Transcript Highlights:

• <00:14:04.639> the breakdown of how they calculated the breakdown of how they calculated the
• direct certification for calculation. direct certification for calculation.
• At a minimum, missed in the calculation.
• <00:26:34.159> remains uh and the aid calculation remains uh and the aid calculation remains
• Meals forms for calculating revenue will go toward providing the stability.

Bills: HF1048, HF1049, HF745, HF2210

Keywords: charter schools, education funding, revenue calculation, general education revenue, special education, school library aid, education finance, school districts, funding eligibility, compensatory revenue, task force, free meals, school funding, education equity, HF2210, school unemployment aid, Minnesota Department of Education, general fund appropriation, unemployment insurance, unemployment claims

Transcript Highlights:

• Is that you use to calculate that? Those are the total insured value, yes. Insured values, but.
• They're calculated based on the cost of replacing structures. in those particular counties or what?
• And it's up to the board's discretion how they want to, essentially, Calculate which models to use and
• models for. each 25% of the calculation.
• And does this exposure that you're calculating in this calculation, is that just for one storm.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Starting point for the Minnesota income tax filing calculations.
• /c><00:22:14.640> not the limitation calculation to not the limitation calculation to not include
• So it's a multi-step calculation.
• So it's a multi-step calculation.
• would give give me a simple calculation would give give me a simple calculation of<00:42:11.599>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we are also continuing site-level hold harmless calculation, and so the calculation is for each
• And then we are also continuing site-level hold harmless calculation, and so the calculation is for each
• And then we are also continuing site-level hold harmless calculation, and so the calculation is for each
• calculation and so those the calculation calculation and so those the calculation is<01:08:36.640
• calculated for fiscal year 2026. calculated for fiscal year 2026.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So SB 63 for the travel and tourism calculation.
• So SB 63 for the travel and tourism calculation.
• of the municipal calculation.
• So the municipal municipal calculation.
• their calculation their calculation or<00:36:06.480> their<00:36:06.960> um<00:36:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a work session on 17 retained bills and moved through several measures, often with motions to ought to pass or inexpedient to legislate. House Bill 54, allowing alternative treatment centers to operate for profit, was supported as a way to improve efficiency and potentially lower costs for medical cannabis users, and it was recommended OTP by a 9-0 vote. House Bill 97, an appropriation for wastewater infrastructure, drew mixed views: supporters said the Senate’s reduced funding still met the bill’s intent, while opponents argued the funding was inadequate for critical infrastructure needs; the committee voted 5-4 to ITL. House Bill 111, extending the Right to Know Ombudsman and exempting certain assistance from unauthorized practice of law, was recommended ITL 9-0. House Bill 197, concerning state payment of a portion of local retirement contributions, was discussed as a recurring issue; members noted an amendment could fund it starting in fiscal 2027, but the committee ultimately voted 5-4 to recommend the bill itself rather than ITL. House Bill 215, requiring landfill permit applicants to submit a harms-and-benefits report, was amended to narrow its scope to future privately owned landfills only; the amendment and the bill as amended both passed 9-0. House Bill 216, on workers’ compensation credit toward retirement service, was ITL’d 9-0 after the sponsor said the proposal was too open-ended and could affect unknown numbers of people.

Transcript Highlights:

• This includes the Governor's budget proposal impacting the guarantee calculation, the maintenance factor
• So 2025-26, the guarantee increases by about $6.8 billion for a calculated guarantee level of $121.4
• The state will not have its final calculation for this fiscal year until May of 2027.
• This law was originally adopted in 2019-20 to provide greater certainty around the calculation of the
• This law was originally adopted in 2019-20 to provide greater certainty around the calculation of the

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held its first hearing of the year on Proposition 98, focusing on the Governor’s budget estimates for the three-year budget window, the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSA), and repayment of education deferrals. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee would rise by about $21.7 billion over the 2025 Budget Act, with increases in each year, full repayment of the existing settle-up obligation in 2024-25, a new $5.6 billion settle-up obligation proposed for 2025-26, and a higher guarantee in 2026-27. Finance also noted revised downward estimates for transitional kindergarten attendance and Los Angeles County property tax reimbursements, and said community colleges would be funded above the split because of enrollment growth. The Legislative Analyst’s Office emphasized fiscal risk and volatility, warning that recent revenue gains are tied heavily to the stock market and tech sector and could reverse quickly. The LAO argued the Governor’s proposed $5.6 billion delay shifts risk into future years and recommended instead fully funding the current estimate, making a larger reserve deposit, considering advance payments or pension-related uses, and finding additional non-Prop 98 solutions to reduce the state’s structural deficit. On the reserve and deferral items, Finance described revised PSSA deposits and withdrawals that would leave about $4.1 billion in the reserve by 2026-27, and both Finance and the LAO supported paying off the remaining LCFF and SCFF deferrals as good fiscal practice. Committee members questioned the size of the settle-up amount, the degree of revenue volatility, the use of the reserve, and the ongoing K-12/community college split. Finance said the proposal is meant to avoid overappropriation if revenues fall, while the LAO said a buffer of roughly $3.5 billion would address typical forecasting risk. Public commenters, including school boards, county offices of education, teachers, and advocacy groups, largely opposed the $5.6 billion withholding or settle-up delay, calling it a manipulation of Prop. 98 and urging full funding and more stable revenue solutions. Several speakers also urged dedicated funding for students experiencing homelessness. The hearing ended with no vote, and the chair announced that broader program discussions would occur in later hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• How do you calculate that PML?
• Calculate which models to use and what percentages, and they're not even restricted to those models,
• for each 25% of the calculation.
• They come to that calculation, um, and that's determined at the board meeting.
• And does this Exposure there you're calculating in this calculation, is that just for one storm?

Transcript Highlights:

• So we have a tax that is inherently hard to calculate.
• According to the Federal CPI Inflation Calculator, a hundred dollars in 2007 was worth $156 in 2023.
• They had to do that because that was part of their no-new-revenue calculation.
• We need a truth in taxation, a number that we can calculate for our budgets for the following year.
• The bill has a really long mouthful about how that is calculated.

Bills: HB511, HB972, HB 1035, HB2481, HB2723, HB2742, HB2894, HB2962, HB3077, HB3093, HB3307, HB3684, HJR67, HJR72

Keywords: ad valorem taxation, caregiver exemption, Medicaid, long-term services, tax relief, assisted living, housing support, property tax exemption, caregiver support, residence homestead, tax exemption, unpaid caregiver, state tax code, property tax, caregiver, waiting list, intellectual disability, developmental disability, ad valorem tax, family support

Transcript Highlights:

• Inherently hard to calculate.
• According to the Federal CPI inflation calculator, $100 in 2007 was worth $156 in 2023.
• But I guess by leaving these chunks of, of value off of the no new revenue rate calculation.
• Calculate, I did sample truth and taxation forms, and they were ignored.
• Um, the bill has a really long mouthful about how that is calculated.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, based on the latest data used to calculate the statutory...
• We will have the final data used to calculate the COLA in April.
• There are California-specific inflation calculations.
• , but also which fiscal years we're looking at to calculate the statutory COLA.
• LCFF gets calculated, it takes into account the enrollment, right?

Summary: The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s education budget proposals for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Learning Recovery Block Grant, and Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), followed by testimony from State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond. On LCFF, Finance outlined the proposed 2.43% COLA, repayment of prior deferrals, and a trailer bill penalty for LEAs that fail to adopt Local Control Accountability Plans on time. The LAO said its COLA estimate was slightly lower and raised concerns that the Governor’s proposed TK staffing ratio increase may be more costly than estimated. Members also discussed whether the current COLA formula should better reflect California-specific or district staffing costs, and whether TK should be more clearly separated from the K-3 grade span adjustment to avoid larger K-3 class sizes. The chair asked staff to work with the LAO on both the TK/K-3 issue and alternative COLA calculations. For the Learning Recovery Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring the first of three delayed payments, $378.6 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, while the LAO recommended adopting the proposal but extending the expenditure deadline by at least a year. The LAO reported that districts had spent $1.6 billion of the $6.8 billion received through 2023-24 and said most districts were only now shifting from federal COVID relief to block grant spending. Members questioned whether the large state and federal investments were improving outcomes, citing declining reading and math trends, while Finance and the State Board president pointed to some signs of improvement, especially in math, attendance, and gains for some student groups. Darling-Hammond emphasized that student needs have grown, that recovery spending has gone to devices, ventilation, staffing, tutoring, summer school, and community schools, and that targeted interventions appear to be helping some districts recover faster than others. On ELOP, Finance proposed adding $435 million to expand universal access by lowering the Tier 1 threshold from 75% to 55% unduplicated pupils, bringing ongoing funding to $4.4 billion. The LAO said the estimate was reasonable but recommended delaying implementation for a year, aligning ELOP with ASES to reduce overlap, moving toward funding based on participation rather than enrollment, and considering a fixed Tier 2 rate. Members and witnesses discussed staffing challenges, the use of funds for students with disabilities, and uncertainty in Tier 2 funding caused by unspent dollars and opt-outs. Darling-Hammond supported ELOP as part of California’s broader after-school and summer learning strategy, said most districts are now offering full-day TK and expanded learning, and urged the state to reduce fragmentation across categorical programs and build more unified systems for funding, reporting, and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• to calculate all that?
• I just bore you going over how they do that calculation.
• A couple of little tinkering adjustments to that in the calculation.
• We can calculate that. Can you do that for me, please, for the last five years?
• So it really is, there are two distinctly different calculations here.

Summary: The Select Committee on Property Taxes met for an educational session focused on how Florida funds public schools and how property taxes are assessed and levied. Dr. Jim Zengali of the Department of Revenue explained the FEFP school funding formula, noting that it is built on weighted student counts, a base student allocation, and programmatic add-ons such as transportation, exceptional student education, school safety, and mental health. He said school funding is roughly split between state general revenue and local property taxes through required local effort, with additional discretionary and capital outlay millages contributing to total school funding. He also described the Department of Revenue’s role in certifying property rolls at fair market value and reviewing them for substantial compliance, including the so-called “nuclear option” if a roll is not approved. Members asked about trends in millage rates, county-by-county funding differences, the effect of growth and enrollment changes, and how property appraisals are reviewed. Zengali said aggregate millage for school funding has declined over the last decade while revenues have still increased, and he agreed to provide additional data on county trends, parcel strata, student growth, and enrollment impacts. He also clarified that school funding is equalized so students receive similar resources regardless of county wealth, and that federal funding plays only a small role in the FEFP. Amy Baker of the Joint Legislative Office of Economic and Demographic Research then discussed existing homestead benefits. She said about half of Florida’s parcels are homestead properties, most fall in the $250,000 to $500,000 value range, and many seniors without mortgages pay property taxes in lump sums rather than through escrow. Baker explained that Florida’s homestead tax burden is middle-of-the-pack nationally and that the main benefits are Save Our Homes and portability on the differential side, plus the $25,000 homestead exemption and related exemptions on the exemption side. She said these benefits reduce taxable value substantially, with homestead properties receiving a large share of the reductions, and noted that the committee requested follow-up data on exemption usage, portability timing, senior exemptions, and county-level patterns. The final presentation, by Lizette Kelly of the Department of Revenue, covered millage rates and the TRIM process. She reviewed the history of truth-in-millage notices, required taxpayer mailings, public hearing notices, and later changes that tied local millage resets to rollback and majority-vote rates. Kelly explained the difference between proposed and adopted millage, the rollback rate, and the majority-vote rate, and described how taxing authorities include counties, cities, special districts, and MSTUs. She also outlined how county taxable value is calculated from just value through assessment differentials and exemptions, and how certain exemptions, such as the additional senior exemption, apply only to the taxing authority that adopted them. No votes were taken during the meeting, but members requested several follow-up data reports for later discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, or like I said, just calculating what the inflationary increase is.
• Um, or like I said, just calculating what the inflationary increase is.
• We assist with those calculations.
• We assist with those calculations.
• We assist with those calculations.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board meeting began with a roll call and approval of the October 7 meeting minutes. The chair then reordered the agenda to hear the item on Medicaid reimbursement rates and network adequacy first because of scheduling issues. Dr. Steve Robertson of the Kentucky Dental Association was sworn in and testified at length about Kentucky’s dental Medicaid program, arguing that reimbursement rates are unsustainably low, have been largely flat for decades, and are often below the cost of providing care. He said Kentucky ranks near the bottom nationally in oral health, dental Medicaid rates are often 60% or less of commercial rates, and the program’s share of the Medicaid budget has effectively remained around 2% despite growth in enrollment and services. Dr. Robertson said the low rates are contributing to provider losses, rural access gaps, longer wait times, dental deserts, and greater use of emergency rooms for preventable dental problems. He cited examples of office costs exceeding reimbursement for basic procedures, noted that many dentists are small private businesses, and said the state is struggling to recruit and retain dentists because of low payment levels and high student debt. He also pointed to disparities with neighboring states and said recent increases in some oral surgery and cleaning codes were not enough to address the broader problem. His recommendations included completing the rebasing study, increasing dental reimbursement in the upcoming budget, tying future reviews to inflation and cost data, aligning benchmarks, and prioritizing preventive and restorative care to improve workforce stability and access. Board members asked about the size of the needed increase, the effect of private insurance on dental practice finances, and what a new dentist might expect to earn. Dr. Robertson said the association is working on an appropriations request and that private insurance pressures are part of the problem as well, since many plans are HMOs or PPOs with limited provider control over rates. He also said the association can no longer conduct reimbursement surveys because of FTC restrictions, but would try to obtain current ADA data. In response to questions about the future of the program, he warned that without significant changes it could become unsustainable and cited Ohio and Missouri as examples where higher reimbursement improved provider participation and access. The board then heard from Mr. Bowman of Baldwin Consulting, who discussed outpatient behavioral health providers, including ABA therapy and mental health/substance use disorder services. He said these providers face similar issues of rising costs, flat reimbursement, and access problems. He reviewed Kentucky’s network adequacy standards, including travel-time standards, 30-day appointment limits, and newer federal requirements that will require services within 10 business days by 2029. He said wait times for outpatient behavioral health, especially children’s services and ABA, have grown substantially, sometimes to more than a year, and emphasized that the Medicaid department must enforce these standards.

Transcript Highlights:

• because 70% is what we had calculated because 70% is what we had calculated with<00:15:43.560>
• Have you gone through that calculation, and if so, what is it?
• I have not gone through that calculation on the nurses.
• I have gone through that calculation on the expansion.
• Um, and I just did a quick calculation, and hopefully this is right.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Health and Family Services met with a quorum still coming together and first handled roll call and minutes. The main presentation came from the Department for Medicaid Services, with Commissioner Lisa Lee and CFO Steve Beckle giving an overview of Kentucky Medicaid, its federal-state financing structure, and the department’s 1915(c) home- and community-based waiver programs. They explained FMAP funding levels for traditional Medicaid, administration, IT, expansion adults, and CHIP, and noted the size of the program, including more than 600,000 Kentucky children eligible for Medicaid or CHIP, about 485,000 expansion adults, over 69,000 enrolled providers, and $18.5 billion in 2024 expenditures. A major focus was the waiver system, including the acquired brain injury waivers, model waiver, independence waiver, Michelle P. waiver, and Supports for Community Living waiver. The department said these waivers are intended to keep people with physical or developmental disabilities in home and community settings rather than facilities, and that many services are not covered by Medicare or commercial insurance. Officials described participant-directed services, interagency administration, and eligibility rules, including that some waiver programs use the child’s income only rather than family income. They also reported an unduplicated waiver wait list of 13,930 people and said the General Assembly had added waiver slots in the last budget, including 650 ABI slots and 1,275 more to be allocated July 1, 2025. The department also discussed a waiver rate study conducted by Guidehouse, explaining that CMS requires a defensible rate methodology because there is no Medicare or commercial benchmark for many waiver services. They said the study used cost and wage surveys, provider and stakeholder input, and aimed to improve transparency, provider stability, and rate parity. Officials reviewed prior COVID-era Appendix K rate increases and budget-driven increases, and said the budget ultimately funded rates at about 70% of the benchmark study, while preserving higher existing rates where needed so no provider would be cut. They highlighted larger differences in behavioral support and case management rates, and said a public report is available. Members asked several questions about the potential impact of federal FMAP changes, especially possible reductions in the enhanced match for expansion adults and Medicaid IT/admin activities. DMS said any FMAP reduction would require more state general fund dollars, estimating about $75 million for each 1% drop in the expansion match, while impacts on administrative IT funding would depend on the systems being built or implemented in a given year. Members also pressed for clarification on waiver wait-list procedures, funded versus filled slots, and what happens when someone on the wait list is later found ineligible. DMS said people on the wait list may not yet have been assessed, can be reevaluated if conditions change, and are still eligible for regular Medicaid state-plan services if they qualify, even if they are waiting for waiver services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because those are calculated every two years, we're all going to be paying that difference in our property
• every two years that we're calculated every two years that we're all<00:11:57.560> going<00:11
• is calculated as 166 of the final compensation after 65, and prior to that it’s 160.
• career there was the higher calculation career there was the higher calculation prior<00:21:42.840
• it was delink because it is calculated it was delink because it is calculated as<00:24:32.480>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met on House Bill 637, which was described as a measure to make whole certain New Hampshire Retirement System retirees who were not included when Senate Bill 57 was incorporated into the 2023 budget. The chair and several members reviewed the bill’s legislative history and fiscal impact, citing estimates that the broader change would cost about $1.4 million to the state and $5.74 million to municipalities, with an actuarial liability increase of about $45 million. The chair argued that the omission of already-retired members was not an oversight but a policy choice made in the Senate, based on the bill’s prospective language and the budget process used in 2023. Testimony and discussion focused on whether the bill should be treated as a fairness correction or as an expensive policy expansion. Supporters, including retirees and representatives of employee groups, said the language was unclear, the fiscal note did not match the bill’s effect, and the change would unfairly leave out actual retirees who had expected the same treatment as active members. They also argued that the retirement system historically linked benefits to Social Security and that the bill would restore equity for those affected. Opponents emphasized the cost, the prospective nature of the original language, and the view that the Senate knowingly chose not to extend the change retroactively. After discussion, the chair moved to recommend the bill inexpedient to legislate, and the motion was seconded. Members then heard brief public comments after the motion was withdrawn and reintroduced because of the weather and the public’s travel. At the final vote, the subcommittee recommended inexpedient to legislate on a 3-2 vote, with the chair noting that the full committee would take up other bills at a later subcommittee hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• At that point, I'll then pass things off to Luke, who will walk us through the calculated contribution
• That more stable asset measure is then used to calculate contribution rates and funded ratios for the
• The funded ratio, in terms of its calculation, is equal to that actuarial value of assets divided by
• Do we have forward-calculated rates that we're going to adopt?
• So if I can rephrase your question, do they generally adopt the rates as calculated?

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The LCFF base grant amounts are calculated on a per-student basis measured by student ADA according to
• We will have the final data used to calculate the COLA in April.
• There are California-specific inflation calculations.
• fiscal years we're looking at to calculate what the statutory goal is.
• Well, when LCFF gets calculated, it takes into account the enrollments, right?

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He said riders are something they used to calculate, but it could be fudged, so the new formula removes
• His understanding is that, when they do the calculation, they will use only buildings that have classes
• Some calculation figured out.
• It's just how we calculate how it's funded. Yeah.
• And then one... ...calculation of how it's funded, yeah.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to hear and discuss three education bills and related budget items. House Bill 1214 would revise K-12 transportation funding by replacing the current rider-based formula with a new formula tied more closely to district size, square mileage, building counts, and the weighted student payment. Sponsors and DPI said the change would better reflect actual transportation costs, hold districts harmless overall, and likely increase funding by about $4 million beyond current spending; they also said parent-provided transportation and open-enrollment mileage rules would remain largely unchanged. No opposition was heard, and the committee closed discussion without taking final action in the transcript. The committee then reviewed House Bill 1013, the education appropriations bill, and walked through proposed adjustments to program and pass-through grants. The chair proposed keeping or reducing some items, eliminating others, and moving one-time items to the stabilization fund; examples included leaving free meals at $4.5 million for now, keeping the paraprofessional-to-teacher program, reducing some grant lines, and removing several new or one-time grants. DPI also explained that the student information system would remain a flow-through grant for this biennium but would move in-house after July 1, 2026. The committee also discussed adding an FTE for the School for the Blind and making a small equipment swap at the Center for Distance Education. House Bill 1369 was discussed as the main school aid bill, including a proposed 2 percent and 2 percent per-pupil payment increase, higher construction bidding thresholds, elimination of the 12 percent cap, and a transfer of $75 million from Foundation Aid to the School Construction Revolving Loan Fund, with the chair suggesting $100 million instead. DPI explained that the bill also included a policy change returning placement decisions for students with disabilities in congregate care to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with support from the governor’s office. The committee heard testimony from school officials seeking gap funding for Title I losses caused by a switch from free-and-reduced-lunch to census-based allocations, saying districts with many open-enrolled students could lose substantial funding and staff positions. Later, the governor’s office presented a proposed $1.5 million one-time appropriation to help schools buy secure storage for student cell phones if a statewide device policy is adopted; members raised concerns about cost, local control, and whether the money would be enough. The committee also heard student testimony and then recessed without voting on the amendment in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• AND IT WILL ALSO BE USED FOR CALCULATING THE QUALITY INCENTIVE PROGRAM PAYMENTS AS A MEASURE OF NURSING
• CMS CALCULATES THE CHILD COURSE SET MEASURE BEFORE ON BEHALF OF ALL STATES USING THE DATA CMS CALCULATES
• LIKE THE PREVIOUS METRICS CMS CALCULATES THE MEASURE ON BEHALF OF ALL STATES USING THE DATA SUBMITTED
• I DID WANT TO MENTION AFTER WE CALCULATED THE BASELINE FOR EACH PLAN, THAT'S WHERE WE WILL START WHEN
• IT IS IN TURN WHERE THESE DATA TO CALCULATE. >> Rep. Gerwig: THANK YOU MR.

Transcript Highlights:

• The data used in the calculation are as of that date, but the tax calculation itself is run at the end
• :29.000> each um calculates tax rates for each um calculates tax rates for each employer<00:46
• and so we do the we kind of we calculate and so we do the we kind of we calculate tax<00:46:34.920
• when we had C when we had calculated when we had C when we had calculated that<00:48:09.880>
• public assistance this calculation public assistance this calculation doesn't<01:03:42.279> even

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That is what the law requires as a starting point for millage rate calculation.
• If you want to go higher than your maximum millage rate calculation, higher than that, up... ...your
• maximum millage rate calculation, higher than that, up to 110%, you need a two-thirds vote.
• ...to determine by calculation the amount of sales tax that would have to be raised.
• calculation available for each jurisdiction.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Finance and Tax met for its first meeting of the session, with a quorum present and several members excused. Chair Avila opened by framing the committee’s main focus as property tax relief and housing affordability, noting the complexity of any changes to Florida’s long-standing property tax structure and emphasizing the need to preserve funding for schools and local public safety. He also introduced new committee staff member Tamisha Black and thanked staff for summer work supporting analysis of potential proposals, including constitutional amendment concepts and other property tax relief ideas. Staff director Azar Khan then presented an update on the General Revenue forecast, explaining that collections remained above estimate but at a slower pace than the prior year, with recent economic indicators slightly weaker than earlier forecasts. He said the new forecast mostly reflected modest adjustments, with a notable share of the increase coming from earnings on investment rather than the usual drivers such as sales tax or corporate income tax. Khan also gave a detailed presentation on ad valorem millages, explaining the different millage types used by school districts, counties, municipalities, special districts, and water management districts; the rollback rate; TRIM notice and hearing timelines; voting thresholds for adopting higher millages; and long-term trends showing millage rates declining over time even as total taxes levied have increased. Members used the presentations to discuss property tax relief options and the relationship between local property taxes and state revenue. President Passidomo praised staff and Senator Bernard’s summer work on proposals. President Gaetz asked about converting homestead property tax revenue to sales tax and was told the rough equivalent could be around a 2.8-cent sales tax increase, though with important behavioral and distributional caveats. Senator Rouson asked about the decline in corporate income tax estimates, and Khan said it likely reflected changes in national corporate profit expectations and collection patterns, promising a follow-up. The Department of Revenue’s Lizette Kelly confirmed that TRIM data, including adopted millages, rollback rates, and maximum millage calculations, are collected by jurisdiction and can be provided to the committee. No bills were taken up and no votes occurred beyond adjournment, which was adopted by motion.