Transcript Highlights:

• This is the type of data that we look at when we're allocating funds to campuses.
• The average in-state undergraduate student pays less than $6,000 in net tuition and fees.
• It's also very consistent with how the Legislature in the past has allocated funds, regardless of what
• the ...with how the Legislature in the past has allocated funds, regardless of whether you're looking
• You go up $100 just $100 on fees, we lose students. They're that price sensitive.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on the BRIGHT Act, a higher education capital bill that would use Fair Share surtax revenue to fund major repairs, modernization, and decarbonization projects across UMass, state universities, and community colleges. UMass leadership described a $4.8 billion deferred maintenance backlog, aging buildings, and the need to modernize facilities, improve accessibility, and reduce emissions. Administration officials said the bill would authorize $2.5 billion in capital funding, split roughly 50-50 between UMass and the rest of public higher education, plus additional targeted funding for housing planning, smaller modernization projects, campus master plans, and workforce skills grants. They emphasized that the financing structure is modeled on the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and would not raise student costs, while also supporting affordability through financial aid and free community college. Members raised questions about regional equity, the distribution of funds among the five UMass campuses and the 24 state university/community college campuses, project labor agreements, whether the bill would unlock private or federal matching funds, and how the system is preparing for AI and changing workforce needs. UMass officials said project selection is data-driven, based on deferred maintenance, safety, accessibility, sustainability, and programmatic needs, and that the flagship campus in Western Massachusetts would likely receive a large share because of its size and needs. They also said UMass Boston would receive its own share and would not be shortchanged by the Bayside project. On labor, they said PLAs are commonly used and they would follow existing board and building authority policies. On affordability, they said the university has shifted hundreds of millions into need-based aid and that the state’s recent support has helped keep tuition low for many students. DCAMM and higher education officials said the state’s public campuses account for a large share of state-owned building space and a disproportionate share of operational carbon emissions, making decarbonization a major driver of the bill. They said the legislation would allow larger, more comprehensive projects that can address deferred maintenance, energy efficiency, and program needs at the same time, while also making some projects shovel-ready through the Fair Share supplemental funding already appropriated. A later panel from the State Universities Council of Presidents argued the bill’s authorization is still too small to meet long-term needs and urged the committee to increase the bond cap and ensure a more equitable distribution among segments. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a release for $460,000 from the special university tuition and fees fund.
• I'm fully aware you have a WAM release allocating 460,000 from the tuition and fees special fund.
• <01:02:15.440> 460,000 have a WAM release um allocating 460,000 have a WAM release um allocating
• from the tuition and fees special fund. from the tuition and fees special fund.
• <01:10:23.680> up which 1.5 million would be allocated up which 1.5 million would be allocated

Bills: HB2241, HB1163, HB1514, HB1696, HB2021, SB2135, SB2466, SB2727, SB3082, SB3097, SB2861, SCR100, SB3096, SB99, SB2138, HB2289, HB2319, HB1711, HB2270, SB3138, SB3076, HB1642, HB2338, HB2171, HB1785, SB2881, HB2505, SB2552, HB1518, HB1815, SB3125, SB3234, SCR162, SB2614, SB3118, SB2053, SB2494, SB2851, SB3073, HB1678, HB1721, HB2475, HB2246, HB1667, HB1516, SB2532, SB3131, SB3154, HB2297, HB1737, SB2143, SB2398, SB2623, HB1740, HB1920, HB1682, SB2153, SB3140, HB2158, HB1718, HB2207, HB1801, SB3229, SB2338, SB3069, SB2600, HB2300, HB1800, HB1960, SB2999, SB2060, SB2866, SB2239, HB1741, HB1713, HB2023, HB2417, SB2877, SB2598, SB2921, SB2645, HB2547, HB2275, HB2452, HB2329, HB2339, HB1838, HB1509, HB1661, HB2271, HB2272, HB2344, HB1888, HB1707, SB2340, HB2474, HB1576, HB1853, HB1804, HB1854, HB2095, HB2050, HB472, SB3215, SB2247, SB2400, HB1618, HB1802, HB1969, HB1541, HB2310, HB2498, HB2443, HB2218, HB649, HB2104, HB1710, SB2802, HB1973, HB1974, HB1894, HB1891, HB1890, SB177, SB2101, SB3320, SB2487, HB2429, HB1870, HB1839, HB2583, HB1391, HB2094, SB2671, SB2673, SB2892, SB2057, SB3245, HB306, HB2592, SB3157, SB3204, SB3324, SB2580, SB2074, SB411, SB3025, SB2934, SB2567, SB2125, SB3238, SB2367, SB2599, SB3007, SB2001, SB2756, SB3029

Keywords: renewable energy, income tax credit, solar energy, wind energy, low-income households, energy policy, commercial drivers license, non-domiciled, federal regulations, commercial learner's permit, citizenship, lawful residency, Department of Transportation, workers' compensation, vocational rehabilitation, injury recovery, employment services, return to work, commercial driving, driver's license

Transcript Highlights:

• Are the mineral fees, the fees that get paid?
• And then during session, I believe the request was to increase their fees.
• Our holding company had to do it, and we had to pay fees, and we went through that fee structure every
• allocation.
• It's the federal allocation that ultimately they're managing.

Summary: The committee met to receive a series of audit presentations, beginning with the statewide Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for fiscal year 2025. The State Auditor’s Office and OMB reported a clean, unmodified opinion for the state, with strong financial results including a $40.6 billion net position, $30.99 billion in assets, $1.81 billion in liabilities, and continued Legacy Fund growth. OMB also explained the new GASB 101 compensated-absences reporting change and discussed pension-liability fluctuations tied to discount-rate assumptions and investment performance. Members asked about how the state compares to others and about the effect of short-term commodity price swings, and OMB said the report reflects actual fiscal-year results rather than forecasts. The committee then heard the University System audit, which also received a clean opinion but included four findings: misreporting of Strategic Investment and Improvements Fund revenue, insufficient monitoring of service organizations at CTS, NDSU, and UND, improper bank reconciliations at Dakota College of Bottineau, Dickinson State, and Williston State, and investment/cash reconciliation problems at Bismarck State College related to bond proceeds. University officials agreed with the findings and said corrective actions were underway, including internal review of bank reconciliations. Members raised questions about NDSU’s use of certificates of deposit, and university staff explained that CDs are used to earn interest on funds being accumulated for future projects. Several other audits were presented, most with clean opinions and no findings, including the State Auditor’s Office, Workforce Safety and Insurance, Housing Finance Agency, Housing Incentive Fund, Job Service North Dakota, the Retirement and Investment Office, PERS, the Center for Distance Education, the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents, the Ethics Commission, and the Office of Administrative Hearings. Notable exceptions included a State Fair Association audit with an adverse opinion on the foundation component unit because its financial statements were not available for audit, and a Securities Department performance audit finding that performance-based pay increases and bonuses were issued without required evaluations. The committee also discussed the State Auditor’s future needs, including more staff capacity, data analytics, cybersecurity reviews, possible subpoena authority, independent legal counsel, and whether some audits—such as the Ethics Commission and State Fair—should be handled by independent third parties or under different statutory arrangements.

Transcript Highlights:

• We save a whole lot of time, money, and resources in calculating what that tax and that fee is going
• Thousands of dollars in late fees were applied, and then our accountant and auditor had to reorganize
• There would be a bond allocation bill as a matter of fact.
• to a um uh in order to obtain allocation to a um uh in order to obtain allocation of<01:13:48.800
• <01:14:51.360> or things 180 days um of the allocation or things 180 days um of the allocation

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , which the state's renewal of that fee is currently before the federal administration.
• fees or substantially increasing pre-existing fees, and it does not grant any fee waivers and requires
• all appropriate fees be paid.
• It eliminates Medicaid enrollment fees or premiums for expansion population adults.
• Counties are already at capacity within their CalFresh allocations.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held its fifth hearing of the year to examine the newly enacted federal H.R. 1 and its effects on California. Members and the chair described the law as a major threat to state health, food, education, and climate programs, and emphasized that California would not be able to fully backfill the federal cuts. Several members also highlighted the bill’s tax provisions, including temporary deductions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, while warning that the largest benefits flow to higher-income taxpayers and that major cuts to Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and clean-energy incentives are delayed or phased in over time. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance presented detailed overviews of the bill’s likely impacts and implementation timelines. They identified the main affected areas as health care coverage and financing, food assistance, higher education, personal income taxes, and clean-energy/electric-vehicle credits. They explained that H.R. 1 limits provider taxes used to finance Medi-Cal, adds work and redetermination requirements, restricts CalFresh eligibility and increases state costs, changes student loan and Pell Grant rules, extends and modifies federal tax provisions, and phases out many clean-energy credits. Finance also noted major rescissions of Inflation Reduction Act funds, new border and immigration enforcement spending, and the possibility of PAYGO sequestration if Congress does not act to offset the deficit increase. During member questions, the committee focused on likely enrollment losses, administrative burdens, and fiscal exposure for the state and counties. Witnesses said many details still depend on federal guidance, but they estimated significant impacts on Medi-Cal, CalFresh, and graduate/professional student borrowing, and noted that California’s high CalFresh error rate could increase state costs. UC testified that the elimination of Graduate PLUS loans would affect thousands of professional students, especially in health, law, and other high-cost programs. Members asked for follow-up data on county, health, and tax impacts, and staff agreed to provide additional tables and estimates as implementation guidance becomes clearer. Public commenters from counties, early childhood advocates, health coalitions, disability rights groups, immigrant-rights organizations, and other stakeholders urged the Legislature to mitigate the law’s effects. They warned of higher county costs, reduced access to health care and food assistance, increased administrative burdens, and harm to children, immigrants, people with disabilities, and low-income families. Several urged new state revenue solutions and stronger protections for Medi-Cal, CalFresh, child care, and home- and community-based services. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with a commitment to continue monitoring federal guidance and to work on state responses in the budget process.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 1001 by Blanco relates to the allocation of certain constitutional transfers of money. ..
• Senate Bill 1015 by Zaffirini relates to excess contributions and fees allocated to statutory probate
• Senate Bill 1016 by Blanco relates to student union building fees at the University of Texas at El Paso
• Senate Bill 1112 by Hughes relates to the determination of fees, charges, and rates for certain benefits
• Senate Bill 134 by Hagen relates to assistance for tuition fees at post-secondary educational institutions

Bills: SJR36, SB26, SJR3, SJR48, SJR50, SJR51, SCR15, SCR17, SB3, SB5, SB12, SB18, SB1001, SB1002, SB1003, SB1004, SB1005, SB1006, SB1007, SB1008, SB1009, SB1010, SB1011, SB1012, SB1013, SB1014, SB1015, SB1016, SB1017, SB1018, SB1019, SB1020, SB1021, SB1022, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1026, SB1027, SB1028, SB1029, SB1030, SB1031, SB1032, SB1033, SB1034, SB1035, SB1036, SB1037, SB1038, SB1039, SB1040, SB1041, SB1042, SB1043, SB1044, SB1045, SB1046, SB1049, SB1050, SB1051, SB1052, SB1053, SB1054, SB1055, SB1056, SB1057, SB1058, SB1059, SB1060, SB1061, SB1062, SB1063, SB1064, SB1065, SB1066, SB1067, SB1068, SB1069, SB1070, SB1071, SB1072, SB1073, SB1074, SB1075, SB1076, SB1077, SB1078, SB1079, SB1080, SB1081, SB1082, SB1083, SB1084, SB1085, SB1086, SB1087, SB1088, SB1089, SB1090, SB1091, SB1092, SB1093, SB1094, SB1095, SB1096, SB1097, SB1098, SB1099, SB1100, SB1101, SB1102, SB1103, SB1104, SB1105, SB1106, SB1107, SB1108, SB1109, SB1110, SB1111, SB1112, SB1113, SB1114, SB1115, SB1116, SB1117, SB1118, SB1119, SB1120, SB1121, SB1122, SB1123, SB1124, SB1125, SB1126, SB1127, SB1128, SB1129, SB1130, SB1131, SB1132, SB1133, SB1134, SB1135, SB1136, SB1137, SB1138, SB1139, SB1140, SB1141, SB1142, SB1143, SB1144, SB1145, SB1146, SB1147, SB1148, SB1149, SB1150, SB1565

Keywords: teacher compensation, education funding, public school educators, teacher retention, teacher designation, dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, research funding, state budget, prevention, healthcare, medical research, Dementia Prevention and Research Institute, severance tax, oil and gas, Texas STRONG fund, economic stabilization, public health, property tax relief

Transcript Highlights:

• I mentioned what's in the supplemental bill right now has $100 million that will be allocated toward
• That you put in place in 2021, and that not only was just an allocation of legacy fund money to paying
• Our board doesn't think it would be prudent to allocate all of our trust fund to the S&P 500, or even
• and TexQuest membership fees.
• They have been allocated that money.

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee heard budget presentations for the Texas Historical Commission, the Pension Review Board, the Employees Retirement System (ERS), Social Security and benefit replacement pay, the Texas Emergency Services Retirement System (TESSRS), and the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT). The Legislative Budget Board outlined recommendations and major changes for each agency, including reductions tied to one-time projects at the Historical Commission, continued funding for courthouse grants, heritage trails, and Holocaust/genocide education, as well as new or modified riders and capital items. For the pension-related items, LBB described funding changes for PRB, ERS, Social Security, and TESSRS, including ERS health plan cost growth driven largely by pharmacy costs, the status of pension funding reforms, and TESSRS’s request for additional state support to address its unfunded liability and staffing needs. Members asked extensive questions about the Historical Commission’s one-time funding, unexpended balance authority, courthouse preservation, the Presidio La Bahia and National Museum of the Pacific War projects, and coordination of Texas history messaging across sites such as the Alamo, San Jacinto, Washington on the Brazos, and other heritage locations. The Historical Commission chair emphasized heritage tourism, economic development, and the need for continued investment in historic sites, staffing, IT modernization, and vehicles. On the pension items, senators discussed PRB oversight of local systems, including the Dallas police and fire pension situation, and ERS investment returns, benchmark comparisons, and rising health costs. ERS officials said the plan remains well funded overall, noted a 2021 cash balance reform and a planned supplemental legacy payment, and explained that GLP-1 drugs such as Ozempic and Mounjaro are a major driver of pharmacy spending; they also said the agency is working with the Texas Pharmacy Initiative and that rebates are contractually returned to ERS. For TESSRS, LBB and agency staff said the system serves volunteer and part-paid emergency personnel, is facing an infinite amortization period, and is requesting additional appropriations, staffing, and IT funding, along with a statutory change to allow an actuarially determined state contribution. The agency said it may otherwise need to cut benefits for volunteer firefighters. For CPRIT, LBB reported about $600 million in recommended funding for the biennium and a 10-FTE increase, while the agency described its $6 billion voter-approved program, $3.75 billion in grants awarded to date, and $10.4 million in revenue sharing since 2011. CPRIT’s only exceptional item was a request for a 10% salary increase for two exempt positions. No committee votes or formal actions were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Listed on our Medicaid fee schedule.
• In fee for service, sorry, current fee-for-service rates are lower than those paid by capitated plans
• Currently,... listed on our Medicaid fee schedule.
• In fee for service, sorry, current fee for service rates are lower than those paid by capitated plans
• This proposal will help in redesigning the Medicaid fee-for-service fee schedule to ensure those children

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services heard a presentation on the governor’s proposed fiscal year 2026-27 budget for the health and human services silo, which totals $48.5 billion. Agency leaders outlined major requests for AHCA, APD, DCF, DOEA, DOH, and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs, including behavioral health redesign, Medicaid rate changes, developmental disability services, child welfare and opioid programs, senior services, cancer research, public health initiatives, and veterans’ facility and technology needs. The committee also received an overview of the overall state budget, which was described as $117.4 billion, up 1.1% from the current year. AHCA’s presentation focused on $71.6 million for a Medicaid behavioral health redesign, including funding for residential treatment, a serious mental illness waiver, and higher inpatient psychiatric rates for youth, plus $7.1 million to raise private duty nursing reimbursement in fee-for-service Medicaid, $2.5 million for the background screening clearinghouse, and $124.4 million for the Health Care Connection System (FX). APD requested funding to continue moving people off the pre-enrollment list and to support developmental disability centers, a new forensic facility, an electronic health record system, and higher operating costs. DCF highlighted $81.9 million for eligibility and system integrity, $187.5 million for opioid prevention and treatment, $35.5 million for community-based care lead agencies, and $72.7 million to expand behavioral health bed capacity, including 474 new beds at state hospitals. DOEA sought additional funding for Alzheimer’s services, home care, and community care for the elderly. DOH emphasized $278 million for cancer research and innovation, $5 million for food and product safety testing, $5 million for the Florida FIRST blood-on-ambulance initiative, and $5.7 million for a public lab feasibility study. Veterans Affairs requested funds for facility improvements, cybersecurity, and medication management equipment. Members asked detailed questions about several items, especially the proposed changes to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), which would reduce eligibility and the number of people served. Senators and public witnesses criticized the lack of transparency and urged the department to pause the changes and work with stakeholders; the Surgeon General said the issue was driven by funding constraints and federal changes, not a legal barrier, and that the agency was exploring alternatives. Questions also addressed the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity, the Kids Care/CHIP expansion implementation, the cancer research funding structure, and the timeline and cost of the FX system. Public testimony focused heavily on ADAP, with speakers warning that thousands could lose medication access and calling for community involvement and a review of the program’s finances. The committee adjourned after the presentations and questions, with no votes taken on the budget items during this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We put a $5 per year cap on the fee.
• maximum fee that a facility would have to pay.
• And so what the original bill that was put in set up a 30-cent fee on every phone line.
• And so what the original bill that was put in set up a 30-cent fee on every phone line.
• So there isn't a new allocation; it's just... ...utilizing the existing dollars.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 2265, which would provide the Fargo National Cemetery with up to a $3 million line of credit to help fund improvements such as indoor bathrooms, parking, a family gathering area, an office, a hearse garage, and a veterans gallery. Supporters said the cemetery has expanded rapidly since 2019, has already conducted about 1,000 burials, and needs better facilities for families and the Honor Guard; they also said the project would be subject to federal VA approval and, once completed, would be taken over by the VA. Members raised questions about the project’s cost, timing, funding sources, whether the bill should be a grant instead of a line of credit, and whether a chapel should be specifically included. No vote was taken on SB 2265 during the excerpt. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2230, which would have the Secretary of State mail active voters a guide on ballot measures at least 45 days before an election, with objective summaries, fiscal impacts, and arguments for and against each measure. Secretary of State Michael Howe said the office already receives many questions about ballot measures and would post the same information online and at polling places, while emphasizing the need to keep the material objective and consistent with election-law restrictions. Members generally supported the idea as a voter-education tool, and the committee adopted a due pass motion on SB 2230 by a 19-0 vote. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 2256, which would provide one-time state support for the NDSU Research and Technology Park in Fargo to expand its role in commercialization, robotics, precision agriculture, and defense-related technology. Park CEO Brenda Weiland explained that the park is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit spun out of NDSU, governed by a board with both university and industry representation, and that the new model is intended to bridge the gap between research and market-ready products without competing directly with private industry. Members asked about ownership, intellectual property, the planned partnership with Carnegie Mellon’s robotics center, and how the park would use the funding; the discussion focused on contracts, licensing, and the park’s intent to build technical capacity and attract companies. The excerpt ends before any vote on SB 2256.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, yes, for that fee schedule, the ones that are on the Medicare fee schedule are reduced by 25%.
• fee schedule. fee schedule.
• fee SC or<00:36:53.920> Medicaid<00:36:54.320> fee<00:36:54.560> schedule.
• <01:02:13.680> That's allocated to something else. That's allocated to something else.
• the fee schedule rate setting. the fee schedule rate setting.

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:

• So those it's an income-based fee.
• Uh originally was incomebased fee.
• This tax, or this fee, is similar to a lot of the other fees that basically stay flat.
• allocated for state aid to education. allocated for state aid to education.
• the statutory net revenue allocation the statutory net revenue allocation formula<04:04:27.680><

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This tax or this fee is similar to a lot of the other fees that basically stay flat.
• This tax or this fee is similar to a lot of the other fees that basically stay flat.
• This tax or this fee is similar to a lot of the other fees that basically stay flat.
• . fees. fees.
• allocated for state aid to education. allocated for state aid to education.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 1596, which would raise New Hampshire’s cigarette excise tax from $1.78 per pack to about $2.80, using an inflation-based adjustment since the rate was last set in 2008. Representative Jerry Stringham, the bill’s sponsor, said the measure would keep New Hampshire competitive with neighboring states, generate revenue, and help offset other budget pressures. He also described the bill as repealing an income-based premium charge in Medicaid/CHIP-related programs and restoring cuts to the University System of New Hampshire, arguing that the combined package would still leave the state in a positive fiscal position. He said the tobacco tax increase would likely have some cessation effect but would remain low relative to other New England states, and he cited prior testimony from health groups supporting a larger increase. Members questioned the sponsor about how the new rate was calculated, the prior tobacco tax reduction and restoration, whether tobacco companies would absorb or pass on the tax, and the fiscal note’s estimates for Medicaid premium revenue and UNH funding. Stringham said he used Bureau of Labor Statistics inflation data, that the earlier 10-cent reduction did not produce the expected sales increase, and that the current bill would eliminate the premium charges now in the budget. He later clarified that the Department of Medicaid Services had updated the revenue estimate, but said the bill still showed a surplus overall. He also said the federal government already imposes a $1-per-pack tax and that New Hampshire would remain below neighboring states even after the increase. Two public witnesses testified in opposition to the tax increase. Anna Bettincourt, a tobacco category manager, argued that higher tobacco taxes would unfairly target smokers, reduce New Hampshire’s tax advantage, and likely shift purchases to other states or illicit markets rather than reduce use. She said tobacco companies generally do not lower prices and that Massachusetts’ flavor restrictions had not eliminated sales. In response to questions, she maintained that a smaller increase would still be harmful and that enforcement problems make bans ineffective. The sponsor and some members countered that smokers impose higher health costs and that tobacco taxes are a policy tool for both revenue and public health. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so it is a program for local governments, but it's attached to this weird distribution allocation
• This is one fee schedule that has not been changed. since 1963.
• New language requires that the division evaluate and adjust registration fees a minimum of once every
• We have a collection of seats that we can replace, sometimes at low or no fee for families.
• How can I be able to allocate or advocate for allocating state funds if I get that information after

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1417 really deals with those indigent defense fees and probation supervision fees, and also
• has a study to look at all fees.
• supervision fees.
• supervision fees.
• DOCR has said it spends nearly $1 million administering the fees and trying to collect the fees.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to review fiscal aspects of House Bills 1417 and 1425, both part of a broader criminal justice reentry package. HB 1417 would eliminate the $35 public defender application fee and end court-ordered reimbursement of indigent defense costs, while also removing the $55 monthly community supervision fee. Testimony from the Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigents and the Department of Corrections said the bill would replace lost revenue with general fund appropriations of about $310,000 for indigent defense and $1.5 million for supervision fees, and that the fees are rarely collected and can hinder reentry. Representative Clemene said the bill is intended to reduce barriers to successful community reintegration and improve data and supervision practices. HB 1425 would create and fund front-end diversion, deflection, and pretrial services programs. Supporters described it as allowing prosecutors and local jurisdictions to divert appropriate low-level offenders from prosecution, establish deflection programs for people with behavioral health needs, and expand pretrial services. The bill includes a pilot program in three counties, a $1 million appropriation to DOCR for one FTE and contracts with local providers, $750,000 to DHS for treatment services, and $55,000 for a study of pretrial services cost savings. Committee members asked several questions about how the pilot counties would be chosen, how the consultant study would be procured, and what services the DHS funds would cover. The committee also heard House Bill 1603, which would provide a $500,000 matching grant for Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act compliance, with $100,000 available to each of North Dakota’s five tribes if matched. Sponsor testimony said the funds would support a Historical Society NAGPRA compliance committee and help catalog and repatriate human remains and cultural items in coordination with tribes. After questions about the federal mandate and the difficulty of identifying artifacts, the committee voted 4-0 to give HB 1603 a do-pass recommendation, with Senator Meyer assigned to carry it forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, aging asset risk... for the perpetual capital repayment stream collected via user fees, and the
• So that made that a little easier decision, but once they were built... have a utility fee too.
• If you have declines in the water tables, we can go to allocations and limit the water use.
• Our good intention fee was $200 to continue on with the project.
• So Representative Swantec, our good intention fee was $200 to continue on with the project.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met with a quorum and received updates from the Department of Water Resources and the State Water Commission, followed by presentations from Deloitte on two legislative studies required by House Bill 1020. Director Reese Haas reviewed major project and budget updates, including the Northwest Area Water Supply and Southwest Pipeline projects, Resources Trust Fund balances, carryover spending, project prioritization, bid conditions, regional water system coverage, and department process improvements. Members also discussed how the commission prioritizes projects, maintenance expectations, and the impact of limited municipal water supply funding. No formal committee action was taken during the DWR update; the commission’s municipal funding decisions were described as pending its April 8 meeting. Deloitte then presented the cost-share policy study, which found that under current policy and forecasted revenues, North Dakota faces an estimated $1.3 billion shortfall over 14 years, with a near-term gap of about $1.8 billion through 2031. The firm outlined seven recommended options, including tighter definitions and a 25% cost share for eligible replacement projects, caps and financing strategies for the Mouse River and Red River Valley projects, aligning cost share with commission priority guidance, delaying lower-priority projects, using available lines of credit, and adjusting reimbursement timing for revolving loan funds. Committee members questioned inflation assumptions, affordability, user fees, and the use of legacy fund earnings for bonding, but no decisions were made. In the governance and finance study, Deloitte said final recommendations are still being refined, with a final report due May 29. The study examined the Southwest Pipeline, NAWS, and Red River Valley systems using governance and finance criteria such as decision authority, transparency, affordability, risk, and access to funding. For Southwest, Deloitte outlined options ranging from improved state-authority coordination to transferring ownership to the Southwest Water Authority; for NAWS, options focused on strengthening the authority’s role and potentially transitioning operations and maintenance; and for Red River, options ranged from enhanced facilitation to formal state oversight or state ownership. Members asked follow-up questions about ownership transfer, capital repayment streams, and why NAWS was not considered for transfer, and Deloitte said NAWS’s limited organizational maturity made that option less viable in the near term.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it would be apportioned off the fines and fees collected through the Corporation Commissioner and
• Another one's licensed operating fees and fines.
• We're trying to allow the state of Oklahoma to be able to go after these registration fees.
• Currently, there are some states, some airports, some people Collecting fees based on your location.
• So what this bill does is say you cannot use this information to collect fees.

Bills: SB1966, SB175, SB1475, SB1950, SB2049, SB2052

Keywords: memorial highways, bridge designations, Oklahoma Statutes, commemorative markers, transportation, uninsured vehicles, reimbursement fund, towing services, commercial vehicles, public safety, memorial, infrastructure, dedication, Toby Keith, aviation, aircraft, surveillance, regulations, fees, Oklahoma statutes

Transcript Highlights:

• In fee for service, sorry, current fee for service rates are lower than those paid by capitated plans
• Currently... listed on our Medicaid fee schedule.
• In fee for service, sorry, current fee for service rates are lower than those paid by capitated plans
• This proposal will help in redesigning the Medicaid fee-for-service fee schedule to ensure those children
• They deposit money into our trust fund through the fees that we have.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services heard presentations on the governor’s proposed fiscal year 2026-2027 budget for the health and human services agencies. Kendall Kelly outlined the overall HHS budget at $48.5 billion, with AHCA accounting for the largest share, and agency heads then highlighted major proposals for Medicaid behavioral health redesign, APD waiver enrollment and facility needs, DCF child welfare, opioid, and mental health investments, DOEA funding for Alzheimer’s, home care, and community services, DOH funding for cancer research, public health initiatives, and lab capacity, and VA funding for facility improvements, cybersecurity, and medication management. Several members praised specific proposals, including increased reimbursement for private duty nursing, Alzheimer’s supports, and the Florida FIRST blood-in-ambulance initiative. Senators also questioned the proposed changes to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), with the Surgeon General explaining that the department expects a reduction in covered patients from about 30,000 to about 20,000 because of funding pressures tied to rebates, federal changes, and premium tax credit issues. Public testimony strongly criticized the ADAP changes, citing lack of transparency and warning that many patients could lose access to medications. Other questions focused on the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity, DCF’s substance abuse and mental health data dashboard, Kids Care/CHIP expansion implementation, APD bed and facility planning, and the FX Medicaid technology project. DCF said about $7 million is set aside for the dashboard system, and AHCA said the governor’s budget includes $124.4 million for FX maintenance and continued module development, with $13.5 million to begin claims processing work. The committee did not take a substantive vote on the budget presentations and adjourned after questions and public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, if there were program estimates that turned out to be less than what we allocated.
• <01:03:10.480> as<01:03:10.720> a reinsurance, we allocated as a reinsurance, we allocated
• out to be less than what we allocated. out to be less than what we allocated.
• allocated by the legislature<01:03:47.119> for<01:03:47.640> reinsurance.
• Um, a lot of this with an insure fee.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So one thing that has not changed is the allocation methodology.
• They will still use the current model to allocate 2026-27 funding.
• Funds will be allocated again on the current model. But this will allow...
• Funds will be allocated again on the current model.
• But again, tuition and fees have not increased.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to hear two presentations focused on the state university system: an update from the Board of Governors on performance-based funding and a state university efficiency study from Ben Watkins of the Division of Bond Finance. Chair Harrell emphasized accountability, maintaining Florida’s top-ranked higher education system, and getting the best return on state investment. A quorum was present, with several senators excused and one arriving later in the meeting. Sarah Donaghi outlined changes to the performance-based funding model. She said the current model will be used for 2026-27 funding, with only minor benchmark changes for metrics tied to programs of strategic emphasis, reflecting a statutory review that reduced the list of designated programs from about 800 to about 200. She also described a new “PBF 2.0” framework approved by the Board of Governors for implementation in 2027-28 funding, which will combine excellence and improvement measures, update benchmarks to the SUS 2030 strategic plan, reduce “layups” where many schools score perfect tens, expand the affordability metric to include students without loans, remove SUS transfer students from certain graduation metrics, and create a new transfer-student outcome metric. The board will run the new model alongside the current one before using it for funding, and no funding changes will occur this year. Watkins presented findings from an eight-month efficiency study ordered by executive order. Using audited financial data, student outcome data, and personnel data, he concluded that Florida’s universities provide strong value because of low tuition, rising degree production, and improved job placement and earnings outcomes. He said tuition remains the lowest in the country and that state support has increased, while per-student spending has also risen, driven largely by payroll costs. He argued that universities should operate more like business enterprises, with more granular budgeting, clearer financial reporting, and efficiency metrics such as operating expense per student and cost per degree, and he recommended that such measures be incorporated into performance funding and board oversight. Committee members asked about national comparisons, data transparency, payroll growth, admissions selectivity, and whether legislation should require more detailed institutional reporting. The meeting ended with no public comment and adjournment after Senator Bracey Davis moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• In our area, there's a fee charge for that.
• that fee changed, or is it up to the GCD as well?
• Save and accept the export fee.
• McCarthy, you referenced costs, the export fees.
• So there's no collection of an export fee.

Keywords: 1184, house, all