Transcript Highlights:

• So, you may see that acronym for future conversations around AOT.
• I was so concerned that programs would just end this month and we could not.
• The three-year programming and look at what we're doing.
• Where the program is being located, how is that going?
• To what program would best fit whom?

Committee: House House Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• A number of programs in the education world are forecast programs, or entitlement programs, and they
• </c><00:30:15.600><c> and</c> programs um or entitlement programs and programs um or entitlement programs
• program.
• </c> programs and those entitlement programs programs and those entitlement programs are<00:35:04.760
• </c><01:27:26.000><c> or</c><01:27:26.199><c> the</c> programs or they reflect programs or the programs

Committee: House Education Finance

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• There's a program called the My Two Aunties program.
• with apprenticeship programs.
• Future rate structure.
• And child support is not just an enforcement program, but a poverty prevention program.
• And child support is not just an enforcement program, but a poverty prevention program.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 229 fleet at Mountain Home Air Force Base positions us to be the F-15E base of preference for the future
• Gunfighters are committed to shaping the future of air power by rapidly fielding advanced capabilities
• Our ability... ...new technologies and future concepts across all domains.
• Our school liaison program manager corrected a deficiency in identifying military-connected children
• Across the state and ways that we can work together for the future of Mountain Home Air Force Base.

Committee: House Transportation and Defense

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we've added on top of a lot of different programs and, ...on top of a lot of different programs and
• There are programs, and that is the spending problem that I'm talking about.
• We have antiquated programs within how we do funding.
• So he went back into that that program.
• I was looking for lights for the future, but go ahead. I'm sorry. Yeah, Mr.

Committee: House Education

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Very proud of the aerospace education grant program.
• Over the course of our program, we had $14 million for our prep hanger program.
• That was a competitive hanger program.
• So, future terminal building.
• Now, let's talk about some of the future projects in our area.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the supervisor and program manager over the system auditors who conducted this audit.
• And I'm going to start by ...program manager over the system auditors who conducted this audit, and I'm
• The core apportionment system is programmed to perform monthly, multilayered calculations.
• OSPI has already experienced issues in a backup program and even though its IT team has begun looking
• This is a very complex calculation with so many programs and variables.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The committee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on OSPI’s school apportionment system, which distributes K-12 funding to districts. Auditors said the system and its underlying 2008-era infrastructure are outdated, unstable, inefficient, and at high risk of errors or failure. They also found weak controls over data input, documentation, oversight, and monitoring, with heavy reliance on a small number of staff and vendor knowledge. In limited testing of three districts, the system calculated 2023–24 funding correctly, but auditors identified small discrepancies between state budget inputs and underlying statutory language and said broader system risks remain unresolved. JLARC members asked about the scope of the district testing, whether smaller districts face greater risk, the meaning of the funding discrepancies, and whether the system could support a future change to a simpler per-student funding formula. Auditors said the discrepancies were small but could compound into millions statewide, and that the audit did not evaluate broader policy questions or alternative system owners. They recommended OSPI modernize or replace the system and address current control weaknesses while the new platform is developed. OSPI officials largely agreed that the current platform needs replacement and said a feasibility study completed in 2024 found the system at catastrophic risk of failure. They clarified that the Legislature had approved up to $16 million in the state IT pool for the project, but that funding is released through gated oversight and not all of it had yet been appropriated for the current biennium. OSPI disputed the auditor’s characterization of some rounding and budget-law issues, saying the calculations were consistent with agency rules and legislative inputs, and explained that some manual workarounds are used to handle newer statutory requirements. One member of the public testified in support of modernizing the system and strengthening controls. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've got statistics based on programs and results from programs.
• So everything from families, farms, and even our future through the programming that we offer that support
• </c> programming and they have our support. programming and they have our support.
• This program housed both SNAP-Ed and FNET programs.
• </c> agents who are doing that programming. agents who are doing that programming.

Keywords: This meeting was pulled from back ups and uploaded in it's entirety due to technical issues., 958, all

Summary: The Make America Healthy Kentucky Task Force met with a quorum, approved the minutes, and then heard a presentation on the state’s “food is medicine” work from Kentucky Hospital Association and Kentucky Department of Agriculture leaders, including Jim Muser, Holly Harris, and Commissioner Jonathan Shell. The chair framed the discussion around personal wellness, injury prevention, and the broader goal of improving health through better sleep, nutrition, and activity, then asked the presenters to describe current initiatives and any policy changes needed. The witnesses described a partnership linking hospitals and Kentucky farmers to improve health outcomes while supporting rural agriculture. They said the effort has moved beyond the pilot stage and now includes more than 40 hospitals statewide, with programs such as healthier hospital cafeterias, grab-and-go options, farmers markets at hospital sites, subsidized CSA boxes for employees, and medically tailored meals or groceries for patients with chronic conditions. ARH was highlighted as a leading model, with local food procurement, employee wellness efforts, and measurable outcome pilots, including a Russell County Hospital project focused on diabetes, heart disease, and obesity. They also emphasized barriers to scaling the model, including fragmented short-term funding, lack of reimbursement for food-as-medicine programs, and burdensome procurement and testing requirements that can make it difficult for small farmers to participate. The presenters said hospitals are using their own funds or temporary grants to sustain programs and argued that policy changes are needed to simplify sourcing, expand reimbursement pathways, and support clinical measurement of outcomes. No votes or formal actions beyond approving the minutes were taken during the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• These programs have been running for a few years, and what this bill does is codify these programs so
• These programs have proven to be successful.
• these programs on an ongoing, forward basis.
• The federal programs at stake exist for students like us.
• , such as the Scholars Honors Program, EOPS, CARE, Umoja, and Puente.

Committee: House Higher Education

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That is a program where if you have diabetes, this is a program that can help you make... ...talking
• a program where if you have diabetes, this is a program that can help you manage those costs.
• program that is designed for high-risk individuals, which is a prevention program.
• in this program.
• Again, a unique program.

Summary: The Employee Benefits Committee met to approve prior minutes, hear presentations on state employee health insurance, compensation, leave, and related policy issues, and then recess for lunch. PERS reviewed the history and structure of the state health plan, noting the long-standing state-paid family coverage, cost-control measures, wellness incentives, the current grandfathered PPO and high-deductible options, and the effects of recent benefit mandates such as insulin caps, prosthetic coverage, medication management, prescription copay changes, and ambulance balance-billing limits. Committee members questioned the fiscal impact of adding benefits and the possible cost of moving to a non-grandfathered plan, while PERS and HRMS emphasized that health insurance remains the top-ranked employee benefit and that any major plan changes should be considered carefully. HRMS also presented compensation comparisons showing state pay generally below private-market benchmarks, discussed targeted market equity adjustments, identified ongoing recruitment and retention concerns in fields like nursing, IT, engineering, and attorneys, and reviewed leave policies, tuition reimbursement, and family leave comparisons with neighboring states. Job Service provided labor market data showing low unemployment, high labor force participation, and wage growth that still trails some neighboring markets, and OMB explained that prevailing wage requirements apply to federally funded projects under Davis-Bacon, not to ordinary state contracts. After lunch, the committee took up the required process for health insurance mandate bills and adopted an amendment to Joint Rule 211. The amendment clarified that the deadline for submitting mandate measures is intended to allow time for all required reports, including both the cost-benefit analysis and any Employee Benefits Committee actuarial report, while leaving the existing deadline unchanged. The amendment was adopted on a roll call vote, with several members voting yes and a few no votes recorded. The committee then moved into its jurisdiction review of bill drafts, beginning with a bill that would automatically renew pre-tax dental and vision elections; members debated whether it had any actuarial or administrative impact on PERS or the state, and the chair explained that the committee’s role was only to decide whether further analysis was needed before later testimony and recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• than five graduates in graduate programs at the master's and doctoral level. ...graduate programs at
• If you think about every program was a row in an Excel spreadsheet, 2,000 programs.
• So that would be post-baccalaureate degree programs, excluding those professional programs of law, OT
• That's really important, as well as those high-cost programs. ...as well as those high-cost programs.
• Again, the idea is keeping a cost of the program in terms of what it actually costs to deliver programs

Summary: The committee met to discuss higher education funding and capital building policy. Members first heard an update from NDUS Deputy Commissioner Lisa Johnson on low-producing academic programs. She described a proposed board policy using a five-year rolling window and thresholds of fewer than 10 undergraduate graduates or fewer than 5 graduate graduates, with programs flagged for three consecutive review periods going to the board. Possible outcomes would include continuation, continuation with modifications, inactivation, or termination. Members asked about how the review would account for program costs, service to other students, workforce demand, and the difference between inactivation and termination. Johnson said the board would consider broader factors and that campuses already do detailed program analysis. Several members also asked about cost savings and staffing impacts from program terminations, and Johnson said the board would try to provide more information later. The committee then received a report on the Capital Building Fund from Jamie Wilkie. He reviewed the program’s history, matching requirements, and recent uses, noting that about $334 million in state and matching dollars has been invested overall, with most going to deferred maintenance and extraordinary repairs. Members discussed whether the program is reducing deferred maintenance and requested updated systemwide data on deferred maintenance and campus space utilization. Wilkie said the board is considering a new study to update deferred maintenance figures, which are based on information more than 12 years old. He also reported that several institutions have used current biennium funds for projects such as residence hall renovations, health sciences housing, generators, and building repairs. Later, the committee began a detailed walkthrough of a draft bill that would replace the current higher education funding formula with an FTE-based model and also revise the capital building fund structure. The draft would use fall enrollment FTEs, add completion incentives for degrees in in-demand fields, and create a separate research funding component for UND and NDSU tied to doctoral completions and external research expenditures. Members raised concerns about the use of older data in the formula, the treatment of waivers, the weighting of professional and health sciences programs, and the use of CIP codes to define CTE and education incentives. The bill draft would also combine capital building fund tiers, broaden eligible uses for deferred maintenance and legislatively authorized projects, change matching requirements, repeal the old formula chapter and the capital pool, and transfer funds from the Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund into the capital building fund. No final votes were taken during the portion provided; the meeting was primarily discussion and review.

Transcript Highlights:

• We issued an unmodified opinion on the federal program, a clean opinion on the federal program.
• The three programs that we audited this year were the mortgage insurance program, the Ginnie Mae program
• That program maintains all of that information.
• That program maintains all of that information.
• A child care workforce incentive program, a program that we had never had in North Dakota.

Committee: Joint Legislative Audit and Fiscal Review Committee

Summary: The Legislative Audit and Fiscal Review Committee met to receive a series of audit presentations, beginning with approval of the prior meeting minutes and a review of the state’s annual comprehensive financial report (ACFR) for fiscal year 2025. The State Auditor’s Office and the Office of Management and Budget reported a clean opinion on the state’s financial statements and described continued growth in net position, strong general fund balance, and significant Legacy Fund investment income. Committee members asked about how the report reflects long-term finances and how North Dakota compares with other states, and OMB noted that the ACFR is based on audited actual results rather than budget forecasts. The committee then heard the North Dakota University System audit, which also received a clean opinion but included four findings: misreporting of Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund construction money, insufficient monitoring of service organizations, improper bank reconciliations at several campuses, and investment/cash recording issues at Bismarck State College. University System officials agreed with the findings and said corrective actions were underway, including internal review of bank reconciliations and greater use of shared services. Members also questioned practices such as campus use of certificates of deposit and whether repeated findings were being adequately addressed. Additional audits were presented for the State Fair Association, State Auditor’s Office, Workforce Safety and Insurance, Housing Finance Agency, Housing Incentive Fund, Job Service North Dakota, the Retirement and Investment Office, PERS, the Center for Distance Education, the Securities Department, the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents, the Ethics Commission, and the Office of Administrative Hearings. Most received clean opinions with no findings; exceptions included a repeat component-unit issue at the State Fair Foundation, a securities personnel-evaluation finding, and a Housing Finance Agency finding involving a late return of escrow surplus. The committee also discussed broader oversight issues, including the need for independent auditing of the Ethics Commission, possible legislative changes to give the State Auditor more subpoena power and independent legal counsel, and future work on data analytics, cybersecurity reviews, and audit capacity. The meeting recessed for lunch after these discussions.

Transcript Highlights:

• I would like to thank the Legislature also for funding the Wright grant program, the Jails to Jobs program
• Farm Worker Housing Grant Program, and the Portfolia Reinvestment Program.
• transit operations program.
• We are very appreciative of the allocations to the state LIHTC program and the MHP program.
• , which includes our AHSC program, another flagship program for how we're able to produce and sustain

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the 2026 Budget Act, which leaders said was the negotiated compromise with the Senate and was expected to move to the floor that evening. Opening remarks emphasized that the plan balances the budget over two years, reduces the structural deficit, and builds reserves, while also protecting core services in the face of federal cuts. Jason Sisney outlined the legislative budget framework and the likely floor bills, including AB 109, SB 110, SB 122, and SB 125. Department of Finance representative Eric Khali said the administration appreciated the two-year balanced approach and supported the modification in SB 122, while noting the package uses additional revenues and new spending to soften or reject some proposed cuts. Most of the discussion focused on major spending areas. Members and subcommittee chairs highlighted protections and additions for health care and human services, including rejecting the proposed Medi-Cal asset limit change, delaying premium increases, restoring clinic and dental funding, supporting distressed hospitals and county indigent care, and expanding county eligibility staffing to handle H.R. 1-related workload. Education members described record or expanded support for TK-12 schools, child care, special education, community colleges, teacher recruitment, and higher education, including a change to extend Cal Grant eligibility to age 30 for some community college students. Housing and homelessness funding was increased for HAP, multifamily housing, and the low-income housing tax credit, while public safety members pointed to investments in victims’ services, restorative justice, and prison closure savings. Several members also raised concerns or priorities tied to the budget deal. Some praised the package as a moral document that protects vulnerable Californians, immigrant communities, LGBTQ residents, seniors, and people with disabilities. Others noted unresolved issues, including the MCO tax’s impact on districts, the need for more support for local journalism, arts, biotech R&D incentives, transit and GGRF-related concerns, and the need for continued work on Prop. 98 and long-term fiscal resilience. The vice chair cautioned that despite the current progress, the state remains vulnerable to revenue volatility and warned that the budget should build more resilience against a possible downturn. No formal vote was taken in the portion provided, but the committee was preparing the budget package for floor action and final negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oliveira, Sustainable Hand Hygiene Incentive Program. Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
• Sear, Nursing and Allied Health Program expansion. Senator Comerford: Thank you, Mr. President.
• , it educates our future early education and care educators.
• We invest in our students because it is an investment in our future.
• our state's economic future.

Summary: The Senate considered and amended House 4769, a major higher education bond bill titled an act to build resilient infrastructure to generate higher education transformation (the BRIGHT Act). Members adopted a series of amendments funding deferred maintenance and capital projects at public colleges and universities, including MassBay Community College (HVAC and window replacement), Massachusetts Maritime Academy, Springfield Technical Community College, Cape Cod Community College, Worcester State University, Quinsigamond Community College, Roxbury Community College, UMass Boston, Middlesex Community College, Salem State University, Berkshire Community College, and MCLA. Several amendments were rejected, including proposals related to a sustainable hand hygiene program, board membership, and some other institutional or policy changes, while a number of amendments were held or withdrawn. The bill ultimately advanced through third reading and was passed to be engrossed by a unanimous roll call, with senators emphasizing the need to address deferred maintenance and modernize higher education facilities statewide. A major floor debate centered on an amendment by Senator Tarr to dedicate $300 million of Fair Share surtax revenue to K-12 education. Supporters argued that many school districts face rising costs, minimum aid, and an outdated Chapter 70 formula, and that the amendment would create a marker for future reform. Opponents said the Commonwealth already dedicates substantial surtax and other funding to K-12 education and that the amendment was not the right vehicle. After a roll call, the amendment was rejected. The Senate also rejected several Tarr amendments on fiscal safeguards, equity analysis, bond covenant requirements, and Chapter 62F taxpayer protections, while adopting others related to UMass Gloucester Marine Station housing and coastal erosion work, and to modernizing Massachusetts State College Building Authority bonding and office-location rules. The chamber also adopted a motion to adjourn in memory of Bolton Police Chief Luke Hamburger, who was remembered for his service, leadership, and community ties. Before adjournment, senators took brief statements on other issues, including a call for greater awareness of rare diseases and the need for improved access to diagnosis and treatment. The Senate also approved extension orders giving committees additional time to report on pending environmental and municipal bills, and it set its next meeting for Monday at 11:00 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• And what we're years into the future.
• </c><00:19:24.880><c> redund</c> follow up on some program redund follow up on some program redund redundancies
• </c><00:20:01.360><c> of</c> including some of the programs of including some of the programs of assistance
• </c> reduce services or close programs. reduce services or close programs.
• </c> future funding. future funding.

Bills: HF3425 , HF3424 , HF1385

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Keywords: supportive housing, grants, housing assistance, funding, Minnesota Statutes, eviction, rent, nonpayment of rent, landlord-tenant, residential tenant, notice to quit, unlawful detainer, housing, lease violation, late fees, rental assistance, legal aid, tenant rights, Minnesota Statutes 504B.321, pre-eviction notice

Transcript Highlights:

• I will oversee the premier trade programs, the market access program, and foreign market development
• Midwest program which uses those funding programs MAP and FMD to support our agricultural producers overseas
• Chairman. comments about nutrition programs and food programs, SNAP and WIC and school meals and especially
• Program, the Regional Agribusiness Program. promotional program and the assisting specialty crop exports
• There are going to be a number of new trade deals signed in the not-too-distant future that those programs

Committee: Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• There are multiple credit programs.
• There are multiple credit programs.
• </c> template or you talking about the future template or you talking about the future future<00:58:41.920
• </c> say that it is specifically this program say that it is specifically this program because<01:00:
• Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. create or worsen uh future create or worsen uh future

Committee: House Taxes

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• With the recent expansion of the program to cover bipolar disorders with psychotic features, in addition
• We will continue to make resources available to the courts through our temporary assigned judges program
• The judicial branch is laying a strong foundation with its model policies, training programs, and...
• It's too soon to report back on the future of the California State Bar, but it's safe to say that nobody
• I look forward to discussing this issue too with you further in the near future.

Summary: The Legislature recessed into a joint convention for the 2026 State of the Judiciary, escorted the California Supreme Court justices to the rostrum, and heard remarks from legislative leaders and Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero. The speakers emphasized judicial independence, the rule of law, and the importance of the courts as a co-equal branch of government. The Chief Justice framed her address as a calm report on the judiciary’s work and major challenges, while thanking legislative and executive partners for collaboration. Chief Justice Guerrero highlighted several policy and operational issues facing the courts. She urged continued support for remote proceedings, noting more than 6 million remote hearings since 2022 and strong user satisfaction, and discussed the CARE Act’s statewide implementation, including petition and agreement numbers and the recent expansion to cover certain bipolar disorders. She also raised concerns about judicial security and privacy, threats and negative rhetoric toward judges, courthouse access issues tied to federal immigration enforcement, and the need for more judgeships and funding in high-need counties such as Riverside and San Bernardino. She also discussed the judiciary’s response to artificial intelligence, including guidance on generative AI, deepfakes, and evidence admissibility, and reported corrective actions after the troubled February 2025 bar exam, including scoring adjustments, expanded provisional licensing, and a return to in-person testing. Additional points included proposed ongoing funding for trial courts, long-standing judicial salary disparities, and the Judicial Council’s 100th anniversary. No votes were taken; the joint convention concluded with the address ordered printed in the Journal and an invitation to a reception for members and guests.

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, the bill increases from three to six the number of programs for which each career center
• All right, we do have one appearance form on the bill: Nathan Hoffman, Foundation for Florida's Future
• It's one of the best investments we can make in Florida's future.
• But at Valencia, doors are open and futures are built.
• Just last fall, we had to turn away more than 80 qualified applicants to our nursing program.

Summary: The committee first took up CS/SB 742 on workforce education, which would let charter schools directly access the Workforce Development Capitalization Incentive Grant Program for career and technical education programs leading to industry certifications, and would expand the number of programs covered by the money-back guarantee at career centers and Florida College System institutions from three to six. Senator Simon said the bill would help fund CTE expansion; Senator Davis asked whether it could reduce funding for school districts, and Simon said it could depending on available grant funds. A supporter from the Foundation for Florida’s Future appeared in favor, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee then heard SB 892, which would codify the Florida State University Center for Election Law so it can continue operating and become eligible for recurring funding. Senator Simon said the center’s work is focused on nonpartisan, evidence-based research related to improving responses to natural disasters and reducing fraud, mistakes, and irregularities in elections, rather than lobbying or redistricting advocacy. FSU supporters testified that the center has already hosted events such as a Bush v. Gore anniversary conference and has contributed to law school scholarship. After questions from Senator Davis about the center’s scope and funding, the bill was reported favorably. The remainder of the meeting consisted largely of confirmation testimony from appointees to university and college boards, who described their backgrounds and priorities. Most emphasized workforce development, student success, affordability, and local community partnerships at institutions including Tallahassee State College, Valencia College, New College, Pensacola State College, Florida Gulf Coast University, University of South Florida, Florida Atlantic University, Daytona State College, University of North Florida, St. Johns River State College, Palm Beach State College, and Santa Fe College. Several appointees highlighted their personal ties to the institutions and their goals of supporting programs in nursing, technical education, research, internships, and graduation rates. One nominee, Dr. Joel Rudman for Pensacola State College, faced pointed questioning about past public comments; he said his remarks were directed at the Florida House, not the Senate, and denied any knowledge of drug use by current or former senators. Public testimony was mixed on his nomination, with one supporter praising his community service and one critic urging rejection. No final confirmation votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• You're a founding member of the court's judicial mentor program and have served on numerous...
• And again, we appreciate the conversation and look forward to future discussions.
• We have Corrine Van Rabinhorst, principal program budget analyst with the Department of Finance.
• We have Corrine Van Rabinhorst, principal program budget analyst with the Department of Finance.
• This would allow the judicial branch to be able to plan farther into the future.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation held a hearing focused first on courthouse facility funding and then on the Governor’s proposed court facilities budget. Legislative Analyst’s Office staff outlined the state’s court-facilities funding structure, including the 2002 shift of trial court facility responsibility from counties to the state, the main funding accounts, the insolvency of the construction fund, the move to General Fund support, the backlog of deferred maintenance, and the large estimated cost of needed new construction and repairs. Judicial Council representatives and judges from Los Angeles and Mendocino described severe seismic, safety, ADA, security, and maintenance problems, with examples of floods, elevator failures, asbestos-related closures, and long-delayed or underfunded projects. They argued that chronic underinvestment is making facilities less safe and more expensive to maintain, and that courthouse conditions directly affect access to justice and public confidence. Committee members pressed witnesses on how projects are prioritized, whether population and filing volume are adequately reflected, why reassessments have not been updated since 2019, how long acquisitions and construction take, and what level of funding would actually close the gap. Members also questioned the fixed county contribution, the use of General Fund backfills, and whether the state should set a clearer long-term funding target for the judicial branch. LAO staff emphasized that any new General Fund commitment would require tradeoffs with other budget priorities and said the Legislature must decide its appetite for funding. Judicial Council staff said the current prioritization was based on the 2019 reassessment and trailer bill language, that a new reassessment would cost about $14 million, and that acquisition delays are often driven by willing-seller issues and CEQA requirements. The chair asked for written testimony and indicated the committee would consider a future field hearing. In the second panel, Judicial Council and Department of Finance representatives reviewed the Governor’s budget proposals for court facilities. They said the proposal includes continued backfill for the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, several new construction and reappropriation items, relocation of Los Angeles courtrooms from the Spring Federal Building, and completion of a fire/life-safety project in Orange County. A court executive from Ventura testified that courthouse conditions affect public trust, employee morale, and the quality of service, citing roof leaks, elevator breakdowns, and HVAC failures as examples of why sustained facilities funding is needed.