Transcript Highlights:

• So the application process: you start with a competitive process and you set the clear requirements in
• So the application<00:10:25.200> process application process application process you<00:10:27.040
• and the bidding process, the competitive licensing review process, puts the burden on applicants to
• application process that they have application process that they have implemented<00:41:00.640><
• <01:01:52.880> uh application process and having the uh application process and having the

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . application. application.
• I do know farmers at home who were a part of this application process who had these types of facilities
• just by sheer number of lottery process just by sheer number of applications<01:15:52.960> by
• marketplace, I guess, in the application marketplace, I guess, in the application process<01:18:
• flooded the application process? flooded the application process?

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:20 Approval of June 4, 2026 Minutes 00:03:09 Prioritizing Kentucky Agriculture: Medical Cannabis 00:03:38 Prioritizing Kentucky Agriculture: Bourbon 01:41:03, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• c><00:15:12.040> qualify application process so you can qualify application process so you can
• <00:17:35.840> processes qualifications and application processes qualifications and application
• We had a competitive project application process.
• And then in 2024-25, again, competitive process: 17 applications were received, and three applications
• process I was project application process I was involved<01:28:52.679> with<01:28:52.880>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Department of Education’s Bureau of Wellness and Nutrition presented an overview of the school meal and child nutrition programs it administers, including the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, Summer Food Service Program, and Special Milk Program. Staff explained which programs are federally funded through USDA, which have state matching funds, and how reimbursement rates are set for different programs and fiscal years. They also walked the committee through a packet showing reimbursement tables, state and federal funding totals, and eligibility data. Members focused much of their questioning on how state and federal reimbursements work for lunch and breakfast, why lunch is shown as a state match while breakfast has meal-based breakdowns, and how the department allocates funds in the budget. The department explained that lunch uses a set state match tied to federal requirements, while breakfast reimbursement is based on meals served. They also reviewed FY 22-24 funding trends, noting higher federal spending during COVID-era waivers and lower amounts as those waivers ended. A committee member asked for the data in Excel and the department agreed to provide it. The discussion also covered summer meal programs and the distinction between the Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT. Staff explained that SFSP provides meals at approved open or closed sites, while Summer EBT is a separate DHHS-run benefit program that provides funds to families; the two programs coordinate through data sharing but are not the same. Members also discussed CEP, with staff explaining that New Hampshire currently has three schools participating, that the qualifying threshold was reduced from 40% to 25% identified students, and that districts must cover the non-federal share with non-federal funds. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• processes of con since 1972. processes of con since 1972.
• And our concern is, why would an applicant ever request a hearing to oppose its own application?
• For an application.
• process and the approval process, and also look at the cost, the potential funding streams.
• The states who have maybe made this change and see how this changed their application process and the

Keywords: 00:00:00 - Call to Order/Roll Call 00:01:25 - Discussion of 26RS HB 689 00:15:15 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 689 00:17:02 - Discussion of 26RS HB 407 00:45:40 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 407 00:49:25 - Discussion of 26RS HB 713 00:55:50 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 713 00:56:54 - Discussion of 26RS HB 676 01:06:42 - Roll Call Vote on 26RS HB 676 01:08:43 - Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 689, which would authorize Kentucky to seek federal approval for a Medicaid state-directed payment program for physician and non-physician professional services delivered through qualifying hospital-affiliated groups, beginning in 2026. Rep. Amy Neighbors and witnesses from Owensboro Health and St. Elizabeth Healthcare said the bill would bring in about $29 million in new federal Medicaid dollars without using general fund money, help retain physicians, support rural and underserved access, and tie payments to quality metrics. Witnesses described staffing shortages, rising costs, and the need to sustain services such as OB care, primary care, and preventive outpatient services. After questions about how the funding would work and whether private practices were included, the committee voted on the bill and passed it with favorable expression. The committee then moved to House Bill 407, as substituted, which would streamline Kentucky’s certificate-of-need process. Rep. Marianne Proctor and supporters from the Pacific Legal Foundation and the Institute for Justice said the bill would not repeal CON but would modernize a system they described as outdated and overly restrictive, citing national trends toward reform and arguing that Kentucky’s process has changed little since the 1970s. They said the substitute added language requiring the cabinet to contact a dominant provider when needed for data to make CON determinations. Mark Gilfoil, speaking in opposition for St. Elizabeth Healthcare, argued that CON is not a barrier to care in Northern Kentucky and said the bill would weaken the process by limiting who can request hearings, present evidence, and appeal decisions, effectively giving applicants control and making approvals nearly automatic. He said St. Elizabeth serves as a safety-net hospital for low-income and publicly insured patients and warned the bill could harm that role. Members questioned both sides about the appeal process, the definition of safety-net hospitals, and whether the bill could increase facilities and create waste or abuse. The discussion was still ongoing when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• c><00:15:12.040> qualify application process so you can qualify application process so you can
• processes qualifications and application processes specific<00:17:37.240> for<00:17:37.720>
• <00:36:09.480> process there is another um application process there is another um application
• We had a competitive project application process.
• process I was project application process I was involved<01:28:52.679> with<01:28:52.880>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee Division II met with the New Hampshire Department of Education to review school nutrition programs and related funding. Department staff Melissa White and Kelly Rambo walked through a packet covering the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility (CEP), After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, and Summer Food Service Program, explaining that these are federally funded USDA programs, with some state supplemental funding in certain areas. They also reviewed reimbursement rates for lunch, breakfast, child/adult care, and summer meals, noting that summer rates follow calendar-year timing while most others follow the state fiscal year. Members asked several questions about how the funding works, especially the difference between federal reimbursements and the state match. Staff explained that the state lunch line in the budget is a fixed match amount tied to federal participation, while breakfast funding is broken out by meal type and reimbursement category. They also discussed why FY 2022 federal spending was much higher during COVID, when USDA covered meals at the free rate for all students, and why FY 2023 and FY 2024 dropped as normal income-eligibility rules returned. A committee member also asked about the “severe need lunch” two-cent rate, and staff said they did not know USDA’s formula. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on summer meals and the distinction between the Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT. Staff explained that SFSP provides meals at approved sites, which can be open or closed sites, while Summer EBT is a separate DHHS-operated benefit program that provides funds to families. They said some schools or sites may not qualify under USDA rules, but eligible children can often use another nearby open site, and the department posts an interactive map and phone line to help families find locations. The committee also discussed the Community Eligibility Provision. Staff said New Hampshire currently has three CEP schools, that the eligibility threshold had recently been lowered from 40% to 25% identified students, and that the program allows participating schools to offer free meals to all students while the local district covers the non-federal share. Members asked whether any districts in the 25% to 40% range had joined; staff said no. The department offered to provide the eligibility report in Excel and noted that the CEP intent is to reduce application burden, though the lower threshold can make the local cost share harder for some districts to absorb.

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, we have streamlined a lot of the process.
• Again, we have streamlined a lot of the process.
• Again, we have streamlined a lot of the process.
• It did lead to a couple little slowdowns in the process because that's a very bureaucratic process.
• , I think he's on the wait list actually, but anyway, the process, whatever process it was, it was very

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs met with a quorum present and heard several housing and disaster-recovery items. The committee heard SB 48 by Senator Gates, which would require local governments to allow voluntary accessory dwelling units, preserve homestead treatment for the owner-occupied portion of the property, limit undue parking restrictions, require 30-day minimum rentals, extend certain density bonuses for military families, and allow reusable tenant screening reports. The bill drew strong support from the Florida Association of Mortgage Professionals and several others, and it was reported favorably. The committee also heard SB 34 by Senator Sharif, creating a historic cemeteries program to help preserve historic African-American cemeteries and allow sale of excess vacant land if proceeds are used for long-term maintenance; it was also reported favorably. The committee then considered and recommended confirmation of Fox Henderson to the Board of Directors of the Florida Housing Finance Corporation. Members also received a presentation from the Department of Commerce on the Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery program and Rebuild Florida. Deputy Secretary Justin Domer described the state’s administration of HUD disaster recovery funds, including more than $4.3 billion received since 2017, housing repair and replacement programs that have completed 5,271 homes, and infrastructure and mitigation projects such as sewer conversion in Alford, the new Calhoun-Liberty Hospital, and the Florida Keys desalination plant. Members asked about average project costs, contractor oversight, corrective actions for deficient work, and audit procedures; Domer said the department uses inspections, vendor oversight, and financial penalties, and noted stricter contract consequences in newer programs. The Division of Emergency Management also presented on Elevate Florida, a federal mitigation program that allows homeowners to apply directly for elevation, reconstruction, acquisition/demolition, or wind-mitigation projects, with a 75/25 federal-homeowner cost share and no state funds. Director Kevin Guthrie said the program is designed to reduce repetitive flood losses and keep homeowners in place, and that it has received more than 12,000 applications, with about 1,500 prioritized, 500 on a wait list, and 305 submitted to FEMA for final approval. Members asked about the 25% match for seniors, the wait list, contractor procurement, and how projects are classified; Guthrie said the program uses insurance proceeds where available, has competitively procured 27 contractors, and may shift projects from elevation to reconstruction depending on damage and flood rules. The committee adjourned after the presentations and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then you do have that ability to be able to offer us that mechanism within that process, that application
• project process.
• processes and our...
• In round five, we just wrapped up the process and went through the prioritization process.
• The checklist for the application process, where they can see what needs to be submitted, and then the

Transcript Highlights:

• These issues mean the application cannot be accepted, and when an application can't be accepted, the
• when an application can't be accepted when an application can't be accepted the<00:05:13.919> voter
• A worst-case scenario would be issues with an application that are so severe that they delay the process
• the voter receives multiple applications the voter receives multiple applications for<00:06:48.240
• <00:10:16.040> are why these B uh ballot applications are why these B uh ballot applications

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• around state applications.
• Around state applications.
• applications.
• But the way the application scoring process works means that Washington, to be frank, is unlikely to
• So how long does the process take? Thank you. Thank you. So how long does the process take?

Summary: The committee met to hear introductory briefings from the Department of Health and the Health Care Authority on agency priorities, federal changes, and implementation challenges. Secretary of Health Dennis Worsham said his department’s listening tour is focused on strengthening governmental public health, improving health care quality and access, and responding to federal funding disruptions and the shutdown’s effects on programs such as WIC. HCA Director Ryan Moran said the agency is prioritizing coverage preservation, oversight of major contracts, affordability, behavioral health integration, rural health transformation, and internal agency operations. Members asked about licensure delays; Worsham said the backlog had been reduced from about four months to six weeks and should be caught up by January 1, with possible further process changes if needed. A major portion of the meeting focused on H.R. 1 and its Medicaid-related implementation. Governor’s health policy advisor Caitlin Stafford, HCA staff, and interim Medicaid Director Trinity Wilson said the state is working with DSHS, the Health Benefit Exchange, tribes, and other partners to prepare for eligibility changes, work requirements, and six-month redeterminations. They said the state expects up to 30,000 Apple Health enrollees could lose coverage under the law’s non-citizen eligibility changes, and that the work requirement/redetermination provisions could affect about 620,000 adults, with roughly 80,000 also enrolled in SNAP. HCA said it hopes to automate most verification, but about 15% to 20% of cases may require manual review, with technology costs estimated at up to $30 million. Staff also said they are trying to keep H.R. 1 implementation mostly in budget language rather than statute, and that communication and navigator support will be important to minimize confusion and coverage loss. The committee also received an update on the Rural Health Transformation Program created in H.R. 1. HCA said Washington submitted its application to CMS on November 5 after extensive stakeholder engagement, including more than 310 written comments, webinars, and tribal consultation. The application centers on six initiatives: rural hospital innovation, community care and prevention, tribal investments, technology and data, workforce development, and rural behavioral health. HCA said the state is likely to receive less than the full $200 million annual amount assumed in the federal program, and that an advisory committee may be created to help guide spending over the five-year program. Members asked about palliative care, small business impacts, and communication with enrollees; HCA said it expects to share outreach toolkits and that no 2026 statutory changes are currently anticipated, though that could change. The final panels covered organ donation and transplant services. Department of Health staff explained the 2023 “Lights and Sirens” law for organ transport vehicles, including licensing, driver qualifications, insurance requirements, and use of emergency lanes and traffic preemption; the department said one company is currently licensed and there have been no complaints. LifeCenter Northwest described the organ procurement process, the legal framework under the Uniform Anatomical Gift Act, and the rarity and complexity of deceased donation, noting Washington has seen strong growth in donation and transplants over the past decade. University of Washington Medical Center staff then outlined its transplant programs for kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas, and multi-organ transplants, describing the multidisciplinary evaluation and waitlist process and the coordination required with donor organizations and hospitals.

Transcript Highlights:

• application, and is responsible for that allocation. >> Uh, do we know what department processes the
• So the review process features numerous steps to verify the information submitted: applicant identity
• So that is part of the initial application process, not only going through the Plaid identity types of
• So that is part of the initial application process, not only going through the Plaid identity types of
• So that is part of the initial application process, not only going through the Plaid identity types of

Bills: HF3217, HF2252

Keywords: bioindustrial facilities, economic development, renewable energy, advanced biofuels, state funding, HF2252, Minnesota bonding, volume cap, private activity bonds, tax-exempt bonds, public facility bonds, public facilities pool, unified pool, bond allocation, municipal finance, bond cap, housing bonds, residential rental projects, manufacturing bonds, enterprise zone bonds

Summary: The committee first approved the prior day’s minutes as amended, correcting the meeting number from the 46th to the 45th meeting. It then took up House File 3217, which would restore funding for the Minnesota Bioincentive Program. Representative Kisha argued the state should honor commitments made to companies that met program requirements and had not received full reimbursement. Testifiers from the Great Plains Institute and Minnesota Biofuels Association said the program has supported bioeconomy investment, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and generated strong economic returns, but has been underfunded, leaving unpaid claims. Members raised questions about whether the bill was retrospective and whether it should be reviewed by another committee; the bill was laid over for further consideration without a vote. The committee then heard House File 2252, a proposal to modernize Minnesota’s private activity bond volume cap by shifting unused allocation from the small issuer/manufacturing bucket to the public facilities bucket while leaving the overall cap unchanged. The bill’s public finance testifier said the current allocation formula is outdated, housing would remain the top priority, and the change would be budget neutral. Testifiers from the Minnesota Milk Producers Association and Minnesota Biofuels Association supported the bill, saying it would better align financing with rural infrastructure, clean water, manure management, renewable natural gas, dairy processing, and low-carbon fuel projects, and could lower borrowing costs for those sectors. Members questioned whether the bill fit the committee’s jurisdiction and noted it might be more appropriate for another committee; the bill was also laid over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, so essentially I'll talk about the process in a minute, but our team reviews applications that come
• So both that application process and when it's time to close out those grants or tax credits, we are
• So both that application<00:10:22.640> process<00:10:23.200> and<00:10:24.000> um
• ><00:10:24.160> when<00:10:24.399> it's application process and um when it's application
• And then the process again, I've touched on it a bit, but the application is on the website for the cabinet

Keywords: Cabinet for Economic Development – Bluegrass State Skills Corporation Overview 02:35 ----Discussion of BR 868, 2026 Regular Session 24:08, 958, all

Summary: The meeting began with a quorum call and approval of the August 21 minutes. The main presentation was from the Kentucky Cabinet for Economic Development on the Bluegrass State Skills Corporation (BSSC), which was created in 1984 and is administratively tied to the cabinet. Staff explained that BSSC supports workforce training for companies in Kentucky through two main programs: the grant-in-aid reimbursement program and the skills training investment tax credit. They also described the board’s structure, quarterly meetings, annual audit, and the metropolitan tax credit tied to UPS in Louisville, along with public-private training consortia supported by the program. The cabinet outlined eligibility and funding rules: applicants must be qualified companies, trainees must be full-time Kentucky residents meeting wage requirements, and eligible training includes in-house company-specific training, train-the-trainer efforts, safety/OSHA training, and outside training through KCTCS or other providers. Grant-in-aid is a 50% reimbursement program capped at $75,000 per company per fiscal year and $2,000 per trainee, while the tax credit is capped annually and is awarded on a first-come, first-served basis. Applications are scored based on county tier, wages, workforce development activity, veteran hiring, participation in consortia, and job growth. Members asked for data on trainees and industries served, and staff said they could provide it. They also discussed coordination with other workforce programs, especially KCTCS and the state’s TRAIN program, to avoid overlap and double dipping. Several members asked about program usage and differences between fiscal years. Staff said the tax credit is less popular because it is not refundable and requires tax liability, while grant-in-aid is more attractive because it is cash reimbursement. They said lower or delayed spending in some years can reflect one-year training windows, reimbursement lag, new facilities ramping up, consortia activity, and special allocations such as those tied to Ford facilities. Questions also covered support for new businesses, which staff said can receive favorable scoring for new jobs and may have funds set aside for new location projects. On veterans, staff said they connect companies to Kentucky Valor and other resources, but the program does not track veteran retention outcomes. The final discussion was on a draft bill related to the Kentucky Horse Park and the U.S. Center for SafeSport. Representative Vanessa Gracel and Kentucky Horse Park President Lee Carter explained that the proposal is intended to help the park maintain integrity and protect athletes, volunteers, coaches, trainers, and guests from abuse and misconduct. They described SafeSport’s federal role in Olympic and Paralympic sports and said they hope to move the draft forward as legislation in 2026. No votes were taken on the BSSC presentation or the horse park discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's something that's a work in process out there.
• out a little bit later in the process out a little bit later in the process that<00:02:25.440>
• employees to notify the commissioner of any potential applicant contact.
• employees to notify the commissioner of any potential applicant contact.
• employees to notify the commissioner of any potential applicant contact.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• formal applications, which definitely speeds up that process.
• Phased approval, common applications, foundations, enabling projects sooner in a tight process...” “.
• So one would be requiring documentation as part of the grant and loan application process, so very early
• So one would be requiring documentation as part of the grant and loan application process, so very early
• process.

Summary: The committee heard a series of presentations on comprehensive plan updates, permitting reform, special purpose district coordination, and subdivision reform. Pierce County and the City of Redmond described their recent comprehensive plan updates, emphasizing housing production, transit-oriented development, middle housing, preservation of affordable housing, and the need for technical assistance and clearer state guidance. Both jurisdictions said the planning process took years and was complicated by overlapping state requirements, changing legislative mandates, and multiple review authorities. Redmond in particular said mid-course legislative changes forced supplemental environmental review and added significant cost and delay, and both local governments asked for more stability, clearer statutes, and better-aligned timelines. Presenters from the architecture, building official, and development sectors focused on permitting delays and proposed ways to speed housing delivery. Dave Boucher of AIA Washington argued for a provisional construction permit process for projects stamped by licensed professionals, along with mandatory deadlines and fewer stalled review cycles. Tim Woodard of WABO described existing tools such as pre-application meetings and phased approvals, noting they can improve certainty but also require staff time and careful coordination. Representatives from Master Builders and D.R. Horton said permit and subdivision delays add substantial cost to housing, citing studies showing months of delay and tens of thousands of dollars added per home, and urged administrative approvals, concurrent review, self-certification, and limits on repeated review cycles. The committee also reviewed a Commerce-led task force report on integrating special purpose districts into Growth Management Act planning. The task force recommended early invitation and notice to water, sewer, school, port, and other service providers during countywide planning policy and comprehensive plan updates, better coordination on grants and capital projects, updated water system coordination plans, and improved school siting and funding alignment in fast-growing areas. Speakers stressed that the recommendations were intended to be light-touch and focused on better communication rather than major statutory overhaul, while also noting that rural and slow-growing areas should not be burdened with the same requirements as rapidly growing jurisdictions. On subdivision reform, FutureWise and the City of Spokane discussed making more subdivision decisions administrative, preserving vesting, clarifying exemptions, and reducing unnecessary notice and appeal steps. Spokane described local reforms such as smaller minimum lot sizes, unit lot subdivisions, and reduced-process “minor engineering review” for simple plats, while raising concerns about new notice requirements and appeals to city councils for technical plat decisions. Across the hearing, members repeatedly returned to the theme that local governments, builders, and state agencies need clearer, more coordinated rules to reduce delay and uncertainty while still protecting safety and planning goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Processes that for small business... ...even as they navigate complicated permitting processes, processes
• , where applicants can submit materials and track the status of their application in real time.
• And service applications.
• It stops local agencies from dragging out the process by sending applications to outside reviewers and
• processes.

Summary: The Assembly Local Government Committee heard a full agenda of bills focused largely on housing, permitting reform, transportation governance, and local government finance. Early in the hearing, AB 24 by Assemblymember DeMaio proposed changing SANDAG board selection to give rural unincorporated areas a stronger voice; members raised concerns about the approach and local input, and the bill ultimately did not receive a second at the time it was heard. The chair later clarified that because no second was made, the bill was held rather than voted out, though the transcript also reflects confusion and later attempts to revisit the item. Several housing and permitting bills advanced with committee amendments and broad support. AB 671 by Assemblymember Wicks would streamline restaurant permitting through self-certification and faster plan review; AB 920 by Assemblymember Caloza would require a centralized online portal for housing permit tracking in larger jurisdictions; AB 1061 by Assemblymember Kirk Silva would allow SB 9 housing in historic districts with limits to protect historic character; AB 818 by Assemblymember Anamarie Farías would streamline temporary manufactured housing after disasters; AB 660 by Assemblymember Wilson would tighten timelines and remedies for post-entitlement housing permits; AB 1308 by Assemblymember Hoover would allow third-party inspections for small residential projects if local inspections are delayed; and AB 1445 by Assemblymember Haney would expand downtown revitalization financing tools for mixed-use housing. Each of these measures drew support from housing, business, and industry groups, with some local-government and special-district stakeholders seeking continued amendments on certain bills. The committee also approved AB 1156, which updates the solar use easement program to better accommodate renewable energy development on water-constrained agricultural lands, and AB 964, which would let local governments offset certain state mandate reimbursement debts against amounts the state owes them. AB 1223, by Assemblymember Wynn, would let Sacramento-area transportation authorities propose sales tax measures for portions of the county and keep revenues local; it advanced despite some transportation and taxpayer concerns. Consent items AB 36 and AB 1131 were also approved. Most bills were reported out on bipartisan votes, often with committee amendments and some members noting they would continue working on the measures in later committees.

Transcript Highlights:

• PROCESS.
• NORMAL PROCESS. FOLLOW NORMAL PROCESS.
• WE RECEIVED 7,000 VOUCHER APPLICATIONS INITIAL ROUND ABOUT YOUR APPLICATIONS.
• THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENTS ARE CONTINUING TO PROCESS APPLICATIONS REVIEWING FOR ELIGIBILITY AND PROVIDE
• ONCE ALL THESE APPLICATIONS ARE PROCESSED THE VOUCHER APPLICATION A WILL BE RE OPEN TO ALLOW MORE FAMILIES

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Staffing reductions at Federal Student Aid have extended processing times for loan relief applications
• The application process is a paper-based process, and we need to look at what an institution is telling
• The application process is a paper-based process, and we need to look at what an institution is telling
• And that was the claim adjudication, the team of people who are processing those applications, as well
• Second, we support improvements to the institutional application process that allow the Bureau to rely

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:12:41.600> of SB 226FN suspending the application of SB 226FN suspending the application
• , seek additional fees from the applicant, seek additional fees from the applicant, but<00:24:37.440
• basically provided a system process basically provided a system process moving<00:25:28.559>
• the site evaluation committee processes the site evaluation committee processes to<00:25:53.039>
• And uh oh, one through the process.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . application. application.
• But all the utility is doing is processing the application.
• But all the utility is doing is processing<00:48:19.359> the<00:48:19.520> application.
• <00:48:20.079> Say<00:48:20.319> you<00:48:20.560> may processing the application
• Say you may processing the application.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Administrative Regulation Review Subcommittee met in August with a quorum present and approved the prior meeting minutes without objection. The committee then reviewed several regulations, generally adopting staff-suggested amendments without objection, and heard brief explanations from agency representatives on each item. The Board of Pharmacy regulations would clarify what registered and certified pharmacy technicians may do under supervision and what certified technicians may not do, while updating registration applications. The Board of Cosmetology package included changes to executive director authority, licensure and reciprocity rules, school requirements, training hours, instructor ratios, sanitation and disease-related rules, complaint procedures, and permit terms; members asked about straight razor language and the increase in student-to-instructor ratios, and the board explained that cosmetologists are not permitted to use straight razors and that the higher ratio was intended to give schools flexibility, especially for part-time students and schools with wait lists. The Occupational Therapy emergency compact regulation added four compact rules adopted in April 2025, and Senator West raised a technical question about certification requirements under House Bill 6; the agency said it had been instructed to file the regulation as submitted. The Department for Fish and Wildlife Resources presented a package covering wildlife management area rules, a northern pintail bag limit increase, reportable disease reporting, and a repeal tied to boat registration fees. After a brief explanation of the new wildlife disease reporting rule, the agency requested and received a deferral of 301 KAR 2:031 to avoid a gap while replacement language is finalized. The Economic Development Finance Authority explained an emergency regulation for the Kentucky Entertainment Incentive Program, saying it was needed because the program had become oversubscribed and because administration was shifting to a new film office and council; members also asked about certification issues under House Bill 6, and the agency said it had filed the regulation as directed. The Department of Workplace Standards emergency PPE regulation was also discussed, with members asking about HB 6 certification language, and the agency gave the same response. The Department of Insurance regulation would create a $10,000 registration fee and a $1,000 annual licensing fee for pharmacy benefit manager licenses, with an agency amendment exempting PBMs that solely serve workers’ compensation plans. Members asked how many PBMs would be affected and why workers’ compensation PBMs were carved out; the agency said there were 70 registered PBMs total, four solely workers’ comp, and that workers’ comp rates are set by statute and could not absorb the fee. Finally, the Public Service Commission’s pole attachment regulation was summarized as a broadband-expansion measure that speeds application review, increases the number of poles allowed in a single application, and shortens dispute timelines; the commission explained it grew out of earlier legislative direction and subsequent emergency amendments, and the committee adopted the staff amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• These handbooks provide a clear overview of the process, as well as practical tips to help applicants
• In addition to these efforts, the board has prioritized modernizing our licensing and application process
• We have retired annuitants that help with application review and processing.
• So that's exactly the reason why CMTC, in the past 15 years, has processed more than 350,000 applications
• So that's exactly the reason why CMTC, in the past 15 years, has processed more than 350,000 applications

Summary: The joint sunset oversight hearing reviewed five regulatory entities: the Board of Behavioral Sciences, the Board of Psychology, the Physician Assistant Board, the Podiatric Medical Board, and the California Massage Therapy Council. Across the hearing, each entity described recent accomplishments, licensing and enforcement workload, workforce shortages, and efforts to modernize processes. Common themes included streamlining licensure, expanding access to care, addressing telehealth or emerging technology, and balancing consumer protection with workforce needs. For the Board of Behavioral Sciences, members discussed workforce shortages in mental health, supervision barriers, telehealth confidentiality, AI in therapy, interstate compacts, school-based services, and military spouse licensure. The board said it has expanded outreach, improved licensing processes, and created temporary practice authority tracking, while also expressing concern about counseling compacts and emphasizing California-specific law, ethics, and cultural competency. Public commenters supported the board’s work and the possible move to a national MFT exam, while also urging more resources. The Board of Psychology highlighted fee adjustments, streamlined licensure pathways, enforcement process improvements, new CPD requirements, and proposed changes including a psychotherapist-client privilege exception for investigations. Committee members and public witnesses focused heavily on that privilege proposal, with some members opposing it as too broad and privacy-invasive, while the board argued it is needed to obtain records in bias and sexual misconduct cases. The board also discussed workforce shortages, processing improvements, and the use of inactive status for psychological associates. The Physician Assistant Board reported growth in the PA workforce and education programs, SB 697 implementation, and financial pressure from rising enforcement costs. The main policy debate centered on physician-to-PA ratios and practice agreements, with board representatives and many public commenters arguing that current restrictions limit access to care, especially in rural areas, while the California Medical Association defended the need for explicit ratios and agreements. The board also discussed AI, fee increases, and tracking temporary practice authority. The Podiatric Medical Board described licensing and renewal reforms, residency expansion, enforcement support, and budget constraints, while public testimony raised concerns about a proposed fee increase and about reimbursement parity and practice recognition for podiatrists. Finally, the California Massage Therapy Council defended the certification model over licensure, citing lower costs, local government collaboration, anti-trafficking work, and its role in vetting applications and disciplining bad actors; no formal votes or final actions were taken during this portion of the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• of determining public benefit. process for um reviewing applications process for um reviewing applications
• That would be a collaborative process between the applicant, the potentially affected community, and
• > the<00:55:57.680> applicant as a part of this process, the applicant as a part of this
• process, the applicant would<00:55:58.680> have<00:55:58.960> to<00:55:59.080> pay<
• the collaborative process between the collaborative process between the applicant, applicant,

Keywords: 1191, senate, all