Transcript Highlights:

• UC endowment withdrawals are limited to a portion of interest earnings on those funds.
• I do want to note two things about the way the UC cut was calculated.
• It was included in the calculation of the 7%.
• , adding it back into our base and then calculating the 7.95% from that.
• Large non-resident interest, Berkeley, L.A., San Diego, even Irvine seems to have a lot of interest from

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held an extended hearing focused primarily on University of California budget issues, enrollment, housing, and Title IX. Chair David Alvarez opened by noting the governor’s proposed 8% ongoing General Fund reduction to UC, the deferral of compact funding, and the College of the Law budget item, while emphasizing that no votes would be taken that day. Public commenters, including UC Davis employees and lecturers, urged restoration of UC funding and opposed the hiring freeze, saying cuts would worsen staffing shortages, reduce research capacity, and harm students and patients. On UC core operations, the Department of Finance said the governor’s budget maintains the compact but defers $240.8 million in ongoing support and continues a planned 7.95% reduction, while the LAO recommended rejecting the deferrals and instead making any changes in the budget year. UC San Diego’s chancellor and UC Office of the President argued the cuts and deferrals would create major campus shortfalls, force hiring freezes, larger class sizes, fewer course offerings, delayed projects, and possible layoffs. Committee members questioned whether cuts could be shifted away from students and toward administration, discussed UCOP reserves and bond debt, and noted that UC’s budget structure makes the campus-level impact larger than the headline reduction. The committee also reviewed enrollment trends and nonresident replacement. The LAO said UC resident enrollment has grown and recommended revisiting 2026-27 targets and pausing the nonresident replacement plan if state funding does not improve. UC said it has exceeded California undergraduate enrollment and nonresident replacement goals, but warned that continued growth without funding would force enrollment reductions and harm quality. Members discussed the role of nonresident and international students, tuition rates, and the value of UC as a pathway for California students and a source of talent for the state. A separate housing item covered the state’s Higher Education Student Housing Grant Program. UC reported that recent bond savings could support additional affordable beds at UC Davis and UC Santa Barbara, but the LAO and Finance noted the Legislature would need to decide how to use the $6.2 million in savings from the original projects. The committee also heard a Title IX update from UC’s systemwide civil rights office, which described campus Title IX structures, training, and policy enforcement, and said the system has been working to improve confidentiality guidance and streamline complaint processes after survey feedback showed confusion and lengthy procedures.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also is interested in math, history, and economics. He hopes to attend St.
• We may not always agree, but today something interesting happened to us both.
• I'm going to find this bill interesting in the debate and discussion here today.
• Interesting information, but my question was very different.
• Tell me again how to calculate a percentage."

Transcript Highlights:

• that, the companies would come back every single renewal and go up by 9.5% because they have to calculate
• that, the companies would come back every single renewal and go up by 9.5% because they have to calculate
• So we would say, if this is something that interests the committee, let's look at it in the interim and
• reflecting TWIA's increasing exposure and prohibits inclusion of loss adjustment expenses in the PML calculation
• We are for it because this bill is designed to reduce the probable maximum loss calculation, which reduces

Summary: The committee first took up several bills and voted them out favorably without amendment: SB 2857, relating to prescription drug purchasing proof for certain health benefit plan issuers and employers; SB 1307, relating to the biennial health coverage reference guide; and SB 527, relating to health benefit coverage for general anesthesia for certain pediatric dental services. Each of those motions passed on a 7-0 roll call. The main discussion centered on SB 1643, which would require prior approval from the Texas Department of Insurance for property and casualty rate changes above 10% from a previously filed rate. The chair framed it as a response to rate volatility and rising homeowners and auto premiums, while several members questioned whether it would slow a market that is already stabilizing and could encourage insurers to file repeated increases just under the threshold. Witnesses from consumer groups supported tighter oversight and argued for a lower threshold, while insurance industry representatives opposed the bill, saying Texas’s file-and-use system and competitive market work better and that the proposal could increase costs or create uncertainty. After testimony, SB 1643 was left pending. The committee then heard SB 1642, which would replace the single Texas Department of Insurance commissioner with a three-commissioner structure and an executive director. Supporters said it could improve accountability and transparency, while opponents argued the current single-commissioner model is more efficient and avoids confusion and added cost. Witnesses also raised concerns about open meetings issues, administrative expense, and the lack of a clear model from other states. SB 1642 was also left pending. Finally, the committee heard SB 2530, the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association omnibus bill. The bill would make a number of changes to TWIA’s governance and finances, including exempting TWIA from certain taxes, moving its headquarters to a coastal county, changing board composition and voting rules, and lowering the probable maximum loss standard from 1-in-100 to 1-in-50. Supporters said the bill would strengthen TWIA’s reserve funding and improve local relevance, while opponents warned it could increase assessments, reduce reinsurance protection, and create operational risks by relocating the headquarters to the coast. The bill was left pending, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:05:11.880> uh<00:05:12.520> study<00:05:12.880> I know there's a an interesting
• uh study I know there's a an interesting uh study I read<00:05:13.199> once<00:05:13.479>
• It's a simple one more calculator. Representative Holland, thank you, Mr. Chair.
• which is exactly into the calculation which is exactly what<01:09:32.759> this<01:09:32.880><
• U Move representative more calculator U Move representative Holland<01:09:52.960> thank<01:09

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And are there potential benefits that we need to be calculating as well?
• Benefits that we need to be calculating as well?
• Is there any way to calculate that? Is that something that you could get to us?
• Is there any way to calculate that? Is that something that you could get to us?
• And it's interesting. That's consistent from system to system that we've spoken to.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard budget testimony from Department of Mental Health Commissioner Brooke Doyle, who said DMH serves about 29,000 people and is facing rising demand, higher operating costs, and uncertainty about federal funding. She explained that the FY26 budget prioritizes fully funding the state-operated inpatient system, which is at 100% occupancy and often serves people transferred from Bridgewater State Hospital, while making reductions in other areas to balance the budget. Those reductions include a 50% cut to case managers, a pause on closing the Pocasset unit pending a working group on Cape access, and changes to youth and contracted services such as right-sizing IRTP and CIRT, reducing Youth PACT from seven teams to three, scaling back flex and jail diversion grants as ARPA funds wind down, and preserving the behavioral health helpline and community-based crisis services. Members from Western Massachusetts and the Cape raised concerns about access, staffing, and the impact of cuts, and Doyle said the department would continue operating IRTP services, improve the referral process, and work with stakeholders on the Pocasset review and other access issues. The committee also discussed school-based mental health, 988, loan forgiveness for workforce recruitment, and the role of co-response programs for law enforcement. Secretary Robin Lipson then testified for the Executive Office of Aging and Independence, describing a proposed FY26 budget increase of about 21% to support councils on aging, home care, elder abuse investigations, caregiver support, care transitions, and nutrition programs. She said the agency is managing rising demand, especially from the growing 80-plus population, and noted uncertainty around federal Older Americans Act funding after the federal disbursement agency was disbanded. To control costs, the office will manage intake and caseload growth in a fully state-funded home care program, but current clients will not lose services. Lipson also highlighted a new $1 million line item for local mini-grants to support age-friendly initiatives. In questions, members focused on elder scams, and Lipson said scams are increasing and the agency is working with banks, district attorneys, and public awareness campaigns. The Health Policy Commission’s Executive Director David Seltz presented the agency’s FY26 request and said the biggest challenge is health care affordability, with family premiums near $29,000 annually and many residents delaying care because of cost. He emphasized that recent legislation significantly expands HPC’s role through a new Office of Pharmaceutical Policy and Analysis, which will examine the drug supply chain and pricing, and a new Office of Health Resource Planning, which will support statewide planning around closures and access gaps. The new law also creates task forces on maternal health access and primary care, and adds transparency and oversight for private equity in health care. Members asked about pharmaceutical costs, GLP-1 weight-loss drugs, 340B, and maternal health closures; Seltz said the data show rapid growth in GLP-1 spending and that the new offices will help the state better understand cost drivers and access problems. The Center for Health Information and Analysis then began its testimony, describing its role as the state’s data hub for health care spending, utilization, quality, and affordability analysis.

Transcript Highlights:

• The level of interest was so great that today's hearing could easily have been expanded to an entire
• The level of interest was so great that today's hearing could easily have been expanded to an entire
• And the increase interest rates we will suffer as a result of higher, as a result of the higher deficits
• It allows up to $10,000 in deductions on car loan interest on U.S.
• That's interesting because I'll bet it's much higher for California low-income people because of the

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:

• They know that these changes they want to know how these changes are calculated, and most importantly
• are calculated and they most<00:25:32.320> importantly<00:25:32.799> they<00:25:32.960
• Um, the ADA actually requires that calculation be done separately for each parking facility.
• <00:46:22.319> the campus for purposes of calculating the campus for purposes of calculating
• those have to be calculated separately. those have to be calculated separately.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several transportation-related bills. HB 1688, which would provide a general excise tax exemption for certain aircraft maintenance materials, parts, tools, and facility construction, received comments from the Department of Taxation and support from Alaska Airlines, Hawaiian Airlines, Kohala Coast Resort, the Activities and Attractions Association of Hawaii, and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii. Testimony indicated the measure was intended to clarify an existing exemption rather than create a new one. The bulk of the hearing focused on HB 2386, which would authorize the Public Utilities Commission to establish automatic adjustment mechanisms and a water carrier inflationary cost index. The Department of Transportation said it would change its testimony to support the bill, citing a 2020 working group recommendation, while the PUC and DCCA offered comments. Matson, the Maritime Group, Hawaii Harbors Users Group, and Young Brothers supported the measure, arguing it would modernize regulation, improve predictability, and help maintain reliable interisland shipping. Hawaii Farm Bureau offered comments, while Hawaii Food Industry Association, Maui Brewing Company, Lani Kai Brewing Company, and the Japanese Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Hawaii opposed it, arguing automatic rate increases were not the solution and that underlying costs and efficiencies should be addressed first. The chair noted the bill was essentially the same as one previously considered, and asked questions about how Hawaii’s water carrier regulation compares with other states. The committee also heard HB 1691, which would allow electronic signatures for certain motor vehicle title transfers after total-loss insurance settlements and remove the notary requirement for that narrow transaction. The City and County of Honolulu Department of Customer Services, Hawaii Insurers Council, Copart, American Property Casualty Insurance Association, and one individual supported it, with Copart saying the change would reduce delays and could allow a faster, largely electronic settlement process. Members asked about county impacts, and Copart said counties would only see a different form with no added cost or electronic integration. HB 1680, requiring county finance directors to notify agencies through a centralized system for vehicle transfers, drew opposition from the City and County of Honolulu Department of Customer Services and one individual in support. HB 2516, raising helmet requirements for electric foot scooters and bicycles and requiring helmets for high-speed or Class 3 electric bicycles, received support from DOT, DOH, AAA Hawaii, and the Hawaii Bicycling League. HB 193, allowing deaf vehicle owners to register a deafness designation visible to law enforcement, drew support from the City and County of Honolulu Department of Customer Services, the Hawaii Disabilities Rights Center, and an individual who suggested amendments to broaden the bill to deaf and hard of hearing individuals and adjust the proof standard. HB 2442, increasing required accessible and van-accessible parking spaces in larger parking lots, was supported by the Disability and Communication Access Board, the Council on Developmental Disabilities, and the Disability Rights Center, which said the bill would address shortages of accessible parking and may need technical amendments to align terminology with the ADA.

Transcript Highlights:

• system in calculating system in calculating rates<04:34:08.240> in<04:34:08.480> the
• Um we calculated the revenue splits.
• So, I'm not really interested in doing that.
• Is the $7 million here in our calculations? Um, I don't believe that.
• The change is the calculation was done.

Keywords: 10am HB 1 & HB 2, 928, house, all

Summary: The committee of conference for HB 1 and HB 2 reviewed the side-by-side budget comparison and began working through agreed and disputed items. Members first confirmed that grayed-out items were already settled and discussed a process for making later technical and intent changes, especially to true up abolished positions after additional decisions were made. They then moved through several budget sections, including judicial branch reductions, retirement systems, the Department of Justice, the Human Rights Commission, liquor enforcement, corrections, and the Department of Information Technology. Several items were agreed to or treated as settled package items, including the judicial branch position, the Department of Justice reduction, the Human Rights Commission item being held until related HB 2 language is finalized, the Housing Appeals Board being moved into the Board of Tax and Land Appeals, and the Office of Child Advocate. The committee also agreed to update the House bill language as needed based on HB 2 decisions, and to keep certain IT support rows in place unless related boards and commissions are eliminated. The effective date remained July 1, 2025, with no change. The main unresolved discussion centered on the retirement systems budget, where the Senate defended a large increase for deferred IT security and investment-function improvements, while the House argued the increase was too large and favored a back-of-the-budget cut. The Senate said the funds would support strategic IT and investment changes and would remain in the trust if cut, while the House emphasized the size of the increase and suggested a compromise. The committee ultimately retained the Senate position on retirement systems for the moment and said it would return to the issue later. On corrections and liquor enforcement, the committee described a negotiated back-of-the-budget cut structure, including a $10 million cut for corrections with some restoration of POS offices and administrative aides, and a liquor enforcement cut that was treated as part of a broader package. The Department of Safety item related to commercial enforcement and motor vehicle inspections was held for later discussion. The meeting ended with several items agreed, several held for coordination with HB 2, and some major budget questions still open.

Transcript Highlights:

• It makes no changes to the calculation of the minimum guarantee.
• There's a figure on page three of our handout that goes through the current calculation, and I don't
• It's interesting that we keep calling it a two-party plan.
• And it's interesting that we keep calling it a two-party plan.
• The appropriations limit is a little bit of an apples-and-oranges calculation, if I may.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 2579, Petrie-Norris, common interest developments, do pass. That's out on an A roll call.
• AB 2579, Petrie-Norris, common interest developments, do pass. That's out on an A roll call.
• AB 1751, Cork-Silva, townhomes, do pass as amended to clarify the bill does not impact the calculation
• AB 1761, Rogers, electricity calculations, do pass. That's out on an A roll call.
• AB 1793, Ward, cash payment calculation, do pass. That's out with Republicans not voting.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee held a suspense-file hearing on May 14, 2026, reviewing hundreds of Assembly bills and a few committee bills. The chair opened by explaining the committee’s budget constraints and the factors used in suspense decisions, including fiscal impact, return on investment, effects on constituents, and protection of the state’s social safety net. The agenda was organized alphabetically by author, and the committee noted that results would be posted later that day online. The committee then acted on a very large number of measures, sending many bills to the Assembly floor on do pass or do pass as amended motions, while holding many others in committee. Topics covered a broad range of policy areas, including housing, health care, education, labor, public safety, wildfire mitigation, water, energy, transportation, cannabis, immigration, and state governance. Many bills were amended to narrow scope, make implementation contingent on appropriations or existing resources, remove provisions, or clarify agency responsibilities; several bills were held without further action. Among the notable actions, the committee advanced bills on items such as Medi-Cal services, child care, wildfire-related programs, housing financing, school and college issues, public safety and criminal justice, environmental and energy policy, and various consumer and business regulations. Some measures were sent out on A or B roll calls, with Republicans often not voting on amended bills. The hearing concluded after the committee reported that a large number of bills had been moved to the Assembly floor, either as do pass or do pass with amendments, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's not how those calculations work.
• That's not how those calculations work. >> Yep. Fair. Okay.
• I'm Senator interest to the committee.
• <01:38:06.000> some<01:38:06.159> were interesting about that is some were interesting
• Um, it's been interesting, definitely a decrease in the Canadian tourists, and it's been interesting

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We can calculate what the impact of that would have been. Yeah, I'm just a little bit curious.
• The compression percentage is calculated based upon the overall growth of values. from year zero to year
• Homestead exemption, but the values that we had at the time to do the calculation were $40,000 values
• the formula is you're going to increase the district's operating budget and that may change the calculation
• Do you foresee any changes in that in that calculation at all?

Keywords: committee meeting, legislation, public testimony, discussion, procedural

Summary: The meeting covered various topics, but specific discussions and bills were not detailed in the available transcript. Despite the lack of documented debates or acknowledgments, it was noted that committee members were present, and there may have been attempts to address crucial legislative matters. The dynamics of the meeting suggested a standard procedural gathering where routine insights were likely shared among the attendees.

Transcript Highlights:

• population because we have those benefits coming in and other transfer payments coming into our calculation
• So we had seen a surge during the pandemic when the Federal Reserve lowered the interest rate to pretty
• So we had seen a surge during the pandemic when the Federal Reserve lowered the interest rate to pretty
• So it's interesting to hear that it's such a major cost driver.
• I can tell you how this was calculated.

Summary: The committee met to hear Amy Baker’s presentation on Florida’s constitutionally required long-range financial outlook for fiscal years 2026-27 through 2028-29. Baker said the forecast reflects slower but still positive economic growth, continued above-average personal income growth, rising wages, and population growth that is increasingly driven by in-migration as Florida’s senior population expands. She highlighted weakening housing-related revenue, especially documentary stamp taxes, softer consumer sentiment, and the expectation that Florida will pass 25 million residents by 2030, with nearly a quarter of the population age 65 or older. Baker said the outlook largely retained the March 2025 general revenue forecast, but the Legislature’s 2025 session actions significantly improved near-term funds available by redirecting or freeing up money, including contingency appropriations and reversions. She noted total state reserves are just under $15 billion, or about 30% of general revenue, and that the budget stabilization fund is at its constitutional maximum. The main spending pressures in the outlook were critical needs, led by a new emergency preparedness and response fund transfer and Medicaid growth driven mainly by medical inflation and behavioral analysis costs in managed care, not by caseload growth. Other high-priority needs were also identified, and Baker said the first year shows a projected surplus, but years two and three show shortfalls, meaning fiscal strategies will still be needed. Members questioned Baker about the accuracy of the forecast, Medicaid managed care costs, the emergency preparedness fund, federal funding assumptions, and whether recent federal legislation was reflected in the numbers. Baker said the outlook is a good representation of the total picture, though the Legislature will likely adjust it as conditions change, and that more information on federal changes would come in later estimating conferences. Senator Trumbull asked about the governor’s veto of $750 million, and Baker said it simply returned to unallocated general revenue rather than being spent or added to the budget stabilization fund. The chair closed by warning members to expect a difficult budgeting process and noting that the committee would adjourn without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• The fee calculation is very arduous and often not calculated correctly by the folks who submit it, so
• I mean, you could have somebody that represents interests if they're from lakes, maybe write interests
• , river interests, or lakes interests.
• <03:05:37.160> River<03:05:37.680> interests<03:05:38.239> or maybe write interests
• River interests or maybe write interests River interests or lakes interests<03:05:42.359> they

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from the Department of Environmental Services on proposed changes in House Bill 2 and related technical changes in House Bill 1 tied to the governor’s permitting realignment initiative. The proposal would move environmental review staff from Fish and Game and DNCR to DES to create a more centralized “one-stop shop” for applicants needing DES permits, especially for wildlife and natural heritage reviews. DES said the goal is to speed permitting, support a 60-day review clock, and improve coordination among agencies while keeping the substantive review work in place. Members asked about staffing impacts, the scope of the transferred duties, and whether the change would create redundancy or weaken the other agencies. DES said most of the affected staff work primarily on these reviews, though Fish and Game staff also handle other state and federal reviews, which is why the proposal was adjusted to keep one of the four Fish and Game positions there and move three to DES, along with two positions from DNCR. DES also described a new supervisory position in HB 2 to manage the transferred staff within its land resources bureau. Officials said the reviews would still be done by specialists, but under DES supervision, and that the agencies would continue to coordinate recommendations on species impacts and mitigation. The committee also discussed fee increases intended to offset costs, including a 50% increase in wetlands fees and a 100% increase in alteration-of-terrain fees, with the department saying the changes would cover the new positions. Members raised concerns about impacts on private homeowners, possible incentives to work without permits, and whether fines should be used more as a revenue source or for mitigation. DES said wetlands permits are roughly split between homeowner-related and commercial projects, that permit-by-notification already creates a two-tier structure for smaller projects, and that enforcement relies partly on public complaints and online permitting systems. The department also said most fines currently go to the general fund and vary widely year to year, with about $75,000 budgeted, and that the proposal would also create permit-by-notification authority for alteration-of-terrain projects between 100,000 and 150,000 square feet, mirroring language in Senate Bill 110. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• > the<00:03:55.280> gun An interesting fact about the gun An interesting fact about the
• > uh<00:26:37.520> the interesting perspective around uh the interesting perspective around
• :37:04.320> student we calculate an assigned student we calculate an assigned student responsibility
• We use that model to calculate a student's state grant award for the given fiscal year.
• compared with the previous calculation compared with the previous calculation and<00:41:06.400><

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So if we have any comments from interested people, please come forward.
• What's interesting...
• And we did an interesting word cloud.
• And I think it'd be interesting.
• So I think it's going to make for some interesting discussion.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee was called to order, a quorum was established, and the minutes from the prior meeting were approved. The first major presentation came from Montana Public Employees Retirement System executive director William Hollahan, who gave an overview of Montana’s Volunteer Firefighters’ Compensation Act plan. He explained that the plan covers volunteer firefighters in unincorporated areas, is funded by 5% of state fire insurance premium taxes, and currently serves 228 departments with about 2,936 active members and 1,242 retirees. He described eligibility rules, annual training and reporting requirements, benefit levels for partial and full pensions, disability, death, medical, and funeral benefits, and said the plan is actuarially sound with roughly $60 million in assets and a funded ratio slightly above 100%. Committee members asked about prior-service credit, whether EMS personnel are included, the effect on recruitment and retention, and whether expanding coverage would require a funding analysis; Hollahan said prior service is not credited, EMS is not currently included, and any expansion would need financial review. Tim Walleen of Workforce Safety and Insurance then presented a draft North Dakota workers’ compensation solution for volunteer firefighters and volunteer EMS personnel. He explained that volunteer responders are already covered by workers’ comp for medical and wage-loss benefits, but the proposal would set a minimum annual wage of $30,000 for calculating wage-loss benefits for qualifying volunteers, with the benefit paid at two-thirds of that amount. Representative Porter suggested tying the volunteer definition to existing code rather than a fixed dollar amount, and Walleen agreed. Questions focused on whether search and rescue or other volunteer emergency services could be included, whether departments would face new paperwork, and whether volunteer organizations can already elect coverage; Walleen said there would be no additional paperwork and that volunteer coverage is already available. The committee also heard from volunteer fire service representatives and the state fire marshal. An Oakes-area firefighter, Mr. Olson, testified that small departments are struggling with retention, communication, and administrative burdens, especially around separate bookkeeping and funding rules for donated or fundraising money, and he said departments need clearer guidance from the state. State Fire Marshal Dr. Matthew Clark introduced himself and outlined a broader effort to improve education, support, and coordination for fire departments, including a planned 10% audit of certificates of existence beginning in 2027, more outreach through his office, and better assistance with training, reporting, and grant access. He said his office is authorized under current law to provide these services, but the role has been vague and underused. Finally, Arnagard Rural Fire District Chief Rick Schreiber testified in favor of new recruitment and retention ideas, including retirement-style benefits, health insurance, tax incentives, scholarships, grants, and more remote or regional training. He said volunteer departments are losing members, that local tax and donation funds are already stretched, and that any new retirement or incentive program should be sustainable and likely involve a mix of state and local support.

Transcript Highlights:

• Joint Legislative Budget Committee staff must adjust the CSF per-pupil calculations to exclude the weighted
• Joint Legislative Budget Committee staff must adjust the CSF per-pupil calculations to exclude the weighted
• Adjust the CSF per-pupil calculations to exclude the weighted student count of any school district that
• But what I find interesting is in those trends from the Auditor General, since we started tracking the

Bills: HB2035, HB2041, HB2611, HB2860, HB4004, HB4049, SCR1032

Keywords: kinship care, child welfare, foster care, relative placement, child protection, child neglect, financial resources, behavioral health, Christian Science treatment, parental rights, group homes, children's rights, safety protocols, employee training, mental health, child safety, oversight, independent committee, transparency, accountability

Summary: The Senate Committee on Government considered only SCR 1032, along with a strike-everything amendment. The amendment would require school districts, subject to voter approval, to dedicate at least 60% of operational spending to teacher pay, with a phased-in increase starting in FY 2028 for districts below that threshold. It also would penalize noncompliant districts by requiring unexpended Classroom Site Fund monies to revert, making districts ineligible for those funds until back in compliance, and directing JLBC to exclude those districts from per-pupil calculations. The Superintendent of Public Instruction could grant limited waivers of the forfeiture provisions for up to one year, not more than two consecutive years for the same district. Supporters, including representatives of Heritage Action, the Goldwater Institute, and the Center for Arizona Policy, argued that Arizona has increased school funding substantially while teacher pay has remained flat in real terms, and said the measure would improve accountability and ensure more money reaches teachers rather than district administration. They cited Auditor General findings and prior voter-approved efforts such as the Classroom Site Fund and teacher pay initiatives as evidence that districts have not prioritized classroom spending as intended. A rural school coalition testified in opposition, saying the proposal would be difficult for small districts to meet because it could force cuts to other essential costs such as fuel, insurance, facilities, and other operating needs, and that the Auditor General’s classroom-spending categories may not accurately reflect actual teacher pay. One committee member also raised concerns that the measure could harm special education and other legally required student services. During discussion, the sponsor said charter schools were excluded because they are private businesses under the state’s framework, despite receiving public funds. The committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and then voted 4-3 to give SCR 1032, as amended, a do pass recommendation.

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 4540 by Paul ruling the unauthorized interest to occupancy sale, rental lease, advertisement or sale
• Leo Wilson relating to the interest in real property held or acquired or on behalf of certain foreign
• of certain other interests in the state of certain property in the Palo Pinto County allowed by the
• Veterans Affairs HB 4949 by Munoz relating to the calculation of the voter approval tax rate of certain
• The calculation of the voter approval tax rate in certain junior college districts for the Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• And the way that that amount is calculated is it's using the state's share of the marginal cost rate
• So the way that would be calculated is taking that $11,000 or so and multiplying it by the enrollment
• We haven't done the exact calculation, but we are working on some calculations that look at the different
• So I'm assuming that's the same because we're all working together on this, but certainly interested
• So I'm assuming that's the same because we're all working together on this, but certainly interested

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held an oversight hearing on the California State University system covering enrollment, core operations, Title IX/civil rights, and basic needs. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s 2026-27 budget does not change CSU enrollment targets from the prior year and proposes a 5% ongoing General Fund increase for core operations as the final year of the compact. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended a lower resident undergraduate enrollment target than the Governor’s proposal, separate funding for enrollment growth rather than folding it into base, a smaller or no base increase tied more closely to inflation, earmarking some base funds for capital renewal, retiring deferred payments, and avoiding new multi-year compact commitments. CSU said enrollment has rebounded for three straight years, but growth is uneven across campuses, with several Northern California campuses still facing structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. CSU described a multi-year reallocation plan shifting about 10,000 FTE and $89 million in ongoing funding toward higher-demand campuses, plus $40 million in one-time support, and said seven campuses submitted turnaround plans aimed at recovering enrollment over the next several years. The system highlighted strategies such as dual enrollment, guaranteed admission pathways with community colleges, outreach to high school students, retention and advising efforts, and new degree models for working adults and military-connected students. Members raised questions about how campus targets are set, whether the May Board of Trustees discussion will address a systemwide enrollment framework, and how CSU will manage future deficits if projected out-year funding does not materialize. On core operations and facilities, CSU said it faces about $320 million in mandatory cost increases in 2026-27 and is pursuing shared services, procurement consolidation, campus administrative sharing, and program redesigns to reduce costs. CSU and the LAO emphasized the system’s large deferred maintenance backlog, estimated at $8.6 billion, and discussed whether CSU’s bond/debt capacity is sufficient to address it; CSU requested up to $1.1 billion for deferred maintenance, while the administration did not propose new funding. The committee also heard CSU’s annual Title IX and civil rights update: CSU said it has implemented 15 of 16 State Auditor recommendations, has dedicated Title IX coordinators at every campus, is using a systemwide case management dashboard, and is piloting centralized investigations at five campuses. Finally, on basic needs, the Governor maintained current funding levels for food assistance/basic needs, rapid rehousing, and mental health. CSU reported heavy use of food pantries, CalFresh support, emergency housing, and counseling services, while warning that federal changes to CalFresh and related funding could make it harder to serve students in need.

Transcript Highlights:

• rates and that buyers expected interest rates to decline.
• Obviously, we can control interest rates to a degree.
• And then we get into the premium impact calculation.
• So the reason I have an interest in it is because this is my patient population.
• And so in the interest of time, I will leave room for Representative Fleming.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Call to Order and Roll Call 00:00:23 Kentucky Bankers Association 00:02:32 How to Read and Understand KRS 6.948 Health Mandate and Federal Cost Defrayal Impact Statements 00:25:40 Proposed Amendments to Kentucky's Essential Health Benefit-Benchmark Plan 00:50:18 Proposed Health Insurance Legislation for the 2026 Session 01:04:22 Reimbursement for Covered Benefits Delivered Through the Psychiatric Collaborative Care Model 01:01:46 Coverage of Eating or Feeding Disorders 01:18:47 Coverage of Hearing Loss 01:25:31, 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Committee on Banking and Insurance met for its first interim meeting, established a quorum, approved routine opening items, and welcomed a new committee assistant and a legislative intern. The committee first heard a Kentucky Bankers Association presentation from Tim Shank and John Cooper focused on the state’s housing shortage, which they described as affecting all 120 counties and especially low- and moderate-income and workforce housing. They urged support for a proposed $20 million banker-backed revolving fund, paired with tax credits, to finance new housing construction; they said the program would be flexible, could support alternatives such as manufactured housing, and would use below-market loans with tax credits vesting over five years only after units are completed. They also asked for extension of the historical tax credit carryforward from five to seven years and for continued support of new market tax credits, arguing that supply-chain delays make the longer period necessary for historic rehabilitation projects. The bankers also raised concerns about credit unions, arguing that because credit unions do not pay the same taxes as banks, they should not be allowed to acquire healthy state-chartered banks or hold state and local deposits. They cited the recent purchase of First State Bank of Middlesborough as an example, saying the transaction would reduce state, county, and city tax revenue and weaken local tax bases. In response to committee questions, the presenters said local regulations, zoning, parking, sidewalk, and utility easement issues can significantly delay housing projects, and they emphasized that state policy and infrastructure support are needed to help address affordability and development barriers. The committee then shifted to a Department of Insurance presentation by Commissioner Sharon Clark on how to read KRS 6.948 health mandate and federal cost defrayal impact statements. Clark explained that the mandate statements were created in 1998 so legislators would have actuarial estimates of how proposed health insurance mandates would affect administrative costs, premiums, and total costs, and she noted that later legislation added federal cost-defrayal analysis. She also reviewed the background of the Affordable Care Act’s essential health benefits framework and said the department’s statements are intended to help lawmakers make informed decisions on proposed health coverage mandates. No votes or formal actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.