Transcript Highlights:

• We looked at what the SMR vendors across the board are suggesting will be the required nth-of-a-kind
• The rule of thumb, once we started to look at what SMR vendors were putting out in their materials, is
• And now it's more of a technical exercise with the regulator and the vendor.
• It depends on the vendor you’re talking to, and yes or no.
• There are some SMR vendors that suggest that their fueling could last 20 years. Others, two.

Summary: The committee met to hear a series of presentations on advanced nuclear economics, workforce, community impacts, and financing. Nucleon Energy’s William Bridge presented a report estimating the economic impacts of hypothetical 200-megawatt and 600-megawatt SMRs, including construction and operating jobs, local spending, tax revenue, and the private-sector conditions needed to attract investment. He said the report used nth-of-a-kind cost assumptions, discussed security and water siting considerations, and argued that early community engagement and permitting work should be timed to when projects are closer to being economic. Committee members questioned cost assumptions, security staffing, transmission and water siting, and whether large reactors or SMRs are more likely to be financed in the near term. Lori Brady of the Nuclear Energy Institute then outlined national nuclear workforce needs and NEI’s strategic workforce planning. She described declining labor-force demographics, the need for hundreds of thousands of new energy workers by 2050, and six workforce priorities: career awareness, pipelines, training and qualification, policy support, retention, and non-traditional pipelines. She highlighted the Nuclear Works career website, the Nuclear Energy Academic Roadmap, the new federal Energy and Natural Resources career cluster, and the Nuclear Uniform Curriculum Program for community colleges. Members asked about AI, robotics, and when training should begin relative to future plant construction; Brady said AI is not expected to replace workers broadly and that training timelines depend on the specific project and staffing plan. Red Wing, Minnesota Mayor Gary Yako described hosting the Prairie Island nuclear generating facility. He said the plant provides a large share of the city’s property tax base, supports well-paid jobs, contributes to local emergency preparedness, and is a strong community partner through donations and employee involvement. He said the city supports relicensing, has regular emergency drills, and has had no issues with dry cask storage. The committee also heard from NEI’s Benton Arnett, who reviewed the current financing landscape, including federal tax credits, DOE loan authority, offtake agreements, and the shift toward project developers and special-purpose vehicles. He said early projects face high first-of-a-kind costs, but federal support and long-term power purchase agreements are helping make projects financeable. Finally, DOE’s Julie Kazeraki described the Office of Energy Dominance Financing and its role in supporting new nuclear, restarts, uprates, and supply chain investments, emphasizing that federal loan and tax-credit tools are intended to reduce upfront risk and improve project affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• It wasn't on the vendor list before.
• It wasn't on the vendor list before.
• </c><00:07:46.360><c> list</c> wasn't on the vendor list wasn't on the vendor list before<00:07:48.599
• We've talked to some vendors.
• We've talked to some vendors.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 110, HD1, which would clarify local food purchase goals for the Department of Education. DOE said it supports the measure and will work toward the 30% local food mandate by 2030. The Department of Agriculture also supported the bill, and outside advocates from the Hawaii Public Health Institute and Hawaii Farm to School Network strongly backed it as consistent with prior farm-to-school laws and helpful for measuring progress toward the goal. The committee then took up House Bill 293, which would exempt certain DOE purchases of local edible produce and packaged food products from electronic procurement rules and allow written-quote purchasing thresholds, including a lower quote requirement for some rural schools. DOE, the Department of Agriculture, the State Procurement Office, and the Hawaii Farm Bureau all supported the measure, describing it as a tool to help the department test and add local products and meet the 30% goal. However, members pressed DOE on the bill’s purpose and mechanics, questioning why the department could not simply add products to vendor lists or use existing procurement flexibility. DOE explained it was trying to test new local products, including products not yet on the USDA-approved list, and said the bill would allow limited pilot purchases while it works through USDA approval and vendor-list updates. Members also raised concerns about whether the bill was being used to bypass procurement and whether small farmers or aggregators could realistically supply the needed volume. House Bill 1069, which would add two voting members representing DOE and the Board of Education to the School Facilities Authority, also drew support from DOE and the Board of Education. Supporters said the change would improve accountability, strategic input, and communication on school facilities matters. SFA testified that it has already increased coordination with DOE through regular meetings and that recent discussions have been more robust. Committee members questioned whether voting seats were necessary given that DOE and BOE could already attend meetings and receive updates, and they raised concerns about how a voting representative would report back and whether the measure would actually solve communication problems. No votes or final actions were taken on the measures during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the rates would be set. the rates would be set.
• </c><00:33:24.920><c> of</c> being price gouged by the vendors of being price gouged by the vendors of
• These vendors are ebooks and audiobooks.
• In some vendors and in some cases, that is possible, not in all.
• Physical collection at a rate of five to one.

Bills: HF4456, HF4544, HF3698

Keywords: data broker, data brokerage, consumer privacy, personal data, data privacy, Minnesota attorney general, registration, public registry, civil penalties, enforcement, special revenue fund, privacy rights, data sales, data collection, consumer protection, chapter 325M, controller, processor, data broker registry, transparency

Transcript Highlights:

• It increases the transient accommodations tax rates by 1 percentage point.
• and any other persons or entities to offer, list, advertise, or display a transient accommodations rate
• </c><00:27:39.279><c> under</c><00:27:39.559><c> certain</c> and thirdparty vendors under certain and
• thirdparty vendors under certain conditions<00:27:40.440><c> allows</c><00:27:40.760><c> for</c><00:
• There are quite a few Main Hawaii Festival vendors, HFIA members, and other businesses that we know of

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The joint hearing of the House Committees on Tourism, Housing, and Economic Development and Technology began with House Bill 604, which would raise the transient accommodations tax by 1 percentage point starting January 1, 2026 and direct the revenue to the Hawaiian Homes General Loan Fund. The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands supported the bill as a source of consistent funding, while the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii opposed it, warning that Hawaii already has very high tourism taxes and that further increases could hurt visitors, workers, and the broader economy. The committees later voted to pass HB 604 with amendments as an HD1 and to defer the date; the vote was adopted, with one member noted as having reservations in the housing committee vote and one no vote in that committee. The committees then heard House Bill 973, which would require transient accommodations brokers and others to display all resort fees, taxes, and government-imposed charges upfront in advertised prices and would establish penalties. The Office of Consumer Protection expressed concerns about the bill’s intent requirement and noted a forthcoming federal FTC rule on junk fees; the Hawaii Hotel Alliance strongly supported the measure as promoting transparency and uniformity, and a public witness also supported price transparency while questioning the size of the penalties. After questions about federal rescission of the FTC rule and enforcement authority, the committees voted to pass HB 973 with amendments as an HD1, including removal of the intent requirement and technical changes, and the recommendation was adopted unanimously. House Bill 594, relating to hotel service disruptions, would require hotel keepers to give notice of disruptions to guests and third-party vendors and allow damages. The Attorney General’s office recommended amendments to add a purpose section and savings clause to address First Amendment and contract clause issues, and Unite Here Local 5 supported the bill, saying guests are not always notified of disruptions and that the measure would improve transparency; the union agreed with the legal amendments. The committees voted to pass HB 594 with amendments as an HD1 and to defer the date, adopting the recommendation. The final measures were House Bill 448 and House Bill 449, both related to technology enablement and economic development for small businesses, including tourism-related businesses. HTDC strongly supported both bills but emphasized that technology should be targeted to the actual problem and coordinated with sister agencies rather than applied broadly; the Hawaii Food Industry Association and Chamber of Commerce also supported HB 448, and HB 449 received support from HTDC and HFIA. The committees adopted amendments to HB 448, including moving a $250,000 appropriation to the committee report, and to HB 449, including deleting duplicative language tied to HB 448 and moving a $500,000 appropriation to the committee report; both bills were passed as HD1s with deferred dates, and the hearing adjourned after the votes were adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's what we're trying to do with this. contracted vendor.
• It's the reimbursement rate that nursing facilities receive for a day of patient care.
• For example, based on the rate-setting methodology for the... one rate component that is the the non
• Based on rate setting method 50% roughly of the overall rate should be allocated to that one rate component
• So, the overall rate? Yes.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we went from a 26% vacancy rate to a 12%, 13% vacancy rate in air quality.
• c> air</c> to a 12% 13% vacancy rate in air to a 12% 13% vacancy rate in air quality. quality. quality
• Now naturally those rates family.
• </c> turnover rate. turnover rate.
• So if you have a vendor in your area, they're a sales tax vendor and they're an electronic filer with

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• how did you select the vendors?
• With the single vendor, but also with previous vendors, are there penalties or litigation risks that
• question, which is if you have a is the vendor lock-in question, which is if you have a single vendor
• All of these vendors here do that.
• You're not stuck with one vendor.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The cloud vendors are helping us protect. But that's outside of what D.A.R. could protect.
• Subscribed to the services from those cloud vendors.
• So you're not considering dropping and replacing it with external vendors for all aspects?
• What kind of rate? Yeah, because we make more just holding on to it.
• Rural hospitals really struggle, the reimbursement rates are low, rural Texas has the highest rate of

Bills: SB1, SB 1

Keywords: appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare, infrastructure, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• how did you select the vendors?
• previous vendor, but also with previous vendors—are there penalties or litigation?
• question, which is if you have a is the vendor lock-in question, which is if you have a single vendor
• You're not stuck with one vendor.
• You're not stuck with one vendor.

Summary: The Emergency Management Committee held an oversight hearing on California’s Next Generation 911 rollout, focusing on Cal OES’s decision to move away from the original regional vendor model toward a statewide provider model. Cal OES said the regional architecture created complexity at the boundaries between regions, leading to misrouted calls, transfer problems, and degraded audio, and that a statewide model would better align with national standards and provide a more reliable, secure system. The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged the Legislature to pause further implementation until it has more information on the problems, tradeoffs, costs, and oversight needs, and recommended stronger reporting and possibly independent technical review before proceeding. Committee members pressed Cal OES on accountability, cost, testing, vendor selection, and whether the current system is safe. Cal OES said the project has cost about $456 million so far, most of it recurring service fees, and that 23 PSAPs had transitioned voice traffic while more than 440 total PSAPs remain in the state. Officials said the current system is operating, that a pause would not put the public at risk, and that the statewide conversion could be completed by summer 2030. Members and the LAO raised concerns about whether Cal OES has enough technical oversight and whether contract language alone is sufficient to prevent repeat problems. The vendor panel largely defended the regional model and argued that the existing system is already built, tested, and ready to expand. NGA 911, Synergem, Lumen, and Atos said the regional architecture provides redundancy and resilience, that early problems were often tied to legacy-system integration, carrier issues, or training rather than the regional design itself, and that a statewide redesign would add cost and delay. Atos said it serves as the statewide backbone and backup and has already carried live traffic, while vendors emphasized that they support continued modernization but believe California should build on the current regional investment rather than replace it.

Transcript Highlights:

• A lot of times to the bonding and the bond rating for the State of Arkansas, making sure we get those
• But I had a question because there was a disbursement of $6.6 million to a vendor.
• And I'm just— Vendors getting reimbursed for the work that they're doing.
• And I'm just curious about how this one vendor slipped through the cracks.
• Or, you know, we see that with vendors on bills and those types of invoices that we pay.

Summary: The committee met to adopt prior minutes and reports from its executive and standing committees, including counties and municipalities, educational institutions, and state agencies. Those reports covered routine audit activity, delinquent private water and sewer audits, municipal accounting compliance issues, education audit findings, and several state agency audit items. The committee also reviewed and adopted the State of Arkansas annual comprehensive financial report for fiscal year 2025 and the related single audit report, both presented by Legislative Audit staff. The state financial report showed unmodified opinions on the state’s financial statements and described total assets of about $41.9 billion and liabilities of about $11.1 billion, along with retirement system assets of $39.9 billion and a net pension liability of $9 billion. Two material weaknesses were identified: insufficient internal controls at the Office of State Technology to monitor threats and unauthorized access, and a Division of Workforce Services methodology change for unemployment-related estimates that was not properly documented or approved. The single audit covered $12.4 billion in federal awards across 469 programs, with 16 major programs reviewed; it resulted in 33 findings, 14 with questioned costs totaling $16.6 million, and qualified opinions for the Summer EBT program, the Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund, and the Child Care Development Fund cluster. Members questioned agency officials in detail about the Summer EBT questioned costs, DHS unresolved findings, broadband grant documentation, cyber security controls, workers’ compensation liabilities, and child care funding and reporting. DHS explained that the Summer EBT issue involved drawing federal funds in advance rather than as benefits were redeemed, and said the process has been corrected. Broadband officials said the questioned $6.6 million reflected documentation-detail disagreements across many invoices rather than missing payments. OST officials described new logging, endpoint detection, and phishing-training efforts, and DFA and Education officials addressed specific audit findings and corrective actions. The committee ultimately moved to hold the two large statewide reports over until the August meeting for further review, with discussion continuing on whether to release some agency staff in the meantime.

Transcript Highlights:

• your opportunity to ask them questions on best practices, what we can do to help bring down insurance rates
• And through our vendors that we have hired, we have digitized that, and we actually have that data in
• We, the Florida Division of Emergency Management, are going to contract directly with those vendors.
• We, the Florida Division emergency management, are going to contract directly with those vendors.
• So we We, the Florida Division Mercy Management, are going to contract directly with those vendors.

Summary: The Banking and Insurance Committee heard a series of presentations focused on mitigation, flood and wind resilience, and insurance discounts. Kevin Guthrie of the Florida Division of Emergency Management outlined several funding streams for mitigation, including federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program dollars, BRIC grants, flood mitigation assistance, and the state hurricane loss mitigation program. He emphasized the new Elevate Florida initiative, which will use about $400 million initially to elevate or reconstruct flood-prone homes, starting with National Flood Insurance Program properties and severe repetitive-loss homes, with no current per-home cap. Guthrie said the state will contract directly with licensed vendors and aims to reduce future flood losses, lower insurance costs, and keep properties on the tax rolls rather than relying on buyouts. Insurance Commissioner Mike Yaworski described Florida’s windstorm mitigation discount program, explaining that the 1802 inspection form is used to assess a home’s overall “envelope” and determine statutory discounts. He said the office is updating the program based on a new wind loss study, with likely changes including greater recognition of roof types such as metal roofs and possible territorial risk adjustments. He also said the Legislature now requires the office to revisit the study every five years. Stephen Fielder of the Department of Financial Services reported on My Safe Florida Home, noting that the program offers inspections and grants for roof and opening protections, has completed more than 100,000 inspections, and has reimbursed hundreds of millions of dollars. He said the department has validated its discount calculations with insurers and that the program is intended to help homeowners reduce premiums through verified mitigation work. Michael Newman of the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety said Florida’s building code is nationally leading and that post-Ian surveys found no wind-driven structural damage in buildings built after adoption of the code. He argued that mitigation should be treated as a system, not isolated upgrades, and suggested adding Fortified designation to the state’s mitigation form to better document verified resilience improvements. Bill Truex, a county commissioner and builder, stressed the need to educate homeowners about floodproofing and roof choices, citing examples where flood panels prevented damage and noting that asphalt shingles often do not last as long in Florida as their marketing suggests. In panel discussion, senators asked about program eligibility, outreach to elderly and digitally challenged residents, contractor vetting, roof-life disclosures, and whether flood insurance should be more broadly required. Officials said outreach will include call centers and in-person assistance, and several participants urged better consumer disclosure and more data-driven guidance on roof and mitigation choices.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is a vendor disclosure, and it's pretty simple. People can read the language.
• So this is a vendor disclosure, and it's pretty simple. People can read the language.
• So this is a vendor disclosure, and it's pretty simple. People can read the language.
• </c><00:25:04.160><c> has</c> but that it requires that the vendor has but that it requires that the
• </c> by the vendor when they purchased it. by the vendor when they purchased it.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , but all the resolutions are specific to a vendor.
• So are there other vendors at play here, or how does that work? Senator Kunesh.
• </c> they're all referencing the same vendor. they're all referencing the same vendor.
• </c><00:19:12.799><c> contracts</c> of people to review the vendor contracts of people to review the
• vendor contracts and<00:19:13.440><c> look</c><00:19:13.679><c> to</c><00:19:14.000><c> see</c><00:19

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But I had a question because there was a disbursement of $6.6 million to a vendor.
• And my first question is that now we do have a guideline as far as vendors getting reimbursed for the
• And I'm just— Vendors are getting reimbursed for the work that they're doing.
• And I'm just curious about how this one vendor slipped through the cracks.
• Or, you know, we see that with vendors on bills and those types of invoices that we pay.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This additional $5 million will be really to support addressing our SNAP error rate.
• They'll collaborate with DHS in coming up with a way to reduce our SNAP error rate.
• , and is that the vendor that you are going to... ...renegotiate with that vendor, or is it going to
• be offered out and opened up for other vendors?
• Our current vendor that we have a contract with, the company name is Wellpath.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Schearer's bill that corrects terminology in the chapter of statutes governing nursing facility payment rates
• 00:03:43.200><c> payment</c> governing Nursing Facility payment governing Nursing Facility payment rates
• 46.159><c> aren't</c><00:03:46.480><c> any</c><00:03:46.760><c> questions</c><00:03:47.080><c> on</c> rates
• if there aren't any questions on rates if there aren't any questions on article<00:03:47.680><c> one
• of peer recovery Support vendors of peer recovery Support Services<00:14:08.519><c> section</c><00:14

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• , it's contracted at a rate plus so that the money can go back to them?
• Also, the compliance rate in this program The compliance rate in this program for the people that participate
• Also, the compliance rate in this program percent higher than our normal case loads.
• Our plan is to roll out the uniforms in April once we get the uniforms from our vendor.
• Those rates fell at 1.5% and 0%. Of murder, those rates fell at 1.5% and 0.4%, respectively.

Summary: The Criminal Justice Subcommittee heard an informational presentation from the Florida Department of Corrections on how the prison and community supervision systems operate after sentencing. Assistant Deputy Secretary Hope Gartman described the reception process for new inmates, including intake, medical and mental health screening, classification, custody and housing levels, gain time, and the department’s academic, vocational, substance abuse, chaplaincy, visitation, and communication programs. She emphasized that reentry begins on day one and that program placement is driven by risk and needs assessments, with facilities matched to inmates’ medical, mental health, and security requirements. Members also asked about family contact, visitor applications, inmate welfare trust funds, tablet access, private prison placement, staffing shortages, overtime, contraband interdiction, and waiting lists for programs; several follow-up materials were requested for distribution to all members. Mr. Winkler then outlined community corrections, explaining the different supervision types under Florida law, including probation, drug offender probation, community control, sex offender supervision, conditional release, and addiction recovery supervision. He described the department’s monitoring tools, such as office and field visits, warrantless searches, alternative sanctioning for technical violations, telephone reporting for low-risk offenders, employment assistance, and mobile probation and reentry units. He said the department’s supervision success rate is about 62%, with more than 91% of successful completers not returning to custody within three years. Members questioned officer workloads, the use of radios and GPS check-ins, the rollout of uniforms and firearms, how violations are handled, and whether all circuits participate in alternative sanctioning; Winkler said the program is statewide and that the department is seeking funding for radios. During public comment, Florida Cares Charity urged the committee to consider evidence on deterrence, parole, and recidivism, arguing that community supervision is less costly than incarceration and can be effective. James Beardy of the Florida PBA emphasized the dangers faced by correctional and probation officers, including long shifts, field searches, and working alone, and argued for higher pay and better support comparable to other law enforcement. The meeting concluded with the chair thanking the presenters and public speakers, and the subcommittee adjourned without taking any legislative votes or formal actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the data shows that the five-year retention rate of people coming in in other states through these
• third-party certifiers is much higher than the five-year retention rate of teachers coming out of our
• So the vendors, the ones I've talked to, are interested in opening up shop in Oklahoma.
• Mara reports that 72% of their candidates that come through their program have a five-year retention rate
• we found 10 years ago was that African-American students were being expelled at double double the rate

Bills: HB2987, HB3026, HB3076, HB3288, HB3315, HB3467, HB3711, HB3885, HB4427, HB4359, HB4363

Keywords: education, academic standards, subject matter standards, State Board of Education, legislative review, joint resolution, curriculum, school standards, Oklahoma Administrative Code, education oversight, common education, curriculum standards, state education policy, rulemaking, legislative veto, kindergarten, military families, education policy, school districts, international military dependents

Transcript Highlights:

• Election administrators still have access to it, election employees, and vendors.
• other than... ...and the state of Texas vendor for voter registration purposes.
• A lot of the offline vendors I've visited with really would like to have this security.
• For 10 years, we have maintained a 95 to 98 percent success rate. rate for housing stability, the rate
• . ...retention rate.

Bills: HB45, SB1540, SB2225, SB2284, SB2382, SB2487, SB2514, SB2595, SB2876, SB2877, SB3031, SB2753

Keywords: flooding, disaster response, emergency preparedness, state guidance, public safety, election officials, confidentiality, personal information, government transparency, spirit beverages, alcoholic beverages, Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, distribution, taxation, firearms, local regulation, archery equipment, weapons, voter registration, statewide list

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:36:26.239><c> we</c> into um what kind of external vendors we into um what kind of external vendors
• ,</c> do the part about third-party vendors, do the part about third-party vendors, um,<01:37:05.360>
• </c><01:37:14.080><c> These</c> like, "Who's the test vendor?" These like, "Who's the test vendor?"
• 37:15.840><c> would</c><01:37:16.080><c> be</c> thirdparty vendors, um, that would be thirdparty vendors
• It's not happening in Florida or Texas, which have higher error rates and fraud rates than we do here

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Rules and Administration Select Subcommittee on Federal Impacts on Minnesotans and Economic Stability met on February 20, 2026, to hear from Minnesota Management and Budget State Budget Director Anna Mingi about federal funding changes affecting the state budget. Before testimony began, Senator Rasmusson objected to a draft committee report that had been prepared in advance of the hearing, arguing it was inappropriate to summarize testimony before it occurred. The chair responded that nonpartisan staff had prepared the draft from Mingi’s submitted presentation and could revise it after the hearing if needed. Director Mingi explained that federal dollars make up more than one-third of state spending and support about 650 federal awards totaling over $23 billion this year, with more than $15 billion supporting state entitlement programs. She said the federal funding environment had changed significantly since January 2025 through executive orders, pauses, terminations, new grant conditions, delayed awards, and the July 2025 passage of H.R. 1, the federal reconciliation bill. Her main focus was H.R. 1’s effects on health care and food assistance, including work requirements for some adults, changes to eligibility for legal non-citizens, limits on retroactive Medicaid coverage and directed payments, new limits on provider taxes, and SNAP changes that shift some benefit and administrative costs to the state and counties. She estimated H.R. 1 would reduce federal funds to state-administered programs by about $327 million in the current biennium and $1.6 billion in the next, with additional costs to hospitals, counties, and other partners beyond the budget horizon. Members asked follow-up questions about whether the estimates were relative to the forecast and whether federal Medicaid funding would still rise over time. Mingi said the estimates were based on the November forecast baseline and that Medicaid federal dollars would likely continue growing overall, though the law still creates significant losses relative to prior projections. Senator Rasmusson emphasized that point in remarks to the committee. The discussion then shifted to federal grant pauses and cancellations: MMB’s tracker showed about six awards on hold totaling roughly $491 million, 13 confirmed cancellations across areas including clean energy, education, food assistance, and public health, and additional threatened or litigated cuts not included in those totals. Mingi identified two canceled violence-prevention-related grants, including a FEMA public safety grant and a justice reinvestment grant, and noted that CDC had recently moved to cancel or seek cancellation of several Minnesota public health grants, including a $65 million public health infrastructure award.