Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 2496 relates to tribal consultation conducted by the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council
• As background, the FSEC coordinates all evaluation and licensing steps for siting certain energy facilities
• FSEC chair must notify federally recognized tribal governments that are affected by the proposed facility
• Certain manufacturing facilities for asbestos-containing building materials are subject to inspections
• Are you worried or are you concerned at all about the impact on folks working in those facilities where

Summary: The Environment and Energy Committee heard three bills. House Bill 2496 would expand tribal consultation in Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (FSEC) siting reviews by requiring the full council, rather than only the chair, to participate in government-to-government consultations with federally recognized tribes, allowing tribes to review and comment on consultation summaries before they go to the governor, and exempting those consultation meetings from the Open Public Meetings Act so long as no deliberation or commitments occur. The bill’s sponsor, tribal representatives from the Yakama Nation, and supporters from labor and conservation groups said it would better protect sensitive cultural and treaty resources; the Association of Washington Business opposed it, citing due process and ex parte concerns, while FSEC staff said they support the intent but have some wording concerns. House Bill 2575 would reduce or eliminate several reporting requirements for utilities and the Department of Commerce, including changing some annual reports to biennial or every-four-years reporting, removing heat-related utility disconnection reporting, and eliminating a Commerce report on utility resource plans and combined heat and power data. The sponsor and Commerce said the changes would streamline duplicative or unused reporting and focus staff time on more useful information, while an opponent warned that legislators should not lose information needed to assess resource adequacy and reliability. A question was raised about whether the bill would affect timely reporting under clean energy laws; Commerce said the bill does not change Clean Energy Transformation Act reporting and that those processes remain in place. House Bill 2605 would raise the asbestos threshold for certain building materials from 0.1% to 0.25% and exempt low-level naturally occurring fibrous silicate material in commercial aggregates, asphalt, and concrete from labeling, use, and inspection requirements. The sponsor said the bill would reduce construction and transportation costs and help use local materials for roads and other projects while still preventing deliberate addition of asbestos-like materials. The Washington Aggregate and Concrete Association supported the bill, saying it corrects an overbroad prior approach and that existing workplace safety laws should address any dust-related risks. The committee heard testimony on all three bills and then closed the hearings; no votes were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is, the main part of the bill deals with issues relating to solar production facilities.
• The main part of the bill deals with issues relating to solar production facilities in our state, but
• The facility utilizes captures.
• It's really common in energy production facilities in our state that...
• Those commercial solar facilities sometimes that's totally out of their control.

Committee: House Utilities

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> care at the facility. care at the facility.
• Facilities investment.
• Facilities<00:10:31.839><c> investment.
• This agreement Facilities investment.
• But we know we do need to explore having a facility that is a modern facility that will train the health

Committee: House Higher Education Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It contemplates 1,200 gaming devices at up to two gaming facilities.
• Just one small note on the location of a potential gaming facility.
• My understanding is that it has not previously built a gaming facility in California.
• This compact allows for up to 349 devices at up to three gaming facilities.
• This compact allows for up to 349 devices at up to three gaming facilities.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Governmental Organization held an informational hearing on seven tribal-state gaming compacts and amendments, with Chair Blanca Rubio noting that no formal vote would be taken because the Legislature cannot amend the compacts. The committee heard briefings from the Governor’s Office and tribal representatives on the Pechanga Band of Indians, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians, Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians, and the Urok Tribe. A recurring theme was updating compact terms in light of the Ninth Circuit’s Chicken Ranch decision, including narrowing or clarifying revenue-sharing, regulatory, labor, and liability provisions while preserving state and tribal interests. For the Pechanga, Agua Caliente, and Yocha Dehe amendments, witnesses described commitments not to sue over certain revenue terms, additional gaming-device flexibility, and continued or enhanced payments to the special distribution fund, revenue-sharing trust fund, and tribal nation grant fund. Pechanga and Yocha Dehe each sought flexibility for 1,000 additional devices, while Agua Caliente sought 500 additional devices and a restructuring of its trust-fund contributions. Tribal leaders emphasized economic development, government services, public safety, education, cultural preservation, and community investments, and local government representatives from San Bernardino County and other jurisdictions spoke in support of the agreements. The committee also heard two new compacts: Fort Mojave’s compact, which replaces an expired 2004 agreement and allows up to 1,200 devices at up to two facilities, including a future site near Needles subject to federal approval and gubernatorial concurrence; and the Urok Tribe’s compact, which replaces an expiring 1999 compact and allows up to 349 devices at up to three facilities. The Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians sought a fifth amendment extending its existing compact while litigation continues, and the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians sought a second amendment extending its compact term and refining liability and insurance provisions. After hearing testimony and brief public comment, the chair closed the hearing and indicated the measures would move to the floor for formal consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• a couple of the facilities, a headquarters lobby remodel for security purposes.
• And then some other facility maintenance at the Lewiston and St. Anthony facilities.
• and the other has stuff going on at the Lewiston facility?
• going on at the Lewiston facility.
• So positions that are directly supervising youth in our facilities.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed the Department of Juvenile Corrections budget. Legislative Services analyst Noah Peterson outlined the agency’s funding sources, staffing, recent expenditure patterns, and several FY 2026 and FY 2027 budget requests, including substance use disorder treatment, youth assessment center funding, replacement items, IT upgrades, and a clinician services transfer from the Department of Health and Welfare. Members asked about the governor’s holdback, public works projects, vehicle replacements, and staffing. Director Ashley Dowell said the department’s census has declined due to strong county partnerships, prevention and diversion efforts, and youth assessment centers, and she explained that a staffing analysis found the agency understaffed by 12 positions, with six vacancies converted to direct care roles. She also described the holdback impacts as coming from contract reductions, internal efficiencies, travel and training cuts, and substance use disorder funding adjustments. The committee adjourned after the department discussion. The committee then reviewed the Office of Energy and Mineral Resources budget. Peterson described the office’s mostly federal funding, small staff, dedicated funds, prior energy resilience appropriations, and FY 2027 requests for personnel realignment, Idaho Orchestrating Nuclear (ION) support, and home energy rebates. Administrator Callie Younger said the office is focused on energy resilience, permitting coordination, hydropower relicensing, geothermal and mining projects, and a growing nuclear policy portfolio. She highlighted the new nuclear task force, the office’s request for information to industry, and work on a federal request related to a nuclear lifecycle campus. Members asked about nuclear development, spent fuel, modular reactors, permitting efficiency, and whether the office might merge with the Office of Species Conservation. Younger said the office is exploring a merger because of overlapping permitting functions and could reduce positions and save some general funds, while also improving its ability to handle nuclear and mining work. The chair closed by noting the committee’s alignment with several governor’s office recommendations and adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Agencies cannot impose requirements on a coal facility in operation prior to 2011 that are inconsistent
• agreement, and can also not impose any additional greenhouse gas emissions requirements on such a facility
• that is inconsistent with the current greenhouse gas emission standard for baseload electricity facilities
• is a sales and use tax exemption for the purchase of coal used at a thermal electric generating facility
• So the goal of the bill is to eliminate that special treatment so that this location, this facility,

Summary: House Finance heard several bills and took no recorded votes. HB 2367 would end special tax and emissions exemptions for the Centralia coal plant by limiting its Climate Commitment Act exemption to pre-2026 emissions, removing limits on additional greenhouse gas requirements, and repealing coal sales and use tax exemptions. The sponsor, Rep. Fitzgibbon, said the bill would help keep the plant’s transition to cleaner natural gas generation on track; Climate Solutions supported it, while business and clean-energy groups raised concerns about allowance-market impacts and asked for amendments to adjust the cap-and-invest allowance budget. HB 1974 would authorize public housing authorities, public corporations, and nonprofits to operate as land banks for affordable housing, give them priority for tax-foreclosed properties, and provide property tax, leasehold excise tax, and REET exemptions for land bank transactions. Rep. Hill said the bill was narrowed to reduce fiscal impact and support existing land banking work in Spokane; supporters said it would lower land costs and speed affordable housing development, while questions focused on how public land would be used and whether affordability should be permanent rather than limited to 30 years. HB 2650, a Department of Revenue request, would standardize notice and effective dates for local REET and lodging tax changes and clarify documentation for an affordable housing sales tax deferral. DOR supported the bill as an administrative efficiency measure, and there was no opposition testimony. HB 2626 would raise the premium tax on health maintenance organizations, health care service contractors, and self-funded multiple employer welfare arrangements from 2% to 3%, remove a dentistry-related exemption, and add a new 1% tax on certain disability and group stop-loss insurers. The sponsor said the bill is intended to help fund Apple Health and subsidies amid federal funding concerns; insurers and business groups opposed it as a cost increase likely to be passed on to consumers and employers, while patient and advocacy groups supported the revenue idea but urged that funds be dedicated to subsidies or other health care supports and that pass-through to consumers be prevented.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're very interesting facilities.
• </c> utilities uh very interesting facilities utilities uh very interesting facilities if<00:02:13.360
• </c> permit any hydroelectric facility permit any hydroelectric facility regardless<00:09:01.640><c>
• of-the art facilities or granting existing<00:09:25.880><c> facilities</c><00:09:26.399><c> the</c><
• it's about all about that facility it's about all facilities<00:15:57.000><c> that</c><00:15:57.120>

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're looking at the generation, collection, and transportation of a raw feedstock to a facility to be
• As the chair said, this bill allows the I-5 Bridge Replacement Project toll facility bond retirement
• By funding bicycle facilities to be part of the oil crisis solution, and I think we've moved past that
• According to TIB criteria, all arterial projects require bicycle facilities or pedestrian facilities
• As the chair said, this bill allows the I-5 Bridge Replacement Project toll facility bond retirement

Bills: HB2111 , HB2495

Committee: Senate Transportation

Keywords: Interstate 5 bridge, toll facility, bond retirement, transportation, state funding, vehicles, streetcar operation, public safety, urban regulation, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• :03:50.360><c> employing</c> six facilities in Minnesota employing six facilities in Minnesota employing
• c> Golden</c><00:03:54.560><c> Valley,</c> Those facilities are in Golden Valley, Those facilities are
• . facility. facility.
• facilities facilities for<00:04:34.000><c> packaging</c><00:04:34.520><c> production.
• . facility. facility.

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It wouldn't work for a custom, non-USDA facility. >> Um, follow-up. >> Go ahead.
• So, but I believe that there are some facilities that are USDA-inspected custom facilities, which means
• that the facility is inspected, but the processing is not inspected as it's happening.
• </c><00:14:42.639><c> in</c> a custom non USDA facility in a custom non USDA facility in &gt;&gt; um<
• </c><00:18:54.880><c> These</c> facilities in New Hampshire. These facilities in New Hampshire.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Environment and Agriculture Committee met in work session on retained House Bill 396, which would exempt meat and meat food products slaughtered and prepared in-state for in-state sale from certain inspections. The discussion centered on the bill’s conflict with federal law and whether any state action could help small farmers process and sell cuts of meat locally. Representative Comtois argued the current federal system unfairly burdens New Hampshire farmers and consumers, while committee members and witnesses repeatedly noted that federal action would likely be required. Mr. Johnson explained that the committee’s prior resolution asked USDA to allow small and very small slaughter plants to use custom-exempt criteria with a third-party inspector, and said discussions had been held with federal offices, but no change had been secured. Members and witnesses described the practical limits facing small producers, including the scarcity of USDA-inspected facilities in New Hampshire, long booking lead times, and the cost of shipping animals out of state. Representative German and others noted that slaughter schedules and seasonal grazing patterns make compliance difficult for smaller farms. Farm Bureau representatives said they were continuing to educate federal officials, but that the USDA secretary’s visit to a local operation had been rejected. They also explained that one local operation can process USDA-inspected meat, but that still involves federal inspection. Several members asked about possible exemptions, workarounds, or whether a state bill would be needed if federal relief were granted; the response was that a federal exemption or rule change would be sufficient and no state action would then be required. The committee also heard broader policy views. Senator Dan Innis said there was strong Senate support for helping small farms and that the issue is mainly federal overreach and economics, not food safety, while acknowledging the risk of federal enforcement against farmers. He compared the issue to other federal-state conflicts and said the current law reflects outdated concerns from the early meatpacking era. Members discussed whether the bill should be amended to include limits on the number of animals processed, similar to poultry rules, to make it more politically viable. No vote was taken during the work session, and the bill remained under discussion for possible amendment before the retained-bill deadline.

Transcript Highlights:

• Hospitals, assisted living facilities, nursing homes, adult family homes, and ambulatory surgical facilities
• is a facility first, a home second.
• We support clear badging in large facilities, but the reality is that many health care practitioners
• We support clear badging in large facilities, but the reality is that many health care practitioners
• And inter-facility transports are a big part of that rural health care service.

Summary: The committee held public hearings on House Bill 2261, which would require health care providers to wear badges showing name, credential, and relevant degrees, require similar disclosure in advertising, and restrict use of the title “physician surgeon” to certain physicians and osteopathic physicians. Supporters, including the Washington State Medical Association and patient advocates, said the bill would improve transparency and informed consent. Opponents from nurse, naturopathic, and adult family home groups argued it was overly broad, burdensome, confusing, and could harm access to care or residential home settings; several also said existing disciplinary laws already address misrepresentation. No vote was taken on HB 2261 during the hearing. The committee also heard House Bill 2283, which would raise the medical loss ratio for fully insured individual, small group, and large group health plans to 90 percent. Supporters, including small business, patient, and physician groups, said the bill would push more premium dollars toward patient care and lower costs or increase rebates. Insurers and the Office of the Insurance Commissioner warned it could destabilize the market, reduce flexibility for administrative services, and lead to carrier exits, though OIC said it was working on amendments. The bill was not voted on in the hearing. House Bill 2425, an agency-request bill on nurse delegation, would broaden what tasks registered nurses may delegate, remove some setting and training restrictions, expand emergency medication authority, and adjust liability and retaliation protections. The Board of Nursing, long-term care providers, and skilled nursing/assisted living representatives supported the bill as a modernization that could ease workforce shortages and improve care access, while the Washington State Association for Justice opposed the immunity provisions and raised patient safety concerns. The hearing ended without a vote on HB 2425. In executive session, the committee advanced several bills. HB 2110, with an amendment clarifying ambulance staffing and RN scope, passed 18-0 with one excused. HB 2113 passed 18-0 with one excused. HB 2122, as amended to require hospitals to offer flu vaccines with several flexibility and critical-access-hospital exemptions, passed 15-3 with one excused. HB 2152, as amended to require certain facilities to allow medical cannabis use for qualifying terminal patients and to add related exemptions and protections, passed 17-1 with one excused. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those two Senate provisions relate to the licensing for the testing facilities.
• There's been some concern facilities.
• to testing facilities when the testing<00:03:22.319><c> facility</c><00:03:22.720><c> makes</c><00:03
• :23.040><c> certain</c><00:03:23.440><c> certain</c> testing facility makes certain certain testing facility
• As noted, we create a licensing variance for testing facilities.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Qualifying facilities that began operation before that date are subject to section 216B.164, which is
• </c> in peaking facilities as carbon-f free. in peaking facilities as carbon-f free.
• , including peaking facilities.
• Thank you. peaking facilities. Changes to the law peaking facilities.
• </c><00:43:23.520><c> And</c> energy generating facilities. And energy generating facilities.

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're left at the facility, and they're stored in very strong, safe containers.
• But it's clearly right now, if you're going to have a nuclear facility, you store the waste on that facility
• Microgrids are often used by manufacturers, research facilities, and hospitals.
• What facility will it come from?
• Including private facilities.

Bills: SB78 , SB235 , SB22 , SB310

Committee: Senate Senate Conservation

Keywords: nuclear energy, renewable energy, sustainability, carbon emissions, energy regulation, microgrid, zero carbon resources, Public Regulation Commission, energy generation, electric utilities, motor vehicle manufacturers, licensing, dealers, franchise agreements, consumer protection, water supply, sewage improvements, environment, funding, Mora County

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 78, which would classify nuclear energy as renewable energy. Senator Thornton and supporters argued that New Mexico needs dispatchable, baseload power and that nuclear should be added to the state’s renewable portfolio standard because wind and solar are intermittent and require extensive land, mining, and battery storage. Supporters also emphasized nuclear’s zero-carbon profile, the safety record of U.S. Navy reactors, the possibility of small modular reactors, and the fact that New Mexico already uses nuclear-generated electricity from out of state. Opponents, including Senator O’Malley and Senator Charlie, argued nuclear is not renewable because it relies on finite uranium and creates long-lived radioactive waste, and they raised concerns about uranium mining impacts, waste storage, and the bill’s lack of a limiting principle. The committee voted 5-4 to do not pass the bill, with Senators Cervantes, Hamblen, O’Malley, Lopez, and Charlie voting yes on the do-not-pass motion and Senators Ezell, Scott, and Thornton voting no; the chair then explained that the vote reflected disagreement over whether nuclear should be labeled renewable, not opposition to nuclear power itself. The committee then heard Senate Bill 235, the Microgrid Oversight Act, with a committee substitute. Sponsor Senator Steinborn said the substitute would restore existing renewable benchmarks for microgrids, require large microgrids to meet zero-carbon targets by 2045, add reporting and PRC oversight, and close a loophole that could let utilities buy microgrid power and shift costs to ratepayers. Supporters, including environmental groups and community advocates, said the bill was needed to regulate large data-center microgrids such as Project Jupiter in Doña Ana County, which they said could drive major emissions, ozone, and nitrogen oxide pollution, strain water supplies, and undermine state climate goals. They also argued the bill would protect ratepayers and ensure transparency and community benefits. Opponents, including Americans for Prosperity, the Chamber of Commerce, oil and gas associations, Xcel Energy, PNM, Consumer Energy Alliance, and economic development groups, argued the bill would impose unnecessary regulation on private microgrids, slow investment, raise costs, and reduce flexibility for reliability projects and industrial development. They said microgrids are already regulated for safety and interconnection, and that the bill could discourage projects in New Mexico. In response, Steinborn said the bill was necessary because current law leaves a loophole for large polluting microgrids and because several major projects are already planned or underway. The committee heard extensive public testimony on both sides, but the transcript ends before a final vote on SB 235 is taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> I think that the site evaluation committee is a very important tool for citing energy facilities in
• I think that that waste facilities.
• Yeah, it actually does include current facilities.
• And those background checks for the new entity that's acquiring the facility would be required.
• </c><00:35:14.960><c> would</c> that's acquiring the facility would that's acquiring the facility would

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You're also affecting veterans in the 14 counties where there are VA facilities.
• Care at some of these facilities, I don't think it's improving patient care.
• The chronic shortages That are documented, both for Indian health facilities and for VA facilities, are
• I'm sorry, 25% higher rate of injury on private equity-owned facilities.
• Of readmission to a hospital after being seen at a private equity facility.

Committee: House Courts, Corrections & Justice Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• WSDOT issues permits and franchises for use of highway rights-of-way for utility facilities such as water
• These leases and franchises require utility providers to construct and maintain their facilities at their
• The Washington State Supreme Court held that the costs of utility facility relocation may not be paid
• Before you is Senate Bill 5750 relating to fees for electric vehicle charging at state facilities.
• Let's go to the Capitol or a state-owned facility to get some free fuel.

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee held public hearings on several bills. Substitute Senate Bill 5690 would require WSDOT to give utility owners advance notice of fish barrier removal and other projects, seek federal funding for those projects when available, and report back to the Legislature; supporters said it would help small utilities plan for costly relocations, while WSDOT said the bill would not achieve its intended effect and that federal reimbursement for these costs is limited. The committee also heard Engrossed Senate Bill 5746, which would create or continue an advisory process on EV charger infrastructure property crime; the sponsor and supporters said it would help address vandalism and theft affecting charging access, and testimony was overwhelmingly in favor. Senate Bill 5750 would authorize state facilities to charge fees for privately owned EVs using state charging stations and deposit the revenue into the motor vehicle fund; the sponsor said this would make charging costs fairer and recover expenses, with broad support and some questions about whether the policy could be implemented administratively without legislation. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6148, which would increase the maximum term for regional transit authority bonds from 40 years to 75 years, affecting Sound Transit. Sound Transit and transit advocates argued the longer term would better match debt to long-lived assets, help accelerate construction, and reduce near-term financial pressure without raising taxes, while opponents warned it would increase long-term costs and shift repayment burdens to future generations. Committee members asked about interest costs, asset values, and examples of eligible long-lived projects such as tunnels and bridges. No votes were taken during the hearing, and each bill closed with testimony counts recorded on the record.

Transcript Highlights:

• by expanding criminal penalties and classifying certain offenses involving these facilities as potential
• I wonder if we have the same protections on water and wastewater facilities.
• That's where he added into transportation facilities the inclusion of airports, heliports, spaceports
• , aerospace facilities, landing strips, mass transit and passenger rail terminals, postal facilities,
• and freight transportation facilities.

Committee: Senate Judiciary C

Summary: The Senate Committee on Judiciary C met on May 19, 2026, with a quorum present and first deferred House Bill 276 at the sponsor’s request. The committee then heard and advanced several bills, largely focused on criminal justice, domestic violence, victims’ rights, probation/parole, and critical infrastructure protections. HB 160, by Rep. Knox, would increase the penalty for domestic abuse battery and battery of a dating partner involving strangulation from three to six years, with at least one year without probation or suspension; it drew strong support from prosecutors and domestic violence advocates and was reported favorably. HB 769, by Rep. Boyd, would create a 24- to 72-hour cooling-off hold in domestic violence cases, with an amendment to make the hold concurrent with other detention periods and to avoid stacking with existing law; it was reported with amendments. The committee also reported favorably HB 1234, which creates mandatory jail time for fleeing the scene after striking a person and failing to render aid, and HB 158, which restores custodial inpatient treatment as an option for probationers and increases the allowable treatment period from 90 to 180 days. HB 169, allowing courts or the parole board to assess extradition costs against absconders based on ability to pay, was also reported favorably. HB 251, requiring notice to a victim or designated family member before resentencing or final conviction hearings, drew support from the Attorney General’s office and opposition from the ACLU, which argued that victim involvement at that stage could be inconsistent with post-conviction standards; it was nevertheless reported favorably. Additional measures advanced included HB 289, which removes a redundant 24-hour delay between denial of a new trial motion and sentencing; HB 394, extending the conditional parole period from nine months to 24 months to allow completion of required programming; and HB 330, increasing penalties and restitution for vandalizing churches and graves, which was supported by the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops. HB 429, expanding critical infrastructure protections to oil and natural gas facilities and related operations and increasing penalties for unauthorized entry, drone activity, and cyber interference, was reported with amendments after discussion about harmonizing the definition with another bill and ensuring coverage of water-related facilities. The committee also approved the minutes from the prior meeting before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do run a jail here, a regional facility.
• So we're going to hopefully have that facility ready for them.
• trail because of that yano between the facility.
• But we have facility money in Mora, and thanks to the Commissioner.
• Already starting to think ahead when this facility is completed.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that related to the Bayvale facility grant down below?
• So this is separate from the facility.
• I work at a facility which would probably compete with this.
• a state-funded facility.
• It's almost like maybe if we want this facility, we should build a state facility in Grand Forks.

Committee: Senate Appropriations - Human Resources Division

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The HR division continued work on the behavioral health budget, with members revisiting several funding items and generally agreeing to hold provider inflation increases until the full division picture is clearer. They tentatively supported additional funding for Community Connect and Free Through Recovery, as well as increases for the drug court program and peer support, while clarifying that some items were already in the House version and others were one-time or grant-related expenditures. The committee spent considerable time on a proposed $2 million behavioral health services program for nursing homes and basic care facilities. Senator Mathern brought revised language to describe a capitated payment model for training, consultation, and direct patient care for residents with medically based behavioral disorders and disruptive behaviors. Some members remained skeptical and wanted to see the amendment before deciding, but the discussion centered on whether the funding would help nursing homes accept patients who otherwise end up in state hospitals or acute care settings. Members also discussed several one-time funding items, including electronic health record and legacy system upgrades, network redundancy for the state hospital, partial hospitalization/intensive day treatment expansion, and a bathroom remodel at the Southeast Human Service Center. The committee restored the bathroom project to the original $972,000 estimate after concerns that the House reduction would not cover the needed ADA and plumbing work. They also debated a $12.96 million behavioral health facility grant for Altru in Grand Forks, with some members opposing it and others supporting it as a regional service expansion, but ultimately set it aside for later consideration. The meeting ended with staff flagging other sections of the bill, including the opioid settlement advisory language, the state hospital steering committee, behavioral health education grants, and the system of care grant. The chair announced that medical services would be taken up the next day, and members agreed to adjourn after planning to revisit unresolved behavioral health items and vote on the held bill later.