Transcript Highlights:

• However, later that year, in October 2011, the Obama administration deemed it actuarially unsound and
• DHCS worked with Milliman, a national actuarial firm, to prepare this study, and the final report was
• That report provides a set of policy options, fiscal estimates, and actuarial analysis of the various
• It also commissioned an actuarial analysis, which was completed in 2023, and these were prepared by Oliver
• Wyman, an actuarial firm.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittees held a joint hearing on older adults and long-term care supports and services, with members and witnesses focusing on the growing “forgotten/overlooked middle” of Californians who are too wealthy for Medi-Cal but unable to afford long-term services and supports (LTSS). Administration witnesses from DHCS and the Department of Aging described Medicare’s limited long-term care coverage, Medi-Cal’s role for low-income residents, and ongoing state work on LTSS financing, including a 2024 financing initiative and a final report due in 2026. Testimony emphasized rising costs, caregiver shortages, homelessness among older adults, and the need to preserve home- and community-based services to avoid more expensive institutional care. Several advocates urged immediate action, especially Medi-Cal share-of-cost reform, housing supports, and protection of HCBS funding. Members asked for the most urgent budget priorities and were told to focus on share-of-cost reform and assisted-living rate protections, along with broader system navigation and caregiver support. The committee also heard testimony on the Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) program. CDA reported that CBAS serves about 42,000 participants through 304 centers, with demand generally stable but geographic gaps in some regions and staffing challenges after the pandemic. DHCS explained a rate-setting issue: a 10% CBAS rate increase had been mistakenly posted on the Medi-Cal fee schedule in 2024, and while Proposition 35 later made the targeted SB 159 rate increase inoperative, DHCS said any repayment by managed care plans would depend on contract terms and the department would not require clawbacks. CBAS providers and advocates warned that the program is in a financial crisis, with six center closures since June 2024, and requested $74.8 million ongoing General Fund to close about half the gap between current reimbursement and costs. Members expressed concern that clawbacks could accelerate closures and noted the program’s role in preventing institutionalization and supporting family caregivers. In the final panel, CDSS presented on In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) provider recruitment and retention and on the AB 102 statewide bargaining report. CDSS said the IHSS Career Pathways program has concluded successfully, with more than 59,000 providers completing training, and that the AB 102 report—based on workgroup meetings and consultant analysis—will be sent to the Legislature shortly. The department said the workgroup viewed statewide bargaining as more viable than regional bargaining, but identified major issues around consumer participation, county fiscal impacts, administrative responsibilities, and the need to define bargaining scope in statute. CDSS estimated that each $1 per hour statewide wage increase would cost at least $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion annually. Provider unions supported statewide bargaining, arguing it would improve wages, benefits, and workforce stability, while county representatives said any statewide model should preserve consumer focus, protect county finances and realignment funds, and keep core administrative functions with local public authorities. The hearing concluded without votes, with members requesting additional follow-up information and urging continued engagement ahead of the May revise.

Transcript Highlights:

• when when we've property valuations when when we've already<02:40:35.800><c> heard</c><02:40:36.240>
• The equalized valuation of a town revalued one year ago is not comparable to that of a town revalued
• of a town raled the equalized valuation of a town raled one<04:39:09.480><c> year</c><04:39:09.719><
• </c> inconsistencies and equalized valuation inconsistencies and equalized valuation but<04:41:45.680
• valuation um um and um that could be we valuation um um and um that could be we could<04:42:31.600><c

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Sandoval County protested it, so we ended up going to the valuation trial.
• The valuation protest board issued a favorable decision that the land grant should not pay taxes on those
• Neal County Valuation Protest Board that decided in favor of the Chihuly land grant on the issue of taxation
• You file it in the one year, and then every year subsequent to that, the county will still issue a valuation

Committee: House House Rural Development, Land Grants And Cultural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• owner in two places, line 10 on my copy and on lines 19 and 20 on my copy related to the 5-year valuation
• 19 and 20 on my copy related to the 19 and 20 on my copy related to the 5-year<02:15:02.079><c> valuation
• </c><02:15:03.599><c> In</c><02:15:03.840><c> both</c><02:15:04.079><c> places,</c> 5-year valuation
• In both places, 5-year valuation notice.

Summary: The committee of conference first discussed House Bill 557, which concerns information on the school budget ballot. The main issue was how to define and calculate the “average cost per pupil.” House members favored a simple calculation dividing the operating budget by enrollment, arguing that it is clearer to the public and matches how taxpayers think about school costs. Senate members preferred the existing RSA-based definition for consistency across statutes and noted that the current definition was about to take effect. Members also debated whether the ballot language should specify the figure as being for the “preceding year,” and some House members ultimately agreed to that clarification while one member did not. After discussion, the Senate declined to move off its position on the calculation method, but agreed to a compromise amendment adding “for the preceding year” to the Senate language so it would align with the rest of the ballot information. The committee then agreed to draft the report with that amendment. The committee then turned to House Bill 71, dealing with restrictions on using public school and higher education facilities to shelter certain migrants, along with a Senate-added provision requiring DHHS contracts to comply with the patient bill of rights. Members generally said they supported the base policy of the bill, but Representative Noble raised a drafting concern about a repeal section that appeared to undo the new contract requirement; the group discussed removing that repeal language and adjusting effective dates. The committee also reviewed Senate-added language creating a donation fund for a proposed accessible pier at Hampton Beach. Supporters said the project would be privately funded through donations, with the state park division managing the fund and any remaining balance eventually transferring to an existing state park donations account if the pier is not built. Members questioned maintenance costs, fundraising responsibility, and whether the account was necessary, but the Senate explained the fund was intended to provide a mechanism for private fundraising and future maintenance support.

Transcript Highlights:

• We discourage the county assessor's proposal for valuation based on the income method, which allows discretionary
• how the bill fits into California's property tax system, which relies on consistent market-based valuation
• replaces a long-standing market-based appraisal framework with a formula that does not reflect standard valuation

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several tax and revenue measures, beginning with SB 1329 on solar property tax assessment. The author and solar industry witnesses argued the bill would create a uniform statewide method, provide certainty for developers, and exclude tax credits and other intangibles from valuation; county assessors and several counties opposed it, saying it would reduce assessed value and depart from market-based appraisal. The bill was moved to Appropriations on a 2-0 vote and placed on call. The committee also heard SB 1406 to close the “Montana tax loophole” used to avoid California vehicle taxes, with support from the California Teachers Association and no registered opposition; it passed 2-0 and was placed on call. SB 984, conforming California law to the federal tipped-income deduction, drew support from the restaurant industry, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, and enrolled agents, and passed 3-0 to Appropriations, on call. Later, the committee considered wildfire- and energy-related tax credits. SB 1084 would create a fire-safe home tax credit for home hardening and defensible space improvements; supporters said it would reduce wildfire losses and insurance costs, and it passed 3-0 on call. SB 1118 would provide credits for backup generators and solar battery systems in high fire-threat areas; the author framed it as a resilience measure for households and small businesses, but members raised concerns about cost, diesel use, and whether the credit would reach lower-income households. The bill was moved 1-0 and placed on call, with the chair and other members noting unresolved budget and policy concerns. SB 1424, expanding a partial sales tax exemption to zero-emission vehicle refueling equipment, received support from hydrogen and electric transportation groups and passed 4-0 on call. The committee also advanced SB 1249, a senior tax deduction for taxpayers ages 86 to 90, with support from LeadingAge California and senior advocates; members noted it was narrowly targeted and passed 4-0 on call. SB 1113, conforming California tax law to the federal tonnage tax regime for U.S.-flag international shipping companies, drew support from maritime industry groups and opposition from ILWU over the fiscal impact; it passed 4-0 on call. SB 1137, the Medical Expense Deduction Act, would allow a targeted deduction for medical expenses for lower-income taxpayers; supporters said it would help families facing high out-of-pocket costs, and it passed 4-0 on call. Finally, SB 1415 would extend a partial welfare property tax exemption to mixed-income housing that includes moderate-income units; supporters said it would help finance “missing middle” housing, while assessors and housing stakeholders requested amendments and guardrails. The bill was also moved forward on a committee vote and placed on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• We discourage the county assessor's proposal for valuation based on the income method, which allows discretionary
• how the bill fits into California's property tax system, which relies on consistent market-based valuation
• replaces a long-standing market-based appraisal framework with a formula that does not reflect standard valuation

Committee: Senate Revenue and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• yellow line shows the local assessed value, so as we can see in this example, Pasco's local assessed valuation
• Pasco's local assessed valuation has kept pace with, you know, the rising escalation of construction.
• Whereas in the Mount Baker example, not every community's assessed valuation has kept pace with that

Committee: House Capital Budget

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee met on December 4 and heard presentations from the Department of Commerce, the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and a consultant on the School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) study. Commerce described its $5 million pilot under SB 5200 to reduce barriers for historically excluded community organizations and local governments, using trusted community messengers and technical assistance; officials said 18 organizations received readiness funding and 79 smaller projects were also supported. Commerce emphasized persistent barriers such as match requirements, reimbursement-based payments, site-control rules, insurance and audit costs, and extensive contracting requirements, and said it is responding with more outreach, digital modernization, internal process improvements, and planned innovation centers. Members asked about small business support, housing program placement, outreach in Eastern Washington, and tribal engagement, and Commerce said it would share contact and demographic information and continue follow-up. RCO reported on its equity work and implementation of a 2021-23 proviso directing it to reduce barriers and improve equitable delivery of grants. The agency said it had already made changes before the proviso, including a small-communities carve-out in youth athletic facilities, stipends for advisory committee members, and match reductions in some programs. Its equity review recommended prioritizing high-need areas, changing scoring criteria, improving applicant capacity, and funding projects that address broader community challenges. RCO said it has since updated grant criteria, added objective measures, aligned application questions, expanded technical assistance, and launched the Planning for Recreation Access program, which funded 54 projects in 34 counties. It also described the Community Outdoor Athletic Facilities program, which did not require match and drew broad interest, with about $200 million in applications across COAF and youth athletic facilities. Members raised concerns about access to information and application complexity, and RCO said it is expanding outreach, advisory committee diversity, and support for outdoor learning programs. The final presentation summarized the SCAP planning study and proposed nine policy changes to address school facility funding challenges. The report found that construction costs have risen faster than SCAP support, many districts have limited debt capacity, and local bond/levy approvals have become harder to secure. Proposed solutions included stronger planning support, a new minor modernization category, use of unused biennial SCAP funds for faster deployment, an education-specification prototype, a SCAP enhancement program for low-capacity districts, acceptance of all non-SCAP local funding, phased modernization, streamlined D-form and reimbursement processes, and revisions to the SCAP formula to better reflect grade-band differences, enrollment projections, and regional cost variation. Committee members said some recommendations could be implemented by OSPI in the near term and asked for supporting documentation on the application and funding formulas. The committee took no formal vote and adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• yellow line shows the local assessed value, so as we can see in this example, Pasco's local assessed valuation
• Pasco's local assessed valuation has kept pace with, you know, the rising escalation of construction.
• Whereas in the Mount Baker example, not every community's assessed valuation has kept pace with that

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee heard presentations from the Department of Commerce, the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and a consultant on the School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) study. Commerce officials described their agency’s role in housing, energy, local government, broadband, and other capital programs, and reported on a $5 million pilot under Senate Bill 5200 that used trusted community messengers and technical assistance to help historically excluded organizations prepare for capital funding. They said 18 organizations received direct support and 79 smaller projects were also funded, but emphasized that statutory match rules, reimbursement-based payments, site-control requirements, insurance and audit costs, and extensive contracting rules remain major barriers. Commerce outlined efforts to expand outreach, digital modernization, internal contracting improvements, tribal MOUs, and innovation centers, and members asked about small business support, housing program placement, and outreach to Eastern Washington and communities of color. RCO described its grant programs for recreation, conservation, education, and salmon/orca recovery, and reviewed equity work done before and after a 2021-23 proviso. The agency had already created a small-communities carve-out in youth athletic facilities, piloted stipends for advisory committee members, and reduced match requirements where allowed. Under the proviso, RCO completed an equity review and a planning program that funded 54 projects across 34 counties, with many applicants being new or long-absent grantees. Staff said the review led to changes in scoring criteria, clearer application guidance, more objective data measures, expanded technical assistance, and targeted community engagement. Members asked about application burden, project sizes, outreach, and how the agency is broadening participation and representation on advisory committees. The final presentation summarized a planning study on SCAP, which examined rising construction costs, fragmented grant programs, local funding barriers, and uneven district capacity. The report recommended nine major changes, including stronger planning support, a new minor-modernization category, a mechanism to use unused funds more quickly, an education-specification prototype, a SCAP enhancement program for low-capacity districts, acceptance of non-SCAP funds, phased modernization, streamlined D-form and reimbursement processes, and revisions to the SCAP formula to better account for grade-band differences, enrollment projections, and regional cost factors. Additional recommendations included ongoing monitoring and evaluation, facilities-impact reviews, matching SCAP increases to construction-cost inflation, earlier locking of funding estimates, flexible program spaces, and updated statewide building-condition assessments. No votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• we take it from the encampment that we are approaching, we do have a city employee who does the valuation
• we take it from the encampment that we are approaching, we do have a city employee who does the valuation
• In this case, our O.P. who does the valuation on the vehicle to hand it over to the tow yard, in this

Summary: The committee heard and advanced several transportation-related bills, beginning with AB 431 on advanced air mobility. The author and supporters from AUVSI, Joby Aviation, United Airlines, Wisk Aero, the City of Long Beach, and Archer said the bill would create a statewide plan and technical framework for eVTOL/advanced air mobility infrastructure, public outreach, and local implementation. No opposition testified, and the bill passed the committee as amended to Appropriations on a unanimous roll call. Members then took up AB 630 on abandoned or hazardous RVs. The author and supporters, including Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass’s office, argued the bill would curb a cycle in which inoperable RVs are towed, auctioned cheaply, and returned to the streets by predatory buyers, while adding notice, recovery, and reporting requirements. Opponents from Western Center on Law and Poverty and ACLU California Action warned the bill would destroy RVs that serve as shelter for unhoused residents and could worsen homelessness. After discussion about the bill’s focus on dismantling rather than towing, the committee passed AB 630 as amended to Appropriations. The committee also approved AB 314, which would support transit-oriented development around planned and existing high-speed rail stations; AB 1223, which gives Sacramento County communities more flexibility to use local transportation revenues for related infrastructure supporting infill development; AB 1111, which adds flexibility to the zero-emission school bus transition for rural and disadvantaged districts; AB 1190, which caps fees charged by DMV business partners and requires clearer disclosure of the official DMV site; AB 987, which limits unreasonable towing fees and related charges; and AB 911, which creates a narrow exemption from Advanced Clean Fleets rules for telecommunications bucket trucks and sail-on-wheels used in emergencies. Most bills drew support from local governments, industry, or consumer groups, while AB 1111 and AB 911 drew opposition from clean transportation and environmental advocates concerned about weakening emissions goals. All of the bills were reported out as amended to the Committee on Appropriations, with recorded roll-call votes and several members adding their names as co-authors or supporters.

Transcript Highlights:

• When these disputes result in lower final valuations, local governments face unexpected funding gaps.
• caused a ton of havoc within our local community by appraising them a different way, increasing their valuation
• Does it even out when all the valuations are said and done? What's your assessment of that?

Bills: HB511 , HB972 , HB 1035 , HB2481 , HB2723 , HB2742 , HB2894 , HB2962 , HB3077 , HB3093 , HB3307 , HB3684 , HJR67 , HJR72

Committee: House Ways & Means

Keywords: ad valorem taxation, caregiver exemption, Medicaid, long-term services, tax relief, assisted living, housing support, property tax exemption, caregiver support, residence homestead, tax exemption, unpaid caregiver, state tax code, property tax, caregiver, waiting list, intellectual disability, developmental disability, ad valorem tax, family support

Transcript Highlights:

• The next value is the total property valuation across the state.
• And the final one is the property valuation per pupil.
• </c> uh property valuation across the state. uh property valuation across the state.
• So you can see for valuation per pupil.
• and the number of kids which valuation and the number of kids which are<05:03:50.320><c> qualifying<

Committee: House Education Funding

Transcript Highlights:

• That provision in 63-4502 identifies that if you have valuation and investment of a billion dollars,
• They may reach the billion-dollar valuation. I don't know if they are there yet.

Committee: Senate Local Government and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• is a lot of times when we have pro se litigants, we're dealing with folks who are appealing the valuation
• assessor on their residents, and a lot of times they're not familiar with the principles that go into valuation

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee met on January 29, 2026, to consider a gubernatorial appointment, three public hearings, and two executive-session bills. Kristen L. Frazier was introduced as the governor’s appointee to the Board of Tax Appeals. She described her background in legislative fiscal analysis, constitutional law, and tax adjudication, and said the board is working on faster residential review and settlement processes. Members praised her service and said the appointment would be voted on at a future meeting. The committee then heard Senate Bill 5893, which would transfer $65 million from the Natural Climate Solutions Account to the Wildfire Response, Forest Restoration, and Community Resilience Account to fully fund wildfire response and forest health work. Committee staff explained the Climate Commitment Act funding source and the account history, and the Department of Natural Resources said the money would support forest health treatments, firefighting readiness, and partner pass-throughs. Forest industry representatives and DNR supported the bill, arguing wildfire work reduces emissions, protects communities, and prevents larger future costs; one member questioned why DNR had not submitted a decision package for the funding. Next, the committee heard Senate Bill 6229, which would subject gains from the sale of qualified small business stock to Washington’s capital gains tax. Staff said the bill would affect about 260 taxpayers, raise about $1.2 million in fiscal year 2027, and cost the Department of Revenue about $1.1 million over four years to implement. Startup founders, venture capital and tech industry representatives opposed the bill, warning it would discourage investment, founders, and job creation in Washington; a Budget and Policy Center witness supported it as a way to make the tax code less regressive and argued the exemption mainly benefits the wealthiest taxpayers. The committee also heard House Bill 1376, which would allow taxpayers to prepay capital gains tax up to six months early without interest on any later refund; staff said it had no revenue impact and a small administrative cost, and the lone public witness opposed it as penalizing success. In executive session, the committee received a briefing on the proposed substitute for Senate Bill 5395 on prior authorization transparency and AI use in health care, and on Substitute Senate Bill 5860 regarding school board compensation. The committee adopted the proposed second substitute for SB 5395 and voted it out of committee with a do pass recommendation to the Rules Committee, subject to signatures. Substitute SB 5860 was moved out of committee without recommendation. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• SO ON THE PROBATE ISSUE, I THINK I WOULD TEND TO AGREE THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF VALUATION BUT
• IS THERE ANOTHER PROCESS IN PLACE WHERE VALUATIONS CAN THEN BE CHALLENGED BY ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE, BY

Transcript Highlights:

• CLOSE OF THE PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR THE PENSION PLAN TOTAL 198.2 BUILDING DOLLARS, THE CURRENT MARKET VALUATION
• PROGRAM IS 70 PERCENT OF ELIGIBLE PUBLIC EMPLOYEES DEFAULT INTO THE INVESTMENT PLAN, CURRENT MARKET VALUATION

Transcript Highlights:

• survey will provide district-level data about employees and potential enrollees, plan offerings, actuarial
• survey will provide district-level data about employees and potential enrollees, plan offerings, actuarial
• :31:32.480><c> plan</c><00:31:32.880><c> offerings</c><00:31:33.360><c> and</c><00:31:33.600><c> actuarial
• </c> enrolles, plan offerings and actuarial enrolles, plan offerings and actuarial values<00:31:35.120

Bills: HF238 , HF3381 , HF3754 , HF1049

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• analyzing sort of what our needs or what our options might be for this year, did you have any kind of actuarial
• So the RAND study that was conducted utilized actuarial analysis and had a full team of researchers.
• Yeah, it was an economic and actuarial evaluation of cases from 2010 through 2022.
• go back and look at some of the criteria that are going into this that might change some of that actuarial
• thing I would like to point out is that there's another study that's been done by the former chief actuary

Transcript Highlights:

• analyzing sort of what our needs or what our options might be for this year, did you have any kind of actuarial
• So the RAND study that was conducted utilized actuarial analysis and had a full team of researchers,
• Yeah, it was an economic and actuarial evaluation of cases from 2010 through 2022.
• go back and look at some of the criteria that are going into this that might change some of that actuarial
• thing I would like to point out is that there's another study that's been done by the former chief actuary

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on State Administration heard presentations on the Department of Industrial Relations’ labor-related budget items, with the main focus on proposed trailer bill language to reform the Subsequent Injury Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) and a related budget change proposal for staffing. DIR said SIBTF has grown far beyond its original purpose, citing the 2020 Todd decision, expanded eligibility based on chronic or asymptomatic conditions, and a backlog that has grown to more than 30,000 pending cases. The administration argued the reforms would restore guardrails, reduce liabilities and employer assessments, and speed processing for severely injured workers; the LAO said the proposal was largely consistent with its prior recommendations. Members raised concerns about using trailer bill language for major policy changes, the retroactive application to open cases, and the impact on workers already in the queue, while supporters from employer groups and public agencies backed the proposal as necessary to control costs and restore sustainability. Public comment was split, with injured-worker advocates opposing the retroactive changes and business/public employer representatives supporting the reforms. The committee then heard the SIBTF workload request, which would phase in 177 positions over five years at a cost of $36.5 million, including staff for the Division of Workers’ Compensation, the Office of the Director Legal Unit, and administrative support. DIR said the additional staffing is intended to address very high caseloads and reduce processing times, but emphasized that the request assumes the reform package is adopted; LAO agreed the staffing increase made sense if paired with reforms. Members asked about vacancy rates, current staffing, and whether the workload request would become the new normal, and DIR said it would monitor caseload trends and adjust future requests as needed. Finally, the committee received an update on the California Workplace Outreach Program (CWOP), which DIR described as a partnership with community-based organizations to educate workers and help employers comply with labor laws. DIR reported that CWOP has reached 1.75 million workers and employers and made 8 million touchpoints since 2020, with the current round awarding $50.7 million to 87 partners for a two-year period through June 2027. Members and public commenters highlighted the program’s role in reaching immigrant, farmworker, janitorial, nail salon, and other vulnerable communities, and several speakers urged continued funding at $30 million per year for five years. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So numerous conversations have been had with the actuaries and with PERS Board members as well as employers
• Uh, the actuaries have reported to me that it's 0.57%.
• Uh the actuaries<00:25:16.960><c> have</c><00:25:17.600><c> reported</c><00:25:18.080><c> to</c><00:25
• :18.320><c> me</c><00:25:19.200><c> that</c><00:25:19.919><c> uh</c> actuaries have reported to me that
• uh actuaries have reported to me that uh it's<00:25:20.400><c> 0.57%.

Committee: Joint Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• in the 87th session, and since then have been committed to making sure that the fund is actually actuarially
• sound and remains actuarially sound.
• This budget includes those actuarially determined payments, which are determined by the process that
• And then, because of actuarial soundness, the ERS plan was declared... ...sound in January of this year
• But as you know, once we reach actuarial soundness, it's kind of a balancing act. ...to stay there.

Bills: SCR8 , SCR25 , SB1 , SB14 , SB24 , SB213 , SB251 , SB315 , SB371 , SB378 , SB379 , SB406 , SB413 , SB472 , SB487 , SB502 , SB502 , SB509 , SB513 , SB513 , SB565 , SB565 , SB583 , SB608 , SB621 , SB650 , SB686 , SB686 , SB707 , SB710 , SB710 , SB761 , SB761 , SB810 , SB815 , SB840 , SB856 , SB875 , SB875 , SB896 , SB896 , SB916 , SB925 , SB958 , SB958 , SB961 , SB965 , SB965 , SB973 , SB973 , SB987 , SB990 , SB995 , SB1018 , SB1019 , SB1146 , SB1146 , SB1198 , SB1252 , SB1252 , SB1253 , SB1253 , SB1330 , SB1343 , SB1362 , SB1499 , SB1499 , SB1532 , SB1532 , SB1547 , SB1547 , SB1555 , SB1596 , SB1596 , SJR36 , SJR12 , SJR57 , SCR25 , SCR22 , SCR12 , SCR8 , SB565 , SB765 , SB62 , SB666 , SB707 , SB888 , SB687 , SB847 , SB1248 , SB14 , SB1006 , SB504 , SB925 , SB995 , SB857 , SB305 , SB296 , SB284 , SB815 , SB1379 , SB1497 , SB1499 , SB1498 , SB241 , SB304 , SB621 , SB1023 , SB1024 , SB686 , SB112 , SB371 , SB204 , SB609 , SB670 , SB502 , SB850 , SB854 , SB413 , SB1555 , SB1362 , SB1346 , SB1033 , SB1220 , SB1073 , SB810 , SB987 , SB1539 , SB447 , SB875 , SB406 , SB985 , SB965 , SB1119 , SB1505 , SB24 , SB1194 , SB1253 , SB1215 , SB1532 , SB1302 , SB856 , SB650 , SB583 , SB673 , SB213 , SB681 , SB1172 , SB1252 , SB378 , SB1343 , SB608 , SB487 , SB955 , SB957 , SB988 , SB990 , SB1019 , SB1021 , SB1120 , SB251 , SB958 , SB761 , SB1 , SB541 , SB315 , SB379 , SB1018 , SB1737 , SB266 , SB1415 , SB1527 , SB125 , SB599 , SB1330 , SB53 , SB916 , SB896 , SB1352 , SB973 , SB785 , SB710 , SB472 , SB1450 , SB1502 , SB1566 , SB414 , SB1062 , SB1547 , SB961 , SB1038 , SB513 , SB578 , SB711 , SB746 , SB942 , SB1404 , SB1448 , SB1738 , SB108 , SB8 , SB318 , SB507 , SB533 , SB689 , SB1026 , SB1349 , SB1355 , SB1433 , SB1434 , SB1596 , SB1403 , SB1198 , SB1146 , SB763 , SB667 , SB1059 , SB617 , SB1567 , SB503 , SB1 , SB1555 , SR233 , SR307 , SR310 , SR318 , SR319 , SCR25 , SJR72 , SJR73 , SJR75 , SJR77 , SJR79 , SJR80 , SJR81 , SJR82 , SB2198 , SB2201 , SB2202 , SB2203 , SB2204 , SB2205 , SB2206 , SB2207 , SB2208 , SB2209 , SB2210 , SB2211 , SB2213 , SB2214 , SB2215 , SB2216 , SB2217 , SB2218 , SB2219 , SB2220 , SB2221 , SB2222 , SB2223 , SB2224 , SB2225 , SB2226 , SB2227 , SB2228 , SB2229 , SB2231 , SB2232 , SB2233 , SB2234 , SB2235 , SB2236 , SB2237 , SB2238 , SB2239 , SB2240 , SB2241 , SB2242 , SB2243 , SB2244 , SB2245 , SB2246 , SB2247 , SB2248 , SB2249 , SB2250 , SB2251 , SB2252 , SB2253 , SB2254 , SB2255 , SB2256 , SB2257 , SB2258 , SB2259 , SB2260 , SB2261 , SB2262 , SB2263 , SB2264 , SB2265 , SB2266 , SB2267 , SB2268 , SB2269 , SB2270 , SB2271 , SB2272 , SB2273 , SB2274 , SB2275 , SB2276 , SB2277 , SB2278 , SB2279 , SB2280 , SB2281 , SB2282 , SB2283 , SB2284 , SB2285 , SB2286 , SB2287 , SB2288 , SB2289 , SB2290 , SB2291 , SB2292 , SB2293 , SB2294 , SB2295 , SB2296 , SB2297 , SB2298 , SB2299 , SB2300 , SB2301 , SB2302 , SB2303 , SB2304 , SB2305 , SB2306 , SB2307 , SB2308 , SB2309 , SB2310 , SB2311 , SB2313 , SB2314 , SB2315 , SB2316 , SB2317 , SB2318 , SB2319 , SB2320 , SB2321 , SB2322 , SB2323 , SB2324 , SB2325 , SB2326 , SB2327 , SB2328 , SB2329 , SB2330 , SB2331 , SB2333 , SB2334 , SB2335 , SB2336 , SB2337 , SB2338 , SB2339 , SB2340 , SB2341 , SB2342 , SB2343 , SB2344 , SB2346 , SB2347 , SB2348 , SB2349 , SB2350 , SB2351 , SB2352 , SB2353 , SB2354 , SB2355 , SB2356 , SB2357 , SB2358 , SB2359 , SB2360 , SB2361 , SB2362 , SB2363 , SB2364 , SB2365 , SB2366 , SB2367 , SB2368 , SB2369 , SB2370 , SB2371 , SB2372 , SB2373 , SB2374 , SB2375 , SB2376 , SB2377 , SB2378 , SB2379 , SB2380 , SB2381 , SB2382 , SB2383 , SB2384 , SB2385 , SB2386 , SB2387 , SB2388 , SB2389 , SB2390 , SB2391 , SB2393 , SB2394 , SB2395 , SB2396 , SB2397 , SB2398 , SB2399 , SB2400 , SB2401 , SB2402 , SB2403 , SB2404 , SB2405 , SB2406 , SB2410 , SB2411 , SB2412 , SB2413 , SB2414 , SB2415 , SB2416 , SB2417 , SB2418 , SB2419 , SB2420 , SB2421 , SB2422 , SB2423 , SB2424 , SB2426 , SB2427 , SB2428 , SB2429 , SB2430 , SB2431 , SB2432 , SB2433 , SB2434 , SB2435 , SB2436 , SB2437 , SB2438 , SB2439 , SB2440 , SB2441 , SB2442 , SB2443 , SB2444 , SB2445 , SB2446 , SB2447 , SB2448 , SB2449 , SB2450 , SB2451 , SB2452 , SB2453 , SB2454 , SB2455 , SB2456 , SB2457 , SB2458 , SB2459 , SB2460 , SJR72 , SJR73 , SJR75 , SJR77 , SJR79 , SJR80 , SJR81 , SJR82 , SB2198 , SB2201 , SB2202 , SB2203 , SB2204 , SB2205 , SB2206 , SB2207 , SB2208 , SB2209 , SB2210 , SB2211 , SB2213 , SB2214 , SB2215 , SB2216 , SB2217 , SB2218 , SB2219 , SB2220 , SB2221 , SB2222 , SB2223 , SB2224 , SB2225 , SB2226 , SB2227 , SB2228 , SB2229 , SB2231 , SB2232 , SB2233 , SB2234 , SB2235 , SB2236 , SB2237 , SB2238 , SB2239 , SB2240 , SB2241 , SB2242 , SB2243 , SB2244 , SB2245 , SB2246 , SB2247 , SB2248 , SB2249 , SB2250 , SB2251 , SB2252 , SB2253 , SB2254 , SB2255 , SB2256 , SB2257 , SB2258 , SB2259 , SB2260 , SB2261 , SB2262 , SB2263 , SB2264 , SB2265 , SB2266 , SB2267 , SB2268 , SB2269 , SB2270 , SB2271 , SB2272 , SB2273 , SB2274 , SB2275 , SB2276 , SB2277 , SB2278 , SB2279 , SB2280 , SB2281 , SB2282 , SB2283 , SB2284 , SB2285 , SB2286 , SB2287 , SB2288 , SB2289 , SB2290 , SB2291 , SB2292 , SB2293 , SB2294 , SB2295 , SB2296 , SB2297 , SB2298 , SB2299 , SB2300 , SB2301 , SB2302 , SB2303 , SB2304 , SB2305 , SB2306 , SB2307 , SB2308 , SB2309 , SB2310 , SB2311 , SB2313 , SB2314 , SB2315 , SB2316 , SB2317 , SB2318 , SB2319 , SB2320 , SB2321 , SB2322 , SB2323 , SB2324 , SB2325 , SB2326 , SB2327 , SB2328 , SB2329 , SB2330 , SB2331 , SB2333 , SB2334 , SB2335 , SB2336 , SB2337 , SB2338 , SB2339 , SB2340 , SB2341 , SB2342 , SB2343 , SB2344 , SB2346 , SB2347 , SB2348 , SB2349 , SB2350 , SB2351 , SB2352 , SB2353 , SB2354 , SB2355 , SB2356 , SB2357 , SB2358 , SB2359 , SB2360 , SB2361 , SB2362 , SB2363 , SB2364 , SB2365 , SB2366 , SB2367 , SB2368 , SB2369 , SB2370 , SB2371 , SB2372 , SB2373 , SB2374 , SB2375 , SB2376 , SB2377 , SB2378 , SB2379 , SB2380 , SB2381 , SB2382 , SB2383 , SB2384 , SB2385 , SB2386 , SB2387 , SB2388 , SB2389 , SB2390 , SB2391 , SB2393 , SB2394 , SB2395 , SB2396 , SB2397 , SB2398 , SB2399 , SB2400 , SB2401 , SB2402 , SB2403 , SB2404 , SB2405 , SB2406 , SB2410 , SB2411 , SB2412 , SB2413 , SB2414 , SB2415 , SB2416 , SB2417 , SB2418 , SB2419 , SB2420 , SB2421 , SB2422 , SB2423 , SB2424 , SB2426 , SB2427 , SB2428 , SB2429 , SB2430 , SB2431 , SB2432 , SB2433 , SB2434 , SB2435 , SB2436 , SB2437 , SB2438 , SB2439 , SB2440 , SB2441 , SB2442 , SB2443 , SB2444 , SB2445 , SB2446 , SB2447 , SB2448 , SB2449 , SB2450 , SB2451 , SB2452 , SB2453 , SB2454 , SB2455 , SB2456 , SB2457 , SB2458 , SB2459 , SB2460