Transcript Highlights:

• and across our state and in some cases and across our state and in some cases law<00:08:16.159><
• <00:24:29.760> a<00:24:29.919> bit rate that generally a higher rate a bit rate that
• No, they get a monthly rate.
• be the rate to cover costs, assuming that all payers paid that rate.
• to do commercial rate setting.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we've increased the rate.
• The capitation rate has to reflect the rates that we require.
• So if you really want to influence rates and change rates, which you have done, right, you've gone from
• If you look at behavioral health rates, some of these rates went into effect in FY24, and we're still
• They have to count the instrumentation before the case, during the case, and also after the case.

Transcript Highlights:

• Case rate at the District Attorney's Office and at the Public Defender's Office? Mr. Chair and Mr.
• And that is the number of cases assigned over the course of a year. And that's a lot of cases.
• to handle those cases.
• Why is that rate so low?
• You have a high referral rate, but the engagement rate looks low. Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• This includes funding for a case. management system for our contested cases, a task that is currently
• When you say cases what what type of cases are they reviewing these are cases?
• So new applications for For a rate case, for example, an electric utility that must come in every four
• then on the water side, the same types of rate cases and interim charges, plus a adjustments of their
• The commission must approve the rate. OK.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Medicaid fraud is a criminal case. It's the same as every other state case.
• . case. case.
• Are we going to, does this include rates, looking at rates for providers and trying to address the rate
• looking at rates does this include rates looking at rates for<00:41:39.839> providers<00:41:40.319
• <00:41:43.200> and rate issue and rate setting and rate issue and rate setting and rebasing

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board reconvened and heard a presentation from the Attorney General’s Office Medicaid Fraud and Abuse Control unit. AG staff described the unit’s structure and work: it investigates and prosecutes Medicaid provider fraud, and also handles abuse, neglect, and exploitation cases involving vulnerable adults in facility settings when asked to assist. They said the office has prosecutors, detectives, auditors, and support staff, works with federal partners, Commonwealth’s attorneys, CHFS, DMS, OIG, and MCOs, and uses a hotline and referral line for complaints. They also explained the MCO referral process, including monthly meetings, stand-down lists, and review of referrals for a “credible allegation of fraud” before the AG office decides whether to open a criminal or civil investigation. The presentation focused heavily on current fraud trends. Staff said behavioral health is a major concern, along with participant-directed waiver services, medically assisted treatment, cash billing for services, controlled-substance billing, and vision and dental fraud. They gave examples such as duplicate time sheets for family caregivers, questionable Suboxone counseling and urine drug screening practices, and a prior optometry case involving false claims for children’s glasses. They also discussed CMS’s estimate that about 5% of Medicaid payments are improper, noted that most improper payments are at the fee-for-service level, and said there is no reliable overall fraud-rate estimate. They highlighted a sharp shift in behavioral health billing after the cabinet’s November 1, 2024 policy changes, saying individual psychotherapy spending dropped while group billing increased, suggesting providers may have moved billing to different codes. Members asked about the scale and timing of cases, how MCO referrals are screened, and whether the data reflected more people being served or just higher spending. The AG office said investigations can take years, with some federal cases still awaiting sentencing from 2018 and 2019 matters, and that they currently had nine individuals awaiting sentencing in federal court. They also reported 58 hotline reports during the referenced period, six cases opened from MCO referrals, and four additional MCO referrals not accepted for active cases. Several members raised concerns about home-based services and the risk of abuse or fraud when family members are reimbursed, and asked whether the process could be streamlined; the AG office said it had no immediate recommendations but would be willing to return with suggestions after further review.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our current mandated reporting system has a nearly 90% failure rate. Failure rate.
• We can do better than a nearly 90% failure rate. Failure rate.
• instead of the default Tier 1 rate.
• The Tiered Rate Structure is a very extensive and complex part of our foster care rate system that's
• In 2019, there were 203 cases identified. In 2024, it has grown to 1,255 cases.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Because you only have the rate of the product, in this case water.
• are high right now, so we can make a case for higher rates.
• because that helps them make their case for a higher rate.
• for a rate increase, based... ...to go before a commission to make the case for a rate increase based
• It continuously goes up every rate case for every IOU in the state of Florida.

Summary: The committee took up several bills and reported each favorably after brief debate and roll call votes. SB 578 would allow wine to be sold in recyclable containers, aligning wine with beer container rules; it had support from Americans for Prosperity. SB 606 clarified when nonpaying guests may be removed from public lodging establishments, updated notice and checkout provisions, and removed a mandatory arrest requirement, with support from Florida Realtors, the Asian American Hotel Association, and the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association. SB 202 addressed a long-running dispute between Miami Gardens and North Miami Beach over a water utility surcharge, requiring the utility to charge residents in the city where the plant sits the same rate as its own residents; supporters argued it was a fairness issue, while North Miami Beach opposed it as a burden on its residents. All three bills were reported favorably. The committee also approved SB 570, which updates and clarifies the scope of work for swimming pool and spa contractors, and CS/SB 928, which targets non-approved disposable nicotine devices by restricting advertising and display visible to minors, increasing inspections and penalties, and adopting an amendment to clarify the bill does not cover fully unlawful products and to add a 500-foot school buffer for smoke shops. SB 346, dealing with state preemption of local regulation of hoisting equipment, was reported favorably after testimony about the St. Petersburg crane collapse during Hurricane Milton; supporters said local governments need authority to address hurricane-related crane safety, while builders and contractors warned against patchwork regulation and urged a more targeted approach. The committee then considered SB 652, creating Veterinary Professional Associates to perform certain tasks under veterinarian supervision, including limited surgical procedures after an amendment clarified those procedures are limited to spay/neuter and non-cavity surgeries. Supporters said the bill would expand access to veterinary care and help shelters, while some veterinarians expressed concern about training and safety; the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee took up SB 354 on the Public Service Commission, adopting a substitute amendment that would expand the commission, require stronger financial expertise and more detailed rate justifications, set rate-filing schedules, tighten storm-hardening review, and add transparency rules for nonprofit water and wastewater utilities; the bill drew support from consumer advocates and AARP, while Florida Rural Water warned of unintended consequences for nonprofit systems. The transcript ends while testimony on SB 354 is still underway, with no final vote shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• change that rate.
• higher than that majority rate, in which case your rollback rate for the current year would then be
• So both the proposed millage rate and the proposed taxes at that rate, and the rollback rate information
• , adopted rates, and prior year adopted rates.
• The property tax rate, not necessarily the millage rate?

Summary: The Select Committee on Property Taxes met for an educational session focused on how Florida funds public schools and how property taxes are assessed and levied. Dr. Jim Zengali of the Department of Revenue explained the FEFP school funding formula, noting that it is built on weighted student counts, a base student allocation, and programmatic add-ons such as transportation, exceptional student education, school safety, and mental health. He said school funding is roughly split between state general revenue and local property taxes through required local effort, with additional discretionary and capital outlay millages contributing to total school funding. He also described the Department of Revenue’s role in certifying property rolls at fair market value and reviewing them for substantial compliance, including the so-called “nuclear option” if a roll is not approved. Members asked about trends in millage rates, county-by-county funding differences, the effect of growth and enrollment changes, and how property appraisals are reviewed. Zengali said aggregate millage for school funding has declined over the last decade while revenues have still increased, and he agreed to provide additional data on county trends, parcel strata, student growth, and enrollment impacts. He also clarified that school funding is equalized so students receive similar resources regardless of county wealth, and that federal funding plays only a small role in the FEFP. Amy Baker of the Joint Legislative Office of Economic and Demographic Research then discussed existing homestead benefits. She said about half of Florida’s parcels are homestead properties, most fall in the $250,000 to $500,000 value range, and many seniors without mortgages pay property taxes in lump sums rather than through escrow. Baker explained that Florida’s homestead tax burden is middle-of-the-pack nationally and that the main benefits are Save Our Homes and portability on the differential side, plus the $25,000 homestead exemption and related exemptions on the exemption side. She said these benefits reduce taxable value substantially, with homestead properties receiving a large share of the reductions, and noted that the committee requested follow-up data on exemption usage, portability timing, senior exemptions, and county-level patterns. The final presentation, by Lizette Kelly of the Department of Revenue, covered millage rates and the TRIM process. She reviewed the history of truth-in-millage notices, required taxpayer mailings, public hearing notices, and later changes that tied local millage resets to rollback and majority-vote rates. Kelly explained the difference between proposed and adopted millage, the rollback rate, and the majority-vote rate, and described how taxing authorities include counties, cities, special districts, and MSTUs. She also outlined how county taxable value is calculated from just value through assessment differentials and exemptions, and how certain exemptions, such as the additional senior exemption, apply only to the taxing authority that adopted them. No votes were taken during the meeting, but members requested several follow-up data reports for later discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• cases.
• is about 230 cases per 100,000 births, where. whereas the United States rate is 102 per 100,000 live
• And so if you look over on this slide, what you can see is that these are case rates.
• So looking at this slide again, this shows rates, so cases per 10,000 hospital deliveries.
• We did 2019 cases and 2020 cases. Right now, we're working on 2021 cases and 2024 cases.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:15:32.040> and change the first year premium rate and change the first year premium rate
• standards or if in in the rare cases standards or if in in the rare cases where<00:28:32.200>
• yes so the new we assuming the new rate yes so the new we assuming the new rate is<00:51:57.599>
• authority to establish that premium rate authority to establish that premium rate at at at 0.78%
• first year I think the rate would have been 70; maybe then the second year the rate would have been

Bills: HF3

Keywords: legislative auditor, reporting, accountability, state finance, executive agency oversight, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• that rate in a back room without anybody involved in that case and bring down those bills.
• rate.
• That case, we had over $400,000 just to defend that case.
• I mean, everything is on a case-by-case basis.
• Set your rate based upon someone else's rate.

Bills: SB 30, SB 517, SB 1313, SB 1314, SB 1316, SB 1541, SB 1698, SB 1845, SB 1860, SB 2420, SB 2429

Keywords: gambling, criminal offenses, penalties, defense, electronic devices, tobacco advertising, youth protection, public health, criminal offense, retailer regulation, e-cigarettes, nicotine products, health, public safety, regulation, advertising restrictions, health and safety, elections, election audit, county elections

Summary: The Senate Committee on State Affairs convened to discuss several critical pieces of legislation including SB30 and SB38. Senator Betancourt introduced a committee substitute for SB38 which underwent a smooth adoption process, moving it favorably toward the Senate. The meeting featured a mix of invited testimonies where both proponents and opponents took the floor. One notable highlight included a testimony from Melissa Casey, who criticized the current legal state as prone to fraud and detrimental to both insurers and the public at large, contending that it inflated insurance costs across the board. The discussions delved deeply into the implications of the bills on judicial processes and potential insurance ramifications, with spirited debates surrounding issues of non-economic damages and jury rights. The atmosphere remained engaged as committee members heard varied perspectives on the bills, showcasing a robust democratic process. The meeting underscored the importance of public testimony in shaping legislation, ensuring that multiple voices were considered as the committee pressed on towards making decisions that affect the legal landscape of Texas.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's an issue I think we're looking at a case or try a case, correct. Exactly.
• I believe they're clearing their cases at a rate that is— They're clearing more cases than are being
• We have performance measures based on clearance rate in the sense of the number of case filings that
• Last session, you did fund a new case-level data system to collect case-level data.
• on the case and also the size and complexity of the new case.

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee convened for its first hearing of the 89th regular session, confirmed a quorum, adopted committee rules by a 15-0 vote, and began review of Senate Bill 1, the state budget for fiscal years 2026-27. Chair Huffman outlined the committee’s organization, introduced staff, and described the budget as conservative and focused on one-time investments. She highlighted major SB 1 priorities including property tax relief, full funding for public education formulas, teacher pay, school safety, border security, Medicaid growth, dementia research, energy and water infrastructure, transportation, wildfire suppression, and other capital and public safety needs. Comptroller Glenn Hager presented the biennial revenue estimate, saying the state has $194.6 billion available for general-purpose spending in 2026-27, with a projected $23.8 billion ending balance from the current biennium. He cautioned that revenue growth is returning to more normal levels and that lawmakers should avoid committing short-term surpluses to ongoing expenses. He also explained that the Economic Stabilization Fund is projected to hit its constitutional cap, meaning an estimated $5.6 billion in severance tax and related revenue would remain in general revenue in the upcoming biennium rather than flow into the fund. Senators discussed whether to raise or rename the fund and the implications of keeping more severance-tax revenue in general revenue. The Legislative Budget Board then gave an overview of SB 1 and the budget’s major funding changes. LBB staff explained that the bill is essentially flat at $332.9 billion in all funds, but includes large method-of-finance shifts and major property tax relief. They detailed how prior property tax relief enacted in the 88th Legislature grew from an estimated $18 billion to $22.7 billion because of higher property values and hold-harmless provisions, and said SB 1 continues that relief with a total of $51 billion in ongoing and new property tax support. Members asked extensive questions about the automatic growth in school tax compression, the constitutional homestead exemption, COVID-era federal funding, Medicaid assumptions, and the sunset of the non-homestead circuit breaker. No additional votes or final budget actions were taken beyond adoption of the committee rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:25:36.360> for time to raise the contract rate for time to raise the contract rate for
• Again, those are case-related and case-driven costs.
• unit and a case unit is how we a case unit and a case unit is how we compare compare compare case<01
• a case unit is a proximately equal cases a case unit is a proximately equal to<01:03:42.520> a
• What used to be reserved for sexual assault cases or homicide cases is now expanded to a number of cases

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• increases beyond the costs already authorized in the utilities' general rate cases.
• Our general rate cases are the main tool for scrutinizing and evaluating costs.
• The PG&E's rate case, for example...
• We have a cycle of general rate cases.
• So yes, general rate cases are a core element, but there are not 406 people dedicated to it.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the question that we've had over the last nine rate cases.
• That's the question that we've had over the last nine rate cases.
• That's the question that we've had over the last nine rate cases.
• I guess my question is: can utilities bill for rate cases?
• , the rate-case work?

Bills: HF3298

Keywords: underground storage tanks, petroleum, reimbursement program, environmental regulation, pollution control, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• This increases the rate of compensation and maximum allowable amounts per case for court-appointed counsel
• of $90 an hour per you know at the rate of $90 an hour per case<01:04:27.680> for<01:04:27.839
• Uh, this increases the rate of compensation, maximum allowable amounts per case for court-appointed counsel
• This increases the rate of compensation in maximum allowable amounts per case for court-appointed counsel
• Next up is HB 398, increases the rate of compensation and maximum allowable amounts per case for court-ordered

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint committees heard testimony on several fireworks-related bills. On HB 550, which would allow law enforcement to use drone recordings to establish probable cause for fireworks arrests in public areas and appropriate funds for drones, the Department of Law Enforcement and Honolulu Police Department supported the measure. The Public Defender and some public testifiers opposed it, arguing that a statute cannot mandate probable cause and that the bill raises constitutional concerns. A prosecutor later explained that the bill is intended to address Hawaiʻi case law, especially State v. Kit, which limits aerial surveillance over homes under the state constitution, and suggested that changing “shall” to “may” could reduce constitutional problems. Members also questioned whether current law already allows video evidence of fireworks violations and whether the bill was necessary. Testimony included both support and opposition from individuals and organizations, and no vote was taken during the hearing. The committees then heard HB 806, which would appropriate funds for the Department of Law Enforcement to conduct sting operations on Oʻahu to enforce fireworks laws. The department and police supported the bill, while the Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi opposed it, arguing that fireworks are already illegal and that the measure adds unnecessary enforcement powers and constitutional risk. Committee members asked what “sting operation” means and whether the term should be defined more clearly; the department said it refers to police or criminal investigations involving deception and agreed a definition would help guide use of the funds. The department also said the funding would support training, storage, and other operational costs for undercover investigations. Finally, the committees heard HB 1483, a broader fireworks enforcement bill that would create an adjudication system for fireworks infractions, revise definitions and penalties, establish new offenses, and increase penalties when fireworks offenses cause injury or death. The Attorney General’s office strongly supported the bill, saying it would improve enforcement by clarifying definitions and allowing cases to be proven without particle testing or expert witnesses when fireworks leave no physical evidence. The Department of Law Enforcement also supported it. The Public Defender opposed the bill, focusing on the bill’s penalty enhancements for offenses that are rarely enforced and its concurrent trial provision, which it said raises problems because of the differences between civil and criminal proceedings. No final committee action or vote was reported in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• 55 to 65% funding rate.
• The program's funding has been divided into two tiers known as rate one and rate two.
• The program's funding has been divided into two tiers known as rate one and rate two.
• 1 and Rate 2 going back to Rate 2.
• “I hope that will be the case.

Summary: The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s education budget proposals for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Learning Recovery Block Grant, and Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), followed by testimony from State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond. On LCFF, Finance outlined the proposed 2.43% COLA, repayment of prior deferrals, and a trailer bill penalty for LEAs that fail to adopt Local Control Accountability Plans on time. The LAO said its COLA estimate was slightly lower and raised concerns that the Governor’s proposed TK staffing ratio increase may be more costly than estimated. Members also discussed whether the current COLA formula should better reflect California-specific or district staffing costs, and whether TK should be more clearly separated from the K-3 grade span adjustment to avoid larger K-3 class sizes. The chair asked staff to work with the LAO on both the TK/K-3 issue and alternative COLA calculations. For the Learning Recovery Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring the first of three delayed payments, $378.6 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, while the LAO recommended adopting the proposal but extending the expenditure deadline by at least a year. The LAO reported that districts had spent $1.6 billion of the $6.8 billion received through 2023-24 and said most districts were only now shifting from federal COVID relief to block grant spending. Members questioned whether the large state and federal investments were improving outcomes, citing declining reading and math trends, while Finance and the State Board president pointed to some signs of improvement, especially in math, attendance, and gains for some student groups. Darling-Hammond emphasized that student needs have grown, that recovery spending has gone to devices, ventilation, staffing, tutoring, summer school, and community schools, and that targeted interventions appear to be helping some districts recover faster than others. On ELOP, Finance proposed adding $435 million to expand universal access by lowering the Tier 1 threshold from 75% to 55% unduplicated pupils, bringing ongoing funding to $4.4 billion. The LAO said the estimate was reasonable but recommended delaying implementation for a year, aligning ELOP with ASES to reduce overlap, moving toward funding based on participation rather than enrollment, and considering a fixed Tier 2 rate. Members and witnesses discussed staffing challenges, the use of funds for students with disabilities, and uncertainty in Tier 2 funding caused by unspent dollars and opt-outs. Darling-Hammond supported ELOP as part of California’s broader after-school and summer learning strategy, said most districts are now offering full-day TK and expanded learning, and urged the state to reduce fragmentation across categorical programs and build more unified systems for funding, reporting, and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, there's a rate case underway almost all of the time.
• Um, there's a rate case underway almost all of the time.
• Um, there's a rate case underway almost all of the time.
• Um, there's a rate case underway almost all of the time.
• <00:11:47.839> case that by by July under our rate case that by by July under our rate case

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3912, as amended, and the author moved that the bill be laid over for consideration in a future omnibus bill. The amendment was adopted without objection. Representative Holland described the bill as an energy affordability measure that would bar utilities from charging certain fees during the cold weather rule for customers above 50% of state median income, prohibit reconnection fees after shutoff for nonpayment, and create a framework for regulating late fees. He argued that late fees are often high, compound monthly, and disproportionately burden low-income households, citing utility debt and disconnection figures and noting that the need for relief is concentrated in greater Minnesota. Annie Levenson Faulk of the Citizens Utility Board supported the bill, saying reconnection fees and late fees fall on households already struggling to pay for essential service. She said reconnection fees should be treated as part of the cost of doing business and that late fees should be limited to a reasonable approximation of actual carrying costs, with protections for low-income customers. She also said the issue is already being considered in utility rate cases before the Public Utilities Commission, but that legislative action is still appropriate. Nick Martin of Xcel Energy and Katherine O'Donnell of CenterPoint Energy opposed the bill in its current form while emphasizing their companies’ commitment to affordability and customer assistance. Xcel said the bill would shift reconnection costs to other customers and could undermine a proposed arrears management program funded by late payment charges; Xcel also noted that the PUC is already reviewing these issues in its rate case. CenterPoint said it already offers extensive outreach, payment plans, and assistance programs, does not charge late fees once a customer is on a payment plan, and that its reconnection fee does not fully cover costs. After testimony and brief discussion, the chair noted the helpful information from utilities, the author said he was open to further work on the bill, and the bill was laid over.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because you only have the rate of the product in this case water.
• are high right now so we can make a case for higher rates.
• because that helps them make their case for a higher rate.
• I came to Florida originally started dealing with the PSC and rate cases in 2016.
• Last sheriff spoke out during the teco rate case because I like so many others.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And after Excel rate case with Excel.
• the Minnesota rate cases, including on the Minnesota rate cases, including on the issue<00:10
• Rate case after rate case, we see the same.
• Um, and we 100% have the jurisdiction to look at what is included in rate cases.
• case and then going to court their rate case and then going to court trying<00:32:18.080> to<

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee heard House File 76, as amended by the adopted A1 amendment, and the chair moved the bill to be re-referred to the general register. The bill would limit the amount investor-owned utilities can charge ratepayers for executive compensation, capping recoverable pay for the top 10 executives at the governor’s salary. Representative Greenman argued the measure would protect customers from paying for lavish executive pay and said it would not affect what executives are paid, only what can be recovered from ratepayers. She cited recent Public Utilities Commission action and ongoing rate cases as evidence the issue is real and recurring. Supportive testimony came from a Minneapolis resident describing financial hardship and rising utility bills, a local worker who said customers have no choice of utility provider and should not fund monopoly executive pay, and advocates from the Energy and Policy Institute and Utility Reform Now, who said ratepayers should not subsidize excessive compensation and that the bill is a targeted reform. Xcel Energy and CenterPoint Energy opposed the bill’s premise by defending the current regulatory process. Their representatives said the PUC already reviews executive compensation in rate cases, generally allows only limited recovery, and has used that process for decades. Xcel also emphasized its affordability programs and said executives help secure savings and investments for customers. Members discussed whether the legislature should set a bright-line rule or leave the issue to the PUC. Representative Greenman said the bill is needed because the PUC process can take years and the legislature should establish a clear standard for all investor-owned utilities. Some members supported the bill as a response to an affordability crisis and the lack of consumer choice, while others said the legislature should focus on broader energy-cost issues and existing regulatory tools. The committee did not take a final vote on the bill in the portion of the meeting provided, but the amendment was adopted and the bill was moved for re-referral to the general register.