Transcript Highlights:

• top priorities. and it's a top priority top priorities. and it's a top priority of<00:48:21.200>
• You have to have a priority, and these providers are the priority.
• You have to have a priority. And there. You have to have a priority.
• That's a priority. into campaign funds. That's a priority.
• your priority, then shame on you. your priority, then shame on you.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened, led the pledge of allegiance, and established a quorum before approving the corrected journal. The Majority Leader then moved a long list of bills—House Bills 1150 through 1179—to be made special orders for February 11, 2026 at 9:15 a.m., and the chamber agreed without objection. The committee then took up House Bill 1150, a supplemental appropriation for the Department of Agriculture. Representative Serna explained it included technical adjustments tied to other agencies, plus a pilot program to test a biocontrol strategy for the mountain pine beetle infestation in Colorado’s ponderosa pine forests. After brief opposition from a member who said he would vote no on spending measures generally, the bill passed. House Bill 1151, the supplemental appropriation for the Department of Corrections, generated extensive debate. Supporters said the bill was necessary to cover major costs such as medical case loads, outside medical and mental health contracts, local jail payments, prison case load, private prison utilization, and food services, while also addressing staffing and parole/community corrections coordination. Opponents argued the state keeps funding more beds instead of investing in services that reduce incarceration, criticized DOC management and delays, and said the legislature should demand better accountability and efficiency. Supporters countered that DOC does not control the parole board or community corrections, that the prison population is aging, and that the state must pay for required custody and care. The transcript ends amid continued debate over the corrections supplemental, with no final vote on House Bill 1151 shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• With our budget priorities, our statutory areas of responsibility, our core mission budget, this budget
• Another priority is $1.8 million for minimum flows and levels establishment.
• Funds are mostly for what's called our SWIM water bodies, our priority water bodies.
• That's the board's priority.
• That's where we sit down every year and we workshop with them and say, what are your priorities?

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Agriculture, Environment, and General Government heard budget presentations from the Northwest Florida, Suwannee River, St. Johns River, Southwest Florida, and South Florida water management districts for FY 2026-2027. Each district described its preliminary budget, major funding sources, staffing levels, and priorities within the four core missions of water supply, water quality, natural systems, and flood protection. Common themes included reduced budgets from the prior year due to completion of major projects, continued reliance on state appropriations and ad valorem revenue, rising construction and maintenance costs, and the need to maintain aging infrastructure while advancing alternative water supply, springs restoration, flood control, and land management projects. Committee members repeatedly asked how much of each district’s budget and personnel were devoted to the core missions, how maintenance and operating projections were developed, and how projects were selected. The districts generally said most spending was tied to core responsibilities, with administrative overhead relatively small, and explained that budgets are built through a mix of staff analysis, governing board direction, strategic basin planning, and cooperative funding with local, state, and federal partners. Several districts highlighted specific projects, including Water First North Florida, Black Creek, Taylor Creek Reservoir improvements, Crane Creek, Everglades restoration, and various springs and watershed projects. The districts also noted challenges from hurricanes, inflation, cybersecurity, and aging water control structures. South Florida Water Management District’s presentation focused on Everglades restoration and the large-scale infrastructure needed to move, store, and clean water in South Florida. The director said the district’s $1.05 billion preliminary budget is largely for flood control, water supply, ecosystem restoration, and maintenance of extensive canals, levees, pumps, and reservoirs, and emphasized that recent restoration investments are producing measurable water quality and salinity improvements. No votes were taken on the district budgets, and the committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The priorities are on the bottom, and we will go into detail about what each of those priorities actually
• Um, so the commission was priorities.
• priorities that focus our body of work. priorities that focus our body of work.
• the priorities that we do.
• Again, if priority for recommendation.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first handled routine business, including roll call and approval of the prior meeting minutes, with one member abstaining because of absence and one member opposing. The main informational items were a Department of Health and Human Services update on the rural health transformation grant and a public health briefing on vaccines, followed by a quarterly budget and staffing update and an annual report from the Permanent Subcommittee on Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Related Dementias. Commissioner Lori Weaver reported that the department submitted the rural health transformation grant application on November 4, described it as reflecting input from communities and providers statewide, and said CMS review and budget negotiations would follow before final approval on December 31. She said the grant could support hiring as long as administrative costs stay within the 10% cap, and that the governor’s office will oversee administration with HHS. Ian Watt then testified that New Hampshire remains committed to vaccine access, including through the universal purchase program and annual respiratory virus guidance for flu, RSV, and COVID-19. He said the state continues to use evidence-based review for vaccine policy, noted the CDC’s change regarding the combined MMRV vaccine for the first dose in young children, and said New Hampshire’s school vaccine mandates remain at nine for schoolchildren and 10 for child care, with statutory exemptions still in place. Department staff also said there have been no supply or funding problems affecting childhood vaccine access. Nathan White, the department’s CFO, reviewed the DHHS budget and vacancy trends. He said DHHS makes up a large share of the state budget, that about 31% of its budget is general funds subject to lapse, and that lapse projections are difficult because much of the budget is driven by utilization rather than personnel. He reported current projected general fund lapse of just under $20 million, compared with about $39 million in the statewide surplus statement, and explained that only about a third of DHHS general funds can actually lapse because of statutory restrictions. He also said the department has about 400 unfunded positions, contributing to roughly a $30 million general fund reduction across the biennium, and that the hiring freeze has pushed vacancy trends upward while critical direct-care positions are being prioritized. The Alzheimer’s subcommittee reported six meetings this year, presentations on state services, silver alerts, brain health awareness, and palliative/hospice care, and work toward a new state Alzheimer’s plan. The subcommittee is developing a needs-assessment survey for people living with dementia, caregivers, and service providers, with the goal of using the results and other data sources to inform the plan. Its recommendations focus on integrating Alzheimer’s and dementia materials into chronic disease and aging outreach, embedding brain health into systems of care, adding cognitive health measures to BRFSS, and continuing partnerships with statewide organizations. Members also discussed recent research and prevention efforts, and the committee noted that a separate bill is being pursued to include Alzheimer’s and dementia in existing public health awareness campaigns.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator, I personally feel like it's a high priority. It's a safety issue.
• , even though the man sitting at the table says it should be a priority.
• That's just a question of general priorities. It doesn't, it doesn't. Should be a priority.
• That's just a question of general priorities. It doesn't.
• that we feel like needs to be a priority.

Summary: The committee first filed a report on the executive protection detail and then reviewed a long list of House and Senate bills that were ready for action, with members instructed to hold any items they wanted removed. The committee then took up several agency requests to amend bills: the Auditor of State’s request for a $370 increase for special deputy expense allowance, the Administrative Office of the Courts’ requests for additional funding for court interpreters and substitute court reporters, and requests tied to local sales tax refunds, county property tax redistribution, emergency medical and law enforcement support, and Northwest Arkansas Community College tornado-related repairs. All of those amendments were adopted, and one amendment on House Bill 1034 was held over at Senator Johnson’s request. A major portion of the meeting focused on an amendment for the Department of Corrections to fund a pilot program using mobile technology to identify and disable illegal inmate cell phones at Varner and Cummins prisons. The bill sponsors and Corrections officials described the problem as a serious public safety issue, saying inmates use contraband phones for criminal activity, trafficking, scams, and outside coordination. Members asked about FCC rules, procurement, whether the system would jam or only identify phones, whether it would affect staff or nearby users, how quickly it would work, whether it would be a one-time or ongoing cost, and whether the department had existing budget authority. Officials said the proposal would require an RFP, that current funding was not available in the department’s budget, and that the technology would be a two-year pilot. The committee ultimately adopted the amendment and then gave the underlying bill a do-pass recommendation. The committee also considered an amendment for the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture, which sought a $4 million increase in appropriation authority. Senators discussed the division’s role in county extension offices, 4-H, research, and salary competitiveness, while others questioned why the division needed more appropriation room when it already had about $10 million in headroom and had requested a different funding level through higher education. Division representatives said the increase would help with salaries and provide flexibility for future funding, and Higher Education staff clarified the original request and recommendation amounts. After extensive discussion, the committee adopted the amendment and gave it a do-pass recommendation. Finally, the committee began acting on governor’s letters, adopting amendments for a homestead property tax credit increase, insurance department conference travel, property appraisal analysis support, career and technical education professional development, regulatory and casino gaming appropriations, a new program integrity line for the Department of Inspector General, consolidation of licensing board appropriations, deletion of a completed Fort Chaffee Readiness Center appropriation, and a revised reappropriation package for prison expansion that included special language limiting use of the funds. Members asked several questions about the prison reappropriation, including whether it still related to the earlier Calico Rock project and whether special language should be considered separately; the committee moved the governor’s letters forward for drafting and further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• For what we're calling priority one babies.
• Those are the highest priority.
• On slide nine, we looked at 149 priority cases and how they became priority; these were substance-exposed
• The priority cases are at many levels. Who is in charge?
• That should be our number one priority.

Transcript Highlights:

• the proposals that we will present to you today attempt to balance the budget and also reflect priorities
• The administration's top priority is to extend the program beyond its 2030 expiration date to provide
• between the administration, the Legislature, and interested stakeholders on shared priorities.
• So, as noted in the A pages and by the governor, the administration's priorities are continued funding
• Also alarmed, and very alarmed, that the wildfire prevention fund is not a priority in SB 901 and SB

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision, especially the proposed extension of the cap-and-trade program to 2045 as “cap-and-invest,” the related greenhouse gas reduction fund (GGRF) spending framework, and several trailer bill proposals. Department of Finance staff outlined budget solutions including a $1.5 billion annual General Fund-to-GGRF shift for Cal Fire that would grow to $1.9 billion by 2029-30, continued support for high-speed rail, climate bond implementation, and various environmental and water-related statutory changes. The administration also described proposals affecting the Delta Conveyance Project, water quality planning, groundwater bulletin timing, Exide cleanup funding, and other agency-specific items, though the chair repeatedly asked staff to keep the presentation high-level and save details for the next hearing. Members from both parties raised strong concerns about the cap-and-invest proposal, arguing that it could reduce or displace funding for transit, affordable housing, active transportation, wildfire prevention, zero-emission vehicles, and other previously committed programs. Several members questioned whether the administration was effectively shifting essential ongoing services like Cal Fire onto a temporary carbon market fund, how the General Fund backstop would work if auction revenues fall short, and whether the proposal would leave enough money for continuous appropriations and future awards. Members also criticized the inclusion of cap-and-invest reauthorization in the budget process and asked for clearer information on the impact to high-speed rail, transit, and other GGRF priorities. The Delta Conveyance Project and related trailer bill language drew significant opposition from members and public commenters, who argued the proposal would fast-track the project, weaken CEQA-related review, and authorize revenue bond financing without sufficient legislative oversight. Public testimony also included support for maintaining or expanding funding for transit, affordable housing, AB 617 community air protection, offshore wind infrastructure, and ignition interlock programs, while environmental and community groups opposed cuts to wildfire prevention, housing, and school climate-related programs. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and the chair said the committee would continue the discussion and receive more detailed responses at the follow-up hearing on Tuesday.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it's just a conversation about priorities. No, certainly.
• But a budget is a reflection of priorities and of values.
• And so the priority, which I believe should be...
• And so the priority, which I believe should be.
• This proposal does not put other financial aid priorities at risk.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard May Revision proposals covering higher education, including the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the University of California, California Community Colleges, the California Student Aid Commission, UC College of the Law, San Francisco, and trailer bill reporting changes. For the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the administration proposed a one-time $10 million General Fund backfill to repay a special fund loan taken to cover litigation costs, plus provisional language to adjust for a pending legal expense and to repay the loan without interest. The LAO opposed shifting costs to the General Fund and raised legal concerns about an interest-free loan under Proposition 26. Senators asked about whether the $10 million would cover the litigation and about the estimated $245,000 in interest savings. For UC, the May Revision maintained the Governor’s ongoing support and included budget language requiring campuses to grow by 2,968 California undergraduates in 2026-27. UC also sought $1.5 million in one-time General Fund support for the First Star foster youth program. UC described strong outcomes for the UCLA program, while the LAO recommended rejecting the new spending because UC already has overlapping outreach programs, including the Early Academic Outreach Program, and because the need for new state funding was not clear. Senators debated whether the proposal duplicated existing services and discussed the program’s reported college-going and completion rates. The committee also heard a request for $1 million ongoing General Fund for UC College of the Law, San Francisco, to maintain campus safety services; the college described its shared-campus model and public-interest mission, while the LAO noted the college was also raising tuition and that the proposal would maintain, rather than expand, current security spending. The committee then reviewed community college proposals. Finance outlined a larger May Revision package centered on a 4.31% SCFF COLA, enrollment growth funding, categorical COLAs, a one-time Adult Learner Demonstration Project allocation, deferred maintenance, and other ongoing and one-time items. The Chancellor’s Office supported the package but asked for more enrollment growth funding, a higher growth rate, and additional policy changes. The LAO recommended at least funding the statutory 2.87% COLA, then considering whether to redirect remaining funds to enrollment growth, categorical COLAs, or one-time priorities; it recommended rejecting the Adult Learner Demonstration Project. Senators questioned the use of the discretionary COLA to cover paid pregnancy disability leave, the impact on hold harmless and basic aid districts, and whether the state should instead create a separate categorical. The Chancellor’s Office and Finance said the COLA approach was intended to provide flexibility, though Finance said it was open to further discussion about districts that would not receive direct funding. For student aid, Finance described May Revision changes to Cal Grant and the Middle Class Scholarship, including a one-time reduction tied to lower estimated costs and a later true-up, as well as proposals for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. CSAC supported the financial aid investments but urged more time and clearer implementation planning for Workforce Pell, noting the need for state approval processes, data linkages, and likely ongoing administrative workload. The LAO recommended rejecting additional Golden State Teacher Grant funding and cautioned that the Workforce Pell trailer bill and one-time funding were premature given the new federal rules and unclear workload. Senators also raised concerns about the Middle Class Scholarship reduction, the need to support students facing higher living costs, and the decline in CADA/DREAM Act applications, with CSAC saying the drop did not reflect reduced need and that outreach should be strengthened. The final item was a set of technical trailer bill changes to shift some UC, CSU, and community college reporting from annual to biennial and consolidate reports; Finance said there were no programmatic changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, we have one priority this year.
• Many years we've had several priorities, and sometimes we get a priority but we don't get our main priority
• <00:37:12.000> Every priority, it must be unanimous.
• Every priority, it must be unanimous.
• CVSO is top priority too this year. CVSO is top priority too this year.

Bills: HF3540, HF3522, HF3544

Keywords: veterans rights, employment discrimination, human rights, Minnesota laws, protected classes, veterans, Minnesota Department of Veterans Affairs, veterans affairs, Secret War in Laos, SGU veteran, Hmong veterans, Laotian veterans, honor guard, military funeral honors, state veterans cemetery, burial eligibility, veterans home, temporary closure, state active service, National Guard

Transcript Highlights:

• These funds support critical public priorities across Arizona.
• We have made problem gambling prevention and treatment a priority.
• Chair, Representative, yeah, that's a high priority for the department.
• It's the priority of combating illegal gaming. The priority of combating illegal gaming.
• The first priority for both revenue types is its stadium bond obligation.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The House Commerce Committee of Reference heard sunset reviews and a performance audit presentation for the Arizona Department of Gaming, the Racing Commission, the Boxing and MMA Commission, and later the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The Auditor General reported that the Department of Gaming and the commissions generally met some statutory duties, but identified several problems: the department did not consistently obtain and review independent audits for event wagering and fantasy sports operators; the department and commissions had gaps in conflict-of-interest disclosures; the department and Boxing and MMA Commission lacked comprehensive complaint-handling processes; the department was late distributing some compact trust fund payments; and there were additional issues involving IT security, horse-racing license checks, fee reviews, public records practices, and licensing compliance. The Auditor General said the department agreed to implement all 36 recommendations, the Racing Commission agreed to six recommendations, and the Boxing and MMA Commission agreed to 13 recommendations. The department director said many fixes were already underway, including updated guidance, complaint tracking improvements, and a historical look-back on operator reporting, and she also discussed efforts to combat illegal gambling and educate minors and families about gambling risks. Committee members questioned the department about third-party audits, penalties for underpayments, public records handling, conflict-of-interest screening, and the department’s position on prediction markets and suitability standards for licensees. The director said the department would review past reports, could assess fines if violations were found, and would generally wait for final adjudication or final action in other jurisdictions before taking Arizona licensing action. After discussion, the committee voted to recommend the Department of Gaming be continued for two years until July 1, 2028, the Racing Commission for six years until July 1, 2032, and the Boxing and MMA Commission for six years until July 1, 2032. The Department of Gaming motion passed 7-4, the Racing Commission motion passed 10-1, and the Boxing and MMA Commission motion passed unanimously. The committee then heard the Auditor General’s report on the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The audit found the board timely processed many licenses and complaints and had adopted curriculum rules, but it inconsistently applied its disciplinary guidelines, sometimes issuing different sanctions for similar violations without documenting the reasons for deviation. The report also found problems with reciprocity education requirements, application review controls, inspections, and compliance with open meeting, public records, and conflict-of-interest requirements, and it suggested possible statutory changes on aesthetics scope of practice, cease-and-desist authority, and training standards for I-LEST technicians. The board agreed with the findings and said it had already updated disciplinary parameters and documentation policies, with more recommendations in progress; committee members asked about discretion in discipline, audit funding, and service efficiency, and the board highlighted its licensing volume, call response, inspections, and complaint handling performance.

Transcript Highlights:

• When you're considering what are low priority, high priority, moderate, what are some of the metrics
• Where's our economic priorities in North Dakota?
• Where's our economic priorities in North Dakota?
• Reese, this is helpful because I never knew when you did high priority, moderate, low priority whether
• So our priority list.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to review several interim studies and receive updates from the Department of Water Resources. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and welcomed Representative Hansen to the committee. Staff then reported that the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study had both satisfied the presentation requirements in their study directives, with no further required testimony unless members wanted additional information. The department’s main presentation focused on major water projects and agency operations. Reese Haas and staff updated members on the NAWS project, the Southwest Pipeline Project, Devils Lake outlet operations, low-head dam safety work, floodplain management repository implementation, data center water use, and the 2027 Water Development Plan. Members asked detailed questions about NAWS funding sources, remaining project costs, capacity concerns for All Seasons and other users, and whether current construction is being designed for future demand. The department said NAWS remains on track for substantial completion by October, that remaining NAWS funding will come from a mix of federal, state, and local sources, and that current construction is designed for ultimate capacity while some future components will be adjusted for increased demand. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to the department’s cash management, Resources Trust Fund revenues, carryover balances, and the State Water Commission’s cost-share program. The department reported $340.6 million in carryover remaining, explained that much of it is already obligated to long-term projects, and noted that oil price forecasts and stripper-well exemptions will affect future revenues. Members raised concerns about large carryovers, affordability for local sponsors, and whether the state should continue obligating money multiple bienniums ahead. The department said it is working with the commission on a revised prioritization framework, including high/moderate/low project categories and a two-tier pre-construction/construction approach, to better manage obligations and affordability. The committee also reviewed Deloitte’s finalized studies on regional governance/finance and cost-share policy. Deloitte presented options for Southwest, NAWS, and Red River governance, with stakeholders generally favoring keeping NAWS largely as is, using the current Southwest model with improvements, and pursuing a more structured governance option for Red River. On cost share, the department said Deloitte’s recommended package would cover projected needs through the 2030s, but would require policy changes such as lower percentages for some project types, a 25% replacement-project rate with a cap, and possible bonding or delayed reimbursement strategies. No votes were taken on these policy questions, and the chair indicated the committee would continue the discussion at future basin meetings and the September Water Topics meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of the other options, delay moderate and low-priority projects.
• When you're considering what are low priority, high priority, moderate, what are some of the metrics
• Where's our economic priorities in North Dakota?
• Reese, this is helpful because I never knew when you did high priority, moderate, low priority whether
• So our priority list...

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to receive interim status updates on several water-related studies and Department of Water Resources projects. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and then heard updates on the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study. Staff reported that the committee had already received the testimony contemplated in the study plans, including input from state agencies, local governments, and out-of-state entities, and that any further action would be at the committee’s discretion. The Department of Water Resources then provided project and budget updates on NAWS and the Southwest Pipeline Project. Reese reported NAWS is expected to serve about 81,000 users, with a total projected cost of about $571 million and about $96 million remaining, while the Southwest Pipeline Project is estimated at $1.06 billion total with about $409 million remaining. Members asked about funding sources, capacity needs, and whether current and future construction is being designed for increased demand; department staff said current work is designed for ultimate capacity, but some future components may need redesign based on new requests. The committee also discussed local cost shares, Minot’s role in NAWS funding, and whether the system is adequate for peak demand. A major portion of the meeting focused on the department’s cash management, carryover, and long-term water funding outlook. The department said Resources Trust Fund revenues are tied to oil extraction taxes and are affected by stripper well exemptions and future oil price declines. Members expressed concern about large carryover balances and whether the state is obligating more money than can realistically be spent in a biennium. The department reported about $340.6 million in remaining carryover and said it is trying to reduce that through a two-tier pre-construction/construction process and closer project vetting. The department also summarized the Deloitte studies on regional governance and finance and on cost-share policy. Stakeholders generally favored keeping the current governance structures for NAWS and Southwest with improvements, while Red River stakeholders leaned toward a different option; the department said it will bring an implementation plan back in September. On cost share, Deloitte’s recommendations would reduce some percentages, prioritize projects differently, and use other measures to close a projected long-term funding gap. Members debated affordability, local burden, deferred maintenance, and whether statutory changes may be needed to allow the commission more flexibility in prioritizing and funding projects. No formal votes or final actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• And what are your priorities? I know. I know. I'm getting there.
• But that is certainly something that I want to continue to see as a priority.
• And the legislature might have other priorities, of course.
• So my priorities under this item would be HAP.
• So my priorities under this item would be H-HAP.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard a series of May Revision budget items, beginning with the State Controller’s Office. SCO described requests for Fiscal Book of Record stabilization, payroll system implementation, ACFR reporting support, and unclaimed property outreach funding. Members focused on the Fiscal system’s July go-live, the improved timeliness of the ACFR, and the unclaimed property program’s roughly $15 billion balance and outreach efforts. The Department of Finance and LAO raised no major concerns, and the item was closed after discussion of how the new outreach funding would be used. The committee then considered several revenue proposals. Finance presented a proposal to tax pre-written digital software and SaaS, with estimated General Fund gains of $450 million in 2026-27 and $900 million ongoing; LAO suggested broader digital tax changes and a business-use exemption, while industry groups opposed the measure as a tax on essential digital tools. CDTFA also presented an administrative request tied to the software tax, and later a $10 million budget reduction reflecting lower operational needs. The committee then heard a federal conformity proposal for new children’s tax-deferred accounts, which LAO supported, and a proposal to cut the first-year LLC/LP minimum tax from $800 to $400, which Finance said would aid small business formation but LAO argued was poorly targeted and would reduce revenue. Another major item was a permanent business tax credit limitation beginning in 2027, capping credits at the greater of $5 million per corporation or 50% of pre-credit liability. Finance said it would raise about $850 million in 2026-27 and more in later years, while LAO noted it would mainly affect large firms using the R&D credit and could also touch California Competes and other programs. Public testimony split sharply between business groups opposing the cap and advocates supporting it as a progressive revenue measure. The committee also heard FTB’s CalFile realignment proposal, which would retain a smaller staff to continue improving the free filing system and return most of the prior funding to the General Fund. The hearing concluded with the California Arts Council’s request to reauthorize the Keep Arts in Schools voluntary contribution fund, which brings in about $221,000 to $266,000 annually for arts grants and teacher stipends. Members and advocates supported the item but also urged larger arts funding, including the Performing Arts Equitable Payroll Fund. The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development then presented proposals for the California Civic Media Program, CA RISE reappropriation, and a reversion of unused Chips for America facility funds; LAO supported the latter two but was cautious about new civic media spending. Members raised concerns about the civic media program’s scope, including the exclusion of broadcast and the lack of a specific ethnic media set-aside, while GoBiz said funds would begin going out in the fall if approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• You'll have that money that you can use to shore up key priorities and key programs.
• And what are your priorities? I know. I know. I'm getting there.
• But that is certainly something that I want to continue to see as a priority.
• And with that, I also want to thank you for the opportunity to talk about my priorities.
• So my priorities under this item would be HAP.

Summary: The committee opened with the State Controller’s Office May Revision requests, including funding for Fiscal book-of-record stabilization, a Broadcom IDMS licensing adjustment, the California State Payroll System, ACFR reporting automation, and $3 million for unclaimed property outreach. Testimony emphasized progress on Fiscal becoming the state’s accounting book of record in July, faster ACFR publication, and the move to electronic unclaimed property claims. Members asked about the size of the unclaimed property fund and how quickly money is transferred to the General Fund; the Controller’s office said about $15 billion is held, with most excess transferred regularly, and the LAO noted the fund is the General Fund’s fourth-largest revenue source. No concerns were raised by Finance or the LAO, and the item was closed after no public comment. The committee then heard the administration’s proposal to tax prewritten digital software and software-as-a-service, with Finance saying it would modernize sales tax treatment and raise an estimated $450 million General Fund and $560 million local revenue in 2026-27. The LAO supported modernizing the tax but suggested broader digital goods coverage and a business-use exemption; industry and taxpayer groups opposed the proposal, warning of higher costs for consumers and businesses. Members also heard CDTFA’s administrative request tied to the proposal, plus a separate CDTFA budget reduction reflecting lower operational needs; that reduction was presented as a savings item and drew positive reactions. Next, the committee considered federal conformity for “Trump accounts,” which would align California tax treatment with federal rules for tax-deferred children’s accounts and avoid tracking burdens for families. The LAO recommended approval, and the item drew no opposition. The committee also heard a proposal to cut the first-year $800 annual business tax to $400 for LLCs, LPs, and LLPs; Finance argued it would lower startup costs and encourage new business formation, while the LAO said the benefit was not well targeted and could subsidize entities that would form anyway. Members discussed the policy tradeoff, and public commenters split between support for small business relief and concern about revenue loss. The final major revenue item was a permanent business tax credit limitation, capping credits at the greater of $5 million per corporation or 50% of pre-credit liability, while excluding the low-income housing tax credit and personal income tax credits. Finance said it would raise significant revenue from large profitable corporations, and the LAO said it was a reasonable option but noted it would mainly affect the R&D credit and could have future implications for programs like California Competes. Public testimony was sharply divided, with business groups opposing the cap and anti-poverty advocates supporting it as a way to recapture revenue. The committee also heard FTB’s CalFile realignment request, which would return most of the direct-file-related resources to the General Fund while retaining a smaller staff to improve CalFile, and the California Arts Council’s request to reauthorize the Keep Arts in Schools voluntary contribution fund, which members and advocates supported despite relatively modest annual donations. The hearing continued with GoBiz proposals on civic media funding, CA RISE reappropriation, and a semiconductor facility reversion, with the LAO supporting the latter two and members raising questions about the civic media program’s scope, outreach, and inclusion of broadcast and ethnic media.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know that it’s going to be widened, and that was my number one priority, followed by the 347.
• These are priorities for the district.
• that have been deemed and have gone through that extensive process to determine what the priorities
• HB the ARTEC bill 2304 includes our 15 regional priority project from NACOG, totaling $81 million.
• So there's many, many needs, but this is the top priority for our region right now.

Bills: HB2067, HB2068, HB2127, HB2164, HB2200, HB2201, HB2242, HB2283, HB2284, HB2285, HB2286, HB2287, HB2304, HB2306, HB2399, HB2601, HB2609, HB2760, HB2761, HB2859, HB2887, HB2892, HB2893, HB2894, HB2978, HB4027, HCM2012, HCM2016

Keywords: appropriation, transportation, infrastructure, Apache Junction, funding, Show Low, road extension, special license plates, nonprofits, charitable contributions, Reay Lane, Graham County, HB 2200, State Route 89, SR 89, Chino Valley, Arizona Department of Transportation, ADOT, road widening, highway expansion

Summary: The committee heard an ADOT presentation on Interstate 11, SR 347, the I-10 Wild Horse Pass corridor, and the I-40/US 93 West Kingman project. ADOT said the I-11 corridor remains under a federal lawsuit covering the full 280-mile route from Mexico to Nevada, with a Tier 1 reevaluation underway and public outreach expected later in the year, concluding in early 2027. ADOT said segmentation of the corridor would add time and cost, and that current work is limited to pre-NOI Tier 2 activities and other allowed planning steps. For SR 347, ADOT described widening, intersection upgrades, two grade separations, and a schedule that could begin construction in summer pending clearances. For I-10, ADOT outlined four widening projects adding a third lane each way, interchange reconstructions, a new interchange at Coley Road, and corridor-wide freeway management systems, with completion expected by late 2029. For the West Kingman I-40/US 93 project, ADOT said the $106.5 million project is about 60% complete and should finish in early 2027; members asked about temporary traffic control near Beale Street and possible additional signage or signals on the corridor. Members also raised local traffic and safety concerns on the SR 347 and I-10 projects, including signal timing, median barriers, construction hours, truck traffic, and the need for clearer driver education and digital signs. ADOT said it would look into signal optimization, possible temporary fixes, and additional signage, and noted the I-10 corridor total cost is just under $1 billion, funded through a mix of MAG, federal, and state money. On I-40, members also discussed a possible temporary traffic light near Beale Street to improve safety and access. The committee then moved to a series of transportation appropriation bills and announced a mass-motion process for the projects. Staff explained HB 2067 for Apache Junction ($29.4 million), HB 2068 for the Wolford Road extension in Show Low ($6.5 million), HB 2164 for Ray Lane improvements in Graham County ($3.73 million), HB 2200 for SR 89 widening in Chino Valley ($36 million, contingent on a $1 million local commitment), HB 2201 for Sedona SR 89A/Forest Road/Ranger Road projects ($8.03 million), and HB 2304, the ARTEC bill, which appropriates about $473 million for multiple highway projects statewide. Witnesses from Show Low, Eloy, Coolidge, Casa Grande, Lake Havasu City, Clarkdale, San Luis, Yuma, and Yavapai County testified in support of their local projects, emphasizing congestion relief, freight movement, emergency evacuation, safety, economic development, and local matching funds. No final votes were taken in the portion provided; the chair indicated the committee would proceed with a mass motion on the project bills after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• leader Swords just in here said the governor essentially went about grandstanding about Democrat priorities
• leader Swords just in here said the governor essentially went about grandstanding about Democrat priorities
• It also, of course, deals with judicial security, which is another priority.
• It also, of course, deals with judicial security, which is another priority.
• I think it is always clarifying when the governor talks about what his priorities are, and as we head

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The discussion focused on reactions to Governor Walz’s final State of the State address and the remaining priorities for the end of session. DFL leaders described the speech as hopeful and a summary of accomplishments over the past several years, highlighting education, paid family and medical leave, climate and labor policies, fraud prevention, affordability, and a new economy shaped by AI. They said the governor’s call to action on gun violence was especially important and argued that Minnesotans care more about the results of legislation than whether bills passed with bipartisan support. Gun violence prevention was a major topic. Leaders said the legislature had already passed measures in 2023 and 2024 including red flag laws, universal background checks, and a ban on binary triggers, and they defended those laws as saving lives. They said the governor’s renewed push for gun legislation was not divisive and that Republicans should join the effort. They also discussed public safety more broadly, including capital security and judicial security, saying there was bipartisan support for a security bill. Other priorities mentioned for the final weeks included combating fraud, making life more affordable, child tax credit changes, a tax on social media/data companies, HCMC modernization and IT, bonding, and school safety. Leaders said the Senate would take up health and human services next, expected the gun package to move out of finance and reach the floor soon, and anticipated conference committees or working groups to begin. They said they were confident the legislature could resolve differences with the House’s single-subject approach and finish its work by the May 18 deadline without a special session.

Transcript Highlights:

• the facility's last major upgrade was in 1989 and improvements to the hatchery rank as DNR's top priority
• for its betterment of DNR's top priority for its betterment of uh<00:03:42.080> buildings<00:
• Consistent with the governor's priorities last legislative session, the governor recommends a total of
• The governor's plan also invests $50 million in high-priority pavement projects on trunk highways across
• of everybody to do that or not priority of everybody to do that or not is<00:18:29.039> is<00

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for making this a priority today. Thank you for making this a priority today.
• bienium periods as one priority bienium periods as one priority organization<00:10:13.440> did
• question, did priority organizations question, did priority organizations mail<00:18:43.280>
• <00:27:15.600> organization identified as a priority organization identified as a priority
• <00:32:25.519> organizations priority organizations priority organizations um<00:32:28.320>

Bills: HF4148

Keywords: Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, Outdoor Heritage Fund, executive director, natural resources, conservation, wetlands, prairies, forests, wildlife habitat, fish and game, bipartisan hiring, interview panel, legislative branch, Minnesota Statutes 97A.056, administrative expenses, nonpartisan staff, council governance, environment and natural resources

Transcript Highlights:

• I know it's very low on the priority list.
• I know it's low on the priority list. It struck me immediately.
• When you go to priority six, um, this is...
• When you go to priority six, um, this is a transformational project.
• So safety is our first priority there.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our priority is making sure that Minnesotans have money in their pockets.
• And so it came down to the tab fee reduction as one of the main priorities that we had and we're able
• Our priority is making sure that Minnesotans have money in their pockets.
• of things that that were high priority of things that that were high priority items<00:03:54.360
• Our priority is making items fell away.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: Legislators and reporters discussed the final contours of a Minnesota bonding and tax package centered on a $1.2 billion capital investment bill. Supporters said the bill would fund state and local infrastructure projects, maintain state assets, and include anti-fraud measures such as electronic verification for service providers and a 100% excess tax on fraud proceeds to prevent offenders from profiting. They also said the package would backfill road-and-bridge funding so the fee reduction would not reduce transportation dollars. A major point of emphasis was a temporary reduction in tab fees, described as a $254 million savings for taxpayers in 2027. Republicans said the reduction was a top priority and that it was secured through negotiations, though they acknowledged it is only a one-year reprieve unless changed in a future session. They estimated the average savings at about $145 on a $50,000 vehicle, with larger savings for households with multiple vehicles. They also noted that the first proposal had included both a depreciation change and a rate change, but only the rate cut remained in the final compromise. In response to questions, lawmakers said the tab fee cut was driven by constituent complaints and that they would try to extend it next year. They also discussed related transportation issues, including accelerating collection of an auto parts sales tax and concerns about greenhouse gas-related costs for roads and bridges. On other topics, one lawmaker said gun control proposals in the House were not part of these negotiations and urged continued movement on the broader package. No formal vote was taken in the exchange, but participants expressed confidence that the bonding portion of the deal was largely settled, while some details of the full package still needed to be finalized.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm grateful to Secretary Sean Duffy who is here today to share the Trump administration's priorities
• for this legislation and I look forward to learning more about those priorities.
• That's a top priority. Let's do it a few more times. Let's do it more efficiently.
• People lose their lives when our bridges aren't safe, and so it's I know it's a top priority for this
• But I, again, I think that's, that would be a top priority for us to move that project.

Keywords: surface transportation, infrastructure reauthorization, bipartisan collaboration, safety, federal programs, funding challenges, bureaucracy, transportation needs, critical projects, public testimony

Summary: The committee meeting focused on the development of the next surface transportation reauthorization bill. Discussions centered around key principles aimed at improving the safety and reliability of the transportation network, reforming federal programs for efficiency, and addressing the diverse transportation needs across various states. Members emphasized the importance of bipartisan collaboration to streamline processes, eliminate bureaucratic delays, and ensure timely funding for critical infrastructure projects. There were also notable conversations about specific projects and funding challenges, reflecting the urgency for action and commitment to modernizing America's infrastructure.