Transcript Highlights:

• Does that owner then pay its due diligence?
• How we're going from one group pays for everything to another group pays for everything.
• They're not paying a fee. We as users are paying those fees when we pay our bills.
• because we're paying too less.
• I had to pay tuition, right? So not only did I not get paid, but I had to pay tuition.

Summary: The committee first took up HB 703 on utility relocation, as amended by a strike-all. The sponsor said the bill would require government authorities that order communication service providers to move infrastructure to pay the relocation costs, clarify expedited timelines, and align the House bill with the Senate version. Supporters argued the communication services tax should help cover these costs, while cities and counties warned the bill would shift major unfunded costs to local governments and taxpayers, especially in fiscally constrained counties. After public testimony from local government and industry representatives and debate over fairness, coordination, and the tax’s intended use, the committee adopted the strike-all and then passed the bill favorably on a roll call vote. The committee then heard and passed CS/HB 379, a securities package updating Chapter 517. The bill and conforming amendment made several technical and policy changes, including expanding certain exemptions, updating foreign jurisdiction and exchange considerations, revising merger-and-acquisition broker rules, aligning fingerprinting requirements with FBI standards, and adding protections related to financial exploitation of specified adults. Industry and Office of Financial Regulation witnesses supported the measure, and the committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably without opposition. Next, the committee passed CS/HB 867 establishing the Coastal Link Commuter Rail Service Act to create a legal framework for commuter rail operations along Florida’s coastal corridor and to help Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties secure insurance and indemnification for service on the Florida East Coast Railway right-of-way. The Florida Chamber supported the bill, and it was reported favorably without debate. The committee also passed CS/HB 1161, which revises Florida’s deepfake law to require covered platforms to remove altered sexual depictions and copies upon request by the victim; the bill drew emotional testimony from a student victim and broad support from members, and a severability amendment was adopted before the bill passed unanimously. The committee then passed CS/HB 453 on pool and spa contractors, which updates Chapter 489 terminology and scope-of-practice rules and, through amendment, limits certain equipment to commercially available products. Finally, the committee passed HB 955 requiring all private employers to use E-Verify for new hires, removing the small-employer exemption. Supporters framed it as workforce integrity and rule-of-law legislation, while opponents warned about labor shortages, burdens on small businesses, and impacts on immigrant workers. After debate, the bill passed 19-3. The committee then began hearing CS/HB 541 on minimum wage requirements, which would allow voluntary waivers of minimum wage for certain internships, pre-apprenticeships, and on-the-job training; the sponsor presented an amendment limiting the duration and clarifying minor waivers, and the committee heard both support from small business groups and opposition from labor, immigrant, and worker advocates before the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• The House getting pay raises.
• A young person pays $5...
• If we can pay for it without cutting teachers' pay, without taking lunch away from children in school
• How to pay for it? I'm good.
• How to pay for it?

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The joint House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees met to hear identical conformity bills, HB 2153 and SB 1106, which would align Arizona tax law with the federal Internal Revenue Code as of Jan. 1, 2026, including some retroactive provisions for tax year 2025. Staff explained that the bills would exclude three federal provisions: the higher federal SALT deduction, the new senior deduction as written in H.R. 1, and the deduction for interest on new car loans. They would instead include a $6,000 retirement-income deduction for taxpayers age 60 and older, a $6,000 Roth IRA contribution deduction, a higher dependent tax credit, and a deduction for child and dependent care expenses above the federal credit. JLBC estimated the package would reduce general fund income tax revenue by about $441.3 million in FY 2026. Members also discussed that the Department of Revenue’s forms had been issued assuming full conformity, and staff and supporters argued the bills were needed quickly to avoid confusion and amended returns during filing season. Committee members and sponsors largely framed the bills as tax relief and a way to provide certainty for taxpayers and preparers. Supporters said the package would help families, seniors, and workers, and noted that the Arizona version was negotiated to keep the overall tax relief roughly comparable to full conformity while shifting benefits away from the SALT deduction and toward child credits, retirement income, and child care. The sponsors also criticized the governor’s executive action and urged prompt passage so taxpayers would know how to file. Opponents argued the bills would reduce state revenue, worsen the budget outlook, and disproportionately benefit higher-income taxpayers and corporations. Several witnesses and members also raised concerns about the child care deduction, the retirement-income deduction, and the business expensing provisions, while supporters responded that the bill was designed to help working families and encourage saving and investment. Public testimony was mixed. The Arizona Society of Certified Public Accountants and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club supported the bills, emphasizing early conformity, filing certainty, and reduced confusion for taxpayers and software providers. Opponents included Save Our Schools Arizona, the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, Opportunity Arizona, and several individuals, who argued the package would deepen budget problems and favor the wealthy. One witness objected to a federal school-choice-related provision she said was being tied to the bill, though committee members said the measure before them was a tax conformity bill and not a school finance bill. The hearing included extended debate over the fiscal impact, the governor’s prior requests for some of the same tax changes, and whether taxpayers would need to file amended returns if the legislature later changed course. The transcript ends during testimony from NFIB, with no final committee vote or action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• paying throughout the year.
• I wasn't paying attention to the agenda.
• If we take the discount off, then when the state pays the county, they're paying the full amount.
• Let's say 90% pay to take advantage of the early pay discount, but 10% don't, or 5% don't.
• will pay the full tax amount.

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:

• for this and who's you know who's paying for this and who's not<00:12:21.120> paying<00:12:21.360
• forecasted previously as to who's paying forecasted previously as to who's paying it<00:13:45.079
• what an EV driver pays in lieu.
• the average Minnesotan motor is PID pay the average Minnesotan motor is PID pay $194<00:42:28.400
• tear from Vehicles which are not paying tear from Vehicles which are not paying their<00:43:19.319

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House File 5 was heard in the Transportation Committee and moved by the author, Representative Jim Joy, to be referred to the Tax Committee. Joy described the bill as a package to make Minnesota more affordable by fully eliminating the Social Security tax subtraction, ending the motor fuels tax indexing, repealing the retail delivery fee, and studying vehicle registration/license taxes compared with neighboring states. Committee fiscal staff explained the bill’s fiscal effects across the general fund, highway user tax distribution fund, transportation advancement account, and metro county sales tax allocations, including that the delivery fee repeal would reduce Transportation Advancement Account revenue and that the bill would shift some revenue sources to offset losses. Several stakeholders testified. The Minnesota Grocers Association strongly supported repealing the retail delivery fee, arguing it is costly and complex for retailers to administer, especially small businesses, and that the costs are ultimately passed on to consumers. The Minnesota Propane Association also supported repeal, saying the fee is burdensome for propane businesses, that only a small share of deliveries are actually subject to it, and that compliance costs can exceed the fee revenue collected. Fiscal staff noted that delivery fee revenue forecasts have fallen below earlier projections, and explained that the fee is imposed on sellers with several exemptions, including a $100 transaction threshold and exemptions for some sales such as bars, restaurants, nonprofits, and certain small businesses. Opposition came from local government groups. The League of Minnesota Cities said it supported the Transportation Advancement Account and its 2023 funding sources, including the delivery fee and motor vehicle parts sales tax, and warned that the bill would prematurely alter a funding structure that cities rely on for predictable transportation revenue. The Minnesota Association of Small Cities said small cities had long lacked dedicated transportation funding and wanted a stable, ongoing revenue stream, but were neutral on the exact source as long as it was reliable. Metro Cities echoed support for stable, predictable transportation funding for metro-area cities. The committee took testimony and discussion only; no final vote was recorded in the excerpt beyond the motion to refer the bill to the Tax Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• this case especially pay a portion, and then the state pay a third.
• this case especially pay a portion, and then the state pay a third.
• developing an impact fees to help pay developing an impact fees to help pay for<00:17:27.679>
• The appropriation to pay off the loan? Yes, that's correct. Totally pay it off, yes, exactly.
• This bill proposes to pay some debt. It also proposes to pay for a new well.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're paying the fuel tax.
• They don't have to pay any taxes anymore. to pay taxes.
• you're asking to pay again.
• They didn't have to pay any of that tax. Everybody else had to pay the tax. Thank you, Mr.
• They didn't have to pay any of that tax. Everybody else had to pay the tax.

Bills: HB214, HB217, HB514, HB593, HB618, HB732, HB908, HB961, HB1010

Keywords: property tax, blighted properties, urban rehabilitation, tax exemption, local government, financial incentives, blighted property, derelict property, property tax exemption, local redevelopment plans, rehabilitation standards, ad valorem tax, community development, senior citizens, homestead exemption, Louisiana Constitution, motor vehicles, local fees, transaction fees, funding

Transcript Highlights:

• He said health plans are already helping to pay for the reinsurance program by paying into the state
• for the reinsurance program by to pay for the reinsurance program by paying<00:18:06.840> into
• reinsurers other than taxpayers paying reinsurers other than taxpayers paying um<00:35:57.119>
• hope you're paying attention did you hope you're paying attention did you should<00:52:50.640> he<
• <00:52:53.119> attention wasn't paying attention wasn't paying attention but<00:52:55.319>

Bills: HF837

Keywords: health insurance, premium security plan, federal funding, state innovation waiver, Minnesota, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Pay raise is an average of 3%.
• That's just the pay raise amount.
• We used $14 million from an account to pay for... $14 million from an account to pay for that so the
• We went back up $9 million for the pay raises.
• For every dollar increase in the base, the employer would pay 80% of that, and the employee would pay

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We are paying through higher insurance premiums. We are paying through rising utility costs.
• We're paying through disaster recovery taxes. We're paying with asthma inhalers for our children.
• We are suffering, and every one of us is paying.
• lives paying lives paying for<00:15:33.640> higher<00:15:33.960> health<00:15:34.200
• these<00:20:30.680> damages Paying their share of these damages Paying their share of these

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: Rep. Athena Hollins and Sen. Ann Johnson Stewart introduced Minnesota’s proposed climate superfund bill, describing it as a way to make major historical greenhouse gas polluters help pay for climate adaptation and infrastructure repair. They said the bill would target large fossil fuel corporations with significant emissions and use the revenue for projects such as stormwater upgrades, bridge and roof protection, erosion control, drinking water protection, cooling cities, and other resilience work. Both lawmakers framed the proposal as a matter of accountability and fairness, arguing that Minnesotans should not keep paying for damage caused by companies that profited from fossil fuel pollution. Several supporters testified in favor of the bill, including St. Paul City Council Vice President Nyang Kheimey, former legislator and medical student Hunter Cantrell, Unidos Minnesota volunteer Bonnie Becol, and 100% Minnesota’s Aurora Vautrin. They emphasized local climate impacts such as flooding, wildfire smoke, extreme heat, emerald ash borer damage, asthma, and infrastructure failures, and said the costs are increasingly falling on taxpayers, local governments, and vulnerable communities. Kheimey highlighted municipal needs and St. Paul’s own climate investments, while Cantrell focused on environmental racism and health harms, and Becol and Vautrin stressed species loss, community recovery costs, and the burden on residents. In the question-and-answer portion, Hollins and Johnson Stewart explained that the bill would apply to fossil fuel corporations with at least 1 billion metric tons of carbon emissions and a nexus to Minnesota, not local utilities. They said the State Auditor’s office would determine the assessments owed by companies, while the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency would hold the fund and administer grants. They also said they were looking to models in Vermont and New York and hoped the proposal could attract bipartisan support because it is tied to affordability and shifting costs away from taxpayers and onto polluters. No vote or formal committee action was taken in the transcript, and the event ended with the sponsors opening the bill to questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• as they pay their property taxes.
• um pay as you go. um pay as you go.
• pay-as-you-go works. pay-as-you-go works.
• So, it says, 'This is excess pay.
• excess increment to pay that debt.'" excess increment to pay that debt.'"

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If you are below, you continue to pay the 10%.
• They're getting it from or what they pay for it.
• I'm paying for the interest that I shouldn't be paying, and I won't have the money down the road because
• What I mean by that is just like your personal mortgage, you pay your personal mortgage before you pay
• They would be required to pay the mortgage payments before they pay any other investments that get paid

Bills: HB2053, HB2116, HB2148

Keywords: stormwater, recharge mapping, water resources, groundwater, appropriation, Arizona, HB2116, Colorado River, litigation fund, water rights, Arizona water law, general fund appropriation, state budget, interstate water compact, Colorado River Compact, water litigation, A.R.S. 45-119, natural resources, water policy, river management

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 2116, which would appropriate $1 million in fiscal year 2027 from the State General Fund to the Colorado River Litigation Fund. The sponsor said it was a repeat of last year’s request and was intended as a backup if the seven Colorado River basin states cannot reach a new agreement. Arizona Department of Water Resources staff testified in support, explaining the state’s role in ongoing Colorado River negotiations and distinguishing the litigation fund from the executive’s separate Colorado River Protection Fund. The bill received a due pass recommendation on a 17-1 vote. The committee then took up House Bill 2053, which appropriates $100,000 to ADWR for updated stormwater recharge mapping and expands the mapping effort beyond state trust lands to private lands. The committee adopted Chairman Livingston’s amendment, which extended the coordination timeline to one year, broadened the agencies involved, and revised language on site eligibility and the definition of stormwater. The sponsor said the bill would help identify more places to capture stormwater for recharge, while ADWR testified neutral, supporting the mapping work but raising a concern about language tied to appropriable surface water because that is a legal determination for the courts. The amended bill passed 11-7. House Bill 2148 was then heard, proposing to give the legislature authority to appropriate non-custodial federal monies, with requirements for specifying purposes and allowing agencies to spend such funds if the legislature does not act. An amendment excluded university and Board of Regents research grants from the bill’s scope, which the chair said was intended to avoid implementation problems. The sponsor framed the bill as a transparency measure, and members discussed the large amount of federal pass-through funding Arizona receives. The amended bill passed 11-7. After the bills, the committee received a lengthy JLBC presentation comparing the executive budget with the JLBC baseline. Discussion focused on revenue forecasts, the impact of federal tax conformity, state employee health insurance costs, SNAP administrative and error-rate costs under H.R. 1, developmental disabilities and AHCCCS growth, and K-12/ESA funding trends. Members repeatedly criticized the executive budget for funding some ongoing costs on a one-year basis and expressed concern about rising caseloads and supplemental needs. No formal action was taken on the presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• And the next one would be a citizen services pay adjustment for us.
• There's various pay structures, but is there, if you had the ability to pay your attorneys more, would
• So we are paying someone a double shift to work that post as well.
• The funds that are associated with those vacancies to pay for it.
• You know, well-designed pay packages are quickly recovering.

Summary: The committee met to hear fiscal year 2026-2027 legislative budget requests from several justice-related agencies. The Florida Commission on Offender Review requested funding for investigator and revocation staff salary increases to address turnover, plus nonrecurring funds for Wi-Fi, seven vehicles, technology support, and commissioner salary adjustments. The State Courts Administrator presented a broad judicial branch request focused on trial court case-management technology, additional case managers, trust fund authority for child support hearing officers, courthouse furnishings, district court flexibility in staffing, a future courthouse for the Sixth District Court of Appeal, Supreme Court elevator replacement, POM accounting implementation support, judicial security liaison positions tied to the Florida Fusion Center, expanded senior management service authority, and judicial salary adjustments. The Office of the Attorney General outlined pay and operating requests for consumer protection, citizen services, ethics, crime compensation, victim services, vehicle replacement, IT and cybersecurity, lease and operating costs, and PALM-related expenses, while several senators questioned the office about outside counsel contracts, contingency-fee arrangements, transparency, and the use of private law firms. The Department of Corrections made the largest presentation, describing severe staffing shortages, high turnover, rising inmate populations, increased assaults, and heavy overtime use. Secretary Ricky Dixon said the agency’s request was driven by constitutional and public safety needs and included funding for operations, security equipment, inflationary costs, vehicle replacement, offender information system modernization, technology restoration, inmate health services, drug and food cost increases, staffing pilots, maintenance, security infrastructure, Florida PALM, recruitment and retention, and $56 million for new correctional housing units. Members asked about inmate labor, prison safety, overtime, vehicle breakdowns, and whether more National Guard support was needed; Dixon said the agency needed more staffing and pay competitiveness rather than a long-term military presence. A correctional officers’ union representative also urged support for pay raises, citing low pay and staffing concerns. No votes were taken on the budget requests. The chair allowed extended questioning, especially for the Department of Corrections, but noted time constraints and asked agencies to return in a later committee meeting, including FDLE, which was deferred because of a House site visit.

Transcript Highlights:

• rate than we pay the maintenance staff.
• Basically, I make sure that we are solvent, that we have enough funds to pay our debts, to pay our employees
• And that's because, in order to pay for these increased costs, in order to pay for additional salary
• And this creates a disparity in pay.
• They don't pay it.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Criminal and Civil Justice heard an update from Department of Corrections Secretary Ricky Dixon on staffing, overtime, capital needs, and inmate population growth. Dixon said the prison population has risen by about 8,000 since January 2021 while staffing has not kept pace, forcing the agency to open 53 housing units without funded positions and rely heavily on overtime and National Guard support. He cited a $189 million deficit tied to salaries and overtime, noted that most staff have less than three years of experience, and argued the solution is to fully fund posts for operational housing units. He also reviewed the department’s fixed capital outlay projects, including repairs, new housing construction, and medical modular units intended to reduce outside hospital transports, and gave an update on the VINE victim notification system and its expansion. The committee then heard from Florida clerks of court representatives Jason Welty and Miami-Dade Clerk Juan Fernandez-Barquin, who described clerks’ court-related and county duties and said clerk budgets have not kept pace with the broader justice system. They requested reimbursements for injunctions for protection ($3.3 million), Baker Act/Marchman Act/sexually violent predator cases ($2.5 million), and juror management ($4.8 million), and said future funding for new judges should include the full courtroom system, not judges alone. Fernandez-Barquin also raised concerns about unfunded mandates, rising retirement and health costs, low court-side pay, and the need to revisit filing fees and trust fund allocations. Members asked about collections, payment plans, license suspensions, and whether some fees or trust fund distributions could be redirected; the governor’s budget had already picked up the $2.5 million request for Baker/Marchman/SVP cases. During public testimony, speakers urged broader criminal justice reforms and additional funding priorities. A prosecutor emphasized that adding judges requires funding for prosecutors, public defenders, and clerks as well. Other speakers called for parole or long-term sentencing reform to reduce prison populations and costs, criticized staffing and conditions in prisons, and raised concerns about inexperienced correctional officers, visitation delays, and lack of air conditioning in some facilities. The committee took no substantive votes on the items discussed and adjourned after hearing the presentations and public comments.

Transcript Highlights:

• teachers received, we're paying that?
• paying the teachers, and we can pay six to eight, nine million dollars for a football coach, or we can
• pay one 17 million to leave.
• The merit pay the state paid for.
• teachers. ...and not paying teachers.

Summary: The committee heard budget presentations and took executive recommendations on several Department of Human Services divisions, including Aging, Adult and Behavioral Health Services; Children and Family Services; County Operations; Developmental Disability Services; and Medical Services, with most divisions showing little or no significant change in total appropriations. Staff and agency witnesses repeatedly explained that many large appropriations are maintained for flexibility, federal matching requirements, or contingency needs, even when actual spending is much lower than the authorized amount. Members also raised concerns about staffing vacancies, long-vacant budgeted positions, and the use of excess appropriation authority across DHS. In Aging, Adult and Behavioral Health, members questioned federal funding levels for mental health and substance abuse grants, the status of senior centers and Meals on Wheels, the Medicaid tobacco settlement program, community alcohol safety grants, and the veterans mental health grant. Agency officials said federal block grants are largely committed, that senior center funding had been delayed by shutdown timing but was now back on track, that the tobacco settlement program had been moved internally within DHS, and that the veterans mental health appropriation remains unfunded. Senators also criticized the adequacy of support for seniors and asked for more detail on how transportation, meal services, and local contributions are funded. In Children and Family Services, members asked about rising appropriation levels, foster care and adoption subsidies, professional fees, the number of children in foster care, and the Children’s Trust Fund. DHS said increases reflect added flexibility for residential treatment, adoption subsidies, and prevention services, while the foster care population has remained fairly steady at about 3,400 children. The Children’s Trust Fund was described as supporting primary prevention programs such as Baby and Me and community schools, and members asked whether it could be administratively combined with other efforts. Questions also covered TANF subgrants, with DHS explaining that it had reduced outside subgrants after discovering over-obligation and was rebuilding reserves. In County Operations, members focused on the summer EBT program, SNAP employment and training, the farmer’s market program, and the state’s TANF reserve position. DHS said summer EBT is still being funded through temporary appropriations because it is a newer program, SNAP employment and training is largely federally funded and may expand under a pending policy change, and TANF reserves were drawn down after prior over-obligation but are now being stabilized. In Developmental Disability Services, members asked about vacancies, human development center staffing, facility construction funds, and the Booneville work program, and DHS said the program has reopened and staffing recruitment continues. In Medical Services, members asked about FMAP, the Our Kids B CHIP program, school-based Medicaid reimbursements, nursing home distress funds, and several large appropriation lines that far exceed actual spending; DHS said these are maintained for claims payment, nursing home receivership contingencies, and other flexibility needs. Each division reviewed was adopted by executive recommendation after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• and we wanted to not only uh fully pay and we wanted to not only uh fully pay can<00:16:00.319><
• So instead of 1.5% going in, it was 7.5% of pay going in, which was more than enough to pay for the benefit
• So instead of 1.5% going in, it was 7.5% of pay going in, which was more than enough to pay for the benefit
• legally require school districts to pay legally require school districts to pay uh<00:20:36.520>
• that that relationship between paying that that relationship between paying and<00:24:25.360>

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:05 HB 545Discussion 00:00:40 HB 545 Vote 00:01:35 HJR 54 Discussion 00:02:25 HJR 54 Vote 00:03:10 HB 694 Discussion 00:03:42 HB 694 Vote 00:28:25, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and first took up House Bill 545, a routine claims bill. Representative Tim Truett explained it as a measure to pay debts the Commonwealth owes. The bill received a motion, a second, and a roll call vote, and passed with favorable expression and no nay votes. Members then considered House Joint Resolution 54, which related to the Kentucky State Fair Board’s expansion plan. The chair explained that the resolution simply acknowledged receipt and approval of the plan so previously appropriated funds could be released. The resolution passed by roll call with no nay votes and was reported favorably to the floor. The main discussion centered on House Bill 694, concerning the Kentucky Teachers Retirement System medical insurance fund and the 2010 “shared responsibility” agreement. The bill would redirect employer contributions from local districts from the health side to the pension side once the plan reaches 100% funded. The chair and Senator Givens argued the bill was a continuation of the state’s long-term commitment to TRS and taxpayer responsibility, while Senator Neal raised concerns about fairness, the timing of the change, and whether the original agreement and statutory trigger for TRS board recommendations had been honored. Testimony from KEA President Eddie Campbell and former Jefferson County Teachers Association president Brent McMahan supported the 2010 agreement but urged the committee to pause the bill, saying the parties should return to the table and that the current proposal could conflict with the original understanding, create actuarial and legal issues, and potentially affect school district finances and bond ratings. Despite those concerns, the committee voted 8-1 to pass House Bill 694 with favorable expression, with Senator Neal voting no and explaining his objection as a process and good-faith concern.

Transcript Highlights:

• They do not get overtime pay.
• . ...and pay.
• We pay according to your rates. Thank you.
• Our pay plan still shows $47,000 as the minimum. Our pay plan still shows $47,000 as the minimum.
• We don’t pay anybody $47,000. We couldn’t; we can’t even pay interns that, frankly enough.

Summary: The committee met for an interim appropriations presentation hearing focused on justice administration agencies. Members heard budget requests from the State Attorney’s Office, Public Defenders, the Justice Administrative Commission, Regional Conflict Counsel, Capital Collateral Regional Counsel, and the Guardian ad Litem Office, followed by a presentation from the Department of Juvenile Justice and a brief public comment from a nonprofit advocate. The chair noted that presentations from the Department of Law Enforcement and the Commission on Offender Review would be moved to a later meeting. The state attorney requested funding to true up underfunded circuits under the existing formula, staff 14 new criminal judgeships, replace declining VOCA victim-services funding with general revenue, and cover a projected due process shortfall. The public defender asked for a higher starting salary for assistant public defenders, funding to restore balance in circuits where public defenders lag behind state attorneys, and staffing for new criminal judgeships. Regional conflict counsel and capital collateral regional counsel also sought salary adjustments, additional attorneys and case costs, and competitive area differential funding to address recruitment and retention issues. The Justice Administrative Commission requested funding for Florida PALM readiness and implementation and for IT hardware and software replacement; it also relayed a clerks’ request for reimbursement related to injunctions for protection, Baker Act, Marchman Act, and sexually violent predator cases. The Guardian ad Litem Office said it now has a guardian ad litem for every child in Florida and requested salary increases for senior and managing attorneys to reduce turnover. The Department of Juvenile Justice presented a much larger budget request to expand residential and detention capacity, increase per diem rates, renovate and replace aging facilities, fund the Broward detention center rebuild, improve cybersecurity and the juvenile information system, and cover rising lease costs. Members asked questions about staffing, compensation, detention and residential treatment needs, mental health and substance-use services, and the Broward project timeline. A nonprofit advocate then asked for better data collection on protection orders and related court actions to support funding for domestic violence and recovery services. The committee adjourned without taking any formal votes on the budget requests.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what this bill does is we have EV vehicles right now that pay, they're registered, and they pay $75
• My constituents don't pay your 75% sales tax for transit. I also don't like it.
• they're not paying.
• my my constituents don't pay your 75% my my constituents don't pay your 75% sales<00:07:49.599><
• 10.279> they're<00:09:10.399> not<00:09:10.800> paying tax that they're not paying

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So we are paying the cost up front.
• We pay—we don't wait for this appropriation to pay overtime. We pay overtime every paycheck.
• But whatever the case is, something has to be overcome because when we're paying overtime, we're paying
• more than we would pay if we simply had people.
• I would argue that pay is, competitive pay is at the top of the list.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• we're paying double for everybody. we're paying double for everybody.
• > they attempt to pay the premiums, but they attempt to pay the premiums, but they don't<00:51
• Um, and so again, we're being asked as taxpayers to pay for the defrayal costs, pay for reinsurance.
• asked as taxpayers to pay for the defrail<01:15:03.440> costs,<01:15:04.640> pay<01:15:
• defrail costs, pay for um reinsurance. defrail costs, pay for um reinsurance.

Bills: HF3388, HF400

Keywords: HF3388, Minnesota premium security plan, reinsurance, health insurance, group health carriers, MCHA, MNsure, individual market, premium stabilization, carrier assessment, health insurance assessment, premium security plan account, state innovation waiver, high-risk pool, reinsurance payments, healthcare premiums, insurance carriers, deferral of assessment, financially impaired condition, HF400

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from the prior day and then heard House File 400, a bill described as a defrayal measure for health insurance mandates. Representative Perryman said the bill would not block future mandates, but would require the state to pay the added costs of any new mandated benefits so those costs would not be shifted to premium payers. She and supporters framed the bill as a way to protect affordability for Minnesota employers, workers, and families, especially in the fully insured market. Testimony in support came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Council of Health Plans. They argued that Minnesota has a high number of mandated benefits, that each new mandate adds cost to premiums, and that businesses—especially small and midsize employers—are already struggling with rising health insurance costs. The health plans representative said the bill would use the existing Commerce defrayal process to reimburse plans for eligible mandate-related claims, allowing those costs to be removed from premium rates. Several members echoed support, saying the bill would improve transparency by showing the fiscal impact of proposed mandates and help prevent people from being priced out of coverage. Members also explored how mandates apply in the market and how premiums are set. Deputy Commissioner Julia Dryer explained that, unless otherwise specified, mandates generally apply to the individual, small group, and fully insured large group markets, while self-insured ERISA plans and other markets are generally outside that scope. Representative Elkins noted that the affected market is relatively small and said small businesses are increasingly moving to self-insured plans because of cost. He and others raised concerns about affordability, while Representative Smith argued that mandates often ensure needed care and that the bill shifts costs to taxpayers rather than insurers. Representative Bacham added a personal example from tribal self-insurance, saying preventive physicals had saved lives and asking whether other factors besides mandates are driving insurer costs. No amendments were offered, and the bill was laid over for possible future consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, the federal government pays a lot more, frankly. They pay all costs.
• They pay all costs. They more, frankly. They pay all costs.
• They pay<00:09:43.640> all<00:09:43.880> medical, pay all medical, pay all medical, uh,
• just had to have it to pay our bills. just had to have it to pay our bills.
• going to pay for it? going to pay for it?

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00:07 Roll Call 00:00:13 Approval of Minutes from August Meeting 00:01:55 Discussion of County Jails 00:03:31 Discussion of Centralized Collection of Net Profits and Occupational License Taxes 01:02:12 Adjournment 01:54:56, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the August 26 minutes, and then took up a discussion of county jail funding. KACO representatives and county officials said jail operations are an ongoing strain for counties because they must pay for inmate care, facilities, and mandated standards, while many counties also rely on jail revenue to offset costs. They described Kentucky’s jail system, including 77 jails, 43 closed counties without jails, and the mix of county, state, federal, and controlled-intake inmates. KACO emphasized that counties remain financially responsible for inmates even when they must contract with other jails, often at costs above the state’s per diem rate, and said it is developing a broader proposal to present later. The testimony focused on rising expenses and shrinking revenue. KACO said counties spent about $374 million on jail operations in FY24, up 24% from FY19, and about $41 million on jail medical costs, up 40%. General fund support for jails was said to total $147 million in FY24, more than double pre-COVID levels. Speakers also noted that state inmate populations in county jails have fallen from about 11,500 in 2019 to 7,212 in 2025, while federal inmates have increased because they are more lucrative for counties. The state jail per diem of $35.34 was described as insufficient to cover actual costs, especially medical care. County judges from Webster, Knox, and Hardin counties gave examples of local budget pressure. Webster County said it now houses 114 state prisoners, 47 county prisoners, and 24 out-of-county prisoners, and that it transferred $512,000 from its general fund to the jail last year, about $77 per taxpayer. Knox County said its jail budget has grown from an initial $2.8 million projection to $5.7 million, with $3 million coming from occupational tax revenue. Hardin County said its jail has an approximate $11 million expense budget against $5 million in revenue, creating a $6 million deficit, driven by higher payroll, medical, and insurance costs and a 29% drop in state prisoner revenue. The judge said the county has responded with property tax increases and an expanded occupational tax district, but still uses reserves to cover other county services. A Grant County magistrate then began speaking from the perspective of magistrates and commissioners, describing her background working at a local jail before serving in county government. The discussion remained centered on the fiscal burden of jails and the need for counties and the legislature to work together on a long-term solution.