Transcript Highlights:

• We had a revised fiscal note come in related to the employer contributions for the new probation and
• We had a revised fiscal<00:06:37.800> note<00:06:38.080> come<00:06:38.280> in<00
• :06:38.960> related<00:06:39.480> to<00:06:39.720> the fiscal note come in related
• to the fiscal note come in related to the employer<00:06:40.360> contributions<00:06:41.160><
• current biennium, fiscal year 26 and 27. current biennium, fiscal year 26 and 27.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, Representative, yeah, that's this is for Fiscal Year 26, so the current fiscal year, and
• Fiscal Year 27 for the upcoming fiscal year.
• Those are addressed in House Bill 1, making funding available for the current fiscal year, Fiscal Year
• 26, and into Fiscal Year 27.
• And I just got a text from Health and Human Services, and that HCA just noted that at the end of fiscal

Transcript Highlights:

• you know, we that in the in the fiscal you know, we that in the in the fiscal note<00:53:10.600>
• I'm just looking at the fiscal note and seeing that the DRA's modeling determined there could be a fiscal
• And just reading the fiscal note, it's obvious DRA does not want conformity.
• :23.800> it's<01:20:23.920> obvious reading the fiscal note, it's obvious reading the fiscal
• <01:48:24.719> note, You will see that in the fiscal note, You will see that in the fiscal

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So when determining fiscal year 25's 25% spending cap, you would take fiscal year 24's ending fund balance
• And that would equal your cap for fiscal year 25.
• So we would have just looked at fiscal year 2024 and 2025.
• Chairman, and Representative Mathy, I did testify last week at the fiscal, or at—I did do a fiscal statement
• I know John keeps notes. Even when I'm on Teams or Zoom, I think we use Zoom, I take notes.

Summary: The committee convened, approved the prior meeting minutes, and received a memo summarizing major audit items. The State Auditor’s office and outside auditors then presented a series of audits, many of which were clean with unmodified opinions and no findings, including the Bank of North Dakota, the Guaranteed Student Loan Program, the Office of the Governor, the State Treasurer, the Office of Management and Budget, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Environmental Quality, Lake Region State College, and the Office of the Governor. The North Dakota Stockmen’s Association audit was also clean overall, but it repeated findings about limited segregation of duties and auditor assistance in preparing financial statements, which the auditor said were expected to continue because of the organization’s small size. Committee members asked about out-of-state board addresses, and the association explained those members were North Dakota residents using South Dakota mailing addresses. Several audits did include findings. The Council on the Arts audit identified two issues: payroll charged to federal awards without supporting time records, and $12,825 in Cultural Endowment Fund spending that was not allowable under state law, including staff training, retreats, and executive director candidate travel. The Department of Public Instruction audit found unsupported scholarship applications in the paraprofessional-to-teacher program, but additional testing confirmed the funds were credited properly and students completed required school district work, so no improper payments were identified. The University of North Dakota audit found a lack of documentation and transparency in School of Law admissions decisions; the auditor said the law school used a holistic process but did not keep notes or evaluation tools to show why applicants were admitted, waitlisted, or denied. UND leadership said the school is in good standing with the American Bar Association and agreed better documentation is needed, and the auditor said the issue was the missing documentation, not ABA accreditation itself. The most extensive discussion centered on the North Dakota Racing Commission audit, which found four findings: overspending the promotion fund’s 25% operating cap, grant conditions not being met, improper breeder fund awards, and improper procurement. The auditor said promotion fund spending exceeded the cap by $327,447 and the fund balance dropped sharply over the audit period. Racing Commission director Bruce Johnson said the agency had become complacent, that grant requests were treated as routine, and that controls and documentation need to be tightened. He also explained that the breeder fund overpayments involved two horses whose ownership transfers were not properly documented before racing, and that the procurement issue stemmed from an advertising contract that proceeded without proper written procurement procedures after a misunderstanding with the State Procurement Office. The auditor said the Racing Commission will now be audited every two years because of the findings. The committee also received updates on Dakota College at Bottineau’s bank reconciliations, which Minot State University said had been brought current after an 18-month backlog, with only one account still needing cleanup; members asked for a written report on the corrective actions. The North Dakota Fair Foundation was reported to have dissolved, with remaining funds transferred to another nonprofit account for continued support of the state fair. Finally, the Department of Public Instruction provided an update on school meal debt, revising the earlier estimate to about $1.1 million based on incomplete district survey responses, and said the Anti-Lunch Shaming law likely increased meal debt because schools must feed students regardless of account balance. Members discussed the need for a more accurate year-end debt figure and possible future reporting at a later committee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I just wondered if there was a fiscal note on this and if you could describe the cost.
• note on this if um there was a fiscal note on this and<00:52:54.559> if<00:52:54.800> you<
• Um there yes, a fiscal note was Robbins.
• <00:54:34.960> note,<00:54:35.200> the understand it from the fiscal note, the understand
• <00:54:45.520> doing<00:54:45.760> the the fiscal note for OHI are doing the the fiscal

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up a series of “same and similar” provisions between the House and Senate higher education bills and adopted them one by one, with brief explanations from members and staff. The items included a cybersecurity addition for a doctoral degree program, Northstar Promise definitions and eligibility limits, self-loan provisions on institution eligibility and data disclosure, and dual training language requiring certificates, diplomas, or degrees to come from accredited postsecondary institutions. The committee also adopted an amendment to the private career school provisions that clarified exempt institutions remain within the act, and removed certain limited-license and renewal fees for institutions participating in dual training grants or the eligible training provider list. Each of these motions prevailed by voice vote. The committee then moved into policy differences between the House and Senate bills, beginning with emergency grants and hunger-free campus grants. Members discussed shifting funding from OHE-administered competitive grants to direct appropriations for the University of Minnesota and Minnesota State, while the Senate retained competitive grant access for private and tribal colleges and added reporting requirements. OHE Commissioner Dennis Olson said the added reporting would be an extra administrative task but raised no significant concerns. Testifiers from the University of Minnesota, Minnesota State, and the private college sector supported faster, more direct funding and described the grants as important for emergency housing, transportation, food insecurity, and other student basic needs. A LeadMN representative also supported the changes, saying campus staff and students wanted funds delivered more quickly. The committee also discussed direct admissions on R31. The Senate proposal would require public and charter high schools to participate in the direct admissions program by the 2029-2030 school year. Assistant Commissioner Wendy Robinson said OHE supports statewide expansion and that the program has improved FAFSA completion, college enrollment, and student retention in Minnesota. Members noted the bill had bipartisan support and heard from advocates such as Ed Allies and Students United. No votes were taken on the policy-difference items during this portion of the meeting, and the chair said further discussion of state grant and sexual misconduct policy differences would be held at a later hearing with additional OHE staff present.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, so let's, on a positive note, move forward.
• This is a summary of Fiscal Year 25 that just ended June 30.
• But first I wanted to note in the table you'll see a subnote about item 2, or the 200s.
• The four positions we're requesting at this time, the first is a fiscal analyst.
• Chair, I just want to make a quick note.

Transcript Highlights:

• Noted. Thank you. So I want to, yes, ma'am.
• Yep, noted. Thank you very much.
• In the orange bars, you'll see the fiscal 26 enacted budget.
• You'll see the orange bars reflecting the fiscal 26...
• 20 federal funding lost to Arizona hospitals by the time we get to fiscal 20 fiscal 33 mr. chair hand

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee met to review the governor’s fiscal 2027 budget presentation, with the chair repeatedly asking members to keep questions brief and avoid speeches. The discussion focused first on the overall revenue and spending outlook, including concerns from members that the executive forecast was more optimistic than the JLBC baseline and that the budget appeared to front-load revenue and expenditure growth. The governor’s budget team said the forecast was close to JLBC’s, that the budget was structurally balanced, and that differences were roughly $100 million per year on ongoing revenue. Members asked for follow-up calculations in writing, including the total multi-year gap and the amount of revenue enhancements above base revenues. A major portion of the meeting centered on tax and fee proposals tied to data centers, water use, and sports betting. The governor’s team defended eliminating the existing data center tax incentive as the removal of a loophole rather than a new tax, arguing the incentive had already succeeded in attracting major investment. They also described a proposed Department of Water Resources fee-setting authority for data centers to support a new Colorado River Protection Fund, and said the proposal would apply to existing and future facilities without a grandfather clause. Members raised concerns about fairness, competitiveness, and whether the changes would require a supermajority vote. The team also discussed increased sports betting fees, saying the revenue forecast did not include dynamic behavioral effects. The committee then moved through major spending areas, including corrections, public safety, border security, cybersecurity, K-12 education, Medicaid, and developmental disabilities. The governor’s budget includes ongoing funding to prevent correctional officer pay cuts, money to comply with prison health care court orders, probation funding, body-worn cameras, law enforcement staffing, fentanyl task forces, and cyber readiness grants. Members questioned the lack of funding for a prison oversight committee and asked for corrections spending totals over the administration. On border security, the executive said it was seeking about $759.7 million in federal reimbursement for border-related costs and that the governor had met with federal officials, including Secretary Noem and Tom Homan, about the request. In education, the budget proposes renewing Prop. 123, adding K-12 base funding, and issuing $1.5 billion in school facilities bonds over three years; members debated whether the proposal was appropriate and whether Prop. 123 revenues could support the debt service. The meeting also covered AHCCCS cost growth and federal HR1 impacts, with the executive warning of major coverage losses and hospital funding reductions, and DDD funding, where the governor’s team said the budget fully funds services and includes about $120 million in supplemental needs. No votes were taken; the meeting was a presentation and question-and-answer session only.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm just kind of off the cuff, but because I'm the CBO on the fiscal side, we do have fiscal indicators
• I understand that the fiscal part along those lines.
• I understand that the fiscal part along those lines.
• Coherence is impossible without fiscal predictability.
• Finally, budget timing, as Sarah Petroski just noted, and I think you may have noted that as well, the

Summary: The joint hearing focused on coherence in California’s education planning and reporting systems, especially the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) and related grant plans. Committee chairs and members described widespread frustration with duplicative, lengthy, and sometimes conflicting reporting requirements, while emphasizing that the goal was not to reduce accountability but to make planning more useful, stable, and student-centered. State Superintendent Tony Thurmond also previewed the Governor’s education budget priorities, including expanded learning, community schools, universal transitional kindergarten, literacy supports, and concerns about the proposed Prop. 98 deferral. Panelists from the State Board of Education, Fresno County Superintendent of Schools, and the Legislative Analyst’s Office said the LCAP was intended to balance local flexibility with statewide transparency, but has become overloaded by repeated revisions and additional requirements. They argued for fewer core reporting elements, more stability over time, better alignment of planning cycles, and integrated systems that reduce duplication. Fresno County staff described a multi-year calendar and support tools that help districts manage timelines, but said these tools only ease the burden rather than solve the underlying problem. The LAO noted that some newer plans, such as expanded learning and transportation plans, are narrative-heavy and often less informative than separate reporting requirements. Local district leaders and county officials described the practical effects of the current system: staff time diverted from instruction, multiple portals and forms, audit risk aversion, and planning documents that can exceed 100 pages. Several superintendents said coherent systems work best when districts have clear priorities, stable governance, and aligned budgets, and when state requirements are predictable and tied to outcomes like literacy, attendance, and student achievement. The California Federation of Teachers added that coherence also depends on meaningful collaboration with educators, classified staff, parents, and communities. Committee members repeatedly asked whether the state should streamline reporting, create a uniform portal, or develop a more unified grant-reporting structure, and Thurmond said the department was piloting a simplified common form and was willing to work with the Legislature and districts on broader solutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'd probably need a fiscal note from those people as well.
• So we'd probably need a fiscal note from those people as well.
• fiscal note from from probably need um a fiscal note from from those<01:00:01.839> people<01:
• I did request a fiscal note, but bill.
• mean, if it comes back with a fiscal mean, if it comes back with a fiscal note,<01:01:07.839>

Bills: HF3477, HF3414, HF103, HF3661, HF3146

Keywords: civil rights, law enforcement, federal collaboration, accountability, state law, constitutional rights, color of law, 42 U.S.C. 1983, section 1983, civil action, damages, injunctive relief, attorney fees, law enforcement task force, federal-state cooperation, intergovernmental agreement, federal agency partnership, Minnesota Constitution, U.S. Constitution, police accountability

Transcript Highlights:

• Berg responded that the base for 2026-27 is about $220 million, and that there is a pending fiscal note
• on the bill because changing and equalizing the rate upward will cost money, so the fiscal note is not
• So we don't know what the fiscal note will be.
• How long has a fiscal note been requested on this bill? Okay, uh... Representative, you mind?
• on<01:26:31.719> this<01:26:32.119> bill fiscal note been requested on this bill fiscal

Bills: HF1346, HF1169, HF1276

Keywords: mandatory reporting, training requirements, child maltreatment, abuse detection, local welfare agency, child protection, child welfare, paperwork reduction, social services information system, SSIS, Department of Children, Youth, and Families, foster care, children in placement, county social services, Tribal governments, private child placing agencies, case management, administrative burden, information technology, human services

Transcript Highlights:

• noting the amount of pain that this causes to make... ...noting the amount of pain that this causes to
• I would note that we had 15 applications for a total of 1,674 beds.
• I would note that we had 15 applications for a total of 1,674 beds.
• We think the focus at budget time should be on the fiscal picture.
• I will just note that there's no General Fund for this proposal.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held an informational hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, focusing first on the Commission on Behavioral Health, then EMSA, and then the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). The Department of Finance said the state faces a third consecutive deficit and that the May Revision includes difficult trade-offs, including proposed eliminations or reversions of some behavioral health and public health funds. The LAO echoed concern about the structural deficit and said it was still awaiting some budget details before offering a full analysis. For the Commission on Behavioral Health, Finance proposed eliminating $20 million in Mental Health Wellness Act funds, arguing the money would help offset General Fund costs and noting future Proposition 1 innovation funding. The commission strongly opposed the cut, saying it would eliminate or delay launch-ready grants for early childhood supports, full-service partnerships, and peer respite, and would eventually end ongoing grant programming. Several advocates and commissioners testified that the funds support underserved communities and that Proposition 1 is not a substitute for the existing programs. The chair asked Finance to look for alternatives, but no vote was taken. EMSA presented mostly technical budget adjustments: increased authority for the California Poison Control System, a correction to EMSIS funding, and a reappropriation for enterprise services and data management. CDPH then reviewed a broader set of May Revision proposals, including reversions from the California Reducing Disparities Project, workforce development, STD prevention, hepatitis C prevention, hospice, and extreme heat funding, as well as a new generative AI pilot for health facility survey reporting. Members raised concerns about cuts to CRDP and gender health equity programs, especially because many grants are mid-contract and serve underserved communities; CDPH said the reversions were part of solving the deficit and that CRDP had been successful, while also clarifying that abortion.ca.gov would not be eliminated. Public comment was overwhelmingly opposed to the CRDP and related cuts, with many speakers describing the programs as life-saving and cost-effective. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• But then anytime we get a fiscal note, I mean, I think we've all done it.
• Well, I wanted to, before I got to my remarks, clarify one point regarding this fiscal note, because
• I was curious when I saw a $70 million fiscal note and actually did an open records request to try to
• We outsource the ability to create fiscal notes to PBM vendors in the state if we were to take them at
• And I'm looking at all kinds of fiscal notes up here, as I've got... Mr.

Bills: SB502, SB513, SB622, SB670, SB731, SB732, SB916, SB961, SB1122

Keywords: SB 502, Texas peace officers, Health and Human Services Commission, HHSC Office of Inspector General, OIG investigators, law enforcement classification, Schedule C, state employee benefits, injury benefits, peace officer status, commissioned officers, state auditor classification, Government Code, Code of Criminal Procedure, human services, health and human services, law enforcement compensation, public employee benefits, Texas state law enforcement, child welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• It's for fiscal year 26.
• This is a fiscal year 27 request for the fiscal year that starts next month. D2A is UA Little Rock.
• D3 is the fiscal year 27 continuation of 26 appropriation.
• This is to be continued into fiscal year 27.
• G1, or all these requests are for a fiscal year 27.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm the Chief Fiscal Officer for the Department of Consumer Affairs.
• Can you just share what were the fiscal capacity challenges for this?
• They just won't be acting in the fiscal agent or admin capacity. Okay.
• I'll note two of the items are for ongoing IT projects at DIR.
• As I noted, we're going to be operational in 2026-27.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration held a May Revise hearing focused on state administration proposals, with the chair noting no actions would be taken and all items would remain open. The committee heard presentations on a range of budget proposals, including technical adjustments for the Governor’s Office of Service and Community Engagement and the California Workforce Development Board, security and election-related funding for the Secretary of State, modernization and loan-backfill requests for the Department of Consumer Affairs, and multiple Employment Development Department updates covering EDD Next, UI and DI/PFL benefit estimates, workforce funding, and an EMT training reappropriation. Several items drew discussion from the LAO and committee members. The LAO generally supported technical or modernization items such as PERB’s implementation requests, GoServe’s College Corps adjustment, the Secretary of State’s security and HAVA grant items, and the Board of Pharmacy modernization proposal, but raised concerns about the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s proposed $10 million General Fund backfill and interest-free loan language. For EDD, the LAO flagged the size of the DI/PFL benefit adjustment and the unusual structure of the document management system proposal within EDD Next, while EDD said the changes reflected higher participation and benefit levels after SB 951 and ongoing modernization needs. The Department of Industrial Relations drew the most extensive questioning. It proposed funding for legal unit reclassifications, EAMS and Cal/OSHA data modernization, a new Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, a COYA reappropriation, and trailer bill changes requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and adjusting the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board timeline. Members pressed DIR on high vacancy rates, long wage theft and workers’ compensation backlogs, low collection rates for fines, and the need for clearer workload and outcome measures. DIR said the requests were intended to improve efficiency, support audits and corrective action plans, and better address emerging workplace risks, while the LAO said the workload drivers behind delays remain unclear. The hearing also included support for CalHR’s employee assistance program consolidation and CDT’s proposal to expand “Poppy,” a statewide generative AI assistant for state employees.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's balanced for both 2026-27 and 2027-28 fiscal years.
• But he led with the fiscal record.
• However, I would note, as Mr.
• Several programs were noted.
• I want to note, and I'll save comments for when these items come up later, but just a few notes on the

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 109, the Budget Act of 2026, and related discussion of the legislative budget agreement. Committee staff and the Department of Finance described a two-year balanced plan with about $253 billion in General Fund spending, roughly $5.5 billion in higher assumed revenues than the May Revision, and about $36.5 billion in combined reserves. They said the package preserves or expands funding for schools and community colleges, child care, IHSS, Medi-Cal-related county administration, housing and homelessness programs, public hospitals, courthouse construction, and some criminal justice and prison-closure savings, while delaying or modifying several prior health care reductions and some Medi-Cal changes. Much of the member discussion focused on Medi-Cal, H.R. 1, and the impact on low-income and immigrant Californians. Several Democrats argued the budget protects vulnerable residents by delaying some cuts, funding county eligibility work, indigent care, public hospitals, and food banks, and rejecting the Governor’s IHSS cuts and asset-limit proposal. Republicans criticized the budget for assuming future revenues, relying on new taxes, and not doing enough to address the structural deficit or improve accountability. Members also raised concerns and support around homelessness funding, Prop. 36, judgeships and courthouse funding, transit and GGRF allocations, local journalism, Caltrans fleet spending, and a proposed “fair share” revenue measure that was not yet before the committee. Public testimony was largely supportive of the budget’s health and human services provisions, especially the rejection of IHSS cuts and the asset-limit proposal, and the inclusion of funding for child care, sickle cell centers, domestic violence services, trauma recovery centers, distressed hospitals, county eligibility work, and transit programs. Some witnesses representing hospitals and health plans cautioned about the effects of moving certain Medi-Cal populations to fee-for-service and about proposed tax changes affecting health care providers. The chair said revenue trailer bills were still being finalized and would likely come back later in the week; the committee then moved to public comment, with the chair limiting speakers to about one minute each.

Transcript Highlights:

• The first part of the amendments is related to the fiscal note.
• There is an updated fiscal note online.
• The fiscal note? The fiscal note? So we didn't get one. No, we did.
• The fiscal note? The fiscal note? The fiscal note. So we didn't get one. No, we did.
• ...reduce or avoid the fiscal note.

Bills: HB410, HR310, HR314, HR316, HR317, HR321, HR275, HR276, HR279, HR282, HR286, HR289, HR292, HR295, HR302, HR319, HR307, HR273, SCR59, SCR61, SCR62, SCR68, SCR69, SCR70, SCR54, SCR55, SCR64, SCR75, HCR32, HB776, HB42, HB119, HB159, HB302, HB1017, HB1028, SB217, SB283, HB953, SB208, HR74, HB998, HB901, HR20, HCR65, HCR71, HCR98, HB284, HB306, HB341, HB366, HB393, HB458, HB577, HB603, HB605, HB614, HB625, HB646, HB733, HB752, HB773, HB798, HB911, HB955, HB996, HB1035, HB1069, HB1113, HB1140, HB1180, HB1191, HB1240, HB1255, SB82, SB89, SB97, SB123, SB237, HB36, HB74, HB75, HB258, HB259, HB414, HB459, HB784, HB848, HB956, HB1095, HB1220, HB1252, SB469, SB479

Keywords: recording, privacy, notification, direct conversation, law enforcement, first responder, penalties, oil and gas, orphan wells, inactive wells, shut-in wells, marginal wells, plugging and abandonment, well decommissioning, site remediation, site restoration, Oilfield Site Restoration, OSR program, financial security, bonding

Transcript Highlights:

• The principal fiscal analyst from the Joint Fiscal Office stated that the bill has no fiscal impact.
• Joint Fiscal Office.
• 00:27:42.320> Joint<00:27:42.640> Fiscal fiscal analyst from the Joint Fiscal fiscal analyst
• However, as noted, if the fiscal impact.
• Uh, your Appropriations Committee heard from the Joint Fiscal Office, who did not offer a fiscal note

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House opened with a devotional in honor of Earth Day, then referred three Senate bills to money committees under House Rule 35A: S. 173 to Appropriations, and S. 232 and S. 327 to Ways and Means. The chamber also adopted JRS 50, a joint resolution setting weekend adjournment so the House and Senate would reconvene no later than April 28, 2026. Several members then made announcements recognizing guests and interns in the gallery, including a homeschooling eighth grader, UVM interns, a constituent shadowing a member, family members, and a Civil Air Patrol delegation. The House next took up S. 89, expanding survivor benefits, and passed it in concurrence with proposal of amendment. It then considered S. 157 on recovery residence certification. The Human Services Committee described the bill as making permanent a temporary framework for certified recovery residences, placing oversight with the Department of Health, requiring standards, data collection, and annual reporting, and preserving resident protections such as written agreements, notice, grievance procedures, and alternative housing arrangements. The committee also said the bill would modernize definitions and repeal the sunset on the current framework. Human Services voted 9-0-2 to recommend the strike-all amendment, and Ways and Means reported the bill favorable 11-0-0, noting no fiscal impact unless a future fee is proposed and enacted. The House adopted the amendment, ordered third reading, and moved the bill forward. The final major item was S. 239, creating a child abuse and neglect reporting working group. The Human Services Committee said Vermont’s mandated reporting system has not been substantially reviewed in over a decade and that the bill would convene experts to review the law and recommend updates. Committee testimony emphasized that Vermont has a very high reporting rate but relatively low rates of substantiation and referral to supportive services, and members said the working group should examine reporting before, during, and after a report, including alternatives when in a child’s best interests. The committee’s strike-all amendment added findings, narrowed and prioritized the working group membership to people with direct child-serving or mandated-reporting experience, set deadlines for an interim report by April 1, 2027 and final recommendations by October 1, 2027, and required the first meeting by August 15. The committee also heard from a wide range of child welfare, education, law enforcement, and advocacy witnesses.

Transcript Highlights:

• I should also note that, as I'm sure members can see, we do not yet have a fiscal note on this bill.
• And so, although the fiscal note is crazy, it's fair at this point.
• <00:46:09.040> note far far lower than what the fiscal note far far lower than what the fiscal
• our<00:46:21.280> last<00:46:21.599> contract fiscal note, uh our last contract fiscal
• note, this is not so with that fiscal note, this is not something<00:46:30.480> that<00:46:30.640

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• fiscal note says that the Department was contacted on 12/26/24 for a fiscal note worksheet, and that
• Well, I've seen no sign of this fiscal note, and I have a stack right here of fiscal notes for bills
• fiscal note says that the Department was contacted on 12/26/24 for a fiscal note worksheet, and that
• Well, I've seen no sign of this fiscal note, and I have a stack right here of fiscal notes for bills
• fiscal note says that the Department was contacted on 12/26/24 for a fiscal note worksheet, and that

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:29:30.519> note<00:29:31.640> okay process of requesting a fiscal note okay process
• of requesting a fiscal note okay thank<00:29:32.799> you<00:29:33.080> representative<
• looking<00:32:33.240> at the fiscal note process and looking at the fiscal note process and
• So really wanting to make sure that we highlight that in the fiscal note.
• note were brought forward and a fiscal note request<00:40:32.880> were<00:40:33.480> were<

Keywords: 1183, house