Transcript Highlights:

• So we are concerned about the proposed reduction in the program in the governor's budget.
• We did see a reduction of about 15% in campus workload across the whole system.
• We did see a reduction of about 15% in campus workload across the whole system.
• I have not heard of any reduction, but I also have not...
• I haven't heard of any reduction of applicants for the programs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Cap and Invest Program is the broadest carbon emissions reduction program in Washington.
• Is there double counting of the reduction?
• under CCA, is there double counting of the reduction?
• Rather than dilute the emission reductions designed by CETA, we encourage the use of 100%.
• To that point, the bill does not guarantee a reduction in emissions.

Bills: HB2272, HB2285, HB2296

Keywords: ski areas, winter sports, terminology update, recreation, regulatory changes, carbon capture, clean energy, environmental regulation, sustainability, green technology, distributed energy, renewable energy, energy resources, energy policy, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• reduction of 820 million.
• :33.760><c> of</c><00:15:33.920><c> future</c> results in a reduction of future results in a reduction
• a contingent reduction there's a contingent reduction associated<00:16:11.360><c> with</c><00:16:11.519
• So this has a fiscal year 2025 reduction of just over $35 million, a 2026-27 total reduction of $42.1
• temporary reduction of DT&amp;H grants, temporary reduction of DT&amp;H grants, though<00:30:56.159>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When there are reductions on the Program Support side, how do you ensure that it's not across the board
• ...that those programmatic are desegregated from the operational in looking at reductions?
• We see those reductions like the reductions... I think what you're hitting at is those reductions.
• We see those reductions, like the reductions we received this biennium, was to our operations, which
• So for sort of the budget reductions, I...

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, reasonable regulation, strong methane reduction.
• Voluntary efforts to achieve net reductions may develop on tribal land and be certified as a net reduction
• It's being sold as a simple codification and emissions reduction bill.
• Over time, emission reduction efforts had made a visible difference.
• She's just so happy about the methane reduction. We want continued methane reduction.

Summary: The committee first took up the proposed 2026 tax package, Senate Bill 151, and adopted a committee substitute after discussion of the package’s funding capacity and included measures. The substitute bundled five bills: a physician tax credit, a quantum facility infrastructure tax credit, a construction materials gross receipts deduction for affordable multifamily housing, a local journalist employment tax credit, and a health equipment gross receipts deduction. Members discussed amendments that raised the physician credit from $4,000 to $10,000, narrowed the housing deduction to project-based certification, and reduced the journalist credit threshold from four stories to three. Concerns were raised about the fiscal impact on municipalities, especially Albuquerque, and about the funding mechanism, but the committee voted 6-4 to give the substitute a do pass recommendation. Senator Sanchez explained his vote, saying he wished more could have been included in the package. The committee then heard Senate Bill 18, the Clear Horizons Act, which would codify statewide greenhouse gas reduction targets and direct the Environment Department and Environmental Improvement Board to develop plans and rules for emissions reductions. The sponsors said the bill builds on the governor’s 2019 executive order, includes a 10,000-metric-ton threshold for covered emitters, allows certified offsets, and is intended to protect public health, reduce climate-related costs, and provide regulatory certainty. Supporters argued the bill would help communities facing wildfire, drought, health harms, and rising insurance and utility costs, and that it would encourage clean-energy investment and long-term economic stability. Opposition testimony came from mining, oil and gas, rural electric cooperatives, construction, agriculture, auto dealers, chambers of commerce, banks, water recycling companies, and realtors. They argued the bill functions like a carbon tax or broad regulatory mandate, would raise energy and compliance costs, could reduce investment and jobs, and would disproportionately affect rural, tribal, agricultural, and low-income communities. Several witnesses warned of higher electricity and fuel bills, revenue losses for local governments, and uncertainty from delegating major policy decisions to rulemaking. Supporters included public health advocates, educators, local officials, clean-energy businesses, tribal and environmental advocates, and residents affected by wildfire and drought, who said the bill is necessary to address climate harms and protect public health and the economy. No final committee vote on SB 18 was reached in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• . saying stigma reduction.
• We acknowledge there's about a $1.6 million reduction that results to the CCR: $720,000 will be a reduction
• $1.6 million reduction that a result to the CCR. 720,000 will be a reduction from Prop 99, and then there's
• an $850,000 reduction related to Prop 56.
• At the same time, public hospitals face $4 billion in reductions.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And this budget does not have spending reductions sufficient to cover... ...does not have spending reductions
• The budget locks in savings from coverage reductions as a structural baseline.
• The budget locks in savings from coverage reductions as a structural baseline.
• Any reduction in costs are currently used to balance the budget.
• We also need to continue negotiations around the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It also covers various activities related to GHG reduction.
• One is just the emission reductions.
• One is just the emission reductions.
• One is just the emission reductions.
• reduction is the key.

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:

• This was funded with Inflation Reduction Act funds.
• This is really important because the reductions in NOx and PM are critical.
• So we've been running our diesel reduction grant program for over two decades now.
• So we're obviously going to be talking about carbon reduction a lot today.
• On emissions, we don't have verified reductions yet.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• However, the emissions reduction objective for the preference is not met.
• And together with the vehicles, they reach 45% of the target reduction.
• And the second scenario is... ...45% of the target reduction.
• Public documentation... 45% of the target reduction.
• B&O tax rate reduction of 82% due to the preferences.

Summary: House Finance met in work session on January 13, 2026, beginning with the introduction of new member Rep. Janice Zahn and a reminder about short-session amendment deadlines. The committee then heard JLARC’s 2025 tax preference performance reviews, covering nine preferences. JLARC recommended continuing several preferences, including natural gas transportation fuel exemptions, reduced B&O rates for travel agents and tour operators, a property tax exemption for nonprofit low-income housing developers, a property tax exemption for multipurpose senior centers, a sales and use tax remittance for disabled veteran adapted housing, a trade convention attendance nexus exemption, a B&O exemption for agricultural fertilizer and seed sales, and a hazardous substance tax exemption for certain pesticides. JLARC also recommended allowing unused silicon smelter-related preferences to expire. Members asked about legislative intent, data limitations, and how performance metrics should be tied more clearly to policy objectives; committee leaders and JLARC staff discussed a new standardized rubric for future tax preference performance statements and fiscal note review. The committee also noted that bills related to some of the reviewed preferences were already introduced. For the low-income housing exemption, JLARC said nonprofit developers were building homes as intended but that the current spending-based metric did not fully reflect the policy goal, and it recommended the legislature decide whether to continue or modify the preference. For multipurpose senior centers, JLARC said the exemption met its inferred objective and recommended continuation, with possible consideration of making it permanent. For the disabled veteran adapted housing remittance, JLARC said few eligible veterans were claiming the benefit and recommended continuation with changes to improve access and consultation with the Department of Veterans Affairs. On the trade convention attendance exemption, JLARC said use was unknown but the preference likely helped keep Washington competitive with other states and recommended continuation, though members questioned the lack of direct evidence and the administrative-burden rationale. The committee then received an update from the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council. The forecast showed the U.S. economy slowing but still growing, with Washington expected to have modest growth, weak employment gains, continued personal income growth, and slow construction. ERFC said tariffs and trade policy remained the biggest risks, inflation was expected to stay elevated in the near term, and the Federal Reserve had cut rates three times in 2025 with two more cuts projected in 2026. State revenues were up $105 million in the current biennium compared with the November forecast, but down $185 million in the next biennium, with growth driven in part by recent legislative changes and improved estate tax collections. Members asked about sector-specific employment trends, the impact of high-income households on retail sales, and how state revenues compare with personal income over time. The meeting adjourned after the forecast presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Amendment 14, offered by Senator Robinson, corrects the reduction amount to TANF workforce services,
• The fiscal impact is a one-time reduction of $45,000 over the 2025-2027 biennium. which the Senate's
• The fiscal impact is a one-time reduction of $45,000 over the 25-27.
• The fiscal impact is a one-time reduction of $45,000 over the 2025-2027 biennium in total funds.
• The amendment removes the reduction to the Running Start FTE amount.

Summary: The Senate Ways and Means Committee met in executive session on Senate Bill 5998, the proposed operating budget, and received a staff briefing on 39 proposed amendments. The amendments covered a wide range of issues, including technical corrections; truancy intervention funding; public defense and Blake-related vacatur work; family reading, shellfish program review, cultural resource protection, agritourism, transmission planning, paid leave, developmental disabilities services, nursing home rates, TANF workforce services, food bank language, oral health access, behavioral health partnership access, sexual assault nurse examiner training, Department of Corrections security measures, child welfare staffing, pediatric interim care centers, Working Connections Child Care, range rider funding, Chinese American history month materials, Running Start, retiree health subsidies, school bus contractor costs, local effort assistance, transition to kindergarten, charter school enrichment, arts grants, and a tribal liaison position. Several amendments were withdrawn before action, including the truancy increase, Blake funding, one DD-related amendment, and others. The committee adopted a number of amendments, including the technical corrections packet, reductions or savings-related corrections, the family reading program, shellfish review funding, the transmission-system implementation funding, the oral health foundation, the partnership access line, health technology assessment funding, the governor errata correction, the sexual assault nurse examiner training contract, the DOC canine scheduling language, the child welfare staffing correction, the people transportation language, the TTK-related amendment, and the tribal liaison funding. It rejected several others, including agritourism, paid leave study language, DD waiver expansion, nursing home add-ons, the PIC program, range rider funding, Chinese American history month materials, Running Start restoration, the LEA restoration amendment, and the arts grant restoration. Some amendments were withdrawn after discussion, including the DD waiver and LEA-related proposals. During debate, supporters of various amendments emphasized service needs for vulnerable populations, including people with developmental disabilities, survivors of sexual assault, Medicaid dental access, behavioral health callers, and students in Running Start and TTK. Opponents repeatedly cited budget constraints, the need for a sustainable operating budget, and the view that some issues were better addressed through collective bargaining or future negotiations. The committee then rolled the adopted amendments into a new substitute Senate Bill 5998 and voted to send it to the Rules Committee with a do-pass recommendation, subject to signatures. Several members stated they would vote no on the budget overall, while others supported it as a difficult but necessary compromise. The meeting adjourned after the final vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• For Waseca sanitary sewer I&I reduction, $8.9 million.
• ><c> reduce</c><00:26:28.040><c> revenue</c> so this reduction would reduce revenue so this reduction
• Uh for a one-time license fee reduction.
• A one-year reduction is great.
• Uh Um a a one-year reduction is great.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The committee took up a large bonding bill and reviewed the final spreadsheet of capital investments. Chairs and members repeatedly thanked staff, House and Senate negotiators, and the Governor’s team for a collaborative process. The bill was described as a statewide package rather than a partisan one, with major funding for higher education asset preservation, DNR projects, public safety, transportation, the Met Council, veterans facilities, corrections, DEED/local projects, and a large water infrastructure section. House Fiscal staff and Senate fiscal staff walked through the bill line by line. Highlights included University of Minnesota and Minnesota State asset preservation, education and language immersion school funding, DNR trail and flood mitigation projects, public safety facilities, local road and bridge grants, Met Council parks and I/I grants, veterans home and armory funding, corrections projects including the Faribault vocational expansion, and many local economic development and public facility projects across Greater Minnesota and the metro. The bill also included Public Facilities Authority water and wastewater grants, housing rehabilitation funding, historical society grants, a Minnesota Zoo operating transfer, airport appropriations, and several cancellations of prior appropriations to help finance the package. Members generally praised the bill and the bipartisan work behind it. Some Republicans emphasized the one-time license fee reduction and affordability, while also saying DEED’s business development infrastructure funding was too low. Senator Nelson highlighted long-awaited transportation projects such as Highway 14 and township roads. Senator Dibble supported the transportation investments but criticized the bill for having no transit funding, calling that a major omission. No vote was recorded in the excerpt, but the discussion centered on final review and support for moving the bonding bill forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Since there is no funding, it focuses on greenhouse gas reductions... ...and ensures that the critical
• It's twofold: that's not only the reduction of greenhouse gases, it's also a reduction of VMT per capita
• It's twofold: that's not only the reduction of greenhouse gases, it's also a reduction of VMT per capita
• It also saves money—$91 billion by 2050 if we can hit our 20% reduction per capita.
• If we can hit our 20% reduction per capita.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 748, a bill revising Minnesota’s transportation greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact assessment requirements for trunk highway projects. The chair first moved and adopted the A2 author’s amendment and then the A3 amendment, which was described as adding implementation time and project exemptions when federal dollars are available. The bill author explained that the measure responds to concerns from stakeholders that the current law can force costly mitigation, delay or stop safety and capacity projects, and create uncertainty because key implementation details are still being developed by a technical advisory committee. Testimony was split. County and city engineers, county commissioners, the Minnesota Transportation Alliance, and the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities generally supported the bill, arguing that the current requirements can add 20% to 40% or more to project costs, are difficult to administer, and could jeopardize critical safety improvements, congestion relief, and federal funding. They cited examples such as Scott County and Trunk Highway 65, and said VMT mitigation is especially hard to quantify and fund. Opponents, including Move Minnesota and Sierra Club, argued that safety and climate goals are not in conflict, that reducing driving can save lives and reduce pollution, and that the bill would weaken an important tool for cutting transportation emissions. Members also asked about how GHG and VMT are measured, whether the required assessment was ready, and who would be responsible for mitigation assets and costs. After discussion, the committee held a roll call vote. The bill, as amended, passed 8-7 and was moved to the General Register.

Transcript Highlights:

• Over 76% of the 10-year reductions would occur in the final five years of that 10-year period, so 2029
• Changes to provider taxes, specifically<00:09:15.200><c> the</c><00:09:15.440><c> reduction</c><00:09
• hold specifically the reduction in the hold harmless<00:09:16.800><c> threshold</c><00:09:17.200><c>
• ><c> occur</c><00:09:50.959><c> in</c><00:09:51.279><c> the</c> 10-year reductions would occur in the
• 10-year reductions would occur in the final<00:09:52.080><c> 5</c><00:09:52.480><c> years</c><00:09:

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: At its second meeting on July 30, 2025, the Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board approved the minutes from its June 25 meeting and received housekeeping materials, including follow-up information on provider taxes, mandatory and optional Medicaid services, and the 1115 community engagement waiver. The chair noted that members should hold general questions until the end of the meeting. The main presentation came from Katherine Castanza of the National Conference of State Legislators, who gave a nonpartisan overview of Medicaid provisions in HR1. She explained that the bill contains more than 20 Medicaid-related provisions, with major changes affecting provider taxes, state-directed payments, eligibility and enrollment rules, work or community engagement requirements, and the frequency of eligibility redeterminations for expansion populations. She emphasized that five provisions account for most of the federal savings, that the fiscal effects are backloaded into the final years of the 10-year window, and that expansion states and provider payment changes make up a large share of the impact. Castanza also highlighted that the Medicaid provisions would take effect either upon enactment or before October 1, 2029, creating roughly a five-year implementation period. She noted that some states may not realize the same savings as the federal government because of financing changes and implementation responsibilities, and she cited estimates that the enacted Senate provisions could reduce hospital payments by 18.2%, or more than $660 billion over 10 years. The transcript provided does not show any votes or final actions beyond adoption of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• We oppose the $20 million BHSA reduction. Thank you. Thank you.
• We oppose the $20 million BHSA reduction. Thank you.
• So I think for the reductions, those are the primary two proposals.
• Last item is CalRx reduction.
• Last item is Calorex reduction.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held an informational hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, focusing first on the Commission on Behavioral Health, then EMSA, and then the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). The Department of Finance said the state faces a third consecutive deficit and that the May Revision includes difficult trade-offs, including proposed eliminations or reversions of some behavioral health and public health funds. The LAO echoed concern about the structural deficit and said it was still awaiting some budget details before offering a full analysis. For the Commission on Behavioral Health, Finance proposed eliminating $20 million in Mental Health Wellness Act funds, arguing the money would help offset General Fund costs and noting future Proposition 1 innovation funding. The commission strongly opposed the cut, saying it would eliminate or delay launch-ready grants for early childhood supports, full-service partnerships, and peer respite, and would eventually end ongoing grant programming. Several advocates and commissioners testified that the funds support underserved communities and that Proposition 1 is not a substitute for the existing programs. The chair asked Finance to look for alternatives, but no vote was taken. EMSA presented mostly technical budget adjustments: increased authority for the California Poison Control System, a correction to EMSIS funding, and a reappropriation for enterprise services and data management. CDPH then reviewed a broader set of May Revision proposals, including reversions from the California Reducing Disparities Project, workforce development, STD prevention, hepatitis C prevention, hospice, and extreme heat funding, as well as a new generative AI pilot for health facility survey reporting. Members raised concerns about cuts to CRDP and gender health equity programs, especially because many grants are mid-contract and serve underserved communities; CDPH said the reversions were part of solving the deficit and that CRDP had been successful, while also clarifying that abortion.ca.gov would not be eliminated. Public comment was overwhelmingly opposed to the CRDP and related cuts, with many speakers describing the programs as life-saving and cost-effective. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are concerned about the proposed reduction in the program in the governor's budget.
• We did see a reduction of about 15% in campus workload across the whole system.
• We did see a reduction of about 15% in campus workload across the whole system.
• Their tuition costs will not be impacted by the reduction to the Middle Class Scholarship.
• I haven't heard of any reduction of applicants for the programs.

Summary: The subcommittee on Education Finance heard an overview of the governor’s budget proposals and higher education financial aid trends, with a major focus on the Middle Class Scholarship (MCS), Cal Grant spending, and the effects of recent federal student aid changes. The Department of Finance said the budget would fully fund Cal Grant at projected levels and reduce MCS coverage from 35% to 17.5% of unmet need in 2026-27, while the Legislative Analyst’s Office supported considering the reduction as a cost-saving measure given out-year deficits. UC and CSU representatives opposed the cut, saying MCS is important to affordability and debt-free degree goals; they estimated average awards would fall substantially and that campuses do not have funds to backfill the loss. The Student Aid Commission said the proposal would reduce aid but simplify administration, and members questioned how lower awards would affect students, borrowing, and work-study options. No vote was taken, and the issue was held open for possible future action. The committee then discussed federal changes to student loans and Pell Grant policy under H.R. 1, including caps on Parent PLUS loans, elimination of Grad PLUS loans, and new proration rules for federal direct loans based on enrollment intensity. The LAO said these changes would likely push some borrowers into the private market, especially graduate and professional students and some parents of students at private institutions. CSU said the changes would affect thousands of graduate and part-time students and could reduce access by about $97 million in loan availability for part-time borrowers, while UC said the new definitions of professional degrees were too restrictive and would reduce access for nursing, teaching, law, dentistry, and other programs. Community colleges said they use relatively little federal loan aid but are monitoring Workforce Pell. Members raised concerns about workforce impacts, social mobility, and whether the state should consider alternative loan programs or other ways to reduce student costs. This issue was also held open. In the segment financial aid update, the LAO reported Cal Grant spending is projected to rise to about $3.2 billion in 2026-27, driven by more recipients and higher awards tied to UC and CSU tuition increases, while CSAC said FAFSA and CADAA applications are up significantly year over year. CSU, community colleges, and UC described their aid packaging and rising aid totals, with CSU reporting over $5.5 billion in aid to 381,000 students, community colleges reporting over $4.3 billion to more than 920,000 students, and UC reporting $3.17 billion in grant aid to undergraduates. Members asked about Cal Grant reform, application trends, and long-term outcomes; UC and community colleges pointed to alumni and wage dashboards, and the LAO noted the state’s Cradle to Career data effort. The committee then took public comment, including testimony on library funding and other education-related priorities, and concluded by holding the issues open without formal action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Within the environmental silo, this includes reductions in excess federal budget authority and reduction
• in includes 850 million in recurring reductions in 354 FTE.
• Within the environmental silo, this includes reductions in excess federal budget authority and reduction
• These reductions are achieved through efficiencies gained and strategic investments.
• And if so, why was there a reduction in that grant program? Thank you for the question.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government met to hear presentations on the Governor’s proposed fiscal year 2026-2027 “Florida’s first” budget for environmental and general government agencies, and to act on several confirmation appointments. The committee first unanimously recommended confirmation of five appointees to water management district and basin board positions. It then heard an environmental budget overview from the Governor’s Office and DEP Secretary Alexis Lambert, followed by a general government budget presentation from Olivia McCaffrey and agency leaders. In the environmental presentation, the administration highlighted a proposed $5.8 billion environmental budget, including more than $1.4 billion for water resources, with $810 million for Everglades restoration, $408 million for water quality, $202 million for Resilient Florida, $75 million for beach renourishment, $150 million for Florida Forever and $70 million for state park infrastructure, and $221 million for hazardous waste cleanup. Additional proposals included funding for FWC law enforcement, boating access, manatee care, python removal, oyster reef restoration, forestry and wildfire equipment, and citrus research and disease prevention. Senators asked about Florida Forever funding, state park wastewater and septic needs, a cut to the Florida Wildlife Research Institute, and how beach renourishment funding would be used after storms. In the general government presentation, the administration outlined budget recommendations for DBPR, the Florida Gaming Control Commission, the Lottery, DMS, PERC, DFS/OIR/OFR, and Revenue. Highlights included DBPR funding for licensing processing, an animal abuse hotline, vehicles, and IT recruitment; FGCC funding for new enforcement squads and a licensing/enforcement IT system; Lottery funding for marketing, retail engagement, IT, and retention; DMS funding for building modernization, fleet telematics, 911 and radio upgrades, cybersecurity, and local cybersecurity grants; PERC funding to handle increased union-related caseloads after SB 256; DFS funding for My Safe Florida Home, fire marshal and first responder support, and financial investigations; and Revenue funding for operations, IT modernization, and fiscally constrained counties. Members questioned funding levels for Florida Forever, state parks, local cybersecurity grants, DBPR fraud and transparency initiatives, and the My Safe Florida Home program’s unused grant balances and matching requirements. No additional votes were taken, and the committee adjourned without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, there's a $4.5 million reduction in fees and self-generated revenues, partially for a reduction
• So I'll start us off with the... there's a $10 million reduction.
• So I'm going to start us off with the... there's a $10 million reduction.
• I'd mentioned earlier what you're— what's reflected there is the reduction.
• Overall, they are seeing a $3.7 million reduction in their budget, or a 2.3% reduction.

Summary: The committee first heard the FY27 executive budget review for Louisiana Economic Development (LED). House Fiscal outlined a $59.4 million LED budget, with major funding from state general fund, self-generated revenue, federal funds, and a marketing dedication, and explained reductions tied largely to the removal of one-time funding and carryforwards. The Secretary highlighted recent economic development results, including major capital investment announcements, job creation, the high-impact jobs program, Louisiana Fast Sites, and efforts to support existing businesses and small business growth. Members repeatedly asked for clearer public-facing materials on the tax and economic benefits of incentives, the use of the entertainment development fund, the structure of the high-impact jobs and Fast Sites programs, and how LED competes with other states. LED also discussed its Storyteller Initiative, regional project distribution, and the role of major events and film-related incentives. The committee then reviewed Louisiana Works’ FY27 budget of $352.7 million. Staff explained that the budget is driven mainly by federal funds and statutory dedications, with changes largely attributable to the One Door to Work Act and the transfer of workforce functions and positions into the department. The Secretary noted a planned $5 million move for the Louisiana STEM Council and a small request for elevator repairs, and members discussed the unemployment insurance trust fund’s improved balance, which lowered employer tax rates and increased benefits. Questions focused on workforce shortages, coordination with LCTCS and other training partners, the new Louisiana Talent Accelerator and workforce modernization efforts, the need for marketing to attract workers back to Louisiana, and remaining gaps in funding for rehabilitation services and disability employment programs. Finally, the committee took up the Department of Conservation and Energy’s FY27 budget of $201.3 million. Staff described decreases tied to the end of the Solar for All grant, lower orphan well spending as prior balances were drawn down, and reductions in some one-time funding and interagency transfers. The Secretary said the department’s reorganization is now largely complete and emphasized a focus on eliminating duplicative functions, strengthening enforcement and permitting, and using available funds more efficiently. Members questioned the reduction in orphan well funding, the impact of the Solar for All repeal, the use of settlement dollars, and the department’s plans for AI-assisted permitting and modernization of the Sunrise database. They also discussed ongoing work on seismic activity in Red River Parish, commercial fishermen’s claims for gear damaged by energy infrastructure, and efforts to improve financial security requirements for operators so future orphan well liabilities are better covered.

Transcript Highlights:

• protection, including trail construction, watershed restoration, wildlife habitat enrichment, fuel reduction
• Corps members at Greenwood will perform vegetation management and fuel reduction across El Dorado County
• We had a very large deficiency and a reduction of fire captains available for the position.
• They also do a lot of fuel reduction work.
• And so if we were to posit, well, not operationally ideal, it would result in a reduction in year-round

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, 19 was that reduction, $400,000.
• That is a reduction, but it's not an understanding that the, That is a reduction, but it's not an understanding
• Those are all just updated Medicaid projections, so there's no reduction in dollars, but not a reduction
• The governor recommended a core reduction of $26,579.
• The governor recommended a core reduction of $2,477.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Summary: The House Budget Committee first heard the Missouri National Guard’s FY27 budget request. Brig. Gen. Bob Payne described the Guard’s dual state and federal mission, recent deployments, counterdrug work, and infrastructure needs. Committee members asked about spending priorities, an internal auditor position required by statute, and a new NDI for World Cup support in Kansas City. The committee then moved into executive session on House Bill 2014, reviewed the House committee substitute and several amendments, and adopted amendments related to the State Fair language, a $50,000 legal expense item, and committee communication language, while rejecting a proposed fund swap for the Great American State Fair. The committee adopted the substitute and voted the bill do pass by 24-0, with one present vote. The committee then began its public hearing on the Department of Corrections FY27 budget. DOC officials outlined a new stipend for CERT team members, core reductions in several administrative areas, and multiple new decision items, including staffing incentives for maximum and medium security institutions and a large increase for food service costs. Members asked about PREA allegations, education funding through Title I and Perkins grants, restitution payments, overtime, utility costs, inmate canteen funds, and staffing/retention challenges. DOC also discussed the prison nursery, vacancies in warden positions, and the limits on using facilities for pre-sentence mental health housing. No votes were taken on the Corrections budget during the portion shown.