Transcript Highlights:

• I wasn't much interested in much of what the Nazarene's teachings said.
• Her research interests encompass hydroclimatic natural hazards, climate literacy, climate services, and
• And<00:07:10.680> her<00:07:10.760> research<00:07:11.160> interests<00:07:11.560
• > encompass And her research interests encompass And her research interests encompass hydroclimatic
• the word 'calculation.'

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House opened with a devotional by Representative Tom Stevens of Waterbury, who reflected on the Sermon on the Mount as a call to resist exclusion, greed, and coercion and to focus on blessing and care for those in need. After the devotional, the chamber suspended rules to take up Senate Bill 313, relating to transforming Vermont’s career and technical education system, and committed it to the Committee on Education. The House also adopted HCR 241, a concurrent resolution congratulating University of Vermont Distinguished Professor and Vermont State Climatologist Dr. Leslie Ann Dupigny-Giroux on receiving the Manny L. Bhaumik Award for Public Engagement with Science, with members offering remarks about her climate work and public service. On the action calendar, the House passed Senate Bill 157 on recovery residence certification in concurrence with proposal of amendment, and Senate Bill 239 on the child abuse and neglect reporting working group in concurrence with proposal of amendment. During discussion of S. 239, a member explained that the House amendment was a technical correction adding the Vermont School Counselor Association and the Agency of Education as stakeholders for the working group to consult. The House also concurred in the Senate proposal of amendment to House Bill 410, which concerns the calculation of recidivism and other criminology measures; the Judiciary Committee said the Senate change was a clarifying wording revision and supported it. The chamber then moved through announcements, including recognition of visiting family members, a UVM intern, and notice of a caucus discussion on permitting modernization. A member also invited colleagues to view Vermont Railways’ train in Montpelier. The House completed its orders of the day and adjourned until the next morning at 9:30 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm just going to highlight one or two things in the interest of time.
• And in the interest of time, I don't have time to go through that.
• Not sure exactly how they plan to calculate that. They will redistribute them to other states.
• Not sure exactly how they plan to calculate that.
• First of all, Pat, one of my interests early on in this was the procurement process with OMB.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Rural Health Transformation Committee met to receive an extensive briefing from the Department of Health and Human Services on North Dakota’s federal Rural Health Transformation award. HHS leaders Pat Traynor, Donna Auckland, Jonathan Ollum, and Krista Freming described the $198.9 million award, the tight federal timelines for obligating and liquidating funds, and the need for rapid procurement, CMS approval, and technical assistance. They outlined broad funding priorities including connect tech/data, care closer to home, workforce recruitment and retention, and a “Make North Dakota Healthy Again” prevention initiative focused on chronic disease, movement, nutrition, behavioral health, and community connection. They also emphasized that the program cannot fund new buildings or supplant existing funding, and that sustainability will be a key requirement for all projects. The department previewed likely first-round grant opportunities, including recruitment and retention incentives, technical assistance and equipment grants for rural providers, financial analysis support for rural hospitals, and exploration of a unified electronic health record option. Freming also reviewed four policy bills tied to the award: a presidential fitness test, nutrition continuing medical education, the Physician Assistant Compact, and pharmacist scope-of-practice changes, explaining that these policy actions affect future scoring and funding. HHS said it will work with tribes, local public health, hospitals, medical and pharmacy associations, and other partners, and will use a website, listserv, listening sessions, and committee updates to communicate opportunities. Committee members raised concerns about how the money will reach rural residents, whether newspapers and existing local communication networks will be used, how “rural” and “frontier” will be defined, how faith communities might participate in behavioral health efforts, and how HHS will avoid CMS delays and supplanting issues. HHS responded that the focus will be on where the patient lives and on rural community need, that local public health units and existing structures will be part of outreach, and that technical assistance and template applications will help speed approvals. The committee approved the December 4, 2025 minutes, then recessed into divisions for further work on the appropriations bill and the four policy bills, with the full committee set to reconvene the next morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• New Mexico, however, has limited options for interested students to pursue this degree path.
• Chair, because what occurs to me, it'd be interesting to see if there's a correlation to schools with
• I'm interested in the idea of residencies in these fields because we're seeing—thank you all so much
• So are we using both calculations from prior to changed measures? Mr. Chair? Mr.
• It's very interesting, the challenges that are coming out.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I know many of them were required to make tough choices and balance a lot of competing interests.
• There is a calculation that is done at the local level.
• So that's how we ensure that we don't mess up calculations from laws that we've seen in the past.
• So that's how we ensure that we don't mess up calculations from laws that we've seen in the past.
• The rush to judgment is not in the state of California's best interest.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on the final three-party budget agreement and related trailer bills, with the Department of Finance outlining the major budget bill and omnibus measures. Finance described a package built around balancing the state budget amid economic uncertainty, preserving core health and safety-net programs, and making significant ongoing reductions in some state programs. The budget bill included major items such as shifting $1 billion from the General Fund to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for Cal Fire, funding universal transitional kindergarten, deferring some UC and CSU funding, supporting foster care and homelessness programs, providing Proposition 36 implementation funding, and achieving Medi-Cal savings through changes to benefits and eligibility. The committee also heard that votes on the budget bills were expected later in the week and the following Monday. Finance then walked through the trailer bills, including health, human services, early learning, education, resources, energy, transportation, labor, housing, tax, public safety, courts, general government, cannabis, and energy-related measures. Notable provisions included a Medi-Cal enrollment freeze for certain adults, new premiums and benefit changes for some immigrants, child care COLA changes, education funding for literacy, teacher support, universal meals, and community college student support, as well as resource and climate measures affecting Cal Fire staffing and energy permitting. The housing trailer bill drew the most discussion, with provisions on CEQA streamlining, a vehicle miles traveled mitigation banking program, a renters’ credit trigger, and a six-year moratorium on new residential building standards. Members also discussed a film tax credit expansion, cannabis enforcement funding, a tribal police pilot program, and changes to tax policy, including military retirement income exclusions and wildfire settlement payment exclusions. Committee members largely praised the staff and the budget process, but several raised concerns and asked detailed questions, especially about the housing trailer bill’s new wage standards, tribal consultation provisions, and possible effects on prevailing wage protections. Finance explained that the housing language was intended to set wage floors for market-rate projects receiving CEQA streamlining, with different county-based tiers and a notwithstanding clause preserving existing prevailing wage laws. Members also questioned the size and timing of funding for the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, Clean Cars for All, Proposition 36, and the film tax credit expansion. Other members highlighted support for public safety, veterans’ tax relief, child care providers, housing production, and higher education, while some expressed concern that the budget’s policy changes were being negotiated too quickly or without enough stakeholder input.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cut was calculated. That's a little different for other state agencies.
• It was included in the calculation of the 7%.
• Was calculated by taking the current year $125 million cut, adding it back into our base, and then calculating
• So our cut was calculated in a slightly different way than other states.
• Resident interest in Berkeley, LA, San Diego, and even Irvine seems to have a lot of interest from non-resident

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . ...the state and local tax deduction to $40,000 from the current $10,000, and the deduction of interest
• In my view, simple conformity is everything that occurs before the calculation of federally adjusted
• taxes is you take your federally adjusted... ...conformity is everything that occurs before the calculation
• So everything that occurs before the calculation of federally adjusted gross income, all those subtractions
• After you've done everything, you've calculated your federally adjusted gross income, you may also, after

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The caucus focused on HB 2153, a tax conformity bill that would align Arizona statute with the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026, including retroactive provisions affecting tax year 2025. Staff explained that the bill excludes three federal provisions from H.R. 1: the additional $6,000 senior deduction, the increase in the state and local tax (SALT) deduction to $40,000, and the deduction for interest on new car loans. It also adds several Arizona-specific provisions, including a $6,000 deduction for certain retirement distributions for taxpayers age 65 or older, a $6,000 deduction for Roth IRA contributions, an increase in the dependent tax credit from $100 to $125, and a deduction for child and dependent care expenses above the federal credit. JLBC’s fiscal note was cited as a negative $441.3 million in year one, declining over the next two years. Chairman Livingston and other Republican members argued the bill was needed immediately because the Department of Revenue had already issued tentative forms assuming full conformity, creating confusion for taxpayers and businesses. They said the state needed a signed law as soon as possible to avoid amended returns, inconsistent filing rules, and uncertainty for small businesses. Livingston emphasized that the bill was intended to protect small businesses from having to keep two sets of books and said he was advising taxpayers not to file until the issue was resolved. Members also discussed the practical impact on small businesses, citing testimony that Arizona has about 700,000 small businesses employing well over a million people. Several exchanges clarified the difference between the governor’s November direction to the Department of Revenue and the bill before the committee. Staff explained that DOR normally assumes “simple conformity” and that the governor’s directive attempted to add “below-the-line” deductions through a worksheet, but that those items still require statutory authorization. Members said the governor’s action was confusing and characterized it as a press release rather than binding law. The committee also discussed the child care provisions, describing them as a federal-style deduction Arizona has not previously adopted and as one of the main new benefits in the bill. The caucus ended without a vote, and members were told the floor would begin at 10 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm interested in what the UC general funds are.
• So, if actually, the cost per student which you calculated by dividing the number of students, or dividing
• Now, granted, when you calculate the marginal cost of a student, does that include the increase in costs
• We can say we'd like to see UC grow by X number of students and calculate, using multiple tools that
• Four decades ago by the LAO and Department of Finance to try to reach a reasonable way to calculate how

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance, chaired by Assemblymember Alvarez, held a hearing focused on University of California budget issues. The committee reviewed UC core operations funding, enrollment trends, federal funding threats, Title IX implementation, and basic needs support. Major themes included the end of the Governor’s multi-year UC compact, the state’s fiscal outlook, UC’s enrollment growth, and the potential impacts of federal policy changes on research, health care, and student aid. On core funding, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to continue compact-related support, defer some payments, and authorize a cash-flow loan. The LAO recommended a smaller or no base increase, earmarking some funds for capital renewal, retiring deferrals when possible, avoiding new compact commitments, and funding UC annually rather than through compacts. UC argued that the compact has supported enrollment growth, student services, and operating costs, but said campuses face rising expenses, structural deficits, and limited reserves. Members questioned the effects of deferrals on students and discussed the need to prioritize less harmful reductions if cuts become necessary. The enrollment panel focused on UC’s growth in California resident enrollment and the nonresident replacement plan at Berkeley, UCLA, and UC San Diego. The LAO recommended maintaining the current enrollment target, funding enrollment separately from base increases, pausing the nonresident replacement plan, and holding enrollment flat in 2027-28. UC said it has already met compact enrollment goals, grown California undergraduate enrollment by about 18,800 students, and that further growth depends on ongoing state support. The committee also discussed the cost of enrollment growth, possible differential nonresident tuition, and a reporting request for UC to analyze the nonresident replacement approach; the motion to adopt supplemental reporting language passed. The hearing also covered federal funding risks, with the LAO and UC warning that federal changes could affect research grants, medical center reimbursement, and student financial aid. UC said research cancellations and suspensions are disrupting labs and graduate student support, while federal health policy changes could increase uncompensated care at UC hospitals. In the Title IX update, UC described its systemwide civil rights structure, annual student training, and campus support offices, and members praised the work while asking about ongoing concerns and intersegmental collaboration. The final basic-needs item began with Finance stating the Governor’s budget does not change ongoing support, but the transcript cuts off before further discussion or action.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think this is an interesting approach and one that has some urgency with the coming cycle.
• By aligning these fee calculations with the intent of the Legislature, the bill promotes consistent,
• Okay, yeah, well, I think what's kind of interesting about this is I don't really know enough.
• It would be interesting to learn just how big a lot of these ADUs are.
• I think calculating these impact fees fairly and proportionately makes sense and is aligned with the

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing-related bills, with most of the discussion focused on streamlining housing production, preserving affordable housing, and reducing barriers to ADUs and EV charging in HOAs. SB 457 would direct HCD to develop statistical formulas based on historical development data to help cities complete housing element site inventories; supporters said it would replace costly parcel-by-parcel analysis with a more realistic, data-driven approach, while the California Building Industry Association raised concerns. SB 1091 would create a Community Anti-Displacement and Preservation Program to help acquire and preserve unsubsidized affordable rental housing; it drew broad support from housing nonprofits, local governments, and committee members who emphasized prevention and preservation, and it was advanced with a motion and second. SB 1117 would clarify that ADU impact fees above 750 square feet are charged only on the portion above that threshold; supporters said current practice creates a fee cliff that discourages ADUs, while cities, counties, special districts, and fire groups opposed it over infrastructure and service funding concerns. The committee members were split, but the bill ultimately advanced on a 10-0 vote with two not voting. The committee also considered SB 904, which would codify and expand reporting and coordination practices used after wildfire disasters to speed rebuilding and identify permitting or code barriers. The author and supporters argued that future wildfire recoveries should not depend on ad hoc executive orders, while some members questioned whether the bill was duplicative of existing streamlining laws; it passed on a roll call after discussion. SB 1267 would require EV charger installers in HOAs to indemnify associations during installation and make homeowners liable for costs arising from use of a privately owned charger; HOA representatives and EV advocates supported it, the California Association of Realtors said it would remove opposition once amendments were in print, and the bill advanced unanimously. SB 1361 would prevent local governments from taking actions to avoid SB 79 transit-oriented housing requirements at existing or planned transit stops; L.A. Metro, labor groups, and housing advocates supported it as protecting transit investments and jobs, while the City of Burbank opposed it, and it was approved on a 9-0 vote. The committee also took up consent items SB 722 and SB 1426, which were approved without controversy.

Transcript Highlights:

• But after seeing the number of slides and also gauging the interest.
• You have to pay back paid claim with interest.
• So the reason I'm interested in this question is I have of my son.
• We calculate our return on investment for every public fund.
• So that's how we calculate our return on investment.

Transcript Highlights:

• does not exclude unpaid time, compensatory time, and non-observed holiday makeup hours in that calculation
• and that is a calculation and that is a clarification<00:04:45.360> also<00:04:45.800> two
• I would say that it would be in the interest of the public that we serve if we were to table this for
• But having a child in this program is not a financial interest, and that's the standard that the House
• But having a child in this program is not a financial interest, and that's the standard that the House

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Committee on Rules and Legislative Administration met with a quorum and took up a series of annual housekeeping resolutions governing House operations and member/staff policies. The committee heard brief explanations from House Controller Pete Squa and HR Director Kelly Knight on each item, including the 2025 P1 service award policy, donated time policy, compensatory time and time card policy, interim/per diem classification, legal fees policy, staff photo/digital image fees, chaplain compensation, leadership compensation, member expense reimbursement, member stationery allocation, postage and digital constituent communications, member communication reimbursement, alcohol consumption policy, remote work policy, drug use policy, and the high school page/internship program reimbursement policy. Most resolutions were adopted without controversy, often with only minor clarifications or no changes from prior years. Notable changes included clarifying donated time limits, refining compensatory time language, updating leadership compensation positions to reflect the new organization, adding a Greater Minnesota mileage option in the member expense reimbursement policy, removing obsolete long-distance reimbursement language from member communication reimbursements, updating the alcohol policy location reference to the Centennial Office Building, and increasing high school page reimbursement from $10 to $15 per day. The committee also noted the House roster staff roster is on file with the controller as required by House Rule 8.20. Two items were set aside for further review: the P5 legal fees resolution was tabled after members raised questions about prior use of the policy and whether the language should be revised in light of past circumstances, and the R5 postage/digital constituent communications resolution was also tabled after Representative Schultz proposed allowing members to choose either 100% digital communications or a 70% digital/30% postage split. The R9 drug use policy was likewise tabled after Representative Engen asked whether changes in state marijuana law affected the policy. All other resolutions brought to a vote were approved and adopted, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a good gauge of what the interest is.
• No one was interested in that.
• I think that's so important and interesting. **Mr.
• It's interesting being on the other side of the dais.
• That would probably yield a lower interest rate for us.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 63, passed this last session, changed the calculation of the at-risk index in the SEG, which
• In terms of Magdalena, the prior at-risk index views federal poverty data, I think, to calculate the
• They were getting less funding for those students, which is interesting because we haven't heard much
• I just wanted to add that I think that's an important part of how those growth units are calculated.
• And per capita, this is really interesting.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:13:04.640> They're uh calculate their rents. They're uh calculate their rents.
• I have numbers on overall interest I have numbers on overall interest earned.<00:59:18.200> So
• Um, so I'm glad they're collecting interest.
• This $57 million worth of interest.
• Um, so I'm glad they're collecting interest.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Amendment barcode number 951-00 specifies that the prohibition on using ADS-B for calculating, generating
• Do you use the latest data to calculate landing fees currently? Yes. So we do use.
• Do you use the latest data to calculate landing fees currently? Yes.
• So we do use. calculate landing fees currently? Yes, so we do use the ADSB data.
• FBOs might, for their vested interest, offer discounts and things of that nature.

Bills: S0086, S0422, S0706, S1054, S1670

Keywords: unauthorized aliens, commercial motor vehicles, safety regulations, civil penalties, law enforcement, ADS-B, automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast, aviation, airports, airport fees, landing fees, departure fees, touch-and-go landing, general aviation, pilot privacy, airspace radius, aircraft tracking, surveillance data, Florida Statutes chapter 330, Part 91

Summary: The Senate Committee on Transportation met and considered several bills, beginning with CS/SB 86 on commercial motor vehicles operated by unauthorized aliens. The sponsor described the bill as a highway safety measure requiring commercial drivers to be lawfully present, hold a valid CDL, read English, and communicate with law enforcement, with vehicle impoundment, civil penalties, and out-of-service orders for violations. After questions about impacts on carriers and interstate operations, the committee adopted an amendment and reported the bill favorably, with one no vote. The committee then heard CS/SB 706, which would preempt naming of major commercial service airports to the state and rename Palm Beach International Airport as Donald J. Trump International Airport. An amendment added FAA approval, trademark authorization, and a flexible implementation period for Palm Beach County; county representatives supported the amendment and bill. The committee also approved CS/SB 1670 on the Outsider specialty license plate after an amendment reduced the Huber Brothers Foundation’s share of proceeds from 25% to 10%. Next, the committee considered CS/SB 1054, dealing with traffic infractions resulting in crashes with another vehicle. The bill would impose escalating fines and license suspensions for crashes caused by running red lights or stop signs, and require bodily injury insurance for a year when injury results. A clarifying amendment limited the insurance requirement to one year, and the bill was reported favorably after supportive testimony from law enforcement and advocacy groups. The final major bill was CS/SB 422 on automated dependent surveillance broadcast (ADS-B) data; it would bar use of ADS-B information to calculate or collect certain landing-related fees. Supporters argued the technology should remain focused on aviation safety and warned against false invoices and discouraging pilot training, while airport representatives said they currently use the data for fee collection and wanted further discussion. After an amendment narrowing the bill’s application, the committee reported CS/SB 422 favorably. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the first chart that I’m really interested in is on page seven.
• And I'm trying to calculate in my head how big of growth is that based on the $15 billion of actual 2025
• But I didn't calculate it on my calculator, just doing that in my head. Sorry.
• But I didn't calculate it on my calculator. Just doing that in my head. Sorry.
• Calculated on my calculator. Just doing that in my head. Sorry.

Keywords: 1182, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• I might just say, in the interest of, I think a good bill going forward, knowing that 10% is only on
• Uh, I can, with a few minutes, calculate that for you.
• Maybe it'd be best if I just calculated those for you quickly. All right, sounds good. >> Madam?
• <00:35:42.600> that with a few minutes, I can calculate that with a few minutes, I can calculate
• just calculated those for you quickly. just calculated those for you quickly.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 4738 was laid over for possible inclusion in the 2026 tax bill. Representative Keeler presented the bill as a funding source for Minnesota’s Safe Harbor program, arguing that trafficking and sexual exploitation are statewide problems and that current shelter and housing resources are insufficient. She and several supporters emphasized that the program serves youth across greater Minnesota, not just the metro, and that state and federal funding pressures make additional support necessary. Testifiers from Place Called Home/Life House, The Link, the City of Minneapolis, and a survivor all described the impact of Safe Harbor and related shelter programs. They cited data on youth served, bed nights, mental health services, and high unmet need, including waitlists and youth turned away because programs are full. Testimony stressed that stable housing and trauma-informed services help survivors recover and move toward education, employment, and family stability. One committee member, Representative Davis, objected to the proposed funding source, saying he would not support taking money from women’s sports scholarships and urging a different source. The bill’s tax mechanism was described as ending the sales tax exemption for preferred seating, suite licenses, and related amenities at athletic and entertainment events. Alec Williams of We Make Minnesota supported the proposal as a fair way to raise revenue from high-end discretionary purchases for a public purpose. Committee discussion also focused on the size of the revenue estimate and the breakdown of the impact, with nonpartisan staff saying roughly 85% would come from suite licenses, 10% from collegiate seating, and 5% from amenities. Representative Smith and others framed the issue as both a tax and moral question, and the chair moved the bill to be laid over.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, in the interest of time, I am going to pair down my comments slightly.
• So, in the interest of time, I am going to pair down my comments slightly.
• So, in the interest of time, I am going to pair down my comments slightly.
• benefit based on of the how we calculate benefit based on a<00:26:56.400> dollar<00:26:56.720
• that because the state I sure calculate that because the state I sure I'm<00:28:38.640> sure<

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 936, an author’s bill requiring cost-benefit analysis before agencies move forward with major rulemaking. Chair Nash moved the bill, the A2 author’s amendment was adopted, and the bill was then discussed as amended. The sponsor said the goal was not to eliminate rulemaking, but to require agencies to “show their work” by analyzing costs, benefits, and assumptions before rules are adopted. Supporters, including representatives from Americans for Prosperity and the Pacific Legal Foundation, argued the bill would improve transparency, uniformity, and accountability in rulemaking. They cited federal and other state models, especially Virginia, and said similar requirements already exist in several states. They also pointed to public support for requiring cost-benefit analysis and said the bill could help agencies avoid costly or poorly thought-out regulations, reduce litigation risk, and improve legislative oversight through notice to committees and publication of preliminary and final analyses. Several members raised concerns. Representative Luger Nikolai said cost-benefit analysis is already part of existing law through SONARs and that the legislature, not agencies, should be the first line of review; she also worried the bill would force dollar valuations on qualitative factors such as accessibility. Representative Craft said the bill could allow unelected officials to negate policy choices already made by the legislature if benefits do not exceed costs. Representative Fryberg said the bill appears to require full analysis even for minor housekeeping rules and may overemphasize dollar-based benefits. Chair Nash and supporters responded that the bill is meant to impose a uniform check on agencies and that many current rules already operate without sufficient legislative oversight. The discussion ended with members expressing both support and opposition, and a roll call was requested, though no final vote was included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, when you run the calculated outcome for the quadratic equation, your answer's going to be wrong.
• So, when you run the calculated outcome for the quadratic equation, your answer's going to be wrong.
• So, when you run the calculated outcome for the quadratic equation, your answer's going to be wrong.
• Next up we'll move to Representative Howard. run the calculated uh outcome for the run the calculated
• in<01:01:00.120> supporting positioned and interested in supporting positioned and interested

Bills: HF3279, HF1879, HF1417, HF2462

Keywords: housing, sales tax, homeownership, rent assistance, community stability, education, counseling, financial assistance, housing development, culturally appropriate services, HF1417, manufactured home parks, manufactured housing, mobile home parks, housing development fund, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, MHFA, infrastructure grants, infrastructure loans, affordable housing

Transcript Highlights:

• That's 7.5% interest if you need $50, that's 15% interest. That is still high.
• There is no interest. There is no interest. There is no interest.
• They don't run interest rates.
• There is just no interest.
• This is... not an interest-based proposal, and it's not an interest-based model.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then we turn to the best-interest factors, and we use those best-interest factors to decide why should
• A year, that's going to take child support into a different calculation.
• And the purpose of the best-interest factors and a family court is to get to what is best for all the
• The thing that is interesting about that one is if the court finds that the parent holding on to the
• Interested in kind of seeing more.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior meeting minutes, and reviewed a memorandum compiling member suggestions for possible legislation. The memo grouped ideas into topics including creation of a family court, expanded education for parents, attorneys, and judges, expedited hearings for parenting-time violations, limiting law enforcement involvement in custody disputes, creating parenting time expediters, and adopting more uniform court procedures. Members also discussed whether to form subcommittees, but the task force decided to continue working as a full committee rather than create subcommittees at this time. The committee then heard testimony from Dr. John Perez, a mental health professional, who described his personal custody experience and his professional work with families he believes have been affected by parental alienation. He argued for stronger education, faster court response times, and better tools to address intentional interference with parenting time. Members questioned him about his case history, the concept of parental alienation, and whether specialized family courts or judges with family-law training could help. Dr. Perez said a dedicated family court and faster hearings would likely have helped his situation. The task force spent substantial time discussing the possible creation of a family court. Judge Hovey supported the idea of a specialized family court or at least a study of one, saying family cases are distinct from ordinary adversarial litigation and that judges with family-law experience could better handle them. Several members agreed that a family court could improve consistency, expertise, and speed, but others cautioned that the task force’s current directive is focused on enforcement of existing orders rather than broader custody policy, and noted that voters had previously rejected equal shared parenting proposals. The group also discussed expedited procedures for parenting-time disputes, with Judge Hovey suggesting a 30-day hearing timeline may be workable. On education, members generally supported requiring parents to complete a parenting education course and adding educational materials explaining court process, child support, and what judges can and cannot do. Mr. McLean suggested a short instructional video for litigants and more family-law education for judges and attorneys, while Ms. Moldenhauer said education could be incorporated into scheduling orders or mediation orders. Members also discussed the Parents Forever course, including whether it should be mandatory in all counties and whether cost is a barrier; no vote was taken on any of these proposals.