Transcript Highlights:

• The Hawaii Election Campaign Fund had a balance of a little under $2.2 million at the end of last year
• /c><00:01:25.840> a<00:01:25.960> little<00:01:26.200> under<00:01:26.560> $2.2
• <00:01:27.280> million<00:01:27.920> and year of a little under $2.2 million and year
• of a little under $2.2 million and that<00:01:28.240> is<00:01:28.439> nowhere<00:01:28.799
• million in the make it a total of 2.2 million in the bill<01:24:57.800> and<01:24:57.920>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard several election-related bills first. SB 51, a comprehensive public financing bill for candidates, drew strong support in testimony but also concerns from the Campaign Spending Commission that the Hawaii Election Campaign Fund has only about $2.2 million, far short of what would be needed, and that the program could not realistically start in 2026 because of staffing and system changes; the commission asked for a start date no earlier than 2028. SB 118, which would create a full-time investigator position at the Campaign Spending Commission, was supported by the commission, which said it has lacked staff growth since 1995 and that an investigator is needed to handle investigations instead of having the commission’s attorney do that work. SB 255, a housekeeping bill on excess cash campaign contributions, was supported by the commission and several county officials and would require excess cash contributions over the limit to be returned within 30 days or turned over to the Hawaii Election Campaign Fund. SB 345, which would expand the current partial public financing program, was supported by the commission but drew questions because it would still allow private fundraising; the commission said that under its assumptions the bill would provide more total public funds than SB 51, with a maximum of a little over $20 million versus a little over $15 million for SB 51. Testimony counts were reported as 125 support/48 oppose for SB 51, 26 support/0 oppose for SB 118, 30 support/49 oppose for SB 255, and 30 support/49 oppose for SB 345. The committee then discussed SB 176 on recount thresholds. The Office of Elections said it would stand on written testimony, and the East Hawaii Republican Party was listed but not present. The Office of Elections explained in response to questions that the bill’s recount trigger would be based on the final election-day count, not the early 6 a.m. tabulation, because the initial count is not complete until later in the day and cured ballots are counted later; the office said it does not want to begin recounts before all election-day ballots are counted. The reported testimony count was 4 support, 50 oppose, and 2 comments. Finally, the committee heard SB 260, the Judiciary’s biennial budget bill. Judiciary staff requested about $6.17 million in FY 2026 and $6.25 million in FY 2027 for operations, 17 permanent positions and one temporary position, plus $11.9 million for capital improvements. The Judiciary said the request would support specialty courts such as Women’s Court, Truancy Court, and DWI Court, a new Wahiawa District Court unit, an additional district court judge in Kona, cybersecurity, the Criminal Justice Research Institute, and facility projects including South Kohala design work and a Kauai chiller replacement. Civil legal services providers, including Volunteer Legal Services Hawaii, Legal Aid Society of Hawaii, the Legal Clinic, Kuikahi Mediation Center, the Domestic Violence Action Center, the Hawaii State Bar Association, and the Hawaii Access to Justice Commission, all supported the bill but asked for an additional $1 million for the civil legal services line item, saying demand is high and the funding is spread across more providers than before. The Judiciary clarified that some of its requested positions would support Wahiawa and Women’s Court, and that the civil legal services funding goes to organizations serving low-income residents on issues such as immigration, domestic violence, evictions, and foreclosures. The committee also briefly took up SB 279 on fentanyl possession thresholds, where the prosecuting attorney’s office supported the bill and said fentanyl is already driving overdose deaths and that the proposed thresholds target distribution-level quantities rather than personal use.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the first question, though, where did that $2.2 million allocation come from?
• "Yeah, what I can offer to that: the $2.2 million was state funding that was transferred from the Department
• amount of money for that is $37 million..." "...correct me if I'm wrong, but the suggestion is that the $2.2
• We do not. $2.2 million in hunger relief organizations that have to incur additional costs to move that

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a work session on food systems and food security, with no public testimony. The first panel focused on household food security and data. Marie Spiker of the University of Washington explained what food insecurity means, its health impacts, and the importance of reliable measurement, warning that the federal Census food security data is being terminated and that there is no true replacement. She described Washington’s WaFOOD surveys as a useful complement, not a substitute, and noted that they show food insecurity affects households at a range of income levels. Katie Raines of WSDA described the state’s food systems work, the need for shared data and dashboards, and the role of agriculture in both food production and the hunger safety net. Committee members asked about the $2.2 million state food assistance allocation, the scale of the SNAP gap, and how household size, housing costs, and other factors intersect with food insecurity. The committee then heard from Tracy Roof of the University of Richmond on the history of SNAP and its relationship to agriculture. She traced the program from Depression-era commodity distribution through the modern farm bill, emphasizing that food assistance has long functioned both as anti-hunger policy and as an agricultural and economic stabilizer. She highlighted how SNAP expands during recessions, supports retailers and farmers, and has become more important since the Great Recession because participation stayed high even as the economy recovered. Roof also noted that Washington has relatively high SNAP participation and low payment error rates, but that recent federal changes could reduce eligibility and shift more costs to states. Members asked how Washington compares to other states and why the program is structured as it is. A later panel featured the Washington State Food Policy Forum and a joint systems presentation from the Washington Farm Bureau, Washington Retail Association, and Washington Food Industry Association. The Food Policy Forum described its consensus-based recommendations on food insecurity, climate and water, regional food infrastructure, farmland protection, and farm viability, including more support for producer purchasing, water planning, and farmland conservation. The industry groups presented a systems map showing how agriculture, processing, retail, and transportation are interconnected, and argued that rising costs, regulations, labor and fuel expenses, retail theft, and thin margins make it harder to keep farms and stores viable. They said food security depends on store viability and local agricultural profitability, and promised to provide a more detailed list of policy recommendations. The final panel included state agency staff from DSHS, DOH, and WSDA. Bryce Montgomery said the Basic Food program serves about 920,000 Washingtonians monthly and warned that H.R. 1 could require Washington to pay up to 15% of SNAP benefits, broaden work requirements, and restrict immigrant eligibility. Karen Mullen described DOH nutrition programs, including WIC, farmers market nutrition benefits, fruit and vegetable incentives, and a fruit-and-vegetable prescription program, while noting funding instability and the end of SNAP-Ed. WSDA’s Katie Raines began describing ongoing food assistance and farmer support challenges, including farmer mental health and the need to address food insecurity across both producers and consumers.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, 2.2 million dollars left in the general fund.
• Uh 2.2 million dollars left in the um Uh 2.2 million dollars left in the um in<00:22:39.920> the

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first addressed an unintended consequence in the Joint Conference Committee report involving dual and concurrent enrollment funding. Staff explained that a dollar-for-dollar reduction tied to Senate File 81 would have fully funded public school dual/concurrent enrollment while leaving no funds for non-public school students. Senator Salazar moved to strike that provision, the motion was seconded, and it carried. Budget and Fiscal Administrator Don Richards then walked through the conference committee report and the major adopted amendments. He reviewed Senate and House amendments affecting items such as sign language interpreters, rural veterinary education, predator management authorization, petroglyphs and pictographs, senior services, community college funding, school district entitlement payments, the School Foundation Program reserve transfer, a tourism-related rodeo museum change, archaeological work on human remains, a jet airplane reduction, abortion-related language, livestock ear tags, provider rates for developmental disabilities, student-athlete endorsement restrictions, a forensic audit for the Wyoming Business Council, and the Yellowstone tree inscription. He also described several deleted sections and policy changes, including removal of spending-policy provisions, flex authority language, and other budget sections. Richards further summarized new or revised appropriations and conditions, including funding for local cybersecurity, stormwater fees, the Wyoming Natural Resource Trust Fund, lab services, IT modernization, Wyoming Public Television, matching funds, cloud services, and restored governor FTE requests. He noted a compromise on the outdoor trails matching program, a conditional $10 million University of Wyoming operational review appropriation tied to future cost savings, and a stablecoin appropriation. He also explained that the report retained the base-bill reversion language, discussed the remaining general fund balance and statutory reserve, and said the committee would circulate the amendment and signatures for floor action later that day. The meeting then adjourned without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• So minimizing the temperature increase to 2.2 degrees Celsius, and then that can be broken down into
• The witness added that minimizing the temperature increase to 2.2 degrees Celsius can be broken down
• So minimizing the temperature increase to 2.2 degrees Celsius, and then that can be broken down into
• So minimizing the temperature increase to 2.2 degrees Celsius, and then that can be broken down into
• So minimizing the temperature increase to 2.2 degrees Celsius, and then that can be broken down into

Bills: HF3556

Keywords: community solar, energy, solar power, renewable energy, Melissa Hortman, 1183, house

Summary: The committee approved the February 26, 2026 minutes and then took up House File 3556, which would rename Minnesota’s community solar garden program the Melissa Hortman Community Solar Garden Program. The bill’s author described the measure as a tribute to Hortman’s leadership and her role in creating the program, noting its importance to Minnesota’s solar industry and the broader clean energy transition. The author moved HF 3556 to the general register, and the committee proceeded to testimony. Testifiers from the Public Utilities Commission, Department of Commerce, solar industry groups, clean energy organizations, and community solar advocates all supported the bill. They credited Hortman with authoring and advancing the 2013 legislation that created Minnesota’s community solar program and said it became a national model that expanded access to solar for renters, lower-income households, and others who could not install rooftop systems. Several witnesses highlighted the program’s growth, including more than 1 gigawatt of approved projects, strong participation by low- and moderate-income subscribers, and job creation and private investment in Minnesota. Witnesses also emphasized Hortman’s personal leadership style, describing her as prepared, persuasive, collaborative, and deeply committed to clean energy and public service. Some recounted personal interactions with her and said the name change would preserve her legacy and ensure future Minnesotans remember her impact. No vote on the bill itself was taken during the testimony shown, beyond the motion to send HF 3556 to the general register.

Transcript Highlights:

• contested cases and 37 projects before the PUC, and our litigation efforts before the PUC has resulted in 2.2
• Okay, has resulted in 2.2 billion dollars in savings. $3.2 billion dollars in savings for Texas consumers

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• contested cases and 37 projects before the PUC, and our litigation efforts before the PUC has resulted in $2.2
• Has resulted in $2.2 billion in savings for Texas consumers.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm looking at line 2.9, and it has the word investments, and then I skip down to line 2.2, and it
• So is there a definition for investments, as seen on 2.9, and the word security, as seen on 2.2?
• and then I skip down to line 2.2 in and then I skip down to line 2.2 in includes<01:13:52.800> the
• So as I'm looking at current law, lines 2.2 through 2.22 have that definition, and then when I see line
• <01:15:46.320> through<01:15:46.560> 2.22 has lines 2.2 through 2.22 has lines 2.2

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, your bill spent $2.2 billion increase in the last biennium. Uh, huge increase.
• <00:37:58.880> billion Um, your bill spent $2.2 billion Um, your bill spent $2.2 billion increase
• other day, which I understand<00:43:27.760> still<00:43:28.079> has<00:43:28.520> $2.2
• 00:43:29.520> million<00:43:30.880> uh<00:43:30.960> for understand still has $2.2
• million uh for understand still has $2.2 million uh for bicycles<00:43:31.839> for<00:43:32.079

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 2.2, 2.8, 8<00:03:10.400> and<00:03:11.239> 2.13.
• And if we look at the one-time costs of the bill, it's more than $2.2 billion.
• So we're talking about a $2.2 billion one-time cost.
• And to just give you than $2.2 billion.
• > cost,<01:30:03.840> the<01:30:04.080> the $2.2 billion onetime cost, the the $2.2

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• reserves is roughly about 2.2 million. reserves is roughly about 2.2 million. Okay. Okay.
• Not we’re not $2.2 billion ahead. We have $2.2 billion in outstanding liability.
• we are $2.2 billion ahead. we are $2.2 billion ahead.
• <00:29:51.920> We Not we're not $2.2 billion ahead. We Not we're not $2.2 billion ahead.
• c> outstanding have $2.2 billion in outstanding have $2.2 billion in outstanding liability.<00:29

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• IT'S JUST A LONG-RUN AVERAGE WE THINK IS ABOUT 2.12 2.2%.
• STANFORD YOU ARE RECOGNIZED. >> DEPARTMENT REQUESTS AN ADDITIONAL 2.2 MILLION IN BUDGET AUTHORITY WITHIN

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It held $2.2 billion in school funding hostage because our governor's voucher priorities didn't align
• It held $2.2 billion in school funding hostage because our governor's voucher priorities didn't align

Keywords: public education, Department of Education, funding, Trump, Kassar, Elon Musk, education policy, youth advocacy, billionaire influence

Summary: This was a press conference organized by student advocates and Texas Democratic lawmakers to oppose efforts by the Trump administration and allies to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and to criticize Texas voucher proposals. Speakers argued that the department and its Office for Civil Rights are essential for enforcing civil rights protections, supporting special education, Title I, Pell Grants, career and technical education, and other federal education programs. They said eliminating the department would weaken oversight, shift power to states that have a poor record on student protections, and harm marginalized, low-income, disabled, and rural students. Congressman Greg Casar framed the issue as a transfer of public money from schools to billionaires, tying the department fight to federal budget and tax-cut debates and to Texas voucher efforts. State Representative Gene Wu said Texas public education is already near collapse and warned that losing federal support would worsen school closures, staffing shortages, and class-size increases. Representative Gina Hinojosa highlighted Texas’s past special education cap and attacks on Section 504, and said she filed bills to route federal block grants directly to schools if federal policy changes move forward. Representative Vicki Goodwin said the state should fund schools rather than vouchers and noted underfunding of special education and inflation pressures. Round Rock ISD trustee Melissa Ross and Texas AFT president Zef Capo emphasized that federal oversight protects students and that Texas has a history of underfunding and mishandling special education, meals, and other services. The final speaker, Westwood High School senior Eliza Abert, said the loss of federal education support would most harm low-income and middle-class students and called on attendees to oppose the changes. No votes were taken; the event ended with a call for public pressure on lawmakers and continued advocacy.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fire mitigation is a big part of the budget; the State Fire Marshal at $2.2 million and their team dealing
• Fire mitigation is a big part of the budget; the State Fire Marshal at $2.2 million and their team dealing
• c><00:11:02.519> Fire<00:11:02.760> Marshall<00:11:03.200> at<00:11:03.360> 2.2
• budget the State Fire Marshall at 2.2 budget the State Fire Marshall at 2.2 million<00:11:04.160
• :11:11.000> I<00:11:11.079> can<00:11:11.200> share The State Fire Marshal at $2.2

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Clayman, that may just be a technical error in the bill on line 2.2.
• So I would move to amend line 2.2 just to include "projected" in front of expenditures.
• Representative Smith moves that on line 2.2, after 105%, we insert the word "projected" before expenditures
• Representative Smith moves that on line 2.2, after 105%, we insert the word "projected" before expenditures

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 4, as amended, was heard in committee. The bill proposes a constitutional amendment to create a Minnesota tax relief account that would capture projected general fund revenues exceeding 105% of projected expenditures and return those funds to taxpayers, primarily through property tax relief or income tax relief. The committee adopted an amendment to put the bill in the author’s preferred shape, and later adopted a technical amendment from Representative Smith to insert the word “projected” before “expenditures” on line 2.2. Representative Johnson presented the bill as an affordability measure meant to return surplus money to the people rather than create new spending, arguing it would help homeowners and taxpayers if a surplus occurs. Ranna Lee of Americans for Prosperity supported the concept of returning surplus funds to taxpayers but also urged broader tax and budget reforms, including triggers for rate reductions and changes to budgeting practices. Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project and Eric Bernstein of We Make Minnesota opposed the proposal, warning that embedding budget and tax rules in the Constitution would reduce legislative flexibility, weaken public investment, shift costs to local governments, and make it harder to respond to recessions or emergencies. Members raised questions about how the formula would work, who would qualify for refunds, whether corporations with property tax liability could benefit, and how the proposal would handle forecast-based calculations and unexpected events such as pandemics or federal policy changes. House research and committee staff clarified that the bill would need to go to Ways and Means and then Rules to satisfy House requirements for constitutional amendments, and that a fiscal note had been requested and was in process. The committee did not take final action on the bill in the portion of the transcript provided, but the motion before it was to recommend passage and send House File 4 to Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our federal appropriation to our Institute was $2.2 million.
• We just received our fiscal year 25 funding, which allocated us $2.2 million again, but then with the
• Congress has allocated us $2.2 million again for next year, but we do not know if that will go through

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, just a point of clarification on line 2.2.
• On line 2.2, it says very clearly, and any additional areas determined by the Board of Trustees, so it
• <00:27:12.000> defined<00:27:12.480> but<00:27:12.640> then Chair, on line 2.2
• So if we take out line 2.2 and 2.3, it leaves us with M State being allowed to add cybersecurity and
• Minnesota uh so if we take out line 2.2 Minnesota uh so if we take out line 2.2 and<00:28:25.880

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The Professional Services currently account for about $2.2 million, and then the tradeoff at the end
• <00:09:45.079> million currently account for about 2.2 million currently account for about
• 2.2 million um<00:09:46.360> and<00:09:46.560> then<00:09:47.480> the<00:09:47.920
• Yeah, so even because it went down from 2.7 to 2.2, the impact is so great from that.
• <01:06:02.839> yeah like balance that out to 2.5 or 2.2 yeah like balance that out to 2.5

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Item 1. 2.2 million with 12 additional FTEs for additional staff vacant positions and salary increases
• This item was adopted at $2.2 million and $3.1 million in all funds.

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Transcript Highlights:

• 00:30:45.480> to Um again, House Bill 561 lines 2.1 to Um again, House Bill 561 lines 2.1 to 2.2
• We're very comfortable with the 2.2.
• lines 2.1. lines 2.1. and<00:35:20.040> 2.2,<00:35:20.720> right?
• <00:35:20.920> It's<00:35:21.080> a<00:35:21.120> fleeing and 2.2, right?
• It's a fleeing and 2.2, right?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• believe<00:58:04.200> it<00:58:04.280> was<00:58:04.400> a<00:58:04.440> $2.2
• I believe it was a $2.2 Representative.
• I believe it was a $2.2 billion<00:58:05.440> education<00:58:06.160> omnibus<00:58:06.600
• a committee that and a budget in a committee that controls<00:58:25.840> a<00:58:25.880> $2.2
• <00:58:26.480> billion controls a $2.2 billion controls a $2.2 billion >> Chairman,<

Keywords: 1183, house