Transcript Highlights:

• about this in the T bill, but basically it takes $3 million out of the pilot fund, that's some of the surplus
• about this in the T bill, but basically it takes $3 million out of the pilot fund, that's some of the surplus
• that's<00:09:06.760> some<00:09:06.920> of<00:09:06.960> the<00:09:07.040> surplus
• /c><00:09:07.920> and<00:09:08.040> puts<00:09:08.360> it that's some of the surplus
• and puts it that's some of the surplus and puts it through<00:09:08.960> the through the through

Keywords: 927, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The fact that people cannot get their surplus proceeds after the sale of their home is ridiculous.
• Homeowners who lose their home and after the home park has sold it, the surplus after expenses should
• after the home park has sold it and and after the home park has sold it and the<00:30:58.480> surplus
• > after<00:30:59.520> expenses<00:31:00.320> should<00:31:00.640> be the surplus
• after expenses should be the surplus after expenses should be returned<00:31:01.160> to<00:31

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And that includes some of the surplus lines fees that we do collect.
• If you buy from a surplus lines company, the consumer is not protected. You're on your own.
• you<00:26:30.960> buy<00:26:31.200> from<00:26:31.360> a<00:26:31.520> surplus
• If you buy from a surplus lines, own.
• If you buy from a surplus lines, the<00:26:32.799> consumer<00:26:33.120> is<00:26:33.360

Keywords: Government Structure - Room 409, 12 January, 2026; 2:00 P.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee held its first meeting under its new Government Structure Committee name and began by electing Senator Chris Johnson as secretary. The chair explained the committee’s purpose as improving efficiency, effectiveness, and stewardship of taxpayer dollars, and said members had asked statewide officials and agencies for ideas on streamlining government and reducing costs. Commissioner of Agriculture and Commerce Andy Gibson testified at length about ways his agency has found efficiencies, especially after the COVID-era consolidation of three agencies into one. He said state procurement and construction rules can add major time and cost to projects, citing a proposed $300,000 building that grew to about $1 million through the state process. He recommended raising repair and quote thresholds, streamlining construction procedures, reconsidering restrictions on payments between state agencies, and allowing more flexibility for agencies to help one another when authorized. Members questioned Gibson about the repair caps, the construction cost increase, Ticketmaster and other technology/vendor arrangements, and whether agencies should have more decentralized control over contracts. The chair and several senators agreed the committee should examine red tape, vendor relationships, and procurement rules, and Gibson said he would provide more information and work with the committee. No formal legislation was acted on in the portion provided. The transcript then shifted to testimony from the Insurance Commissioner, who said his department is heavily affected by IT and board structure issues and oversees 17 boards. He urged consolidation of some boards, criticized the effects of SB 2362 on special-fund agencies, and said the State Fire Academy and other operations have been constrained by general-fund treatment and limited authority. He also discussed insurance-rate pressures, including projected premium increases, wind pool rate concerns on the Gulf Coast, and the need for mitigation to stabilize costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and we'll have a surplus of funds, which would make this vote a lot easier.
• Um, and we'll have a surplus of funds, which would make this vote a lot easier. by the end of the year
• Um, and we'll have<00:25:22.320> a<00:25:22.400> surplus<00:25:22.799> funds<00:
• 25:23.120> which<00:25:23.360> make<00:25:23.520> this have a surplus funds which
• make this have a surplus funds which make this vote<00:25:24.080> a<00:25:24.240> lot<

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Fiscal Committee met on December 19, with Senators Long and Lang serving as replacements. The committee approved the November 21 minutes and adopted the consent calendar after removing two Department of Health and Human Services items for separate discussion. It then took up an HHS request involving nursing facility rates, where Nathan White explained that $2.2 million would be transferred from a long-term care Medicaid eligibility contract to the nursing facilities budget. He said the funds would offset an otherwise projected 3.9% average rate decrease and bring the overall average change to zero for the next six months, with rates reset again in July under state law. Members asked about the budget adjustment factor, bed counts, and whether additional funds could raise rates further; White said the factor is statutory, capped at 28.76%, and that more money would lower the factor and increase rates. The committee also corrected a date in the request from February 1, 2025 to February 1, 2026, and approved the item. The committee next approved another HHS item related to rural health transformation grants. Members confirmed the request covered the full amount applied for this biennium, and asked about the technology component. HHS said the grant is not solely about AI, but about broader technology improvements such as electronic medical records, back-end systems, and tools to improve access and sustainability in underserved areas. The committee approved that item as well. The Judicial Council then requested funds for contract attorneys providing indigent defense on a fixed-fee basis. The council said current funds had already been exhausted and that the new appropriation would be used immediately. Members questioned the size of the request and the number of people awaiting counsel; the council reported about 150 incarcerated people and about 300 non-incarcerated people waiting for counsel, more than in recent years. It attributed the increase to competition for attorneys, public defender offices closing intake in some locations because of caseload limits, and broader case and court-system changes. One member raised constitutional concerns about delays in counsel for incarcerated defendants. The committee ultimately amended the request downward to $1 million, approved it, and then approved a motion to place several annual financial reports on file and release them to the public when available. The committee also discussed dashboard reporting from HHS, asking for more detail on community mental health center caseloads and budget-reduction information, and HHS agreed to provide more useful monthly detail.

Transcript Highlights:

• truth is that right here in our state, in the state of Minnesota, in 2005 when we had a $18 billion surplus
• truth is that right here in our state, in the state of Minnesota, in 2005 when we had a $18 billion surplus
• truth is that right here in our state, in the state of Minnesota, in 2005 when we had a $18 billion surplus
• truth is that right here in our state, in the state of Minnesota, in 2005 when we had a $18 billion surplus
• Minnesota, uh, in 2005 when we had a $18 billion surplus, it was not health care and making health care

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We really shouldn't have a surplus at the end of the year because there have been a lot of educational
• We really shouldn't have a surplus at the end of the year because there have been a lot of educational
• <02:25:40.880> shouldn't<02:25:41.280> have<02:25:41.359> a<02:25:41.600> surplus
• We really shouldn't have a surplus okay.
• We really shouldn't have a surplus at<02:25:42.160> the<02:25:42.240> end<02:25:42.319>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Funding Committee met in executive session and reviewed several previously heard bills, but focused its discussion on SB 586 and SB 580. The chair explained that SB 586 would require school districts and school administrative units to publish audit reports after the fiscal year, and that an amendment, 1472H, had been prepared to replace the relevant audit/reporting section. The amendment would add SAUs to the reporting entities, expand the contents of audits to include items such as employee lists, pay, benefits, and pension liabilities, and change the timing so audits are submitted nine months after the fiscal year end, followed by a three-month Department of Education review and then a further correction period before any grant funding could be withheld. The amendment would also require the reports to be posted in searchable electronic form on the web. Committee members discussed whether the bill’s “non-compliance” language referred only to incomplete submissions or also to audit findings, and several members raised concerns about whether the Department of Education had the staff and authority to take on this role, whether the existing DOE25 process would be displaced, and whether the bill should instead remain with the Department of Revenue Administration. One member noted that the fiscal note anticipated the need for additional auditors and significant staffing costs. The committee also reviewed SB 580, described as a school cooperative purchasing program bill that also contains policy provisions for charter school trustees, school board members, and receivership-related language tied to Claremont. The chair said the committee had previously heard comments from Charlie Arlinghouse on the cooperative purchasing portion and would use a side-by-side comparison prepared by staff when it reached that bill. Other bills on the docket were briefly described but not taken up that day: SB 491, which has committee-requested amendments and a separate non-germane amendment related to curriculum frameworks and academic standards; SB 513, an owner’s project manager bill held as a possible vehicle for future non-germane language; and SB 531, concerning a cosmetology program in Coös County and a possible task force. The chair said the committee would not address 491, 513, or 531 that day and would return to 580 and 586.

Transcript Highlights:

• In years when there is a surplus, the legislature often does not fund capital projects with severance
• It would just be a portion of that surplus dollars that would go towards funding projects and it...
• So if the legislature were to say, "Hey, we've got a surplus this year and we're going to dump some money

Transcript Highlights:

• that we are talking about cutting things like education and human services because of going from a surplus
• that we are talking about cutting things like education and human services because of going from a surplus
• that we are talking about cutting things like education and human services because of going from a surplus

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As we saw, especially in the UTP, there was a $15 billion surplus.
• It removes the authorization of all tolling entities from using their surplus revenue to fund other toll
• Then we could use the surplus revenue to build other roads, and surely everybody would be for that.

Bills: HJR58, HJR63, HB263, HB542, HB905, HB 1288, HB1402, HB2003, HB2262, HB2323, HB2429, HB2876, HB3019, HB263

Keywords: healthcare, insurance, elderly, retirement, benefits, transit-oriented projects, constitutional amendment, state highway fund, funding allocation, voter approval, highway fund, funding, public transportation, transit projects, transportation, local transit, fund allocation, voting rights, election integrity, ballot access

Transcript Highlights:

• The BCRF does have a significant surplus that is residual from the pandemic.
• The beverage container program does have a bit of a surplus right now, so we don't anticipate that it
• So we don't anticipate that it will have that impact because of the surplus.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• One by Morales and Maverick relating to the disposition of certain surplus motor vehicles and other law
• HB 2002 by DARB relating to the eligibility of an organization to receive surplus agricultural products
• HB 2275 by Morgan relating to the arbitration provisions and supers in surplus lines insurance contracts

Transcript Highlights:

• on your show that we had a $18 mentioned on your show that we had a $18 billion<00:09:09.600> Surplus
• and<00:09:10.240> they<00:09:10.360> spent<00:09:10.519> $10 billion Surplus
• and they spent $10 billion Surplus and they spent $10 billion<00:09:11.560> more<00:09:12.560

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• in the budget cut for the department, if I remember right under HB 2, didn't we agree to allow for surplus
• is probably correct. under HB2 didn't we agree to allow for under HB2 didn't we agree to allow for surplus
• 31.600> be<00:13:31.680> used<00:13:31.920> to<00:13:32.160> backfill surplus
• funds to be used to backfill surplus funds to be used to backfill that<00:13:32.959> first<00
• Litman about the um excess the surplus we're expecting in the Medicaid uh and the MET tax.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• President, that we didn't have to have had there been proper management of the surplus that we had experienced
• They spent an entire $18 billion surplus.
• They spent an entire<02:11:42.800> $18<02:11:43.119> billion<02:11:43.760> surplus.
• <02:11:44.800> They<02:11:45.040> raised entire $18 billion surplus.
• They raised entire $18 billion surplus.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• second memory, my understanding, was that the money that was removed from the fund was essentially surplus
• 35.880> budget is nearly all of the projected budget is nearly all of the projected budget surplus
• for the coming bium which turns surplus for the coming bium which turns into<01:05:39.200> a<
• or fund I think the state had about $18.5<01:22:47.440> billion $18.5 billion $18.5 billion Surplus
• and I think we also increased Surplus and I think we also increased taxes<01:22:51.440> about

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard a reinsurance overview from Deputy Commissioner Julia Dryer of the Minnesota Department of Commerce on the Minnesota Premium Security Plan. She explained that reinsurance helps stabilize premiums in the individual market by reimbursing insurers for high-cost claims, and said Minnesota’s program has lowered premiums, preserved carrier participation, and helped maintain consumer choice. She warned that without continued funding, the program would be depleted and individual-market premiums could rise by about 25%, with potential losses in coverage and access to care. She also described the program’s structure under a federal 1332 waiver, the role of MCHA in administering the program, and the state’s receipt of more than $650 million in federal pass-through funds to date. Dryer said the current program is funded through the end of 2025, though the federal waiver authority runs through 2027. The governor’s proposal would create a new assessment on insurers, estimated at roughly 2% to 3%, to fund the state share of the program and avoid another full waiver submission. She noted that the proposal assumes MinnesotaCare funding would be held harmless and that the program would be reduced if federal basic health plan funding were negatively affected. She also said projected costs changed because individual-market enrollment has grown and enhanced federal subsidies were removed from the estimate. Members raised concerns about the proposal’s impact on premiums and the history of the fund. Senator Rasmusson argued the new assessment amounts to a large tax increase on health insurance and questioned who would be assessed and whether the surcharge would be capped. Dryer responded that the assessment would be based on annual claims experience and market conditions, with final amounts determined at the end of each year, not monthly. Senator Duckworth and Senator Frentz supported reinsurance as a way to keep premiums lower, while also questioning how the program should be financed. Senator Green asked about the mechanics of the assessment and the role of the department in setting it, and Senator H questioned why the fiscal note assumed 12% annual growth for program costs when general premium growth was lower. No vote or formal action was taken in the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• in some of those rules so the dollars can be utilized for things like potentially there could be surplus
• funds that could be rolled over into some Housing Trust Fund, so surplus funds could sort of be, you
• <01:06:16.920> funds potentially there could be surplus funds potentially there could be surplus
• /c><01:06:19.400> Trust<01:06:19.760> Fund<01:06:20.520> so<01:06:20.760> surplus
• their Housing Trust Fund so surplus their Housing Trust Fund so surplus funds<01:06:21.400> could

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The House Housing Finance and Policy Committee approved the previous meeting’s minutes and then heard testimony from Housing First Minnesota and the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities on housing supply, affordability, and land-use policy. Mark Foster of Housing First Minnesota said the state is chronically undersupplied by roughly 100,000 units, that the median new single-family home price has risen above $530,000, and that only about 27% of Twin Cities households can now afford a new home. He argued that regulatory and local approval processes, especially planned unit developments and aesthetic mandates, add significant cost and reduce the number of homes built, and he urged the committee to remove exclusionary barriers and modernize residential development approvals. Members questioned Foster about zoning, aesthetic requirements, and homeowners associations. He said most new housing in growing metro communities is negotiated through PUDs, which he described as increasing costs and limiting supply, and gave examples such as stone exterior requirements adding thousands of dollars to a home. He also said HOAs can be useful in some cases but are often imposed when not needed. Several legislators responded positively to the Housing First Minnesota Foundation’s work, including transitional housing and veteran housing projects. Elizabeth Wefel of the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities said cities outside the metro also face a housing shortage, but their challenges differ: market failure, inadequate sewer and water infrastructure, and gaps in starter, workforce, and senior housing. She said many Greater Minnesota cities are already updating zoning, reducing lot sizes, allowing more density and ADUs, and investing local money, land, and partnerships to spur development. She asked the legislature to speed up rollout of housing funds, support infrastructure and workforce programs, and adjust housing tax credit and TIF rules, while warning against one-size-fits-all preemption of local zoning authority. Members discussed the need for tailored solutions and the differences between metro and Greater Minnesota housing markets.

Transcript Highlights:

• What we'd like to do today is talk a little about the general fund process, the budget surplus, or the
• revenue, the spending, the surplus that's projected for the coming biennium and the deficit for the
• general fund process the budget surplus general fund process the budget surplus or<00:15:45.839>
• <00:15:46.440> the<00:15:46.600> spending<00:15:47.120> the<00:15:47.560> Surplus
• or the revenue the spending the Surplus or the revenue the spending the Surplus that's<00:15:48.680

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Education Finance Committee met on January 21, 2025, for its first hearing of the session and began with organizational business. Members and staff introduced themselves, described their districts and backgrounds, and the chair reviewed committee procedures, including how to request bill hearings, amendment deadlines, and handout deadlines. The committee also heard introductions from nonpartisan and partisan staff, including House Research and House Fiscal Analysis personnel who will support the committee’s work this session. The main substantive item was an overview presentation on the state budget and education finance process. Staff explained how Minnesota’s general fund is forecast twice a year, how the committee should read the budget documents and aid/levy tracking sheets, and how the current biennium compares with the upcoming budget window. They described the November forecast, noted that the committee will later receive the February forecast, and outlined the committee’s role in reviewing K-12 state aid spending, school district revenue, and property tax impacts. Staff walked through the aid appropriation summary spreadsheet and explained its columns, including end-of-session spending, fiscal year 2024-25 actuals and estimates, and the 2026-27 and 2028-29 planning horizons. They emphasized that many education programs are forecast-driven and can change with enrollment and other data. The presentation also summarized the state’s overall revenue mix and spending priorities, noting that K-12 education is the largest general fund category and that state aid makes up the majority of school revenue. No bills were heard and no votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, the next item down is in the surplus statement.
• <05:30:26.638> But<05:30:26.798> I'll positive surplus or or deficit.
• But I'll positive surplus or or deficit.
• <06:00:38.480> So surplus statement gets them right.
• So surplus statement gets them right.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 66, a right-to-know measure that would broaden access from “citizen” to “person,” including out-of-state requesters. Members also adopted an amendment removing the current no-filing-fee provision for appeals of unfavorable right-to-know ombudsman rulings, citing budget concerns. The bill was then reported ought to pass as amended on a 16-9 vote, with a minority report requested. House Bill 187, which would let a parent or guardian seek a protective order on behalf of a minor alleging abuse by someone outside the family or household, was described as a narrow fix with little fiscal impact. It passed unanimously, 25-0, and was placed on the consent calendar. House Bill 215, requiring landfill permit applicants to submit a report on potential harms and benefits, was retained because its policy had been folded into House Bill 2; the committee voted 25-0 to retain it. House Bill 219, dealing with renewable portfolio standard changes and lower renewable energy certificate values, drew opposition from members who said it would weaken renewable energy development and raise concerns about energy costs, but the motion to retain was adopted 14-11, allowing the bill to be moved into House Bill 2. The committee then retained House Bills 365, 552, 566, 572, 607, 611, and 624, all by unanimous or near-unanimous votes, generally because the relevant policy or funding had been incorporated into House Bill 2 or because the bills were viewed as technical or low-impact. HB 566 was described as a landfill leach-management bill with a fiscal note under $10,000 annually and was sent to consent. HB 572 and HB 607 were retained because their money components were moved into HB 2, though one member objected that HB 607 represented an unfunded mandate for the Hampton Beach Area Commission. House Bill 511, concerning ICE detainers and county detention practices, generated the most debate. Supporters said the amendment clarified how long counties may hold detainees without a federal contract and compared the detention period to existing bail rules; opponents argued the bill could sanction detention of people not charged with crimes and raised due-process concerns. The committee adopted the amendment 14-11 and then reported the bill ought to pass as amended on another 14-11 vote, with a minority report requested. House Bill 639, involving securities and digital currency issues, was also reported ought to pass after members noted unresolved concerns but said the Secretary of State’s Securities Division was willing to continue working on it in the other body; the vote was 16-10.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we went through the foreclosure process, never saw the light, had the sale in November, sold the property

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The subcommittee of the Tax Reform and Relief Committee met with a quorum to begin its study of whether the content of North Dakota real estate tax statements should be revised to improve transparency. Legislative Council staff reviewed the background for the study, including House Bill 1176, current statutory requirements for tax statements, and recent changes such as separate line items for bonded debt, primary residence credit, and legacy fund-related amounts. The Tax Department then explained the current statement format and noted that the form is prescribed and approved by the tax commissioner, with changes typically driven by statute and implemented collaboratively with counties and vendors. County officials from the North Dakota Association of Counties described the full annual process for preparing budgets, setting levies, calculating taxable values, and issuing notices and tax statements. They said counties spend significant time coordinating with taxing districts, neighboring counties, and software vendors, and that the new budget hearing notices and valuation notices have not generated much public response. Members raised concerns about the usefulness and clarity of certain line items, especially the legislative tax relief calculation and the primary residence credit, and discussed whether the current statement creates confusion rather than transparency. Testimony also addressed the 3% cap, mill levy worksheets, assessment cycles, and the role of county auditors and tax directors in maintaining accurate values. The committee also heard from software vendors CPT and Tyler Technologies about how legislative changes are programmed into tax systems and how online taxpayer portals can provide more detailed breakdowns of tax bills. Vendors said changes required by law are generally absorbed in contracts rather than billed directly to counties, and they demonstrated web tools and pie-chart style breakdowns that show where tax dollars go. NDACO presented a survey of eight counties estimating tax statement preparation and mailing costs, concluding that outsourced printing tends to be cheaper on average and that total statewide tax statement costs may be roughly $600,000, though the estimate was based on limited data. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and focused on gathering testimony and identifying issues for possible future recommendations or bill drafts.

Transcript Highlights:

• Per sale without verifying borrowers' ability to repay, lending leading to 30% foreclosures within three

Bills: HB200, HB541, HB1803, HB30, HB175, HB249, HB721, HB851, HB897, HB 1128, HB1904, HB1916, HB5560, HB3071, HB5627, HB5435, HB3913, HB2921, HB2695, HB2688, HB3045, HB3483, HB3673, HB4213, HB4226, HB783, HB4373, HB4735, HB5155, HB5057, HB4984, HB4944, HB4813, HB5339, HB5196, HB5033, HB4853, HB3486, HB4211, HB74, HB4670, HB4730, HB4743, HB4603, HB4463, HB3892, HB4139, HB4752, HB4520, HB4517, HB4486, HB4437, HB4426, HB4396, HB4263, HB3487, HB3418, HB2284, HB2266, HB2229, HB4912, HB2189, HB4506, HB5269, HB5224, HB5195, HB3317, HB4166, HB3947, HB3358, HB3370, HB4438, HB3745, HB3602, HB3697, HB2001, HB1968, HB3371, HB3909, HCR7, SB1744, SB1364, SB1316, HB2026, HB3302, HB3368, HB1639, HB5652, HB4655, HB5654, HB5658, HB5656, HB4894, HB4996, HB5088, HB5650, HB4464, HB3751, HB5665, HB5661, HB 1237, HB2802, HB5437, HB2703, HB5666, HB5667, HCR113, HCR86, SB2196, SB463, SB856, SB1245, SB1169, SB509, SB985, SB305, SB552, HB1535, HB 123, HB1804, HB426, HB1773, HB1871, HB2035, HB2492, HB1411, HB4753, HB4666, HB4529, HB1499, HB1610, HB2028, HB1506, HB886, HB3546, HB796, HB223, HB3556, HB2448, HB4638, HB 111, HB180, HB 1027, HB 1178, HB610, HB 1277, HB1615, HB1620, HB5342, HB4885, HB4751, HB4530, HB4488, HB2149, HB2071, HB2282, HB2248, HB2243, HB2522, HB2310, HB2513, HB2300, HB1902, HB1813, HB3719, HB4284, HB3743, HB3778, HB5153, HB5147, HB4877, HB4850, HB3261, HB3005, HB3033, HB2849, HB2967, HB3531, HB1768, HB333, HB2914, HB2613, HB3717, HB3704, HB2697, HB3801, HB3099, HB3488, HB3477, HB3466, HB3396, HB3469, HB2594, HB2776, HB2564, HB2298, HB5331, HB5646, HB5247, HB5323, HB4384, HB3896, HB4014, HB3627, HB3594, HB2524, HB510, HB561, HB5111, HB5446, HB 1181, HB3963, HB2785, HB1661, HB2460, HB200, HB541, HB1803, HB30, HB175, HB249, HB721, HB851, HB897, HB 1128, HB1904, HB1916, HB5560, HB3071, HB5627, HB5435, HB3913, HB2921, HB2695, HB2688, HB3045, HB3483, HB3673, HB4213, HB4226, HB783, HB4373, HB4735, HB5155, HB5057, HB4984, HB4944, HB4813, HB5339, HB5196, HB5033, HB4853, HB3486, HB4211, HB74, HB4670, HB4730, HB4743, HB4603, HB4463, HB3892, HB4139, HB4752, HB4520, HB4517, HB4486, HB4437, HB4426, HB4396, HB4263, HB3487, HB3418, HB2284, HB2266, HB2229, HB4912, HB2189, HB4506, HB5269, HB5224, HB5195, HB3317, HB4166, HB3947, HB3358, HB3370, HB4438, HB3745, HB3602, HB3697, HB2001, HB1968, HB3371, HB3909, HCR98, HCR92, HCR126, HCR7

Keywords: juvenile offenders, parole eligibility, youth justice, criminal justice reform, inmate rehabilitation, direct patient care, healthcare, physicians, medical services, insurance regulation, dentist, dental hygienist, interstate practice, licensure, compact privilege, public health, military members, disaster relief, tax rates, local government