Transcript Highlights:

• In addition, it adds a data practices piece so that data on individuals collected, created, received,
• And I've certainly lived and breathed that in my 38 years practicing law, as well as service on this
• </c><01:58:14.719><c> or</c> Uh, except for target practice or killing an animal.
• In practice, national stakeholders frequently include national gun control advocacy organizations.
• In practice, national prevention policy.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's obviously assessed at development.
• They're assessed. The builder pays it. But the ultimate person paying is the home buyer.
• It's hard to say that the residents who don't pay the assessment go to the ballot to vote on whether
• They're generally weighted by the property value, the assessable value.
• They don’t have any assessment or property tax because it’s in a complete donut hole.

Bills: SB32 , SB464 , SB996 , SB1163 , SB1173 , SB1277 , SB1452 , SB1453 , SB1548 , SB1882 , SB1883 , SB2016

Committee: Senate Local Government

Keywords: ad valorem taxation, tax exemption, franchise tax credit, income production, personal property, SB 464, school buffer zone, tobacco retailer, vape shop, e-cigarette, vaping, nicotine, tobacco products, retail permit, comptroller, Class A misdemeanor, school proximity, youth access, public school, private school

Summary: The Senate Local Government Committee heard several bills by Senator Bettencourt focused on property tax and local government accountability. SB 32 would provide about $700 million in business tax relief by raising the business personal property exemption from $2,500 to $25,000 and continuing a 20% franchise tax credit for inventory taxes paid. Witnesses from NFIB, the Texas Retailers Association, and Texas Realtors supported the bill, saying business personal property and inventory taxes are burdensome and especially hard on small businesses. After no opposition testimony, SB 32 was left pending. The committee also heard SB 1453, which would change how interest and sinking tax rates are calculated by using only the minimum debt service required under bond schedules, while still allowing a higher rate with a 60% governing body vote and a public explanation. A witness from the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association supported the bill as a way to keep debt rates from rising as property values increase and to preserve tax relief. The bill was left pending after testimony. SB 1883 would tighten rules on local impact fees by requiring 60 days of public availability for capital improvement plans and land use assumptions, raising the approval threshold for adopting impact fees from a simple majority to two-thirds, limiting how often fees can be increased, and expanding notice requirements. Builders and developers testified in support, arguing that impact fees are often poorly reviewed, lack accountability, and are passed on to homebuyers, worsening housing affordability. Committee members discussed adding audit provisions and questioned the lack of city testimony. The bill was left pending with subcommittee action. SB 1452 would require a voter election to decide whether a municipal management district continues to exist, with dissolution if voters reject it; supporters said it would add accountability, while others noted some districts provide essential services and infrastructure. The committee heard testimony from district representatives and builders, then left SB 1452 pending before recessing.

Transcript Highlights:

• , but it's for $170,000 for the sex offender assessment.
• So beyond that, we implemented the Ohio Risk Assessment Tool, which is an assessment tool that helps
• us make sure we get the... ...a risk assessment tool, which is an assessment tool that helps us make
• We're working through getting those assessed.
• Those Ohio assessments, you'll be doing those when people enter the system? Yes.

Committee: All JOINT BUDGET COMMITTEE

Summary: The committee first adopted revised JBC rules, which staff said were updated to reflect legislation passed in the 2025 session. It then heard a presentation from DFA Secretary Jim Hudson on the governor’s proposed balanced budget for FY27, with no action taken. Hudson said the budget reflects three priorities: limiting state-government growth, continuing investments in education, and advancing income-tax cuts. He highlighted increases for education funding through EFAs, pay-plan costs for Corrections, DPS, and the Attorney General, higher education productivity funding, drug task forces, a Corrections medical contract, the governor’s 1033 initiative, SNAP error-rate reduction efforts, and an additional $100 million set aside for Medicaid sustainability. Committee members questioned the size of the tax cuts, the balance requirement, public education funding, Medicaid trust-fund levels, EFA funding, and the expected impact of new SNAP cost-sharing rules. The Division of Higher Education then presented its productivity-based funding recommendations. Officials said institutions were 2.61% more productive overall, with funding changes driven by a statutory formula that rewards degree production, underserved populations, and high-demand fields. Members asked about declines at UA Little Rock, the formula’s multipliers, the role of the Arkansas Access Act and a new return-on-investment metric, and how two-year colleges are adjusted for size. The committee also reviewed special items and approved two letters: one authorizing 17 net personnel changes across nine institutions, and another adding special language for North Arkansas College’s entry into the University of Arkansas system. The committee then adopted the Higher Education Coordinating Board’s recommendations for all institutions. A lengthy portion of the meeting focused on the University of Arkansas system, especially Fayetteville’s athletics funding and the broader impact of the House/NIL settlement. Chancellor Charles Robinson and system officials explained that the board had waived a longstanding campus transfer and directed the university to provide an additional $6 million to athletics, with some costs likely to be passed through to students but partially offset by existing budget growth. Members debated whether the university should prioritize academics or athletics, how the transfer originated, and whether the athletic changes would affect affordability. The committee also discussed the 1890 extension program at UAPB and the Division of Agriculture’s land-grant funding. UAPB officials said the state match is intended to be one-to-one, that the current recommendation aligns appropriation with actual spending, and that a $2 million set-aside remains available if needed. The Division of Agriculture later clarified that its Smith-Lever extension and Hatch research funds are part of the UA system’s separate budget and that the state matched about $6.2 million in federal extension funding last year. The committee then moved to the Department of Corrections. It approved G1, transferring 51 positions to the secretary’s office to activate a recidivism program, with an estimated cost of about $4 million. Staff then began walking through the department’s FY27 budget, noting an increase of about $8 million for administration and shared services, including a $170,000 sex-offender assessment appropriation moved under Act 723 of 2025 and roughly $6 million more for medical contracts. Questions on the Corrections budget had just begun when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• bit of background as necessary, talk through what the question does, and then talk through how we assess
• bit of background as necessary, talk through what the question does, and then talk through how we assess
• , and Jim, I'd say the agnostic bit about this is part of the danger or perils of valid petition practice
• And there is practically a century of evidence to show that.
• I will skip my discussion of what that has been able... practically a century of evidence to show that

Bills: H5006 , H5007

Committee: Joint Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions

Keywords: tax revenue, state surplus, taxpayer refunds, budget growth, Massachusetts General Laws, income tax, tax reduction, state law, personal income tax, tax rates

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on two proposed ballot initiatives: one to reduce the state personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over three years, and another to revise the state tax collection cap law (62F) so the cap would be based on the prior year’s actual collections plus wage-and-salary growth and would include surtax revenue. Committee chairs outlined the hearing process and noted that the measures would need additional signatures to qualify for the 2026 ballot if not enacted by the legislature. The committee’s expert witness, Doug Howgate of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, said the income tax proposal would lower the base rate in stages beginning in 2027 and would ultimately reduce state income tax collections by about $5.4 billion annually when fully implemented. He estimated savings would vary by income level, from a few hundred dollars for lower- and middle-income households to about $10,700 for taxpayers at the surtax threshold. He argued the proposal would improve tax competitiveness but would also require major budget adjustments, likely including reserve use, spending cuts, and possibly new revenue measures; he cited prior downturns and said the state’s rainy day fund is stronger than in past recessions, though spending growth and health care costs remain concerns. On the 62F proposal, he said rebasing the cap to prior-year collections would make refunds more likely, with modeled refunds totaling about $7.9 billion without the surtax and $10.1 billion with it over the last decade, and warned it could reduce stabilization fund deposits and constrain recovery after recessions. Proponents of both petitions, including representatives from Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts, NFIB, Pioneer Institute, and the Mass Opportunity Alliance, argued that Massachusetts faces an affordability and competitiveness crisis and that lower taxes would help families, small businesses, job creation, and outmigration. They said the income tax cut would put about $1,300 a year back into the hands of average families, help pass-through businesses reinvest, and improve the state’s ability to compete with lower-tax states such as North Carolina. Their economist, Rebecca Paxton, presented a model projecting average annual revenue losses of about $680 million during the phase-in and a total net income tax revenue impact of $2 billion to $2.2 billion, while saying long-term revenue growth would be stronger after implementation. The hearing ended with committee questions and a brief dispute over a planned voter testimonial video, which the chairs said was not appropriate for the hearing at that point.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've seen, you know, the assessments have changed numerous times.
• We've seen, you know, the assessments have changed numerous times.
• The people most qualified to make and approve legally required school policies like instructional practices
• required school policies<00:28:31.360><c> like</c><00:28:32.240><c> instructional</c><00:28:33.039><c> practices
• </c> policies like instructional practices policies like instructional practices and<00:28:34.559><c>

Committee: Senate Education

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It reflects conservative fiscal management practices and spending decisions, while other states that
• highway fund, but we have a cap at 10% and that appears to be appropriate. based on what is standard practice
• Now, we are here today in part because of your your budgeting practices, while the economy's grown, you
• then going into these career fields is just like brain drain that is specific to Texas where people practice
• , so we've modified the CANS assessment tool to use that tool to best determine what type of placement

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: budget, House Bill 1, public education, healthcare, border security, federal funding, spending limits

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on reviewing the proposed budget for the upcoming biennium, with substantial discussions around House Bill 1 and its implications for public education, healthcare, and border security. The Comptroller presented a revenue overview indicating a total of $194.6 billion available for general purpose spending, which reflects a slight decrease compared to previous years due to fluctuating economic conditions. Members raised questions regarding spending limits and the impact of federal funding on state programs, highlighting concerns about the sustainability of funding in light of potential changes at the federal level.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator Brantley has been trying to track where we're at practically for the people that are out there
• It's rules of procedure and practice.
• It's rules of procedure and practice.
• I would hope the next step would be we would have those experience in the practice.
• And so, not to get too far into the weeds, but I see this in my practice, and you all hear about it all

Committee: Senate Senate Judiciary

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• On the immunization assessment fund, has that been adjusted to the new recommendations of the CDC?
• in our state, private, commercial, TRICARE even, participate in this assessment fund.
• Every single health insurer in our state pays an assessment and an assessment fee...
• Director: Every single health insurer in our state pays an assessment, an assessment fee, that goes into
• There's a board that is set up that they agree on the amount to be assessed.

Summary: The committee heard budget presentations for several Department of Health and Welfare divisions, including Early Learning and Development, Public Health Services, and Family and Community Partnerships. The analyst and director explained recent reorganizations, such as moving the Idaho Child Care Program into Early Learning and Development, shifting Emergency Medical Services out of Public Health, and proposing to move the Idaho Home Visiting Program from Public Health to Early Learning and Development for efficiency. The presentations also covered ongoing and one-time funding requests for child care capacity, immunizations, HIV and hepatitis prevention, lab testing, disaster preparedness, and kinship navigation services. A major focus was the Idaho Child Care Program capacity funding. Committee members asked about the source of the money, how much was already set aside, whether the funds would create new slots rather than subsidize existing ones, and how the department would verify proper use. The director said the money comes from the federal Child Care Development Block Grant, is intended to expand provider capacity in underserved and rural areas, and can support both licensed and unlicensed providers as long as federal health and safety requirements are met. Members also questioned the proposed five new program integrity positions, including a fraud investigator, and the director said they are needed for a full annual review of providers and beneficiaries; she later corrected that the positions are ongoing, not one-time, funding. Public health questions centered on the effectiveness of HIV and hepatitis prevention spending, the immunization assessment fund, and the role of public health more broadly. The director said HIV and hepatitis funds support education, screening, and surveillance rather than treatment, that the state continues to see a need despite rising case counts, and that the department is revamping outcome reporting. On immunizations, she said the assessment fund is financed by insurer assessments and supports vaccine purchases at lower cost, with the governor recommending an increase based on the assessment board’s decision. Members also asked about the home visiting program’s funding history, the proposed transfer of funds between Youth Safety and Permanency and Switzie for rare complex cases, and the use of ARPA funds for one-time data modernization projects. No formal votes were taken in the transcript, and the committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm a dentist and practice owner in God's Country, Brighton, Massachusetts.
• It's the result of opaque insurer practices.
• The practice is known as network leasing.
• We formed in 2019 to turn diagnosis from luck into everyday practice.
• This is simple, practical, preventative public health policy.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services held a lengthy public hearing with more than 70 people signed up to testify, focusing mainly on health insurance and health care access bills. Early testimony centered on H.1257/S.712, which would require insurance coverage for medically necessary treatment of genetic craniofacial conditions. Supporters included legislators, dentists, and medical experts who said these conditions are not cosmetic, can severely affect eating, speech, pain, and social functioning, and often create major financial hardship because insurers deny coverage. A related dental bill, H.1262/S.676, drew technical testimony from the Life Insurance Association of Massachusetts about implementation issues with the 2022 dental loss-ratio law, while the Massachusetts Dental Society supported H.1306/S.696 on transparency in dental network leasing and opposed H.1262. Representative Gentile also testified for H.4013, which would ban for-profit acute care hospitals and for-profit health insurers in Massachusetts, arguing that profit incentives undermine patient care. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to H.1261/S.799, a bill to protect patients from surprise ambulance bills. Municipal fire chiefs, Boston EMS, nonprofit ambulance providers, and the bill’s Senate sponsor said the measure would require insurers to pay ambulance providers directly and promptly, cap patient out-of-pocket costs, and reduce confusion caused by out-of-network billing. Witnesses described ambulance services as essential public health infrastructure and said current billing practices can discourage people from calling 911 or leave municipalities and nonprofits unable to recover costs. Committee members asked about unpaid debt, municipal billing burdens, and how the bill would affect rates and reimbursement. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee also heard extensive testimony on H.1249/S.805, which would require screening for PANS/PANDAS in medical and clinical settings. Legislators, clinicians, parents, a teen with the condition, and educators described PANS/PANDAS as an infection-triggered inflammatory illness that can present as sudden psychiatric symptoms and is often misdiagnosed as a mental health disorder. Supporters said routine screening at well visits, emergency rooms, and other clinical settings would help identify children earlier, reduce unnecessary psychiatric treatment and hospitalizations, and improve outcomes. Testifiers repeatedly urged favorable action, emphasizing the personal and financial toll on families and the potential for early treatment to prevent long-term harm. The hearing concluded with continued testimony on these bills; no committee action or votes were announced.

Transcript Highlights:

• Since they're administrative assessment.
• Thank that assessment or premium tax. Thank you.
• be assessing them necessarily. necessarily. necessarily.
• </c> assessments and when those assessments assessments and when those assessments are<00:35:44.480><
• It's going to be returns or assessments.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee took up the pooled risk management program bill and reviewed a new amendment drafted with input from the Insurance Department and Legislative Services. Department witnesses explained that the proposal would move oversight of pooled risk management programs from the Secretary of State’s office to the Insurance Department, add a licensure requirement, preserve the programs’ non-insurer status, and exempt them from third-party administrator licensure. They also described a series of solvency tools in the draft, including financial reporting, risk-based capital standards, minimum capitalization, investment limits, commissioner examination and enforcement authority, rulemaking authority, merger and affiliate-transaction review, confidentiality protections, and a separability clause. A major theme of the discussion was that pooled risk management programs differ from commercial insurers because the risk remains with the member local governments rather than being backed by a state guarantee fund. Witnesses said the bill is designed to emphasize solvency over return of premium and to give the Insurance Department a regulatory “toolbox” to prevent insolvency, including a proposed $5 million excess or stop-loss coverage benchmark, optional accessible policies, and a requirement that boards vote on dividends or premium returns when capital exceeds 600% of risk-based capital. Members questioned how this approach differed from the original Secretary of State bill and whether assessments on towns would still be possible; the department responded that the new framework would allow more flexible oversight and alternatives to immediate court action. The committee also discussed why the statute should continue to say the programs are not insurers, with the department explaining that this preserves their autonomy and avoids applying unrelated insurance laws and premium taxes. Members asked about the department’s workload and were told the department believed it could absorb the new duties without additional funding. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Before we even finished completing the assessment questions, Patrick asked me about a specific nonprofit
• And mine's more comment because I'm pretty well versed in this area after almost 40 years practicing
• </c> area after 40 almost 40 years practicing area after 40 almost 40 years practicing law<00:38:00.320
• Uh, fast forward again, Burr worked for me several years before retiring again from the practice of law
• </c> before retiring again from the practice before retiring again from the practice of<00:57:54.400>

Keywords: 0:00:04 Call to Order 0:00:50 Dept for Public Advocacy 0:51:31 Life Learning Center 1:21:06 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary heard testimony from the Department of Public Advocacy (DPA) on attorney compensation and alternatives to incarceration. Because the committee lacked a quorum, the chair skipped formal roll call and minutes approval, then invited DPA Public Advocate Damon Preston, Deputy Public Advocate Melanie Lowe, and alternative sentencing worker Cena/Tina Mills to present. Preston said DPA is fully state-funded, has 698 funded positions, and was near full staffing with 673 filled positions and 42 new law graduates expected to join in August. He argued that DPA’s resources lag behind those of prosecutors, noting that local prosecutorial offices receive substantially more total funding and have additional revenue sources beyond the state budget. Preston focused on salary disparities and turnover. He said DPA trial-office attorneys total about $26 million in salaries, compared with about $41.9 million for prosecutors on publicly listed state funding, and estimated that more than 100 additional prosecutors are paid through other sources, bringing total prosecutor compensation to a little over $50 million versus DPA’s $26 million. He said starting DPA attorney pay is $58,200, experienced attorney pay averages about $73,000, and that these levels are too low given law school debt and the state’s constitutional obligation to provide defense counsel. He also said DPA attorney turnover is about 20%, median service time before separation was 15 months in 2024, and exit interviews often cite salary as the main reason for leaving. He gave examples of former DPA attorneys moving to prosecutor offices for raises ranging from 12% to 50%. Committee members asked about how often defendants are represented by private counsel versus DPA and how that affects workload. Preston said a 2017 study found about 50% of misdemeanor cases and about 75% of circuit court cases were handled by DPA, with DPA handling most of the most labor-intensive cases. He said DPA will step aside when a defendant hires private counsel or is found ineligible, and he acknowledged the system historically erred by denying counsel in some cases, though he said the current concern is whether DPA is now appointed too broadly. Members requested updated trend data on appointments over the past decade. Preston also described DPA’s pay scale and said the agency’s compensation structure makes retention difficult. Mills then described DPA’s alternative sentencing worker program, which she said has operated for about 20 years and has received national recognition. She shared a case example involving a client named Patrick, who faced a prison sentence on a possession charge and was referred to a horse-based treatment and certification program in Shelbyville. She said the client wanted treatment and a fresh start, a bed became available, and she and the client’s attorney presented an alternative sentencing plan to the court. The presentation was interrupted briefly by a technical issue, but the testimony continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• Idaho Safety Assessment Center Coalition. Any comments? Any comment? Representative Gallabese.
• And also in the proposal, the way it was written, I was real impressed because it covered the assessment
• Okay, Idaho Safe Teen Assessment Centers. I'd entertain a motion. Mr.
• And they do their best to try to make an assessment or a good guess every year. ...best to try to make
• an assessment or a good guess every year as to how much they're going to need for the next year.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee first approved the January 29, 2006 minutes, then spent most of the meeting reviewing Idaho Children’s Trust Fund and related prevention-focused grant requests. Members repeatedly discussed whether proposals fit the committee’s mission of youth substance-abuse prevention, the need for measurable outcomes and oversight, and whether some requests were more like child care or general social services than prevention. Several members also noted that future legislation and a clearer planning framework may be needed so the committee is not simply reacting to applicants’ own goals. The committee then considered individual funding requests. It approved one-time funding for the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund ($692,240), the Idaho Safety Assessment Center Coalition ($1 million through the Department of Juvenile Corrections), the Idaho Network of Children’s Advocacy Centers ($3 million through ICDVVA), a recovery center request ($150,000 ongoing through Health and Welfare), a statewide drug awareness media campaign ($5 million through the Office of Drug Policy), and the governor’s recommended $25 million one-time transfer to the Department of Health and Welfare/Division of Medicaid to help address the Medicaid forecast and general fund impact. The Children’s Bridge request for $3.5 million did not receive a second and died. Throughout the meeting, members emphasized that any approved funding should include intent language for distribution, oversight, reporting, and in some cases procurement or performance measures. There was also discussion that some programs should have a designated state agency “home” for long-term sustainability, and that the committee should better track whether funded programs are actually reducing youth substance use and related harms. The meeting ended after the committee adopted the motions and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Davis responded that, while that is true, the intent is also to ensure that when one fee is assessed
• to that organization, and that we assess to that organization, and then<00:13:16.839><c> we</c><00:13
• :17.040><c> assess</c><00:13:17.400><c> the</c><00:13:17.520><c> rebate.
• So, as they then we assess the rebate.
• one fee on the that when we assess one fee on the entire<00:15:30.040><c> region.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The rate is 5% on the assessed value of timber when it is harvested.
• Senate Bill 5994 will... ...taxing district in the county in proportion to the timber assessed value
• When assessors see what levies they're going to be dealing with, add them in, the assessed value in,
• When assessors see what levies they're going to be dealing with, add them in, the assessed value in,
• When assessors see what levies they're going to be dealing with, add them in, the assessed value in,

Summary: House Finance held public hearings on two Senate bills. On Senate Bill 5252, staff explained that the bill would remove the one-acre limit on a property tax exemption for nonprofit public assembly halls, beginning with property taxes due in 2027. Staff said the fiscal impact would be minimal, with no loss to the state levy and only a small local property tax shift, though the Department of Revenue anticipates a one-time administrative cost. Senator Shoemaker and a grange representative testified in support, saying the change would help rural granges that serve as community gathering places and are facing rising costs and property tax burdens. The committee then heard Senate Bill 5994, which would change how timber tax revenues are distributed to school districts. Staff said the bill would extend distributions to districts that had qualifying levies in either of the prior two years, even if they do not have such a levy in the current year, and that it would take effect immediately with no state revenue impact but an indeterminate effect on school district funding. A county assessor testified that he supported the policy but was concerned the immediate effective date would disrupt current levy distribution calculations and suggested a January 1, 2027 effective date instead. No votes were taken, and both hearings were closed before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, Senate Bill 118 relates to non-ad valorem special assessments, like fire assessments, against
• For 25 years, Florida law mandated that local government levies a special assessment against RV parks
• Then such special assessment ...regulated under Chapter 513.
• Then such special assessment must be collected in the same manner as hotel, motel, and similar facilities
• This legislation clarifies that a local government levies a special assessment against an RV parking

Committee: Senate Finance and Tax

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• an assessing firm to do it, the responsibility is the select board's to do the assessing. >> And the
• They did the assessment, and then Dr. came and said he can't do that assessment.
• street and you can do your assessing street and you can do your assessing that<01:03:20.240><c> way.
• They did the assessment and assessment. They did the assessment and then<01:05:32.319><c> Dr.
• He has no training assessment.

Committee: House Ways and Means

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Because practically access to drugs.
• In practice, though, that's never been a real practical obstacle for any right-to-try law, for, you know
• And the practical reality is they just are not going to.
• And the practical reality is they just are not going to.
• </c><04:04:28.000><c> by</c> backdoor conversion therapy practice by backdoor conversion therapy practice

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The salaries, the base salaries, are based upon assessed valuations, and this has not been changed for
• The assessed valuation ranges were changed to be more comparable, and they extended it.
• And I appreciate, excuse me, I appreciate that you put a chart in here with the assessed value growth
• As the bill sponsor mentioned, it's based on assessed valuation.
• Well, assessed valuations have changed dramatically in the last 45 years.

Summary: The Committee on Local Government first took up Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 975, which concerns community paramedic/mobile integrated health services and related jurisdictional issues. Supporters, including ambulance and EMS leaders from Caldwell County and Cox Health, said the bill would help expand community paramedicine in rural and regional areas, improve patient care, reduce unnecessary emergency room use, and lower Medicaid costs. One witness described a successful program that cut Medicaid charges dramatically, while another said the bill would help ambulance districts merge and operate more efficiently. An opponent representing the Missouri State Council of Firefighters said the group supported the underlying bill but was concerned about the Senate-added jurisdictional language affecting community paramedic services and wanted those issues resolved. The committee heard testimony but took no vote before closing testimony on the bill. The committee then heard House Bill 3496, sponsored by Rep. Rodger Reedy, which would update county official salary schedules and assessed valuation ranges that have not been revised in decades. Reedy and the Missouri Association of Counties said the bill is intended to modernize minimum salary schedules while preserving local control through county salary commissions, with a growth factor designed to account for changing assessed valuations over time. Committee members asked about how the bill interacts with other salary legislation and whether counties could use alternative training or salary arrangements approved by their associations. Supporters said the proposal was developed through a multi-year task force process involving county officials and related associations. The Missouri Association of Counties and Warren County officials testified in favor, saying the bill reflects a broad consensus and better matches current county finances. No one testified in opposition to House Bill 3496, and the chair closed the public hearing and adjourned the meeting after testimony concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• The salaries, the base salaries, are based upon assessed valuations, and this has not been changed for
• And I appreciate, excuse me, I appreciate that you put a chart in here with the assessed value growth
• And I appreciate, excuse me, I appreciate that you put a, you know, the chart in here with the assessed
• As the bill sponsor mentioned, it's based on assessed valuation.
• Well, assessed valuations have changed dramatically in the last 45 years.

Committee: House Judiciary

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Then I'll talk about fish passage barriers in general, the different types, how they're assessed.
• So the state has been assessing fish passage barriers since the 40s.
• protocols that the state uses to assess a barrier.
• So we have to assess every crossing that we own in the case area every 10 years, forever.
• We do an assessment and go upstream and determine where's the end of fish use.

Committee: House Capital Budget

Keywords: 904, all