Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the Capital Project Overview Committee.
• </c><00:16:38.800><c> project</c><00:16:39.120><c> that</c> used for another capital project that used
• Um, this specific project, on occasion.
• </c><00:16:55.920><c> has</c> now as a as a need, but the project has now as a as a need, but the project
• </c> enough to do the project given the cost? enough to do the project given the cost?

Summary: The Capital Project Overview Committee approved the February 24 minutes and then voted to confirm Senator Mark Maki as vice chair. The committee next took up DAS request CAP 25004, which sought permission to use the remaining $713,667 from a $7 million appropriation for the purchase of 25 Hall Street to address deficiencies identified in an engineering study. DAS explained the building was bought for $6.25 million after the study revealed issues, and the funds would be used first for the most urgent repairs, especially the roof. In response to questions, DAS said the roof estimate was about $560,000, with other estimated needs including a skylight at $288,000, plumbing at $59,000, HVAC at $325,000, and electrical work at $547,000; the committee approved the request. The committee then considered CAP 25005, another DAS request to transfer $221,632 from five completed capital projects to the Hillsborough County South cell block renovation project. DAS said the project had been identified years earlier, had only recently entered design, and now appeared likely to cost more than the original appropriation because of inflation and delay. Senator Lang asked whether the transfer would be enough, and DAS responded that there was no final estimate yet but they hoped to engineer the project to fit the available funds. The committee approved the transfer. Later, the committee welcomed Senator Maki, who accepted the vice chair position. Under other business, members discussed a prior proposal in HB 2 that would have changed reporting from quarterly to annual; the committee was told the amendment had been made so that change would not go forward, and that the relevant section remained in HB 25 because it corrects capital budget language in multiple places. The committee set its next meeting for June 30 at 9:00 a.m. and requested that the Liquor Commission attend to discuss the 90/95 sale of property. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• <c> and</c> Highway projects and Bridge projects and Highway projects and Bridge projects and thank<00
• projects.
• projects.
• Forty projects total in the metro area and 140 projects in Greater Minnesota.
• Forty projects total in the metro area and 140 projects in Greater Minnesota.

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• It moves this review back down to the individual project level.
• In one public project, they revealed about 7,000 pounds of One public project revealed about 7,000 tons
• These are low-impact projects.
• for these small, low-impact projects.
• The cost of the project goes up each and every day.

Summary: The Senate Environment, Energy, and Technology Committee held public hearings on two bills. On SB 5609, concerning cultural resource reviews under SEPA, staff explained that the proposed substitute would require cultural resource review for certain categorical exemptions, including infill housing and some GMA-related projects, unless a local government has an approved data-sharing agreement, ordinance, or cultural resources management plan with tribal consultation. Senator Kauffman said the bill is intended to protect tribal cultural sites without stopping development. Supporters, including tribal representatives and some local officials, said early review and consultation can prevent irreversible damage and provide clarity; opponents from business, builders, and county planning groups argued it would add costs, delay housing and permitting, and shift too much authority to state-level review without clear timelines or standards. The committee took public testimony only and then closed the hearing on SB 5609. The committee then heard SB 6284 on high-risk artificial intelligence. Staff described requirements for deployers of high-risk AI systems to maintain risk management policies, conduct impact assessments, notify consumers when AI is used in consequential decisions, and report algorithmic discrimination to the Attorney General, along with disclosures for government agencies and an extension of the AI task force with a workplace subgroup. Senator Elias said the bill is intended to focus regulation on high-risk uses while preserving innovation. Testimony was mixed: consumer and student advocates supported the bill’s transparency and accountability measures, while industry, banking, insurance, hospital, and technology groups raised concerns about definitions, implementation, overlap with existing regulation, and possible effects on innovation or regulated sectors. The committee heard public testimony and then adjourned after closing the hearing on SB 6284.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> coordinating on the water projects. coordinating on the water projects.
• . projects. projects.
• These projects are regional.
• It is a very important project. much. It is a very important project.
• </c> entire project three times. entire project three times.

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• If we make any projections and mid-level projections run about 25% a year over each 10-year period going
• Months after Project Jupiter was announced, there's another project in Lee County, which is said to be
• A worthy project can withstand scrutiny. A worthy project can withstand oversight.
• This project can be a good project.
• This project can be a good project.

Bills: SB78 , SB235 , SB22 , SB310

Committee: Senate Senate Conservation

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:

• The majority of these projects are permanent supportive housing. Thank you.
• The majority of these projects are permanent supportive housing.
• Historically, we relied on this project to bring in additional federal money to stand up new projects
• Or is it all our projects? Or what is that in the scheme of things?” “It’s $120 million projects.
• What procedural steps does a project have to go through?

Summary: The Housing Committee held work sessions on federal Continuum of Care homelessness funding and on state step-housing siting rules before moving into public hearings on House Bill 2266 and House Bill 2489. Commerce staff said HUD’s late and restrictive Continuum of Care funding notice put about $120 million a year in Washington operating support for existing homeless housing projects at risk, but a lawsuit led by the Attorney General forced HUD to restart renewal funding. Commerce also reviewed how local governments are implementing step-housing requirements, including model ordinances, planning updates, and ongoing compliance reviews under recent state law. House Bill 2266 would require cities and counties to allow step housing in all nonindustrial zones, apply the same permitting and environmental review as other residential uses, limit design review to administrative processes, and remove certain local standards and conditions on existing buildings and affordable housing. Supporters, including Plymouth Housing, Disability Rights Washington, King County, the Attorney General’s Office, and Catholic Community Services, argued the bill would reduce discriminatory barriers, protect people with disabilities, and make it easier to site shelters, transitional housing, and permanent supportive housing. Several city representatives and the Association of Washington Cities opposed or sought amendments, saying the bill was too broad and could limit local authority over operational agreements, safety plans, spacing, community engagement, and funding conditions; some asked for clearer carveouts for emergency shelters and related uses. House Bill 2489 would bar local governments from enforcing public-space anti-camping or similar laws unless adequate alternative shelter space is available, with “life-sustaining activities” and “adequate alternative shelter space” defined in detail. Rep. Gregerson said the bill would create a statewide floor and prevent punishment for survival conduct when no real shelter option exists. The ACLU, service providers, and shelter operators supported the bill, citing displacement from fragmented local ordinances, enforcement costs, and the need to align enforcement with actual shelter availability. Testimony also described low-barrier shelter operations and examples of people stabilizing once housed. The hearing on HB 2489 began with staff explanation and initial testimony; no votes were taken on either bill in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• of those projects.
• We proposed that program as a project line under Ped Bike and a project line under Safe Routes, and you
• Funding first, projects after, or projects first, funding after, are two different timelines for the
• This is another one that could be a project line that says, go find regional trail projects and put them
• for projects.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The committee began with a transportation budget and revenue overview from Haley Gamble and Brian Moore. They reviewed the 2025-27 adopted transportation budget, noting $15.5 billion in expenditures, with the Department of Transportation making up the largest share. They said the 2025 session’s new revenues, including the fuel tax increase and other fee changes, allowed the committee to move from projected structural deficits to a balanced four-year plan, while preserving major programs such as culverts, ferry timing adjustments, highway preservation, and local maintenance funding. They also discussed updated revenue forecasts, including a modest downward revision in fuel consumption and uncertainty around some revenue sources, but said overall revenues remain stronger than previously projected. Committee members asked for more detail on dedicated funds, regional fuel tax patterns, and whether preservation needs could be supported through bonding. The committee then heard a remote presentation from Dr. Jessica Chichino of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety on traffic safety trends and countermeasures. She described the group’s “30 by 30” goal to reduce traffic fatalities 30% by 2030, citing increases in deaths for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists, and comparing U.S. fatality rates unfavorably with other high-income countries. Her presentation emphasized speed management, impaired driving enforcement, safer roadway design, and pedestrian protections such as lower speed limits, speed cameras, traffic calming, roundabouts, better lighting, and pedestrian beacons. She also highlighted research showing that larger vehicles increase pedestrian risk and discussed Bellevue pilot projects using smart signal technology that reduced near misses. No action was taken on the presentation. In the final work session item, Barb Chamberlain of WSDOT and Justin Leighton of the Washington State Transit Association discussed potential transit and active transportation grant programs that had been proposed but not enacted in 2025. Chamberlain explained how new grant programs require runway time, staff capacity, and clear program design, and contrasted “projects first, funding after” with “funding first, projects after” approaches. She addressed the proposed Senior Transportation Emphasis Program and regional trails/cycle highways concepts, noting questions about eligibility, scoring, and how such projects would fit with existing active transportation and preservation work. Leighton reviewed the state’s transit grant portfolio and argued that a transit safety and security grant could help agencies fund operator barriers, lighting, shelters, behavioral health support, and non-uniformed security staff. He also raised concerns about sales tax treatment of security contracts, staffing shortages, federal uncertainty, CDL non-domicile issues, and long procurement timelines for buses. The committee asked questions about definitions, program purpose, and implementation challenges, but did not take any votes or formal action.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're the folks that live with These projects.
• I had a question about the other project.
• That's the tension that exists in virtually every project.
• how we go about these projects.
• Phase of the project 100 on the state side. No, it wasn't.

Committee: House Public School Capital Outlay Oversight Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the opportunity to hear about a project the opportunity to hear about a project um<00:02:52.480>
• I would just say that the impact of this grant is farther reaching beyond the project itself.
• Looking at some of the projects that have been handed out or awarded, those projects aren't always in
• </c> awarded uh there those projects aren't awarded uh there those projects aren't always<00:09:47.160
• Representative Greenman, I don't have a list of the current projects in the queue.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I’m not seeing how moving that into this on a case-by-case, project-by-project mitigation or impact
• projects, typically.
• They built the projects.
• Here are the projects.
• So it's not a forward-facing project. It's a project that's already been allocated.

Committee: Senate Government Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• These were the big two projects.
• And there's been some changes to the City of Lincoln project, but still basically the same project.
• These were the big two projects.
• And there's been some changes to the City of Lincoln project, but still basically the same project.
• The project team that we built around this project.

Summary: The committee first approved the December 10 minutes and then received a DEQ base budget summary and agency overview. DEQ staff explained that the agency is largely federally and special funded, with major ongoing costs in salaries, operating expenses, grants, and continuing appropriations. Director Dave Glatt and accounting director Beth Jacobson highlighted core programs, the move to a new chemistry laboratory, the new state fuel inspection program, wastewater-related funding from HB 1577, and implementation of SB 2267 for on-site wastewater rules. They also noted the agency’s spending patterns, possible federal EPA cuts, and the likelihood of some fee adjustments or program changes if federal support declines. Members asked about DEQ’s travel, field offices, future staffing, and how the agency would respond to reduced federal regulation. DEQ said most staff are based in Bismarck, with field offices in Fargo, Sawyer, and Gwinner, and that travel is driven by inspections and spill response. Glatt said the agency would continue to rely on science and law, and that any future federal retrenchment could mean more state responsibility but likely not a wholesale increase in FTEs. The committee also discussed a feedlot enforcement case in the Minot area, with DEQ explaining its role in ensuring compliance, permitting, and animal-waste management standards. The Department of Health and Human Services then presented on FTE block grant reporting, TANF balances, child care transfers, and the Rural Health Transformation Program. Donna Ockland explained that no line-item transfers had occurred yet for the new rural health work, but about 33 positions were planned and some current staff time could be reimbursed through approved cost allocation. HHS also reviewed TANF’s frozen eligibility and block grant structure, the transfer of up to 30% of TANF funds to child care, and recent program changes that increased benefits and raised the income limit. Staff said the department is using TANF more strategically to support child care and other allowable uses, while still carrying over unused funds as many states do. Finally, Pat and HHS staff gave an update on the Rural Health Transformation Program, saying the first funding opportunity was being posted and that the state is on track to obligate the federal funds within the required timeline. They described priorities such as workforce retention, preceptor development, technical assistance for critical access hospitals, community wellness projects, and ambulance upgrades. Members asked about rural versus urban eligibility, immigrant recruitment, evaluation of year-two funding, and how the program would address varied local workforce needs. The meeting then shifted to an Office of Management and Budget update on the new State Hospital project, where Lindsay Ashley reported continued construction progress, updated cost information, and selected alternates, with photos and details showing work underway in multiple building sections.

Transcript Highlights:

• . ...to make sure that we have the appropriate numbers of people needed for that project or projects.
• These kinds of projects.
• So when you're looking at building a project, you obviously are going to have some project equity in
• and so for these early mover projects about half of your project costs can come in before.
• It's NEA's Project WIZARD.

Summary: The Advanced Nuclear Energy Committee met to hear a series of presentations on the economics, financing, workforce, and community impacts of advanced nuclear deployment in North Dakota. William Bridge of Nucleon Energy presented the committee’s economic impacts and private-sector financing report, estimating construction and operating job impacts, local spending, and state/local tax effects for hypothetical SMR projects. He said the report assumes first-of-a-kind costs are still high, used a $6 million per megawatt nth-of-a-kind proxy, and estimated peak construction workforces of about 500 for a 200-MW plant and 1,000 for a larger facility, with roughly 100 operating jobs for a 200-MW plant. Committee members questioned security costs, capital cost assumptions, water and transmission siting constraints, and whether the model included fuel and waste; Bridge said the report included initial fuel in capital cost and that waste disposal is funded through existing federal mechanisms. Lori Brady of the Nuclear Energy Institute then outlined national nuclear workforce needs and NEI’s strategic workforce planning efforts. She described declining labor-force participation, retirements, and the need for a much larger future workforce, and said NEI has organized recommendations around career awareness, pipelines, training and qualification, policy support, retention, and nontraditional recruitment. She highlighted tools such as the Nuclear Works career website, the Nuclear Energy Academic Roadmap, the new federal Energy and Natural Resources career cluster, and the Nuclear Uniform Curriculum Program for community colleges. Members asked about AI, timing for training relative to plant development, and whether advanced manufacturing would reduce staffing needs; Brady said AI is not expected to replace workers and that training timelines depend on the specific project and staffing plan. The committee also heard from Gary Yaco, mayor of Red Wing, Minnesota, who described Prairie Island’s role in his community. He said the plant provides a large share of local property tax revenue, supports well-paid jobs, contributes to emergency preparedness funding and training, and is broadly supported by the city despite periodic protests and public concerns. He emphasized the plant’s security, regular drills with local and federal responders, and the absence of problems with dry cask storage. Later, Benton Arnett of NEI discussed the current financing landscape for advanced nuclear, explaining how tax credits, federal loan support, off-take agreements, and new business models are helping projects move forward. He said early projects face high upfront costs and long lead-time procurement, but that investor confidence is improving as federal policy and regulatory streamlining continue. The committee asked about waste funding, comparisons with natural gas, the effect of political shifts on investor confidence, and whether the market will narrow to a few winning technologies; Arnett said the industry is still sorting that out, but expects clearer winners in the late 2020s and early 2030s. The meeting concluded with an introductory presentation from Julie Kazeraki of DOE’s Office of Energy Dominance Financing, who said the office is focused on accelerating nuclear deployment through financing support.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then our next project is again at FFA. It's our swimming pool renovation and repair project.
• </c> our uh next project is again at FFA. our uh next project is again at FFA.
• </c> campus education enhancements project. campus education enhancements project.
• </c> KET projects. KET projects.
• </c> renovation project. renovation project. Thank<00:58:20.319><c> you.

Summary: The Capital Planning Advisory Board met for its first meeting of the year, confirmed a quorum, approved the prior year’s minutes, and welcomed new co-chairs and members. The board reviewed the capital planning timeline and a list of agencies that submitted plans but would not testify. Members were reminded to keep presentations brief because of a packed agenda. The Cabinet for Health and Family Services presented first, outlining priorities centered on public safety, infrastructure preservation, and preventive maintenance. Its requests included a $21 million maintenance pool, phase two funding for a new state public health laboratory, construction of an 18-bed children’s psychiatric hospital, and several projects at Western State Hospital and Western State Nursing Facility, including HVAC work, cooling tower repair or replacement, and chiller plant repiping. Additional projects covered elevator upgrades at Hazlewood and phased cottage renovations at Oakwood. Board members asked about vacant buildings, the cost per bed for the youth psychiatric facility, and the relationship between the CHFS youth facility and a separate DJJ facility; CHFS said the youth facility would serve DCBS-involved youth and be separate from the DJJ project. The Kentucky Department of Education then described its state-operated facilities, including the Kentucky School for the Deaf, the Kentucky School for the Blind, and the FFA leadership training center. Its priorities included additional funding for the FFA classroom and activity building, a rewrite of the SEEK education finance application system, renovation and repair of the FFA swimming pool, electrical upgrades, campus education enhancements, safety and security work, door and window replacements, and HVAC maintenance. Members asked about student outcomes, the size and cost of the swimming pool project, and construction cost assumptions; KDE said it tracks student outcomes through special education staff and that current estimates reflect higher post-COVID construction costs. The Education and Labor Cabinet began its presentation with 12 priority projects, including a state labor exchange system, renovation of the McDow Vocational Rehabilitation Center, and a new adult education and family literacy management information system. The cabinet said the labor exchange would connect job seekers and employers at no cost, while the McDow renovation was needed because the 30-year-old facility faces safety and code concerns. The cabinet planned to continue through the remaining priorities and answer questions at the end of its presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• President, House Bill 206 is the annual water project fund project authorization bill.
• Let's go back, let's go back to the fact that these projects are not state projects.
• President, the project is defined through the IRB. It's the construction project.
• construction project.
• They're local projects, the city, they pay prevailing wage, local projects, city projects, so.

Transcript Highlights:

• The supplemental revenue from land leases for solar projects and other renewable energy projects can
• If it's a community solar project, it may not be.
• So there's a benefit, if it's a community solar project, it may not be.
• Bergman shared, so we're not talking about billion-dollar projects.
• I'm not sure if there are current projects in the country of Yemen.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Revenue

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 3256, a bill stemming from the Massachusetts Cranberry Revitalization Task Force that would remove Chapter 61A barriers for certain renewable energy projects on non-producing agricultural land. Supporters said the bill would let farmers separate adjacent land from Chapter 61A without a municipal right of first refusal, avoid rollback and advance tax penalties, and use small solar or other renewable projects to generate supplemental income while keeping the farm in operation. Testimony emphasized that the proposal is intended to be “farm-first,” limited to marginal or accessory land, and could also produce local tax revenue for municipalities. Some members raised concerns about whether the bill should be limited to solar, the appropriate project size, impacts on other agricultural sectors, and whether future sales or conversion back to other uses should trigger local rights of first refusal. Witnesses said the bill had been reported favorably in a prior session and noted that similar projects typically involve 20-year leases with extensions. The committee also took testimony on S. 2009, which would authorize regional transportation ballot initiatives. MAPC and Transportation for Mass argued that the bill would give municipalities and groups of municipalities a flexible tool to raise local revenue for transportation projects such as transit, roads, bridges, bikeways, and pedestrian infrastructure, with sunset provisions so the revenue ends when the project ends. They said the measure would not raise taxes on its own, but would allow local voters to decide whether to adopt a revenue source, and pointed to examples from other states where similar initiatives funded major transit and infrastructure projects. No votes were taken during the hearing. Testimony was also heard on S. 1922, which would create a Massachusetts fund allowing voluntary taxpayer donations to the UN Least Developed Countries Fund or related 501(c)(3) nonprofits supporting climate-vulnerable communities. Climate Reality Project representatives said the bill would let Massachusetts residents support climate resilience projects in the world’s poorest countries at no cost to the Commonwealth, and could serve as a model for other states. Senators questioned how recipient countries and nonprofits would be selected, what safeguards would exist regarding countries such as Yemen, and how taxpayers would know where donations would go; witnesses said the fund would be administered through the UN system and that they would provide more clarification. Rep. Michelle Ciccolo also testified on H. 3051, seeking a one-year deferral of the higher interest rate that applies when deferred property taxes become due after the death of a senior or veteran, saying the current jump to 16% can burden heirs and discourage use of the deferral program. The hearing concluded without any votes or committee actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• 10:08.080><c> five</c> capital projects includes five capital projects includes five maintenance<00:10
• </c> maintenance related capital projects. maintenance related capital projects.
• Important projects, but those projects that don't always get the top listing and they're not the most
• Again, the project was ranked pretty low. It was number 24 out of 25 projects.
• > ranked</c><00:24:38.000><c> pretty</c> Again, the project was ranked pretty Again, the project was

Summary: The House Budget Review Subcommittee on Transportation met without a quorum at first, then later approved the minutes once quorum was established. The committee heard presentations from Transportation Cabinet officials Mike Hancock, Jeremy Slinker, and Sean McCarnieran on maintenance, vehicle regulation, general administration, highways, and related capital projects. Hancock emphasized that maintenance is the cabinet’s most visible public service, especially for snow and ice removal and routine roadway upkeep, and said rising costs have outpaced funding. He cited a 61% increase in highway construction costs since 2020 and said maintenance spending was $488 million in FY 2024 and $511 million in FY 2025, while the FY 2026 baseline request was $483.3 million. The cabinet’s additional maintenance request would add $23.6 million in FY 2027 and $38.6 million in FY 2028, with expected impacts on litter pickup, mowing, vegetation management, and pothole repair if not funded. The cabinet also outlined five maintenance-related capital projects: additional funding for Ballard County maintenance/salt storage, Hopkins County maintenance/salt storage, Whitley County maintenance/salt structure, and the District 2 office and materials lab, plus reauthorization of the Breckinridge County maintenance and salt facility. Hancock also asked for budget language allowing the cabinet to use unexpected restricted and federal funds more quickly, similar to existing authority for federal earmarks. McCarnieran described the governor’s inclusion of funding for the ASHTOWare system, employee health exams, priority IT projects, and a District 7 office renovation request, noting that some items were not funded because they ranked low among competing projects. He also said the governor’s budget included a $7.5 million annual maintenance pool for the cabinet’s 1,200 facilities and requested additional restricted fund authority for Trimark and the Cumberland Gap Tunnel. Slinker focused on the Department of Vehicle Regulation, saying recent investments in staffing and equipment had reduced wait times and improved customer service in driver licensing offices. He requested $535,600 to keep temporary contract workers in place for the rest of the year, warning that without it regional office operations would have to be reduced. He said the surge in demand was driven by new 15-year-old licensing requirements, vision testing, and Real ID implementation, but believed the volume was beginning to level out. He also outlined FY 2027 and FY 2028 plans totaling $20.38 million and $19.85 million, including six new regional offices and a shift away from temporary workers toward state positions. Additional requests included $106,000 for debt service on the new driver’s license modernization system and operating costs of $5 million in FY 2027 and $2.5 million in FY 2028 to support the transition from the old system. Members asked about the cabinet’s funding sources, and officials said the road fund is the primary source, supported by motor fuels tax, usage tax, driver-related receipts, and some restricted funds; they stressed that the requests were not for additional general fund dollars. Questions also covered employee health exam reimbursements, the annual Trimark/Cumberland Gap contract, and the District 7 renovation request. No votes were taken on the budget items during the meeting, beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Compared to a general capital project.
• Can't really do any project for that.
• Each sheriff wishes to submit a project.
• I mentioned the project in Suffolk County right now that is happening as an energy efficiency project
• Of the projects.

Summary: The Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration met on October 17 with members attending in person and virtually. The commission approved the September 15 minutes and then heard a detailed presentation from DCAM Commissioner Adam Bakey on the correctional facilities portfolio, including the age and condition of DOC and sheriff facilities, deferred maintenance, ADA compliance, decarbonization mandates, and how capital funding is allocated. Bakey said the correctional portfolio includes 36 facilities, with average ages over 50 years, and described how older, rapidly built facilities from the tough-on-crime era now face significant maintenance and replacement needs. He also explained the distinction between catch-up deferred maintenance and ongoing keep-up needs, and noted that construction costs and code thresholds have made projects more expensive. Commissioners and sheriffs asked about ADA requirements, aging and overcrowded facilities, hazardous materials, parts availability for obsolete systems, plumbing and health risks, and whether a newer, more modern correctional facility should be considered. Bakey said many projects trigger broader code upgrades, that some dormant facilities remain in the portfolio, and that health-care and correctional construction are among the most expensive building types. He outlined current funding, including annual deferred maintenance allocations for DOC and formula-based five-year commitments for sheriffs, plus a new competitive capital program for larger sheriff projects. He also explained the Designer Selection Board and “house doctor” process used to procure architects and engineers. The commission then shifted to planning its next steps, focusing on public input. Members agreed the next meeting should likely be a public hearing or include public testimony, with possible input from people with lived experience and consideration of facility tours, especially of women’s facilities such as Framingham. Members emphasized the need to define the commission’s scope clearly so testimony stays focused on structural and consolidation issues rather than all correctional policy topics. The meeting ended with plans for the co-chairs to coordinate the public process and a motion to adjourn, which passed without opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• In Rosemount, they had Project Bigfoot. In Hermantown, it's Project Loon.
• In North Mankato, it's Project Deacon. In Farmington, it's Project Bengal.
• In Monticello, it's Project Groundhog. In Pine Island, it's Project Skyway.
• In Hermantown, it's Project Bigfoot. In Hermantown, it's Project<00:09:59.640><c> Loon.
• In Farmington, it's Project Deacon. In Farmington, it's Project<00:10:03.600><c> Bengal.

Summary: Lawmakers held a bipartisan press availability on a bill to prohibit local governments and their officials from entering into non-disclosure agreements with private entities. Supporters said the measure is intended to protect transparency, public participation, and Minnesotans’ right to know about local decisions involving land use, public financing, and economic development, especially in cases involving data centers and other large projects. Representatives and senators from both parties described the bill as a response to examples in cities such as Rosemount, Farmington, Hermantown, North Mankato, Monticello, Pine Island, and others, where they said NDAs kept communities from learning about projects until decisions were effectively already made. The authors argued that the bill is not anti-development or limited to data centers, but instead prevents corporations from using private contracts to circumvent Minnesota’s open meeting and data practices laws. They said Chapter 13 already addresses trade secrets and other confidential information, and that the bill is meant to stop NDAs from creating secrecy around government decision-making. They also said they had heard little organized opposition so far, though they acknowledged questions about how the bill would affect early-stage business recruitment conversations and how local governments, especially smaller ones, would implement the change. Members also discussed the bill’s legislative path. They said it had previously received unanimous support in committee and was sent to the general register, then moved to the Judiciary Committee at the request of Chair Scott, who wanted a hearing. The authors said they did not believe the bill raised Chapter 13 issues requiring judiciary review, but agreed to the referral as a courtesy and said they were seeking a hearing. They reported that Senate consideration had previously ended in a tie vote, but said momentum was growing and expected stronger support this session. No vote was taken during the press event.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do require that projects of 1 to 3 million dollars report to the Capital Projects and Bond Oversight
• Committee and make a note that relative to the Hardin County project that when the HVAC project is completed
• ><c> county</c> uh HVAC project is completed, the county uh HVAC project is completed, the county must
• <00:07:21.640><c> $318</c> authorize capital projects totaling $318 authorize capital projects totaling
• </c> projects totaling $420,000. projects totaling $420,000.

Summary: The Kentucky Senate Appropriations and Revenue Committee met with a quorum and first took up House Bill 503, the legislative branch budget, adopting a committee substitute and reporting it favorably. The chair said the Senate version fully funds defined calculations, provides 2% raises in each fiscal year for legislative employees, removes a paragraph on operating expense reductions, and includes $1 million in the first year for a judicial branch salary study. House Bill 504, the judicial branch budget, was then amended and reported favorably; changes included 2% annual raises for judicial employees, revised operating expense language, $1 million each year for county current services, retention of Boyle County fit-up language, reporting requirements for smaller capital projects, full funding for nine judges added in 2022, and removal of furlough prohibitions and certain budget implementation language. Both bills passed the committee unanimously with favorable expressions to the floor. The committee then considered House Bill 500, the executive branch budget, adopting a committee substitute before hearing a lengthy summary of major spending and policy changes. The chair described statewide 2% annual employee raises, agency base reductions with many exemptions, increased school safety and 911 funding, veterans and military funding, local government and severance-related changes, attorney general and auditor funding, pension and retirement system support, education funding changes including SEEK, postsecondary and scholarship provisions, public safety and corrections funding, and multiple capital projects. The chair also highlighted Medicaid-related provisions, including added waiver slots, increased state-directed payments, a 2.5% reduction in managed care vendor payments for plan years 2027 and 2028 with savings redirected to fee-for-service rates, and additional funding for behavioral health and public health programs. The bill was reported favorably after members explained their votes, with several noting they had only recently received the full 228-page bill and wanted more time for detailed review. Finally, the committee adopted a committee substitute for House Bill 900, an appropriation measure for government agencies, and reported it favorably. The chair said the bill remains a work in progress and that one-time funding requests from across the Commonwealth and across party lines would continue to be addressed as the process moves forward. All measures considered during the meeting passed the committee with unanimous or near-unanimous favorable votes, and the meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• non-road-related projects such as wetland restoration.
• putting projects there.
• And then lastly, auditing the Build NCC project because it included non-roadway projects like the San
• required for the road widening projects themselves.
• As it relates to the NCC project, sure, there are some examples.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee met to consider new audit requests. The State Auditor reported 10 JALAC audits in progress, with several expected to be published over the coming months, and noted that litigation is delaying the Huntington Beach air show audit. The committee approved a consent calendar of four audit requests covering UC library resources, law enforcement information sharing, EDD unemployment insurance claims, and Housing and Community Development housing development monitoring. The committee then heard Assembly Member DeMaio’s request for an audit of SANDAG’s road project management and use of transportation funds. DeMaio argued the audit was needed to restore public trust and examine whether restricted funds, voter-approved revenues, and project commitments were properly handled. SANDAG’s CEO and CFO said the agency manages many funding sources, undergoes frequent audits, and has strengthened internal controls; they said the requested review would be duplicative of existing oversight. After debate, the committee voted the request down. Next, Senator Valadares presented an audit of the Board of State and Community Corrections’ Proposition 47 grant administration, focusing on whether grantees and BSCC are accurately reporting outcomes and recidivism data and whether oversight is sufficient. BSCC said the program already has multiple oversight layers, including Controller audits, and cited reported improvements in homelessness, employment, and recidivism outcomes. The committee approved the audit. Finally, Senator Cortese’s audit of CalHR’s dental benefits procurement and contract oversight was heard, with supporters citing long-standing benefit caps, provider network problems, and retirees’ out-of-pocket costs. CalHR said its network remains strong, that it recently ran an RFP adding MetLife as a second carrier starting in 2027, and that it uses performance guarantees. The committee approved that audit as well, then completed add-on votes approving the earlier consent calendar items before adjourning.