Transcript Highlights:

• health transformation funding.
• We prepare our five-year journey through the rural health transformation funding.
• Assuming rural health funds can be used to develop this program and build it in-state, then the expectation
• So we have the opportunity to use rural health funds in that direction.
• So we have the opportunity to use rural health funds in that direction.

Summary: The Rural Health Transformation Committee approved the minutes from its May 28 meeting and received an update from DHW Director Juliet Sharon on the status of the Rural Health Transformation Program. Sharon said the department has posted a public funding-opportunities page with a subscribe feature, is using an expedited committee review process for solicitations and subgrant opportunities, and plans to provide monthly summaries, award information, and federal progress reports. Members asked for clearer access to information on applicants and awards, and Sharon said the department is open to posting more complete listings in SharePoint and to simplifying provider-facing applications. The committee also discussed outreach to rural providers and the need to ensure smaller organizations know about opportunities and can apply within the short timelines. The committee then heard from the Idaho Military Division on its portion of the program. Bureau Chief Wayne Denny said the division is working with DHW on modernizing state communications and emergency systems, including next-generation 911, relocating backup communications infrastructure, coordinating exercises, and supporting rural health extenders such as community health workers and community health EMS providers. Members asked how those roles would function, how counties would participate, and how the work would be sustained after the five-year funding period; Denny said the goal is to demonstrate return on investment so counties and payers can support the services long term. Jennifer White of the State Board of Education described higher education and graduate medical education proposals. She said Idaho’s institutions are coordinating on statewide strategies for rural health workforce training, including mobile simulation, shared clinical infrastructure, learn-in-place programs, and targeted equipment and facilities. She also outlined GME and medical education options, including a strategic rural GME incubator, a rural training site network, and possible support for undergraduate medical education such as expanded seats or the University of Idaho–University of Utah partnership. Members debated sustainability and whether rural health funds should support only GME or broader medical education; some supported using the funds to build Idaho-based training capacity, while others cautioned against creating long-term state obligations without broader legislative approval. No formal votes were taken on those policy questions. In closing, Sharon said the department expects more provider subgrants, ongoing assessments, the first federal reporting deadline at the end of August, and the creation of a governor-appointed rural health transformation task force with legislative and rural representation. The committee tentatively scheduled an additional meeting for August 18 and discussed a later September meeting, likely around September 23-25, to review the federal report and any emerging issues.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as part of this, the program and the funding, the $50 billion in funding, was to be awarded to states
• of rural hospitals.
• , and if we are funding rural in some of those areas, just so this committee can actually get us to see
• If you can train other health professionals in rural markets, they tend to stay in rural markets.
• eat lunch in a rural community.

Summary: The Rural Health Transformation Committee met to receive an overview from Department of Health and Welfare Director Juliet Sharon on Idaho’s Rural Health Transformation Program, created under the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Sharon explained the $50 billion federal program, Idaho’s application timeline, the state’s ranking and award amount, and the five broad initiative areas in the approved plan: technology and access, innovative care models, workforce development, chronic disease and behavioral health, and rural infrastructure/partnerships. She emphasized that the funding is tightly overseen by CMS, with required reporting, compliance checks, sustainability plans, and the risk of losing funds if Idaho does not obligate money or meet milestones on time. She also outlined the state’s plan to hire a 12-person temporary team and to use a mix of RFPs and competitive subgrants, with monthly reporting to the committee and a shared information space to track solicitations, rubrics, and awards. Committee members questioned several parts of the plan, especially scope-of-practice issues tied to the application, the use of telehealth funding, workforce retention, and the survey process used to shape the application. Representative Tanner asked whether the state could continue pursuing scope changes for dental hygienists and physician assistants and whether legislative action could affect funding outcomes; Sharon said the state would continue to evaluate those policies, but that compliance, timely spending, and performance would be the main factors affecting funding. Representative Healy raised concerns about the survey’s heavy use of “other” responses and about telehealth spending, arguing some telehealth uses may not be practical for specialty care. Representative Manwaring requested a shared drive for real-time data and asked for raw survey results and dollar-based funding caps. Sharon agreed to provide follow-up information, including survey data and additional details on funding limits. Chris Jones of Catalyst Policy Group then presented broader policy observations and examples from other states. He praised Idaho’s application, urged the committee to keep the focus on patient-centered rural access, and highlighted ideas such as community health workers, remote patient monitoring, rural training pipelines, value-based care networks, and telehealth models that reduce staffing needs and improve sustainability. He also cautioned against relying on social determinants of health funding, noted the importance of rural training and partnerships, and praised Idaho’s 3.5% tribal set-aside. The committee ended by agreeing to set up a shared information hub with LSO, to expect follow-up materials and possible solicitation drafts soon, and to tentatively plan its next meeting around CMS’s Idaho visit on May 28.

Transcript Highlights:

• matching funds.
• matching funds.
• Funding toward initiatives similar to the Rural Tech Catalyst Fund Initiative cannot exceed the lesser
• Funding toward initiatives similar to the Rural Tech Catalyst Fund Initiative cannot exceed the lesser
• Grant funds.

Bills: HB1623

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Summary: The committee heard House Bill 1623, the appropriations bill tied to North Dakota’s Rural Health Transformation Program, which is funded through a new federal rural health care grant. Senator Bekkedahl explained the bill’s background, the interim committee process that developed it, and the federal conditions attached to the award, including spending deadlines, administrative cost limits, and restrictions on uses such as new construction, supplanting existing funding, and certain other costs. Legislative staff then walked through the seven sections of the bill, including appropriation authority, transfer authority, contingent appropriations for pass-through grants, procurement and public improvement exemptions, recipient reporting, legislative reporting, and immediate effective date. Commissioner Traynor and HHS staff described how the department plans to implement the program, emphasizing that the funding is intended to improve rural access, workforce recruitment and retention, technology and data connectivity, and community health initiatives. They said the department will rely on local applications, technical assistance, templates, listening sessions, and partnerships with providers, schools, public health units, tribal entities, and other community groups. Members asked about reimbursement timing, upfront costs, administrative expenses, sustainability after the five-year grant period, and whether CTE centers, public health units, gyms, grocery stores, and other community partners could participate; the department said yes, within program rules and with a focus on measurable outcomes and sustainability. Several supporters testified in favor. Mental Health America of North Dakota and the Mental Health Advocacy Network supported the bill and urged investment in community-based mental health, crisis response, children’s services, peer support, and mobile crisis teams. HIA Health described the grant as a chance to expand home-based and hospice care, noting that rural providers already have workable models but need funding to scale them. A cybersecurity representative also supported the bill, warning that the large amount of health data and AI-related tools will require strong data protection and professional support. The hearing was closed with no opposition testimony, and the committee announced it would return later in the day for further work on the bill and other measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• For education, the bill directs more than $25 million of new funding to our rural education consortia
• President, this amendment simply updates the funding for the rural critical access hospitals we have
• It creates a dedicated Office of Rural Prosperity, so rural local governments finally have a single place
• It works that way in rural Florida.
• 1972 funding structure, this is what he said... ...of how we fund school choice within that 1972 funding

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several introductions, including recognition of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority’s Founders’ Day and a visiting debate student. The chamber then received and adopted, by a 39-0 vote, a committee report confirming 52 gubernatorial executive appointments to various state, regional, and local boards and commissions. The first major bill was SB 250 on rural communities, described as a broad “Rural Renaissance” package. Sponsor Senator Simon outlined provisions creating an Office of Rural Prosperity, a Renaissance Grant Program for counties facing population loss, housing and transportation investments, additional funding for rural education, and rural health care support. Two amendments were adopted to remove overlapping grant language tied to new federal rural health funding and to update hospital funding estimates. Senators from both parties generally supported the bill, though some raised questions about eligibility for certain rural areas and how funds would be accessed. The bill passed 39-0. The Senate then took up CS/SB 318 on educational scholarship programs. Senator Gates said the bill responds to Auditor General findings by separating scholarship funding from public school funding, requiring student identification and enrollment verification, reducing administrative fees for scholarship funding organizations, requiring annual audits, and directing the Department of Education to develop a competitive selection and performance-based business plan for those organizations. Three amendments were adopted, including changes to the stabilization fund and documentation requirements. Senators from both parties debated transparency, accountability, and implementation concerns, with some also urging future attention to declining-enrollment school districts and the quality of scholarship providers. The bill passed 38-0. At the end of the session, the Senate waived rules to immediately certify SB 250 and CS/SB 318 to the House, welcomed Palm Beach County visitors in the gallery, and adjourned until the next scheduled meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• For education, the bill directs more than $25 million of new funding to our rural education consortia
• President, this amendment simply updates the funding for the rural critical access hospitals we have
• It creates a dedicated Office of Rural Prosperity, so rural local governments finally have a single place
• It works that way in rural Florida.
• 1972 funding structure, this is what he said.

Summary: The Senate convened with a prayer, pledge, and several recognitions, including Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority’s Founders’ Day, a visiting debate student, and later Palm Beach County Day at the Capitol. The chamber then took up committee reports and confirmed a slate of 52 executive appointments by a 39-0 vote. On special order, senators considered SB 250 on rural communities. The bill, described as a “Rural Renaissance” package, would create an Office of Rural Prosperity, establish a Renaissance Grant Program, increase housing and transportation support, and direct new funding to rural education and health care. Two amendments were adopted to update rural health funding and hospital estimates. Members from both parties spoke in support, while raising questions about eligibility and access to grants for certain rural areas. The bill passed 39-0. The Senate then debated CS/SB 318 on educational scholarship programs. The bill responds to Auditor General concerns by separating scholarship funding from public-school funding, requiring student identification and enrollment verification, reducing administrative fees for scholarship funding organizations, tightening payment and audit procedures, and creating a stabilization fund for scholarships. Three amendments were adopted to remove a district declining-enrollment provision from the bill, adjust private-school documentation timing, and clarify withdrawal form and parent-attestation procedures. Senators from both parties supported the measure while noting concerns about oversight, school quality, and future conforming legislation. The bill passed 38-0, and both SB 250 and CS/SB 318 were certified to the House before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• For education, the bill directs more than $25 million of new funding to our rural education consortia
• to strengthen its delivery of rural health care.
• President, this amendment simply updates the funding for the rural critical access hospitals we have
• It creates a dedicated Office of Rural Prosperity, so rural local governments finally have a single place
• It works that way in rural Florida.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several introductions, including recognition of Alpha Kappa Alpha Founders’ Day and a visiting debate student. The chamber then took up a committee report on 52 executive appointments. After explanation by Ethics and Elections Chair Don Gates, the Senate adopted the report and confirmed the appointments by a vote of 39-0. The first major bill was SB 250 on rural communities. Senator Simon described it as a broad rural development package creating an Office of Rural Prosperity, a Renaissance Grant Program for counties losing population, housing and transportation investments, additional funding for rural education, and rural health care measures. Two amendments were adopted to remove overlapping health provisions in light of a new federal rural health grant and to update hospital funding estimates. Senators from both parties spoke in support, while also asking about eligibility and access to grant funds. The bill passed 39-0. The Senate then considered CS/SB 318 on educational scholarship programs. Senator Gates said the bill responds to Auditor General concerns by separating scholarship funding from public school funding, requiring student identification and enrollment verification, reducing administrative fees for scholarship funding organizations, requiring annual audits, and directing the Department of Education to develop a competitive selection and performance plan for those organizations. Three amendments were adopted, including removal of a declining-enrollment provision for later conforming legislation and changes to enrollment documentation and withdrawal procedures. Senators from both parties supported the bill while raising concerns about accountability, student oversight, and school quality. The bill passed 38-0. Afterward, the Senate waived rules so SB 250 and CS/SB 318 could be immediately certified to the House. The session ended with announcements, including Palm Beach County Day at the Capitol and a reminder about the chamber group photograph, followed by adjournment until the next scheduled meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is a one-time $50 billion, five-year pot of funding that is intended to go to all 50 states for rural
• So you will see that we are going to be funding activities in rural communities and from rural providers
• So you will see that we are going to be funding activities in rural communities and from rural providers
• One activity highlighted is using rural health transformation program funds to pilot a system that will
• rural and rural hospitals make sure that rural and rural hospitals and<00:42:03.839><c> clinics</c><

Bills: HF1925

Committee: House Health Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• For education, the bill directs more than $25 million of new funding to our rural education consortia
• President, this amendment simply updates the funding for the rural critical access hospitals we have
• It creates a dedicated Office of Rural Prosperity, so rural local governments finally have a single place
• It works that way in rural Florida.
• 1972... ...view of how we fund school choice within that 1972 funding structure, this is what he said

Transcript Highlights:

• It's 100% federal funding. There is no state match involved in this in this grant funding here.
• The second tranche of funding is what's called the workload funding.
• So expended funds are those funds are on spent by the by the subsequent fiscal year.
• The first funding period will have a total of 20 months to spend the funds while the other funding periods
• Each subsequent funding will include the baseline funding that was already approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what we're doing is we're putting forward a package of sustainable EMS funding for our rural services
• So what we're doing is we're putting forward a package of sustainable EMS funding for our rural services
• </c><00:15:52.880><c> for</c><00:15:53.199><c> rural</c> long-term sustainable funding for rural long-term
• sustainable funding for rural communities<00:15:54.480><c> and</c><00:15:54.800><c> all</c><00:15:54.959
• we need to funding is in rural Minnesota we need to find<00:33:26.640><c> a</c><00:33:26.799><c> way

Summary: The meeting focused on the financial and workforce crisis facing Minnesota emergency medical services, especially ground ambulance providers in rural areas. Michael Johnson of the Minnesota Ambulance Association said EMS serves more than 600,000 Minnesotans a year and argued that reimbursement rates do not cover the cost of readiness, staffing, and 24/7 response. He and others called for ongoing EMS sustainability funding of about $50 million, higher Medicaid reimbursement, and continued support for EMT/paramedic scholarships, first responder training, and high school EMS programs. Senator Grant Hoschild and Representative Jeff Backer echoed the urgency, describing EMS as a moral imperative and emphasizing that rural communities cannot wait for ambulances when lives are at risk. Backer, who also volunteers as an EMT, described staffing shortages, reliance on volunteers, and a recent cardiac arrest response to illustrate the importance of local EMS coverage. Becca Hitch of PUM Area EMS said rural services are paid only when patients are transported, not for responding or treating on scene, and that one-time aid helped but did not solve underlying deficits. Bradley Peterson of the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities said local governments that hold ambulance licenses are being forced to absorb unrecovered costs through property taxes, and that state support is needed to prevent service failures and rising local burdens. In response to questions, speakers said a 2023 statewide study found about $120 million in need, with roughly half tied to operational deficits and half to volunteer support; last year’s aid included about $24 million for rural services and some improvements in volunteer call pay and equipment needs. They also discussed a proposed 10% Medicaid increase, possible special tax district ideas, and the need to target any new funding toward rural services most at risk.

Transcript Highlights:

• FOR EDUCATION, THE BILL DIRECTS MORE THAN 25 MILLION NEW FUNDING TO OUR RURAL EDUCATION CONSORTIUMS.
• Simon: THIS AMENDMENT UPDATES THE FUNDING FOR THE RURAL CRITICAL ACCESS HOSPITALS WE HAVE IN THE BILL
• DO YOU KNOW THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING GOING BACK INTO THOSE PARTICULAR PROGRAMS AS WELL AS THE FUNDING AMOUNTS
• IT CREATES A DEDICATED OFFICE OF RURAL PROSPERITY SO RURAL LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FINALLY HAVE A SINGLE PLACE
• YOU REPRESENT A LOT OF RURAL COUNTIES, SO DO I.

Transcript Highlights:

• The role of the health stabilization fund is significant; many red and blue states recognize that rural
• So let me ask you, in those classifications, and we're looking at a Rural Stabilization Fund, would all
• of our hospitals basically be eligible for this Rural Stabilization Fund?
• Part of the lack of language at this point is in that Rural Stabilization Fund.
• Thank you for all the funding and what you've supported to date, because it's made rural health care

Committee: House Federal Funding Stabilization Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• If we get the rural transformation funds, uh, I know we can't use them for the reimbursement rates, but
• If we get the rural transformation funds, uh, I know we can't use them for the reimbursement rates, but
• If we get the rural transformation funds, uh, I know we can't use them for the reimbursement rates, but
• So here's how I describe the two programs to my constituents: Rural health care transformation funds
• </c> know, if we do get the rural know, if we do get the rural transformation<00:59:10.559><c> funds,

Bills: HB0004

Committee: House Labor, Health & Social Services

Transcript Highlights:

• That is not being funded by rural health, but it's a tool we'll use to connect to the clinical data in
• That is not being funded by rural health, but it's a tool we'll use to connect to the clinical data in
• That is not being funded<00:21:33.520><c> by</c><00:21:34.120><c> by</c><00:21:34.280><c> rural</c><00
• by by rural health, but it's a funded by by rural health, but it's a tool<00:21:36.000><c> we'll</c>
• they don't have a strict restriction on expending these funds specifically in this defined rural area

Bills: HB20 , HB276 , HB644 , HB812 , HB816 , HB916 , HB1131 , HB1247 , HB1518 , HB1525 , HB1537 , HB1541 , HB1546 , HB1553 , HB1562 , HB1565 , HB1566 , HB1576 , HB1577 , HB1591 , HB1605 , HB1612 , HB1613 , HB1614 , HB1618 , HB1620 , HB1650 , HB1656 , HB1658 , HB1661 , HB1664 , HB1668 , HB1676 , HB1707 , HB1711 , HB1713 , HB1715 , HB1718 , HB1727 , HB1749 , HB1756 , HB1774 , HB1776 , HB1801 , HB1802 , HB1805 , HB1813 , HB1815 , HB1831 , HB1838 , HB1853 , HB1854 , HB1859 , HB1863 , HB1871 , HB1872 , HB1918 , HB1920 , HB1952 , HB1965 , HB1966 , HB1967 , HB1969 , HB1972 , HB1973 , HB1974 , HB1975 , HB1980 , HB1985 , HB2005 , HB2023 , HB2031 , HB2033 , HB2062 , HB2113 , HB2114 , HB2116 , HB2138 , HB2139 , HB2156 , HB2158 , HB2159 , HB2171 , HB2208 , HB2268 , HB2270 , HB2272 , HB2273 , HB2276 , HB2289 , HB2310 , HB2315 , HB2335 , HB2338 , HB2339 , HB2340 , HB2343 , HB2361 , HB2384 , HB2387 , SB2338 , SB2431 , SB2438 , SB2593 , SB2907 , SB2671 , SB2321 , SB3084 , SB2401 , SB3033 , SB2972 , SB3032 , SB2806 , SB3014 , SB2108 , SB2981 , SB2973 , SB2423 , SB2078 , SB2322 , SB2397 , SB2896 , SB2088 , SB2347 , SB2408 , SB2970 , SB2851 , SB2713 , SB2697 , SB2312 , SB2192 , SB2363 , SB2530 , SB3028 , SB2024 , SB3007 , SB2599 , SB2596 , SB2662 , SB2930 , SB3334 , SB2378 , SB3019 , SB3231 , SB2240 , SB2372 , SB2175 , SB2046 , SB2298 , SB2922 , SB2835 , SB3263 , SB2174 , SB2128 , SB2006 , SB2489 , SB3134 , SB2982 , SB2425 , SB2849 , SB2797 , SB2795 , SB2575 , SB2521 , SB2765 , SB2386 , SB2852 , SB2022 , SB2117 , SB2277 , SB2387 , SB2688 , SB2885 , SB3132 , SB3219 , SB2169 , SB2591 , SB2090 , SB2983 , SB888 , SB3249 , SB2611 , SB2429 , SB2463 , SB3154 , SB3131 , SB3152 , SB3315 , SB2448 , SB2054 , SB2140 , SB2520 , SB2377 , SB2986 , SB2010 , SB2189 , SB2026 , SB3010 , SB2818 , SB2002

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill makes a significant investment in our rural roads, both providing new funding for SCRAP and
• expands eligibility for rural infrastructure fund grants to include disaster-impacted, unincorporated
• rural areas.
• You have the heart for rural Florida.
• issue because rural Florida, if it doesn't have that voice that champion, this rural Florida, if it

Committee: Senate Fiscal Policy

Summary: The Committee on Fiscal Policy met and first considered CS/SB 7012 on child welfare, presented by Senator Graal. The bill addressed three areas: child welfare workforce shortages, higher-acuity children in out-of-home care, and services/data for commercially sexually exploited children. It would create a CPI and case manager recruitment program aimed at former public safety and service workers, convene a workforce work group, establish a four-year treatment foster care pilot in two judicial circuits identified by DCF based on removal and placement data, and require more detailed, extractable child-level data on commercially sexually exploited children along with a bed capacity study and service gap analysis. Two amendments were adopted: one clarified record retention for redacted assessments, and another attached the appropriation. The committee then heard CS/SB 110 on rural communities from Senator Simon. The bill proposed a broad rural development package, including a state office of rural prosperity, a Renaissance grant program for counties with declining populations, increased housing support, major rural road funding, school consortium funding, and additional health care resources for rural facilities and training. A delete-all amendment was adopted that expanded and refined several provisions, including local sales tax trust fund distributions, county connectivity projects, agritourism marketing support, disaster-impacted rural infrastructure eligibility, insurance and provider eligibility changes, and increased funding for critical access hospitals and rural medical education reimbursement. Both bills drew broad support from local government, education, health care, housing, and rural advocacy representatives. Supporters said the rural bill was especially comprehensive and would help small counties, schools, roads, housing, and health care, while one witness cautioned that road expansion should be balanced with protection of agricultural and natural lands. Senator Bradley and Senator Simon emphasized local control and the importance of strengthening rural Florida without imposing mandates. CS/SB 7012 and CS/SB 110 were both reported favorably, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund.
• Water Project Fund, and Colonial Infrastructure Fund have regular sources.
• hit rural areas.
• So, funded through our general fund, the borrower...
• One of them is for the Housing Trust Fund, where we get recurring funds.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• For the rural hospitals and rural clinics, this particular bill is an expansion of the Rural Health Care
• The changes to the Rural Health Care Delivery Fund statute will do two things.
• So, to summarize, the past Rural Health Care Delivery Fund was for the expansion or initiation of services
• There is additional federal funding that we are applying for to also support rural communities in New
• Health Care Fund.

Committee: Senate Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• First, it creates an Idaho Rural Health Transformation Fund within the state treasury.
• The opportunity for rural health investment through Rural Health Transformation Program funds is a once-in-a-generation
• I see these funds as necessary for our rural hospitals.
• Funding to go to rural hospitals is really essential, and we should do that.
• Do they want this rural health care funding?

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• So the endowment, in funding libraries, it funds jobs.
• They're funded through the, And that is funded. They're funded through the IMLS federally.
• How do we fund rural libraries 20 years from now, 100 years from now?
• I would ask that we strengthen our workforce retention by funding and expanding rural career pipelines
• I would ask that, you know, we strengthen our workforce retention by funding and expanding rural career

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy presentation from the New Mexico Rural Library Initiative in support of fully funding the rural library endowment with an additional $29.5 million. The presenters described rural libraries as essential community infrastructure that provide not only books and internet access, but also early childhood programs, adult education, workforce support, telehealth, disaster response, and civic meeting space. They argued that the endowment would provide stable annual support for staffing and operations, help sustain libraries in very small towns and tribal communities, and support new or developing libraries. Members asked about eligibility, county coverage, how funds are distributed, and whether the state tracks broader outcomes such as job placements or certifications; the presenters said the State Library administers the funds and that the initiative itself is a nonprofit capacity-building organization, not the fund manager. Some members raised concerns about whether an endowment is the best long-term model versus recurring annual appropriations, and about the need for better reporting and state-library involvement. The committee then heard from food bank leaders Jill Dixon and Katie Anderson about food security and its economic impact. They said New Mexico’s five food banks and more than 500 partner agencies serve all 33 counties, distribute over 45 million meals, and rely mostly on philanthropy, with some state and local support. They emphasized that SNAP is a major economic driver, supporting grocery access, jobs, and local spending, and that recent legislative growth funding helped food banks respond to a surge in demand during a SNAP disruption. They also highlighted food banks as community hubs that can connect people to health care, job training, and other services, including through clinic referrals and closed-loop systems. In response to questions, they said food access gaps remain in some rural areas, that clients can generally seek food at other distribution sites without barriers, and that longer-term solutions should include more grocery access, healthy corner stores, and stronger broadband and health care infrastructure. The final presentations came from the Gallup-McKinley County Chamber of Commerce and the Artesia Chamber of Commerce. Gallup-McKinley described a shrinking workforce, youth outmigration, crime, health care shortages, malpractice costs, and gross receipts tax burdens as major barriers to rural economic growth, and urged action on workforce pipelines, housing, public safety, malpractice reform, and tax/regulatory changes. Artesia highlighted its murals, library, sports tradition, oil and gas, agriculture, federal training center, and refinery, while also noting workforce shortages, health care recruitment challenges, housing constraints, and the need for quality-of-life investments and more flexible regulation. The committee also briefly heard a bill presentation proposing a New Mexico-Ireland Trade Commission to promote bilateral trade and investment, especially in technology, agriculture, and energy sectors. No votes were taken because quorum was not reached, and the endorsement item was not acted on.

Transcript Highlights:

• And Oklahoma City, Tulsa, east of Tulsa, 50 miles, that ain't rural. Rural is just what you said.
• It's not rural, but I do believe there are other rural areas.
• It's not rural, but I do believe there are other rural areas.
• Because the funding, I did not have a funding mind in mind.
• We could actually do this with no funding, with existing funding.

Summary: The Public Safety committee met and first considered HB 2993, as amended by a PCS, which would create 11 Council of Government-based positions to help rural law enforcement pursue grants and equipment funding. Members questioned the estimated $1.1 million annual cost, whether the program would mainly benefit rural areas rather than metro counties, and how the money would be administered through Oklahoma Homeland Security. The bill author explained that each COG would receive one funded position and that the money would stay within each COG. The committee voted 7-2 to report the bill favorably. The committee then heard HB 3850, which would require inmates to obtain a high school equivalency diploma as a condition of parole and would place the diploma in the inmate’s release file to improve employability and reduce recidivism. Questions focused on whether the requirement applied to all inmates, how it would affect release eligibility, and whether existing DOC programs already provide similar training. The author said the bill would build on current law and could help reduce waiting lists for equivalency programs. The committee voted 8-1 to pass the bill. Next, HB 3595, with a PCS, would create a revolving fund in the Department of Public Safety to award counties grants for traffic-control public safety equipment, especially for events where vehicles could be used to harm crowds. Members discussed the bill’s dependence on future appropriations and its status as a vehicle for the idea while budget issues are resolved. The committee voted 7-2 to report it out. The committee also unanimously passed HB 3763, requiring two hours of domestic violence training as part of continuing education for law enforcement, and HB 3760, a tax credit for donations to qualified law enforcement foundations, with the author noting a planned amendment to include COGs and certain other nonprofits. The chair announced one more meeting the following week and then adjourned the meeting.