Transcript Highlights:

• And so you’ll see in both LTIF 1.0 and 2.0, we’re delivering all of these projects on schedule and under
• In fact, we’re running a surplus right now, particularly on LTIF 2.0.
• And so you'll see in both LTIF 1.0 and 2.0, we're delivering all of these projects on schedule and under
• In fact, we're running a surplus right now, particularly on LTIF 2.0. on schedule and under budget.
• In fact, we're running a surplus right now, particularly on LTIF 2.0.

Summary: The committee met for an informational hearing focused largely on the state capital outlay process and House Bill 2. Roger Husser and Matt Baker of the Division of Administration/Facility Planning and Control described how the office prepares and administers the capital outlay bill, said the bill has grown substantially over five years, and argued that recent changes in culture, staffing, project management, cash-flow analysis, and use of third-party support have more than doubled project expenditures and improved delivery. Members asked about the use and cost of third-party project managers, delegation of smaller projects to agencies, hiring difficulties, and whether the changes represented better interpretation of existing law versus statutory changes. Husser said some statutes were amended, some internal customs were removed, and the office would provide a list of those changes. He also explained that the office is trying to move away from overly rigid practices and toward faster project completion while still following public-bid and oversight rules. A major portion of the discussion centered on the size and structure of the capital outlay bill, especially the gap between Priority 1 cash capacity and the much larger Priority 5 backlog. Husser said the current annual Priority 1 limit is tied to construction inflation and is about $574 million, with additional surplus funds also available, but that the bill contains far more Priority 5 funding than can realistically move in a five-year plan. He and members discussed dormant projects, scope creep, legacy projects that have sat in the bill for years, and the problem of false expectations for non-state entities. Proposed solutions included limiting Priority 5 to five times Priority 1, requiring annual re-endorsement by members, setting district or project caps for non-state projects, requiring time limits and reporting for grant-like non-state projects, placing matches in escrow, requiring design readiness before submission, and consolidating the many existing reporting requirements into one clearer report. Members also discussed bundling multiple projects under one agency project, which the House had begun piloting for LSU, UL Lafayette, Southern, and DOTD, and which Husser said could improve flexibility, reduce overappropriation, and better reflect actual spending. Baker then explained cash-flow management and the commitment process, saying FPC now analyzes projects annually to estimate what can actually be spent in the next fiscal year and uses commitments to allow projects to proceed when future-year funding is expected. He said overappropriations can result from poor cash-flow estimates, delays, dormant projects, or projects coming in under budget, and that the office is already reworking cash-flow assumptions and reappropriating savings where possible. Members also raised concerns about change orders and low bids; staff said project managers review change orders closely, require concurrence on non-state projects, and sometimes reduce scope to keep projects within budget. After FPC’s presentation, the committee heard the beginning of Louisiana Economic Development’s capital outlay discussion, where LED explained that its projects generally fall into three categories, including the Economic Development Awards Program and Site Readiness Program, both used to support targeted economic development and job creation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so you’ll see in both LTIF 1.0 and 2.0, we’re delivering all of these projects on schedule and under
• In fact, we’re running a surplus right now, particularly on LTIF 2.0.
• And so you'll see in both LTIF 1.0 and 2.0, we're delivering all of these projects on schedule and under
• In fact, we're running a surplus right now, particularly on LTIF 2.0. on schedule and under budget.
• In fact, we're running a surplus right now, particularly on LTIF 2.0.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held an informational hearing on the state capital outlay process, with Roger Husser and Matt Baker of the Division of Administration’s Office of Facilities Planning and Control (FPNC) presenting a detailed review of House Bill 2 and proposed improvements. They said FPNC administers about 54% of the bill, while other agencies administer the rest, and emphasized that the capital outlay program has improved significantly over the last few years, with project expenditures more than doubling due to better cash-flow management, staffing changes, and more efficient project administration. They also explained how the bill is structured by priorities, how the priority-one cash line of credit is capped and adjusted for construction inflation, and how the bill has grown into a much larger, longer-range plan than a true five-year program, especially on the non-state side. A major theme was that the bill contains too many dormant, legacy, and low-priority projects, which creates false expectations and ties up funding. Committee members pressed the presenters on culture change, third-party project management, staffing shortages, and the use of technology and statutory interpretation to speed projects without sacrificing compliance. Husser and Baker said they had reduced internal bureaucracy, used staff augmentation because of hiring difficulties, delegated smaller projects to agencies when appropriate, and improved cash-flow analysis so projects can move forward with less money up front. They also discussed overappropriations, dormant projects, and the need to reappropriate unused funds to projects that can actually spend them. The presenters offered several recommendations and considerations: limit the number and size of new projects, reduce scope creep, require more regular endorsement of long-running projects, consider caps on priority-five funding, impose time limits and reporting requirements on non-state grant projects, and possibly require non-state entities to escrow or otherwise demonstrate their match earlier. They also suggested bundling related projects together, expanding that approach beyond the current pilot, and improving transparency by showing full project funding history and the first year each project appeared in the bill. No votes were taken, and the meeting remained informational, with members generally supportive of the efficiency reforms while also raising concerns about false hope, dormant projects, and the need for clearer expectations and accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• And there's a 2.0. We're at 1.0 right now. All of our systems are at 1.0. They've passed 2.0.
• Our current vendor is moving toward and has had tested and is on the brink of ready to deploy 2.0.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• At that time, the provider tax was actually part of an overall package deal, was reduced from 2.0% to
• thought to myself, well, what if we just, uh, you know, increase the provider tax back from 1.8 to 2.0%
• <01:24:49.360> to reduced from 2.0% to reduced from 2.0% to 1.8%<01:24:51.800> uh<01
• the provider tax back from<01:25:24.560> 1.8<01:25:25.239> to from 1.8 to from 1.8 to 2.0%
• uh and then um use them the extra 2.0% uh and then um use them the extra money<01:25:30.719> to

Bills: HF837, HF1903, HF499, HF794

Keywords: health insurance, premium security plan, federal funding, state innovation waiver, Minnesota, newborn safety, anonymity, healthcare provider, safe place, child welfare, HF499, nursing, nurse licensure, temporary permit, temporary nursing permit, Board of Nursing, endorsement licensure, reregistration, refresher course, health occupations

Transcript Highlights:

• The term used was ACM 2.0.
• In fact, you yourselves, Senator, used that same term in front of, you said ACM 2.0 would be West Oʻahu
• <01:05:10.440> in<01:05:10.640> fact<01:05:10.839> you term used was ACM 2.0
• in fact you term used was ACM 2.0 in fact you yourselves<01:05:11.720> Senator<01:05:12.200><
• at a you said ACM 2.0 would be West West West aahu<01:05:18.520> so<01:05:18.640> that

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , through the support of Menimus 2.0, through the support of Menimus 2.0, which<00:39:23.680>
• Karen Benfield continued her remarks on Senate Bill 246, the Momnibus 2.0.
• Um we know that 11 maternity wards 2.0.
• There’s a reciprocal benefit and approach with the potential funding of Momnibus 2.0.
• There’s a reciprocal benefit and approach with the potential funding of Momnibus 2.0.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Veneath, can you tell me who the largest grant recipient of the GUMBO 2.0 is? Yes, ma'am.
• Veneath, can you tell me who the largest grant recipient of the Gumbo 2.0 is?
• So the largest grant recipient for Gumbo 2.0 is a company called Swift Fiber.
• “Second, how much did your members win in GUMBO 2.0?” “I don’t know offhand.

Bills: HB1163, HB1168, HR252, HR253, HCR103, HCR108, SB80, SB131, SB251, SB254, SB279, SB384, SB414, SB468, SB469, SB496

Keywords: fireworks, retail sales, fire safety, legislation, holiday celebrations, construction standards, precast concrete, DOTD, building regulations, minimum requirements, public projects, private projects, consumer protection, credit card fees, cash transactions, rounding practices, transparency, low-income, economic impact, residential construction

Transcript Highlights:

• ." >> We could call the bill that you have before you in Senate Bill 183, Senate Bill 183 2.0.
• Bill 183, Senate before you in Senate Bill 183, Senate Bill<00:13:27.840> 183<00:13:28.440> 2.0
• Uh<00:13:30.000> the<00:13:30.120> General<00:13:30.360> Assembly Bill 183 2.0
• Uh the General Assembly Bill 183 2.0.

Keywords: 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The MAP Act 2.0 will close some legal loopholes that have allowed some fraudsters to avoid accountability
• The MAP Act 2.0 will close some legal loopholes that have allowed some fraudsters to avoid accountability
• The MAP Act 2.0 will close some legal loopholes that have allowed some fraudsters to avoid accountability
• The MAP Act 2.0 will close some legal loopholes that have allowed some fraudsters to avoid accountability

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Three years from now, when this moves beyond the first launch and we move into phase 2.0 and 3.0, those
• beyond the first launch and we move into beyond the first launch and we move into phase<00:47:47.520> 2.0
• 49.280> those<00:47:49.440> are<00:47:49.599> where<00:47:49.760> the phase 2.0
• and 3.0, those are where the phase 2.0 and 3.0, those are where the additional<00:47:50.640> innovations

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: A presenter from Fast Health Corporation described a proposed Kentucky Health Command System tied to Senate Bill 175, which would create a state-sanctioned AI platform for rural hospitals and telehealth. The company said the system would help rural residents get health information remotely, triage minor issues, and escalate more serious cases to Kentucky providers, with use cases including blood pressure, diabetes, maternity care, smoking cessation, and other preventive-care topics. The presenter argued the system would help rural hospitals compete with out-of-state telehealth companies and keep patients connected to local care. The presentation also emphasized a commercial model the sponsor said would generate new revenue through ads and branded interactions, with the bill reportedly directing 80% of that revenue to rural hospitals and 20% to the state to maintain the system. The presenter said the technology would augment, not replace, doctors and nurses, and claimed it could improve access and convenience in underserved areas. Committee members raised concerns about liability, whether the AI could provide medical advice, and whether there was evidence it had reduced emergency room visits; the presenter said the system could not give medical advice and acknowledged the technology is still very new. The sponsor of the bill said the goal was to help transform rural health care, reduce unnecessary ER use, and capture revenue that would otherwise go to commercial search engines and out-of-state companies. No vote or final action was taken during the portion of the meeting provided, and the discussion ended with questions about branding, loyalty, and the legal limits of the AI system.

Transcript Highlights:

• There were a lot of eyes on House File 2310, where it truly embraced a good 2.0 model that refined the
• file 2310 where it truly embraced<00:41:39.040> a<00:41:39.440> good<00:41:39.720> 2.0
• ><00:41:40.359> model<00:41:41.040> that<00:41:41.200> refined embraced a good 2.0
• 00:41:52.079> own<00:41:52.240> Community<00:41:52.520> solar<00:41:52.880> 2.0
• 2.0 Bill largely<00:41:54.240> modeled<00:41:54.680> after<00:41:54.920> what<00

Bills: HF2103, HF2793

Keywords: energy, renewable energy, ammonia, hydrogen, certificate tracking, funding, environment, community solar, energy policy, sustainability, solar garden program, regulation sunset, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• System Guidelines, offering additional clarifications on the implementation of its predecessor, VVSG 2.0
• Based on those new standards, ES&S is developing its VVSG 2.0 and 2.1 systems to completely eliminate
• Based on those new standards, ES&S is developing its VVSG 2.0 and 2.1 systems to completely eliminate
• We anticipate submitting our first VVSG 2.0 release for federal certification by the Election Assistance
• We anticipate submitting our first VVSG 2.0 release for federal certification by the Election Assistance

Keywords: Discussion of BR 25 (2026 RS) 04:15 Presentation on voting systems by ES&S 48:14 Presentation on voting systems by Hart InterCivic and Harp Enterprises 01:13:07, 958, all

Summary: The committee met, approved the October 21 minutes, and then took up BR 25 for the 2026 regular session, a proposal to prohibit the use of tax dollars and public resources to advocate for or against ballot questions, including constitutional amendments. Senator Rawlings and the other presenters argued the current law already bars such advocacy but lacks meaningful enforcement, citing the 2024 school choice amendment campaign and other examples where public officials and school systems allegedly used taxpayer-funded resources to influence voters. They said the bill would add civil and criminal penalties, while preserving First Amendment rights for public employees acting in their personal capacities. Much of the discussion focused on whether the bill should be limited to school districts or broadened to cover other public entities, and on how to define terms such as “advocating in impartial terms.” Members raised concerns about possible effects on county and city lobbying through groups like KLC and KCO, on legitimate factual explanations by public officials, and on whether the bill could unintentionally restrict needed representation for local governments. The sponsors said the measure was intended to be narrow, would be vetted further, and would not bar individuals from speaking on their own behalf. Several members suggested revisions. Representative Lockett asked that schools and school employees be specifically named, and suggested separating the lobbying restrictions from the ballot-measure provisions into different bills. Representative Layman questioned the meaning of the bill’s language and whether it would cover factual testimony by officials. Representative Heen asked about a Jefferson County example involving legal fees used to challenge petition signatures; counsel said that situation would likely be allowable under the bill as drafted, though some members thought it should be covered. No final vote was taken on BR 25 during this discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, we could call this Senate Bill 183 2.0.
• I appreciate your hard work in this space and the 2.0 and continuing to work in this space.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:16 Discussion SB 158 01:12 Vote SB 158 04:06 Discussion HB 794 05:20 Vote HB 794 08:20 Discussion SB 183 09:44 Vote SB 183 17:46, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• member of the Oil and Gas Research Council, to provide some detail on the Enhanced Oil Recovery Bakken 2.0
• the legacy fund for the Boccan East pipeline and other funds for these enhanced oil recovery Bakken 2.0
• the legacy fund for the Boccan East pipeline and other funds for these enhanced oil recovery Bokin 2.0

Summary: The committee received a compliance and budget update on Industrial Commission agencies and programs, including the Industrial Commission administrative office, the Oil and Gas Research Program, the Clean Sustainable Energy Authority, the State Energy Research Center, the Research Technology Park grant program, and related funds. Staff reviewed spending and balances for items such as electric grid resiliency grants, lignite research, enhanced oil recovery, the salt cavern business case study, and the new NDSU research and technology park grant. Members also discussed timing, carryover balances, matching requirements, and how some programs are structured to reimburse projects over several years rather than spend funds immediately. Karen Tyler of the Industrial Commission described the agency’s administrative budget, the grant management system nearing completion, and the transition to standalone audits and staffing after separating from other agencies. She also outlined the status of active grant rounds across lignite, oil and gas, renewable energy, outdoor heritage, and clean sustainable energy programs. Members asked about the length of active grants, demand for clean energy funding, and the possibility of future grant rounds. Tyler and members also discussed the salt cavern study, the need to better define its commercial value, and the research technology park grant’s cash-match requirement. Ron Ness then testified on enhanced oil recovery and broader oil and gas market conditions. He said North Dakota production remained steady, but future growth depends on infrastructure, longer laterals, and better use of natural gas and carbon dioxide for EOR. He described the state’s EOR grant round, the use of federal DOE funding to replace part of a state-funded project, and the expectation of additional grant rounds. Members asked about CO2 supply, storage, and the economics of using legacy fields and pipelines to extend oil production and support agriculture and industrial uses. The committee also heard from Bank of North Dakota President Don Morgan, who reviewed the bank’s mission, governance, lending verticals, disaster programs, and new initiatives. He said the bank is seeing deposit growth flatten and is responding to fintech competition by focusing on liquidity, risk management, and a new payment infrastructure initiative called Rough Rider Coin, which he emphasized is not crypto and not a public coin, but a banking payment rail for North Dakota institutions. Members asked about student loan rates, disaster lending, and how the bank’s lines of credit and balance sheet capacity are affected by deposit trends. Morgan said the bank remains profitable and continues to support agriculture, commerce, and industry through participation loans, student lending, and state-directed programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill is the Crisis Act 2.0.
• I am here today in support of AB 1932, the Crisis Act 2.0, as a grantee of the first Crisis Act.
• I am here today in support of AB 1932 to Crisis Act 2.0 as a grantee of the first Crisis Act.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Human Services Committee heard a long agenda of child welfare, food assistance, child care, and social services bills. Early actions included AB 308 on regional center safety training for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, AB 1049 to remove sponsor deeming from the California Food Assistance Program, AB 1201 to narrow a violent-felony bypass for family reunification services, AB 2379 to require know-your-rights training for family child care providers, AB 2429 to ease requirements in early childhood mental health consultation, AB 1755 to repeal CalWORKs’ 100-hour work penalty, AB 2478 to create a kinship family approval pathway, and AB 1969 and AB 1996 to expand coordinated cradle-to-career and child-poverty reduction efforts. The committee also began discussion of AB 1932, which would continue and strengthen community-based crisis response services. Testimony was largely in support across the hearing. Advocates, county representatives, child care providers, legal aid groups, food banks, disability organizations, and anti-poverty coalitions argued that the bills would reduce administrative barriers, improve access to benefits and services, and better protect children and families. Several authors and witnesses emphasized real-world harms from current rules, including fear of immigration enforcement, wrongful benefit denials, delayed kinship placements, and the burden of outdated eligibility requirements. On AB 1201, county welfare officials and child welfare advocates said the bill would preserve judicial discretion while allowing more parents a fair chance at reunification; on AB 2478, they said a kin-specific approval path would help place children with relatives more quickly; and on the child care bills, providers said current reimbursement and compliance systems are unsustainable. There was some committee concern about accountability and safety, especially on AB 1049 and AB 1201. One senator questioned whether removing sponsor deeming could weaken program integrity, and another raised concerns about whether narrowing the reunification bypass could expose children to unsafe environments or criminal activity. Authors and supporters responded that the bills still leave eligibility screening, judicial review, supervision, and service plans in place, and that the changes mainly remove automatic barriers or overly broad rules. Votes taken during the hearing were generally favorable: AB 308 passed 3-0 and was held on call; AB 1049 passed 2-1 and was held on call; AB 1201 passed and was held on call; AB 2379 passed 3-0 and was held on call; AB 2429 passed and was held on call; AB 1755 passed and was held on call; AB 2478 passed and was held on call; and AB 1969 and AB 1996 both passed and were held on call. The committee also noted that some bills were on the consent calendar and approved those items 3-0 while holding them open.

Transcript Highlights:

• The reading of the statute would imply that they would then get shifted over to NEM 2.0, which I don't
• If you're on NEM 2.0, you go back to NEM 2.0. Senator. Okay, now I have a question. Yes.
• If you're on NEM 2.0, you go back 1.0.
• If you're on NEM 2.0, you go back to<00:17:21.400> NEM<00:17:21.600> 2.0.
• to NEM 2.0. I see the teacher. to NEM 2.0. I see the teacher.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't believe the Finance Committee should be Criminal Justice 2.0.
• 00:32:35.760> be<00:32:36.159> criminal<00:32:36.640> justice<00:32:37.200> 2.0
• <00:32:38.240> Um,<00:32:38.640> this should be criminal justice 2.0.
• Um, this should be criminal justice 2.0.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're in the process of doing a Sky Vision 2.0. It will have more sophisticated systems.
• a<01:14:34.159> a<01:14:34.480> Sky<01:14:34.800> Vision<01:14:35.120> 2.0
• the process of doing a a Sky Vision 2.0. the process of doing a a Sky Vision 2.0.
• 01:31:22.960> 2 that has allowed us to do Sky Vision 2 that has allowed us to do Sky Vision 2 2.0
• , which Bob talked about earlier, 2.0, which Bob talked about earlier, which<01:31:25.679> is<

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The task force approved the October 14, 2025 meeting minutes and then heard a presentation from Austin Kaylor of WSP on alternative aviation fuels. Kaylor described an ongoing feasibility study focused on Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport and the other four commercial airports in Kentucky, with an eye toward both near-term use of alternative aviation fuel in existing supply chains and longer-term in-state production using local feedstocks. He said Kentucky’s current jet fuel use at the five airports is about 609 million gallons annually and could approach 1 billion gallons by 2050, and he outlined potential feedstocks such as soybeans, corn, and waste oils, along with existing logistics assets like river terminals, trucking, rail, and some pipelines. He also discussed federal and state policy support, including renewable fuel credits and the recent 45Z tax credit extension, and said the study suggests significant economic-development potential if Kentucky can leverage existing infrastructure and incentives. Members asked about the cost of sustainable aviation fuel, whether taxpayers would be subsidizing it, and whether food crops would be diverted from food use. Kaylor responded that the market is increasingly using second-generation and waste-based feedstocks, that federal incentives can cover much of the price differential, and that SAF is a direct substitute for conventional jet fuel with some efficiency benefits. He said demand comes from both U.S. and foreign carriers, including major U.S. airlines that have made emissions-reduction commitments. Members also raised the possibility of locating production in Appalachia to create jobs closer to feedstock sources; Kaylor said that approach has worked in other states and could fit Kentucky’s logistics network. The committee then heard from Leif Elder of the Utah Department of Transportation, who introduced himself and said he would discuss advanced air mobility legislation in Utah. The transcript cuts off before his substantive presentation, and no further votes or actions were recorded after the question-and-answer discussion on alternative aviation fuels.

Transcript Highlights:

• The most general eligibility requirements are that each student has to have a minimum 2.0 cumulative
• They still need to make sure that you have that cumulative 2.0 GPA.

Summary: The Student Academic Success Subcommittee met to discuss Florida’s current “sports choice” rules and high school NIL policy, then heard and passed HB 151. FHSAA officials and Sarasota County Schools staff explained eligibility rules for student-athletes, including GPA, age, semester limits, physicals, insurance, and the different participation options for traditional public, charter, home education, Florida Virtual, and private school students. Members focused on how controlled open enrollment works, whether private school students can play at public schools and vice versa, transfer timing and capacity limits, recruiting restrictions, and the role of local district policies. Sarasota officials said about 400 students in their county participate through non-traditional athletic arrangements, and FHSAA said statewide there are 5,460 non-traditional student-athlete forms on file out of roughly 280,000 student-athletes. The committee then reviewed Florida’s high school NIL framework. FHSAA said students in grades 9-12 may enter NIL deals, with no income cap, but they are barred from agreements involving adult entertainment, alcohol, tobacco/vaping, cannabis, controlled substances, gambling, weapons, political or social activism, and NIL collectives. Students must have a written contract and cannot use school logos or uniforms without permission. FHSAA said about 25 students statewide had NIL deals so far, and Sarasota was first to file. Members raised concerns about recruiting, taxes, financial literacy, mental health, and whether students should be treated as employees, while district staff said they provide education and financial literacy resources but do not review contracts. After the discussion, the committee took up HB 151 by Rep. Abbott. The bill allows students at FHSAA-member private schools to participate in sports at another member school when their own school does not offer that sport, and it removes the current 200-student enrollment limit. An amendment clarifying the private-school language was adopted without objection. A public witness from a small private school supported the bill, saying it would let the school join FHSAA without losing local athletic access for its students. Despite some members raising fairness and funding concerns, the bill passed on a 15-0 vote and was reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• e-Transcript California, which has a total of $12 million allocated to support the development of E-Transcript 2.0
• successful outcome of that contracting process and the implementation, ultimately, of E-Transcript 2.0
• And then she described that ultimately the transcript 2.0.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee began with public comment and then heard an informational update on the administration’s Career Education Master Plan and the California Education Interagency Council. State agencies described efforts to better align workforce, higher education, and TK-12 systems through data sharing, dual enrollment, e-transcripts, career passports, and regional partnerships. Members asked about the council’s timeline, strategic plan, reporting requirements, and whether it would have authority to act; administration staff said the council is being stood up, its first meeting is due by the end of June, and a strategic plan is due by the end of November. Members also raised broader questions about the relationship of this work to the Master Plan for Higher Education and common course numbering. The committee then took up the Governor’s proposed $100 million one-time expansion of dual enrollment grants. Finance said the proposal would extend grants for middle college, early college, and CCAP programs, add eligibility for regional occupational centers, provide extra support for justice-involved youth, prioritize high-need LEAs, and allow funds for teacher professional development. The proposal would also reduce the minimum instructional day for certain dual enrollment students from 240 to 180 minutes to better align schedules and remove barriers. The LAO recommended rejecting the funding, arguing that dual enrollment is already growing and that the proposal does not address major fiscal barriers. The Chancellor’s Office and CDE supported the investment, emphasizing access, equity, and technical assistance, especially for rural and small districts. Members questioned instructional-minute changes, reporting on outcomes, adult learner access, and whether the funds would support ongoing or one-time costs. Next, the committee considered trailer bill language to align the definition of long-term English learners across data systems. Finance and CDE said the change would simplify identification by using a seven-year definition for LTELs and a six-year definition for students at risk of becoming LTELs, matching the dashboard and research on the typical time needed to reach English proficiency. Some members expressed concern that the proposal could delay intervention for students who have been English learners for four or five years and questioned why the issue was being handled through budget trailer bill language rather than policy legislation. After discussion, the committee voted on a motion to reject the proposal and refer it to the policy committee; the motion received two aye votes and the item was held open. Finally, the committee heard a proposal to extend the Supporting Inclusive Practices Project by one year, from June 30, 2026 to June 30, 2027. Finance said the extension would continue the existing project, while CDE raised concerns about the project’s contract structure, fiscal management, and scalability. A Marysville Joint Unified School District representative testified that SIP had helped the district bring preschool services back into district schools, expand inclusive practices, and reduce reliance on more restrictive placements. Members questioned why funds had not been fully encumbered and whether the project was best positioned to support statewide preschool inclusion goals, with CDE suggesting that existing infrastructure may already be better suited for that work.