from misleading or unfair practices, savings clauses, and effective-date changes to July 1, 2077. SB 601, relating to law enforcement search notices and securing entrances, drew support from the Office of the Public Defender and a private citizen who described the bill as a response to warrantless searches and a transparency measure; there was also opposition from Maui County police and one other testifier. The committee then moved to SB 871 on arson, where the Department of the Attorney General raised drafting and constitutional concerns and the Public Defender opposed the measure as vague, overbroad, and creating problematic sentencing provisions, while HPD supported it as a public-safety tool. The chair ultimately recommended SB 871 pass with amendments softening mandatory language, adding parole language, and changing the effective date to July 1, 2077; the recommendation was adopted. The final measures were SB 1130, exempting certain construction rebuilding materials from general excise tax in federally declared disaster areas, and SB 104, restricting solitary confinement in correctional facilities. The Department of Taxation requested third-party certification and a later effective date, and the committee adopted amendments reflecting those requests and moving the effective date to January 1, 2026. On SB 104, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation opposed the bill, citing staff assaults and existing policy updates, while the Oversight Commission, Public Defender, and multiple advocates supported it as a safeguard with oversight and due process protections. The committee passed SB 104 with amendments, including adopting the commission’s definition language, changing terminology to “restrictive housing,” and setting the effective date to July 1, 2077.

Transcript Highlights:

• eligible for the same types of incentive eligible for the same types of incentive programs<00:38
• that if we're we're giving an incentive that if we're we're giving an incentive to<00:38:42.480>
• giving an incentive to this form<00:38:47.079> too.
• incentives across the board. incentives across the board.
• Is there some kind of incentive peak.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• gives a tremendous Financial incentive gives a tremendous Financial incentive to<00:25:37.840>
• <00:26:27.399> or do not provide an incentive or do not provide an incentive or disincentive
• incentive incentive to<00:40:16.800> um<00:40:17.200> financially<00:40:18.280> to<
• you'd have the perverse incentives you'd have the perverse incentives because<00:59:22.000> the
• <01:39:12.960> in really serious perverse incentives in really serious perverse incentives

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on HB 563, which would revise the education funding formula for pupils receiving special education services by replacing the current single special education amount with three differentiated categories. Representative Rick Ladd, the prime sponsor, said the bill largely tracks a House-passed version from the prior session with minor figure adjustments, and explained that the proposal uses projected FY26 amounts for three categories based on time in general education versus more intensive placements. He also noted that the bill does not address catastrophic aid directly, but that special education aid, CAT aid, and proration all remain issues for later work sessions. Ladd and supporters argued that weighted categories better reflect actual costs and are more sustainable than treating all IEPs the same. Representative Margaret Drye said the approach was one of the best ideas from the education funding subcommittee and urged the committee to support differentiated aid. Representative Ames asked how the category amounts were derived, and Ladd said Category A follows the FY26 base, Category B is a higher weight, and Category C is a still higher weight for more intensive services, though he acknowledged the exact multipliers were developed earlier and could be revisited. He also said the committee would continue discussing whether the weights are appropriate and how they interact with CAT aid. Testimony from Bonnie Dunham strongly opposed the bill. She argued that funding based on placement rather than actual service need would create incentives to move students into more restrictive settings, could stigmatize children with labels such as "Category C," and would undermine the least restrictive environment requirements under federal special education law. She described her son’s experience in inclusive settings as beneficial and said the bill would have penalized the district for serving him there. In response to questions, she said schools and parents should base funding on the child’s actual needs and costs, not on placement, and urged the committee to recommend the bill inexpedient to legislate.

Transcript Highlights:

• , particularly around the research and development tax incentive, which is something I have been talking
• So I think that weakening these incentives for investment, while they may generate...
• So I think that weakening these incentives for investment, while they may generate increases in revenue
• Additionally, implementing a permanent business credit limitation will weaken the important incentives
• greatly appreciate the increased allocations to students experiencing homelessness and to the CTE incentive

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the 2026 Budget Act, which leaders described as the compromise budget expected to move to the floor later that evening. Opening remarks emphasized that the plan balances the budget over two years, reduces the structural deficit, and builds reserves, while also protecting core programs from federal cuts. Jason Sisney outlined the legislative budget plan, saying it uses higher-than-expected revenues and reserve balances to reject some proposed reductions and fund temporary restorations and new spending in areas such as education, child care, health care, housing, homelessness, and public safety. Department of Finance representatives said the administration appreciated the two-year balanced framework and the effort to address out-year deficits, while noting the plan includes additional spending and revenue changes. Sisney also previewed floor bills including AB 109, SB 110, SB 122, and SB 125, with SB 122 described as a modification to the tax credit proposal and SB 125 as the managed care organization tax proposal. Subcommittee chairs then described the major policy choices in their areas. Health chair Addis said the budget responds to federal health care rollbacks by protecting Medi-Cal, clinics, hospitals, dental care, and other safety-net services, while also supporting reproductive care, gender-affirming care, and county health systems. Education chair Alvarez highlighted increased school funding, expanded learning, special education, teacher support, community colleges, and a change to Cal Grant eligibility for older community college students. Other chairs emphasized child care expansions, homelessness and housing funding, prison closure and criminal justice savings, wildfire mitigation, county support for Medi-Cal and CalFresh administration, and accountability measures tied to homelessness and corrections spending. Several members also raised concerns or priorities, including the impact of the MCO tax on providers, the need for more support for local journalism, transit and climate funding, biotech and R&D incentives, and continued work on Prop 98 and long-term revenue solutions. No formal votes were taken in the portion provided, but members broadly expressed support for the budget framework and the need to continue negotiations with the administration before final passage. The committee discussion repeatedly framed the budget as a response to federal policy changes and a choice to protect vulnerable Californians while maintaining fiscal responsibility. The vice chair, citing LAO warnings about future volatility and limited reserves, pressed Finance on whether the budget represented a record-sized state budget and whether revenues were also at record levels, underscoring concerns about the state’s preparedness for a downturn.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a without a tax incentive you do not have a film industry. They will not come.
• California right now is talking about a 35% tax incentive, and you're barely competitive at the 22%.
• um and I I understand you're incentive um and I I understand you're saying<00:46:55.520> that
• This is a without a tax incentive you do not have a film industry. They will not come.
• California right now is talking about a 35% tax incentive, and you're barely competitive at the 22%.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee took up House Bill 422, relating to school impact fees. The Education Committee recommended passage with amendments, and Ways and Means concurred. The amendments would repeal the construction fee component of the school impact fee while retaining the land impact fee and in-lieu fee requirements, remove related statutory language, exempt certain developments from school impact fees, raise the unit threshold for satisfying the land component to 100 units, require the School Facilities Authority to adopt rules and policies, and require a report to the Legislature on the effect of repealing the construction portion of the fee. The measure was also given a sunset date of June 30, 2029, with the committee report to note that the changes are intended to test the efficiency and efficacy of the fee structure and could be made permanent if the report supports that outcome. The committees adopted the recommendation, with one senator initially voting no and then changing to yes after the amendments were explained. The meeting also included a separate hearing on House Bill 1155, concerning procurement for Department of Transportation projects and construction manager/general contractor procurement. DOT testified that it supported the concept but wanted to narrow the bill, saying the current language was too broad and that the goal was to allow more innovative procurement while preserving selection safeguards. The State Procurement Office said it supported the bill’s language but was willing to work with DOT on alternative wording. Several construction-related organizations, including subcontractors, iron workers, elevator constructors, and building trades representatives, opposed the bill, arguing that exemptions from the procurement code would weaken protections such as retainage, equality, and prompt payment and could invite favoritism or corruption. In response to those concerns, the chair proposed amendments limiting the exemption to DOT, narrowing the qualifying contracts, adding a two-year sunset, requiring a report after the first year, and clarifying that project management could not be procured under the section. The amended recommendation passed, though several members voted with reservations. A separate item, House Bill 476, was briefly called up at the end of the agenda, with a recommendation to pass with amendments to increase a rate from 7.25% to 8%, but discussion was not completed in the portion of the transcript provided.