Transcript Highlights:

• SD1, encouraging Hawaii insurers and the Hawaii Property Insurance Association to reduce insurance costs
• documents that small modular plant costs documents that small modular reactors<00:17:49.200> are<
• are are one of the biggest factors costs are are one of the biggest factors and,<00:20:59.840> um
• of energy is is kind of that point cost of energy is is kind of that point in<00:21:12.080> time,
• Right now, uh, levelized<00:21:16.240> cost<00:21:16.400> of<00:21:16.640> energy

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Commerce and Consumer Protection met on April 16, 2025, and heard three resolutions. STR 57 SD1 urged Congress to create a national reinsurance program to address insurance impacts from catastrophic natural disasters; there was no public testimony, and the committee later recommended passage without amendment. STR 198 SD1 encouraged Hawaii insurers and the Hawaii Property Insurance Association to pursue subrogation claims against polluters to reduce insurance costs for residents; again, there was no public testimony, and the committee recommended passage without amendment. The committee spent most of its hearing on STR 136 SD1/HD1, which would create a Hawaii State Energy Office nuclear energy working group to study advanced nuclear power technologies. The Public Utilities Commission and State Energy Office provided written testimony and answered questions. Testimony from 350 Hawaii, Energy Justice Network, and an individual witness opposed the measure, arguing nuclear power and small modular reactors are too expensive, unproven, slow to deploy, create unresolved safety and waste issues, and do not align with Hawaii’s renewable energy goals. Opponents also criticized the measure’s amendment process, saying it replaced the original contents without adequate public notice. During decision-making, the committee adopted the recommendation to pass STR 57 SD1 unamended and STR 198 SD1 unamended. For STR 136 SD1/HD1, the committee adopted a recommendation to pass the measure with amendments, including changing it to a one-year working group with an interim report in 2026 and a final report before the 2027 Legislature. The motion passed with one recorded no vote and some excused members, and the meeting adjourned afterward.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, higher pharmacy costs.
• increased caseload, increased pharmacy costs, and higher costs in managed care and fee-for-service.
• increased caseload, increased pharmacy costs, and higher costs in managed care and fee-for-service.
• And the cost of the asset test elimination, the original estimate, was a bit lower than what actual costs
• We keep hearing about how much Medi-Cal expansions cost, but not enough about the cost of cutting them

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held the first of several hearings on the Governor’s May Revision for health care, with opening remarks focused on the state’s projected $12 billion deficit, looming federal Medicaid changes, and the potential impact on Medi-Cal, public health, reproductive health, and safety-net providers. Several members criticized the proposal as balancing the budget on vulnerable Californians, while others defended the need for cost containment and questioned the administration’s assumptions. The chair set ground rules for respectful, focused questioning and outlined three topics: the Medi-Cal proposals, Proposition 35, and Proposition 56. DHCS Director Michelle Baas presented the May Revision’s Medi-Cal package, saying the department’s budget totals $200.6 billion overall, including $45.2 billion General Fund, and that the proposals are intended to address rising caseloads, pharmacy costs, and managed care spending. She described proposed changes for adults with unsatisfactory immigration status, including a freeze on new full-scope enrollment for those 19 and older, $100 monthly premiums beginning in 2027, elimination of adult dental and long-term care coverage, removal of PPS/RAP payments to FQHCs and rural health clinics for that population, and a pharmacy rebate aggregator. Other proposals included eliminating certain OTC drug classes, removing GLP-1 coverage for weight loss, prior authorization and step therapy changes, reinstating the Medi-Cal asset test, eliminating acupuncture as an optional benefit, allowing utilization management for hospice, raising the managed care minimum medical loss ratio to 90%, reducing PACE capitation rates toward the midpoint of the actuarial range, eliminating the skilled nursing facility workforce and quality incentive program, and suspending the SNF backup power requirement. The LAO said the revised Medi-Cal spending estimate is about $2.5 billion higher than the Governor’s Budget in the budget year, and that the increase appears driven more by higher per-enrollee costs than by caseload alone. The LAO said the budget solutions are concentrated in a few areas, are largely ongoing, and should be considered in light of federal uncertainty, but suggested the Legislature could explore alternatives such as more targeted income thresholds for the undocumented expansion and simpler asset-test rules. Department of Finance officials said the proposals are difficult but necessary to address a third consecutive deficit and rising Medi-Cal costs. Members then pressed the administration on the methodology and impacts of the proposals, especially the enrollment freeze, premiums, asset test, hospice controls, PACE reductions, and the elimination of benefits and provider payments. No votes or formal actions were taken at this hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, and what this bill does, it gives them the authority to make that allocation.
• Uh, and what this bill does, it gives them the authority to make that allocation.
• the authority to make that allocation. the authority to make that allocation.
• <00:20:25.840> I<00:20:26.080> mean those fees and all those costs.
• I mean those fees and all those costs.

Bills: HB259, HB206, HB207, HB259, HB206, HB207

Keywords: income tax credit, tax incentive, recruitment, remote work, remote worker, recruited worker, rural counties, small counties, county population tiers, opportunity zone, teacher recruitment, nurse recruitment, law enforcement recruitment, workforce development, economic development, relocation incentive, Alabama Department of Revenue, nonrefundable tax credit, tax carryforward, state income tax

Transcript Highlights:

• The majority of these resources are being allocated into parts of the state where it is harder and more
• And when they do, it is cost prohibitive for many residents.
• are being allocated into parts of<00:02:03.520> the<00:02:03.680> state<00:02:03.840><
• And when they do, it<00:02:59.120> is<00:02:59.280> cost<00:03:00.080> prohibitive
• c><00:03:00.640> for<00:03:00.800> many it is cost prohibitive for many it is cost prohibitive

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• of costs in both cost causation and rate case expenses.
• This method of allocating costs provides a cost avoidance and signal to large consumers that can intentionally
• costs.
• Scenario 4 is a little different in how T-cost is allocated. talking about were these lighter costs and
• But my larger point was just the concern about ensuring that cost allocation more carefully looked at

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• How much is it going to cost them?
• The cost of implementation account was initially created for CARB to recover its costs related to the
• So can you elaborate on how an actual reasonable cost...
• There's a high cost to replace them.
• And so the cost... ...are not used very often, and so the cost to replace them would be high, given how

Summary: The committee hearing focused heavily on CARB’s broad trailer bill request for regulatory fee authority. Finance and CARB argued the proposal would let CARB develop fees to recover reasonable costs for implementing and enforcing regulations, while the LAO recommended rejection because the authority was too broad, could apply to an entire division of code, and would delegate core legislative taxing/fee-setting power without enough guardrails. Members from both parties raised concerns about the breadth of the authority, accountability, affordability impacts, and whether the Legislature would be put in an up-or-down position after CARB had already developed regulations. CARB responded that fees would still go through a budget change proposal and legislative approval before collection, and cited existing examples such as transport refrigeration units and commercial harborcraft fees. The committee then reviewed CARB’s request for permanent resources to implement SB 905 on carbon capture, utilization, storage, and carbon dioxide removal. CARB said the Legislature had previously authorized limited-term positions and funding, but it had struggled to recruit and retain staff with specialized regulatory and technical expertise, and that the work had included pre-rulemaking contracts, technology review, and permit-related preparation. Members questioned the pace of work, the use of limited-term positions, and whether additional permitting authority would be needed. CARB said it hoped to begin rulemaking later in the year if permanent resources were approved. Members also discussed the cap-and-trade spending plan, noting lower-than-expected auction revenues but higher interest earnings, and the need to monitor the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and possible May Revision changes. The committee then heard overviews of the zero-emission vehicle package, the Community Air Protection Program, demand-side grid support, and e-bike incentives. CARB described ongoing investments in community-based transportation equity, drayage trucks, harbor craft, and other clean technology demonstrations, while members pressed on affordability, program duplication, and whether enough funding was being directed to incentive programs. No formal votes were taken during the portion provided, and the chair repeatedly indicated that the hearing was intended to surface concerns for later budget negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• But what are the key cost drivers for universities?
• But there's a cost with that.
• The costs around 1.1 million dollars.
• The been a Quest scholarship program cost the university around $354,000 and the homeless waiver costs
• We're charging around. bottom 10% in terms of the cost.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Housing cost burden means that you're paying more than 30% of your income toward your housing costs.
• have the highest housing cost burden.
• , you know, the state costs go up proportionately. ...put them in an institution, and then our costs,
• And it's way more cost efficient.
• So it wasn't that the money was allocated just to allocate it, but the projects were definitely, the

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met as the Regulatory Division of the budget section and received updates on several Industrial Commission-related agencies and programs. Legislative Council first reviewed base budget materials, then the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency reported on its current appropriation and staffing, noting that its new FTEs were being filled gradually and that it remained largely funded through special and federal funds. Agency leaders described homeownership lending, loan servicing, and housing incentive fund activity, including below-market mortgage rates, down payment assistance, and a growing servicing portfolio that has increased workload but not yet required additional FTEs. Housing Finance also detailed use of the Housing Incentive Fund and homeless grant dollars. Officials said the multifamily HIF round drew more than $73 million in requests and awarded $25 million, while the single-family program supported rural development and community land trusts. Homeless grant funding was split between emergency shelter, prevention, and rapid rehousing, with performance-based scoring used to renew or reallocate awards. Members discussed housing affordability, aging households, rental assistance, and the need to coordinate housing and site-preparation messaging with Commerce. The agency asked that HIF, single-family, and homeless funding be maintained or increased in the next session. The Department of Mineral Resources then presented its budget and operations update. Staff said the agency was on track financially, had filled most of its new reclamation FTEs, and was not expecting major litigation costs beyond normal late-biennium invoices. The director reviewed agency initiatives including Project North Star IT modernization, organizational restructuring, succession planning, rulemaking, and implementation of the development incentive well tax program and critical minerals rules. He also discussed oil and gas activity, explaining that longer laterals, especially three- and four-mile wells and the first five-mile spacing case, are helping keep production relatively flat even as rig counts ease. Members asked about gas capture, hedging, break-even prices, and the effects of Iran and Venezuela on oil markets. The committee also heard about enhanced oil recovery grants and the Pipeline Authority. The EOR program’s $25 million appropriation was fully allocated to six projects, with total awards reaching about $45.1 million when other fund balances were included, subject to a possible 5% reduction if federal DOE money does not materialize. Officials said the projects are public, reimbursement-based, and will produce results over the next several years. Finally, the Pipeline Authority outlined natural gas transmission projects, including the imminent Bakken Express line and the proposed Bakken East project, which WBI was selected to advance after an Industrial Commission RFI process. The project is moving through open season, survey permission, and regulatory work, with in-service dates projected for 2029 and 2030.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:54:30.599> so keep up with ongoing operating costs so keep up with ongoing operating costs
• children's mental health the total cost children's mental health the total cost of<01:15:06.719>
• immediate utilization of any allocated immediate utilization of any allocated funds<01:15:48.400
• Prevent or mitigate remediation later in their lives, reducing special education costs today and costs
• The reason this works is the cost of land in a township is considerably less than the cost of land in

Bills: HF2148, HF2693, HF2542, HF1141, HF1770, HF1489, HF1709, HF244, HF1266, HF807, HF2619, HF1340

Keywords: affordable housing, local control, revolving loan fund, community partnerships, Minnesota housing policy, housing, locally controlled housing, Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, housing infrastructure bonds, state bonds, bonding bill, supportive housing, permanent supportive housing, homelessness, veterans housing, senior housing, manufactured home parks, community land trust, single-family housing, multifamily housing

Transcript Highlights:

• a studio apartment costs about $2,000 a month.
• potential reduction of those costs, improves project feasibility, reduces total development costs by
• State funding programs are to deliver housing, and housing costs more than affordable housing costs more
• They're collected at the cost of service.
• And definitely the rising cost of living. Housing is ridiculous. Cost of living is ridiculous.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision proposals focused on housing, homelessness, and related administrative changes, and took no votes, holding items open for later action. Item 1 would realign staff positions and resources as part of the Governor’s housing and homelessness reorganization, including shifting two Cal ICH positions to HCD, moving one Cal ICH position for communications/external affairs, and authorizing a chief deputy director at the new Housing Development Finance Committee. Administration witnesses said the changes were technical and net zero-cost, while the LAO recommended approval but asked for clarification on funding for the chief deputy. Several senators questioned whether the staffing shifts would weaken Cal ICH’s homelessness work and whether adding communications capacity was appropriate without new housing funding. Item 2 proposed creating a $100 million Disaster Rebuilding Fund at CalHFA, with $56 million General Fund and $44 million in existing National Mortgage Settlement funds, to support disaster-impacted homeowners through tools such as loan loss guarantees and interest rate buy-downs. CalHFA said the fund would help homeowners bridge the gap between insurance proceeds and rebuilding costs and would work through approved lenders. The LAO raised concerns about the lack of alternatives in the proposal, the broad discretion left to CalHFA in program design, and the General Fund cost. Senators pressed for more detail on eligibility, equity safeguards, lender oversight, and how many homeowners would actually benefit, with some warning the proposal was too open-ended and could miss the most vulnerable households. Item 3 addressed trailer bill language for HAP Round 7, including a proposed $500 million General Fund allocation tied to new accountability measures, pro-housing designation requirements for 14 large cities and 11 counties, local match requirements, streamlined system performance metrics, and recapture/reallocation of unspent funds. HCD said the proposal would avoid a new application process by treating Round 7 as additional disbursements of Round 6 and would provide technical assistance to jurisdictions. The LAO and several senators questioned the timing, the burden of pro-housing designation and local match requirements, the vagueness of some standards, and whether the proposal would delay rather than speed up funding. Members also debated whether the trailer bill preserved or weakened existing homelessness accountability metrics and whether the approach was too complicated given local budget pressures and ongoing homelessness needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• that are allocated there.
• The total cost for both of those projects... To take three years to build.
• along with the contractor cost.
• So townships had 180 applications, 44% of the overall cost.
• It's a total cost of $18.4 million that would come out of the Flex Fund.

Summary: The Budget Section approved the March 18 minutes and received an OMB update showing the general fund is still ahead of the budgeted starting point, but revenues through May are now about $76 million below the legislative forecast, driven mainly by individual income tax and sales tax shortfalls. OMB also reported the budget stabilization fund is above its cap, meaning a transfer to the general fund is expected, and reviewed oil price/production assumptions, noting continued volatility. Members asked about the income tax netting process, the sales tax decline, oil price discounts/premiums, natural gas taxation, and when the executive branch would present its revenue forecast. The committee then acted on several Emergency Commission requests. It approved, as a group, requests for federal mine reclamation funds for the Public Service Commission, an additional criminal investigator FTE and funding for the Attorney General’s office, and a DPI transfer for bridge software costs. It separately approved DPI request 2164 for $500,000 to support the food vendor program after debate over whether the program’s savings were known and whether the money was simply a pass-through. OMB also reported on federal grants, fiscal irregularities, tobacco settlement proceeds, budget guidelines for agencies, FTE pool usage, vacancy savings, and the DAPL settlement, noting the settlement funds had been deposited and that a deficiency appropriation may be needed later to cover remaining accrued interest. Tax Commissioner Brian Kroshus presented on the primary residence credit program, saying participation has grown sharply and that the current biennium will likely need about $431 million, roughly $22 million above the appropriation. He explained how the credit interacts with homestead and disabled veteran benefits, how the 3% property tax cap works, and why county valuations and mill rates vary. The committee also received a Legacy Fund/Budget Stabilization Fund report showing strong returns, and DOT Director Ron Henke received approval for two Flex Fund highway projects on ND 49 and ND 31. Henke also explained remaining Highway 85 funding and said the department is exploring uses for leftover state dollars. Finally, the Department of Mineral Resources reported on abandoned well plugging and site restoration, noting North Dakota remains in relatively strong shape compared with other states, and DPI began a presentation on gap funding tied to the 3% levy cap, reporting 24 districts received $1.8 million in the first year and projecting higher future needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a business where your fixed costs don't really change very much, but your volume runs up the
• This is a business where your fixed costs don't really change very much, but your volume runs up the
• Like Chairman Nichols said, that's how it was allocated, from my understanding.
• Their monies are not allocated for whatever it is used. You have the city taxpayers' money.
• There's $20 million when I have really rough math on what the police officers would cost.

Bills: SB39, SB2129, SB2141, SB2246, SB2323, SB2439, SB2722

Keywords: commercial motor vehicle, truck liability, motor carrier, trucking, civil liability, respondeat superior, negligent entrustment, negligent maintenance, negligent loading, negligent repair, bifurcated trial, exemplary damages, punitive damages, personal injury, collision, employer liability, vicarious liability, Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Texas tort reform, commercial truck accident

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee reconvened on SB 2722, as substituted by Senator Bettencourt, which would redirect a portion of Harris County Toll Road Authority surplus revenues to the City of Houston and impose audit and tax-rate penalty provisions. Houston Police Chief Noe Diaz and Fire Chief Thomas Munoz testified in support, arguing that Houston bears a large share of toll-road public safety burdens, citing thousands of police and fire responses on toll-road property and the need for compensation for emergency services. Bill King, testifying neutrally, said the toll authority generates large excess revenues and urged stronger oversight and clearer controls on how the money is spent. Opponents, including Harris County officials, business and neighborhood representatives, and toll-road critics, argued the bill would divert transportation dollars, create a precedent for taking toll revenues for general municipal use, and could worsen project delivery and incentives; several also questioned the accuracy and interpretation of the revenue figures and the lack of comparable audit requirements for the city. The committee took extensive testimony but left SB 2722 pending without a vote. The committee then heard SB 2129, which would increase fines for motorists who disregard railroad crossing gates or flaggers, and SB 2323, which would redact railroad crew members’ personal information from public accident reports. Both bills were presented as safety measures, with railroad labor testimony in support, and both were left pending after brief public testimony. The committee also heard SB 2141, a Zaffirini bill concerning specialty license plates for judges, with the substitute aimed at reducing security risks by changing how judges are identified on plates; it too was left pending. Finally, the committee heard SB 2439, another Zaffirini bill, described as a TDLR cleanup measure related to ATV and off-highway vehicle safety certification. The bill would abolish the current training and certification program, which supporters said was burdensome and underused given the small number of approved instructors statewide. With no significant opposition on the record, the committee closed testimony and left SB 2439 pending as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• That would be any cost, much less a significant cost.
• cost.
• , if any cost.
• If they choose to incur other costs, those are the county's costs.
• This bill could cost lives because we're not focusing on how and where to allocate resources effectively

Bills: HB1320, HB2012, HB2293, HB2655, HB3174, HB4108, HB4661, HB4799, HB5534, HB5580

Keywords: transportation, infrastructure, funding, state budget, public safety, child welfare, county boards, membership, local governance, public welfare, government service, social services, Texas Family Code, regulation, vendors, solicitors, roadside sales, county authority, Sweeny Hospital District, board of directors

Transcript Highlights:

• that are allocated there.
• Chairman, if we're saving money by buying in bulk, why is it costing more money?
• along with the contractor cost.
• Townships had 180 applications, 44% of the overall cost.
• It's a total cost of $18.4 million that would come out of the Flex Fund.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Since December of 2020, our highway cost index has grown 62%, meaning what?
• Cost us $1 to build in 2020, now cost us $1.62.
• And so we're fighting the highway cost index that is growing.
• And so if no action was taken by the commission to allocate.
• I also want to be a little comment here about cost of construction.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Subsection F relates to the excess funds after final project costs.
• So, you'd think there'd be pressure to get the money allocated.
• As you’ve heard me speak, the cost of a foot of waterline...
• to and gave that as a base allocation to each county.
• They would like to have the funding allocated by September.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's a cost-effective strategy to reduce homelessness.
• Um so it comes with no general fund cost.
• We it comes with no general fund cost.
• it um is that allocated in there? it um is that allocated in there?
• resources of their 10 million allocation resources of their 10 million allocation for<00:13:25.920

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• of that cost. of that cost.
• But when this cost is so minimal >> Okay.
• developer might bake that into the cost developer might bake that into the cost of<00:24:36.000>
• may pass the cost on. may pass the cost on.
• And most of those cite the high cost of housing as one of the reasons.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The joint House committees on Housing and Education heard HB 1713, HD1, which would repeal school impact fees and transfer remaining balances in the school impact fee and certain fair share accounts to the school facilities special fund. The Department of Education testified in opposition, while the Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, the Attorney General’s office (with comments and suggested constitutional amendments), the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the School Facilities Authority, Grassroot Institute of Hawaii, NAP Hawaii, Avalon Development Company, Mark Development, Maui Chamber of Commerce, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Landis Research Foundation, BIA Hawaii, and others testified in support. The Tax Foundation of Hawaii offered comments. The DOE said the bill would weaken a key tool for matching school facilities to residential growth, while supporters said the current program leaves funds unused or restricted in ways that limit their effectiveness. A lengthy discussion followed about the difference between the older school impact fee program and the separate fair share agreements tied to land use entitlements and change-of-zone approvals. DOE Deputy Superintendent Jesse Suki explained that fair share funds are tied to the district where they were collected, may be too small to build a full school on their own, and are held until needed for projects such as Core Ridge, Central and West Maui, and other planned schools. Committee members pressed DOE on why funds had remained unspent for years, how much money was in the accounts, and whether the department had reviewed audit findings about the program. Members also questioned whether homeowners ultimately bear these costs through developers passing them along. The committee did not take a vote during the portion of the meeting provided. The discussion ended with members and DOE debating whether the current statute should remain in place, whether past entitlements should be affected, and whether the bill should be amended to better address remaining construction-related obligations and the use of collected funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• This method of allocating costs.
• Uh, by re-examining, uh, the cost allocation there.
• costs.
• That scenario 4 is a little different in, in how T cost is allocated.
• Uh, but my larger point was just the concern about ensuring that, uh, cost allocation is more carefully

Transcript Highlights:

• Sometimes there are adjustments made to program costs because certain costs may be rising in certain
• We want to offset some of those costs.
• So there's just different cost factors.
• When the presidents talked about cost factors, we looked at the actual cost reports.
• The presidents talked about cost factors. We looked at the actual cost reports.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee for Higher Education met to review Florida’s workforce and Florida College System funding models as part of budget planning. Chair Harrell opened by emphasizing the state’s growing focus on technical education and workforce pathways, and the committee first heard from Tara Goodman of the Department of Education on district workforce education. Goodman explained the programs funded through district workforce dollars, including career certificates, applied technology diplomas, registered apprenticeship, and adult general education, and described the model’s reliance on lagged enrollment, program cost weights, local tuition offsets, and supplemental factors such as disability services, GED testing, and minimum funding for small rural districts. She also noted federal support through Perkins and WIOA and said the model is used to determine unmet need and guide appropriations. In response to questions, she said health care programs are generally among the higher-cost offerings and may be supplemented by pipeline funds. The committee then heard from Kathy Hebda, Chancellor of the Florida College System, on the college system’s funding model. Hebda described the main funding sources, including the program fund, student success incentive funds, pipeline funds, tuition and fees, and performance-based incentives, and explained that the current model was developed by the 28 college presidents under legislative direction. She said the model uses a three-year average FTE, weights workforce enrollment more heavily than non-workforce enrollment, gives significant weight to completions, includes a small-college factor and regional cost differentials, and also provides targeted funding to bring colleges up to a floor based on per-FTE funding. Senators asked about colleges below the target, cost differences among programs, faculty salaries, and health insurance costs; Hebda said the model is meant to provide flexible operating dollars that colleges can use for those expenses, but specific salary and benefit decisions are left to the institutions. Seminole State College President Georgia Lorenz also testified in support of the college funding model, saying it holds institutions accountable for enrollment and completions, can be adjusted to reflect state priorities like workforce, and addresses differences in size and regional costs. No bills were voted on, and the committee adjourned after brief closing remarks thanking Seminole State College and the presenters.