Transcript Highlights:

• so it does not mean more revenue for the schools.
• But it's not going to be more revenue to the schools.
• We have done our own calculations under two separate methodologies.
• So the LPV number is a statutory calculation.
• So the LPV number is a statutory calculation.

Bills: SB1090 , SB1293 , SB1414 , SB1429 , SB1503 , SB1536 , SB1633 , SB1724 , SB1764

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: savings and loan, technical correction, Arizona Revised Statutes, financial institutions, prohibitions, GPLET, abatement, tax incentives, local government, property improvement, central business district, insurance, settlement demands, time limits, third-party claims, regulatory compliance, initiative, referendum, ballot measures, petition circulators

Transcript Highlights:

• This is how the calculation lays out and looks for each of the institutions.
• That rate would be rounded to the nearest hundredth for the calculation.
• This would not include any inflationary increases, so it's just what the current calculation is.
• So it's just what the current calculation would be under the current formula.
• But that's how that's calculated. On the completion factors, this is what you'll see.

Committee: Joint Higher Education Funding Review Committee

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is how the calculation lays out and looks for each of the institutions.
• That rate would be rounded to the nearest hundredth for the calculation.
• So it's just what the current calculation is. This would not include any inflationary increases.
• So it's just what the current calculation would be under the current formula.
• But that's how that's calculated. On the completion factors, this is what you'll see.

Committee: Joint Higher Education Funding Review Committee

Summary: The Higher Education Funding Review Committee met to continue work on a draft higher education funding formula and related capital building fund changes. Lisa Johnson of the North Dakota University System updated the committee on the board’s developing policy for low-producing academic programs. She said the board is using a five-year rolling window, with thresholds of fewer than 10 undergraduate graduates or fewer than 5 graduate graduates, and that programs flagged in three consecutive review cycles would go to the board for review. Possible outcomes include continuation, continuation with modifications, inactivation, or termination. Members asked about how the policy would account for enrollment, program costs, workforce need, and programs that serve students outside their major. Johnson said the board would likely use an accompanying procedure to consider those factors. She also reported that about 200 programs could potentially be reviewed under current guidance, with 135 inactivated and 112 terminated, and said the process is intended to support quality and stewardship rather than simply cut programs. Jamie Wilkie then reported on the Capital Building Fund. He reviewed the fund’s history, matching requirements, and use for extraordinary repairs, deferred maintenance, and some legislatively authorized projects. He said about $334 million in state and matching dollars has been invested overall, with roughly 78.7% going to deferred maintenance and extraordinary repairs. Committee members pressed for updated information on how much deferred maintenance has actually been reduced, and several members said they wanted clearer reporting on the return on investment from new buildings versus repairs. NDSU representatives said the tier funding has helped significantly reduce deferred maintenance and allowed demolition and renovation work on campus. The committee also discussed the need for updated five-year facility plans and space-utilization information from the institutions. The committee then began a section-by-section review of a draft bill that would replace the current higher education funding formula with an FTE-based model and restructure the capital building fund. The draft would fund UND and NDSU differently from the other nine institutions, use fall enrollment rather than completed credits, add performance funding for completions in in-demand fields, create research incentives for UND and NDSU, and combine capital building fund tiers while changing matching requirements and eligible uses. Members raised concerns about the treatment of professional students, the use of CIP codes, incentives for waivers, and whether the formula should rely on more current data. The committee did not take final action on the draft during this meeting, but it continued detailed discussion and indicated more review would follow.

Transcript Highlights:

• The hour of 7:30 a.m. having arrived, this Revenue and Taxation Committee meeting is called to order.
• corporations already washed through the system and it's already been incorporated into the current revenue
• Okay, so I'm looking at the actual Tax Commission, I mean, excuse me, the Tax Foundation calculations
• corporations already washed through the system and it's already been incorporated into the current revenue
• Okay, so I'm looking at the actual tax commission, I mean, excuse me, the tax foundation calculations

Summary: The Revenue and Taxation Committee met on January 23, 2026, and considered only one item: RS 33071, Representative Jeff Ehlers’ annual tax conformity bill. Ehlers explained that the proposal would conform Idaho tax law retroactive to calendar year 2025 and forward to federal changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill, while continuing Idaho’s longstanding nonconformity with bonus depreciation. He said the bill also addresses federal R&E/R&D expensing and allows individuals to benefit from the federal changes, which he described as providing tax relief to Idaho taxpayers. Ehlers also said the bill would prevent “double dipping” by taxpayers who might otherwise use the same qualified expenses for both the new federal deduction and Idaho’s research activities credit or investment tax credit. Representative Gannon questioned the fiscal note, arguing that the Tax Commission’s estimate appeared too low compared with analyses from the Tax Foundation and other states, and raised concerns that the true revenue impact could be much higher, potentially affecting future budgets. Ehlers responded that the Tax Commission’s zero-impact view applied to the credit portion, while the main cost came from the R&D deduction and the personal provisions, and he said the committee’s fiscal estimate of about $155 million was based on the midpoint of Tax Commission estimates. After discussion, the committee took up Representative Raybould’s motion to introduce RS 33071. The motion passed on a voice vote, with one recorded nay, and the bill was introduced. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• About 88% of total revenue-related funds for 26-27 is projected to come from tax revenues.
• Now to non-GRR revenue.
• This shows the all funds, the general revenue, and all state funds, which is general revenue, general
• revenue.
• calculations.

Bills: SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• New revenue now gives HHS the runway to implement items that will achieve those savings and revenue goals
• We need to uh think big and revenue.
• ,</c><01:14:12.159><c> it's</c> Operational cost is not revenue, it's Operational cost is not revenue
• </c> these revenues in the following manner. these revenues in the following manner. $7<01:17:40.080>
• </c> mean by that is we um when we calculate mean by that is we um when we calculate data<01:31:22.000

Committee: House Health Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• accounted for about 41.1% of state transportation revenue.
• Revenues are going down in most states; transportation revenues are going down in most states.
• So you have less revenue coming in.
• You know, lottery revenue, casino revenue. So you've got some gambling things.
• In Colorado, transportation revenue and all revenue, in fact, is constrained by a constitutional amendment

Bills: HB2109 , HB2139 , HB2192

Committee: House Transportation

Keywords: vehicle loads, public highways, transportation, road safety, infrastructure, HB2139, snowmobile registration, snowmobile fee, vehicle license fee, registration fee, Department of Licensing, RCW, vehicle registration, winter recreation, off-road vehicle, moped, motorcycle, trailer, recreational vehicle, vintage snowmobile

Transcript Highlights:

• The compensatory revenue hold harmless effectively.
• revenue calculation in fiscal year 2026.
• Maintain the program revenues; it would just be that there would not be state aid attached to the revenues
• There is a reserve that was created in 2024 for unspent Q Comp revenue.
• There are a variety of revenue raisers we could look at.

Bills: HF2430 , HF2433

Committee: House Education Finance

Keywords: education finance, teacher training, Read Act, state aid, school funding, education funding, children with disabilities, transition aid, special education, school district consolidation

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> after we do the revenue forecast. after we do the revenue forecast.
• </c> when we forecast uh revenues. when we forecast uh revenues.
• process to take care of that calculation process to take care of that excess<02:15:28.960><c> revenue
• </c> excess revenue so the rate is lowered. excess revenue so the rate is lowered.
• </c> largest other uh revenue source. largest other uh revenue source.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The meeting focused on preliminary fiscal 2026 revenue estimates and the governor’s office request for an official revision to fiscal 2026, with members reminded that any estimate adopted now would not bind the December official estimates. Staff from S&P Global walked through three forecast scenarios—control, optimistic, and pessimistic—based on recent federal tax changes, tariffs, and other policy developments, emphasizing that the outlook remains highly uncertain. Under the control scenario, the presentation projected below-trend real GDP growth of 1.8% in fiscal 2026, slowing to 1.5% by fiscal 2028, with unemployment peaking around 4.5% and the Federal Reserve cutting rates three times to a long-run range of about 2.75% to 3%. The optimistic scenario assumed lower effective tariffs, stronger growth, and better labor and housing outcomes, while the pessimistic scenario assumed a broader trade war, higher effective tariffs, faster deportations, weaker employment and consumer spending, and unemployment rising to about 6.3%. Speakers also noted that the forecast was prepared before later BLS revisions and that recent data on inventories and AI-related investment made the recent quarters look unusually volatile. Members discussed how the current fiscal 2026 outlook compared with earlier assumptions and noted that the eventual revenue revision may be smaller than the spread between the optimistic and pessimistic economic scenarios. The governor’s office and committee members also reviewed sector-specific impacts, including manufacturing, housing, light vehicle production, exports, and consumer sentiment, with particular concern about Kentucky’s auto and housing-related industries. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• What are some of the maybe top three sources of revenue there?
• It is technically University of California revenue.
• Yes, that's from a tuition revenue increase.
• Exactly. and increase revenues for those same increasing costs.
• Is that how you calculated that? Yeah.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I am James Eldridge, Senate Chair of the Joint Committee on Revenue.
• We simply cannot afford to leave this revenue on the table.
• Without this revenue, patients will suffer.
• Without this revenue, patients will suffer.
• So we very much support this funding and revenue raising.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Revenue

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Revenue, chaired by Senator James Eldridge and Representative Adrian Madaro, opened its hearing with a moment of silence for the late Lowell State Senator Ed Kennedy and reviewed hearing procedures and deadlines. The committee then took testimony on several corporate tax bills, including S. 2033/H. 3110 on offshore tax avoidance, H. 3248 on a manufacturing tax exemption, H. 3057 on a tiered corporate minimum tax, and S. 2041 on a corporate tax haven blacklist, along with a separate business interest deduction bill. No votes were taken during the hearing. Supporters of S. 2033/H. 3110, including labor unions, health care workers, educators, public health advocates, seniors, and several legislators, argued that Massachusetts needs new revenue to offset federal cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, health care, education, and other services. They said the bill would raise roughly $400 million annually by increasing the share of offshore profits included in the state tax base from 5% to 50%, and they framed it as a fairness measure that would require large multinational corporations to pay more while leaving most local businesses and workers unaffected. Testimony emphasized risks to MassHealth, PCA services, adult dental care, hospitals, schools, and public health programs if new revenue is not raised. Opponents, including the Mass Taxpayers Foundation and the Council on State Taxation, argued the proposal is poor tax policy and likely unconstitutional because it would tax foreign-source income without allowing foreign tax credits or a comparable apportionment method. They said Massachusetts should take a broader, coordinated approach to federal tax changes rather than a standalone bill, and warned of litigation risk and possible double taxation. Supporters such as MassBudget and former tax counsel Don Griswold countered that the bill is a reasonable rough-justice approach, consistent with federal and neighboring-state treatment, and that it would primarily affect a small number of very large multinationals. On S. 2041, the Global Business Alliance opposed the proposed tax haven blacklist, while supporting a separate bill allowing business interest deductibility.

Transcript Highlights:

• So moving on to... ...which every year is greater through the calculation.
• Do we have a good sense or a calculation of what that might be?
• Part of it is also our revenue estimates. And it shows the COLA.
• Part of it is also our revenue estimates for the final quarter that is used to calculate the COLA, which
• You've got revenue, you've got expenditures. What can we do?

Summary: The committee heard opening public comment and then took up several K-12 budget items in the Governor’s January proposal. On LCFF and necessary small schools, the Department of Finance described a 2.41% COLA, a roughly $2.2 billion increase for districts and charters, and a $30.7 million ongoing augmentation to raise necessary small schools funding by 20%. The LAO supported funding the COLA and said the small schools proposal had merit, but questioned the 20% figure and warned about a sharp funding cliff around the enrollment thresholds. Members and witnesses repeatedly raised declining enrollment, attendance, and the need to align funding with outcomes and local cost pressures. The chair and several members also asked whether consolidation, shared administration, or alternative formulas could better address small district costs, and the issue was left open for further discussion. The panel then discussed special education equalization. Finance proposed $509 million ongoing Proposition 98 funding to raise the statewide special education base rate to $999 per ADA, which would fully equalize SELPA base rates; the LAO said the same target could likely be reached with less money under current assumptions. CDE strongly supported equalization as an equity issue and said about 15% of students are identified with disabilities, with identification rising by roughly 20,000 to 25,000 students per year. Members raised concerns about staffing shortages, high caseloads, and the need to use any additional funds for inclusive practices, alternative diploma pathways, and the extraordinary cost pool. The committee also discussed whether the budget language should reflect the $509 million amount or the $999 rate, and the item was held open. For the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring $757.3 million one-time to complete the program, while the LAO recommended approval because learning loss remains unresolved and districts have generally used the funds for tutoring, supplemental instruction, and other academic supports. CDE explained that LEAs must revisit their needs assessments and that many districts are using the funds alongside other support systems, but members pressed for clearer accountability and better data on how much money actually goes to tutoring or other direct services. The committee then reviewed the Student Support and Professional Development Discretionary Block Grant, with Finance proposing $2.8 billion one-time and the LAO saying discretionary funding can help districts address local priorities but should be paired with fiscal oversight and possibly more targeted priorities. Members split between supporting flexibility for local needs and worrying that the grant could be used to cover ongoing structural deficits without clear evidence of student-outcome gains; the issue was also held open. Finally, the committee heard a high-level overview of school facilities funding under Proposition 2, with Finance proposing to continue $1.5 billion in bond spending in 2026-27. OPSC said that at the current pace all Prop 2 K-12 funds would likely be exhausted around 2029-30, and that demand is shifting toward modernization as enrollment declines in many areas. Members asked about school closures, reuse of unused sites, and the new small school district facilities program, which OPSC said is moving toward proposed regulations and would begin accepting modernization applications in November 2026 and new construction applications in January 2027. The committee also briefly noted community college facilities funding and asked for more information later in the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• We missed the 2025 revenue forecast by almost $100 million.
• So we receive a revenue forecast from our chief economist at DFM that projects revenues.
• And so the long-term view on revenue forecast, The long-term view on revenue forecast really gives you
• a sense of what the economic drivers are predicting about the revenue forecast.
• Do we have numbers from January on revenues? Mr. Bybee.

Committee: Senate Agricultural Affairs

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I did not say they would have to find a new way to get that revenue.
• The revenue impact is $91 million.
• And yes, revenues go higher. The more people who move in, Rep.
• create another revenue to make sure that Rep.
• I can't say, we didn't contemplate, I didn't calculate that." Rep.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:06:39.960><c> and</c> over to the Department of Revenue and over to the Department of Revenue
• It is not a calculator in their retirement.
• It is not a calculator in their retirement.
• </c> duty pay to be included in calculating duty pay to be included in calculating the<03:22:56.600><
• This change would not only be fair but also... from the yearly calculation of hours from the yearly calculation

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 180, which concerns critical incident stress management teams. Representative Mark PR, the bill sponsor, proposed an amendment to add a definition of “team leader” and to clarify that teams may or may not be affiliated with a municipality. He argued that a certification test offered by the International Critical Incident Stress Foundation is unnecessary and too expensive at $400, since team members are volunteers who already receive training and continuing education. Committee members asked about the training structure and certification language, and the sponsor explained that the teams are self-certified and that the amendment was intended to clean up the bill’s language. The committee then voted on HB 180 in executive session. Amendment 0261H was adopted 11-0, and the bill was then moved as amended and passed 11-0. The committee placed the bill on consent. Later, the committee heard House Bill 438, sponsored by Representative Timothy Horan, dealing with immigration detention and related state policy. Horan described the bill as an update to earlier legislation and said it would codify best practices, prohibit state cooperation with mass deportation efforts, bar for-profit operation of immigration detention facilities, and require Executive Council approval before the governor could deploy the National Guard for immigration deportation activities. Committee members questioned whether the bill could be read as authorizing detention facilities and discussed the relationship between the state and Strafford County Jail. An amendment presented on behalf of Representative Patrick Long was described as a technical rewrite that removed several sections and changed language, but the hearing ended before any vote was taken on HB 438.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are currently staff in the department, but they are not funded by any fee revenue.
• So the numbers that you cited are those from the fee revenue, or are they general fund?
• The bill has no revenue impact to the state property tax levy.
• Let's hear from Steve Ewing from the Department of Revenue.
• That doesn’t make sense at a time when every revenue dollar is so precious.

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held a public hearing on nine bills. Senate Bill 5872 would create the Pre-K Promise Account to receive philanthropic donations for ECAP preschool slots; supporters, including DCYF, the governor’s office, and early learning advocates, said it would help expand access to high-quality pre-K with a 10-year Ballmer Group commitment for up to 10,000 new seats annually. Senators asked how the money would flow, and staff and witnesses explained it would be governed by an MOU and deposited annually; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5879 would eliminate two JLARC studies, one on lodging tax reporting and one on training benefits; supporters said the reports were duplicative and burdensome, while the hospitality industry warned against losing transparency, and no action was taken. Senate Bill 6047 would permanently codify various capital budget administration rules, including minor works flexibility and early learning grant changes; testimony focused on technical cleanup and on provisions affecting co-located child care and community projects, with no vote taken. Senate Bill 5988 would authorize the Department of Health to charge fees for accrediting opioid treatment programs, with support from DOH and tribal/nontribal providers who want the state to continue providing the service; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5923 would allow Island Hospital in Skagit County to qualify as a critical access hospital, with local hospital leaders and residents supporting the measure to improve reimbursement and sustain rural care; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5832 would raise the Lemon Law arbitration fee from $3 to $6 to fund the Attorney General’s consumer protection work, and the AG’s office, dealers, and the sponsor said the program is effective and underfunded; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5970 would make permanent the property tax exemption for multipurpose senior citizen centers, with AARP supporting the bill as a benefit to seniors and caregivers; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5994 would preserve timber tax distributions for school districts that recently had qualifying levies, and forest industry witnesses supported the bill while suggesting a possible amendment for state forest transfer lands; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5949 would narrow the B&O tax exemption for insurance-related businesses so it applies only to the entity paying the insurance premiums tax, retroactive to 2019; the Department of Revenue and bill supporters argued it restores tax equity, while insurers, health plans, and business groups opposed it as retroactive, ambiguous, and likely to raise premiums. The committee heard extensive testimony on that bill, but the transcript ends with adjournment and no recorded vote or executive action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Calculation would be done annually, with the first calculation occurring in December of 2026.
• Annually, with the first calculation occurring in December of 2026.
• This clears up some confusion on who is to receive revenue from these hotel room rentals, the county
• into the grant program before it hits general revenue.
• into the grant program before it hits general revenue.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate considered and passed a series of House bills on third reading, with several title amendments and a few effective-date motions adopted. Early in the session, members passed HB 4452 removing acreage limits on land owned by church or religious trustees, HB 4577 creating reciprocal driver’s license recognition agreements with Ireland and Japan, HB 4588 authorizing West Virginia participation in a federal tax credit scholarship program, and HB 4592 requiring higher education institutions to create coordinated campus safety maps. HB 4602 was amended to align with a prior Senate child welfare pilot program, and members discussed its projected cost and implementation timeline before passing it. HB 4603 created a pre-adjudicatory alternative disposition process in abuse and neglect cases, and HB 4606 narrowed bail rules by requiring consideration of residency and community ties while prohibiting personal recognizance bonds for violent felony offenses after an adopted amendment. The Senate also passed HB 4710 changing the party-registration deadline for candidates from 60 to 180 days before an election, with debate over its impact on independents, and made it effective January 1, 2027. HB 4712, known as Bailey’s Law, increased penalties for DUI causing death and related conduct, with emotional testimony from members about the victim and similar tragedies. HB 4765 established a pay raise for teachers, school personnel, and state police and added a market-pay enhancement system based on county cost-of-living differences; an amendment to the amendment capped county differentials and guaranteed at least a 1% increase in every county. HB 4865 created an optional program for high school and homeschool students to serve as election official trainees, and HB 4869 established narrow guaranteed-issue rights for Medicare supplement policies. Later bills included HB 4995, which strengthened video/audio recording rules in special education classrooms and was passed, then reconsidered and passed again; HB 4996 creating a new crime for making threats of violence against schools or children; HB 5048 guaranteeing virtual instruction for foster children in temporary placement; HB 5065 adding recordkeeping and geolocation requirements for hotel marketplace facilitators to ensure proper hotel tax remittance; and HB 5074 reallocating medical cannabis fund revenues to child protection, homeless services, research, law enforcement, and other purposes. The Senate also passed HB 5101, the Joanna Phillips Domestic Violence Prevention Act, which increased penalties for domestic violence offenses and adjusted bail provisions, after amending it to conform with the earlier bail bill. Additional measures passed included HB 5166 requiring notice before political committees are fined for filing violations and allowing limited extensions, HB 5168 directing $12 million in lottery funds to EMS first responders and county EMS support, HB 5182 authorizing certain state treasurer security personnel to carry concealed firearms, HB 5212 streamlining higher-education financial aid rules, HB 5214 allowing court-ordered drug testing of parents before reunification in abuse and neglect cases, HB 5353 regulating virtual currency kiosks with licensing, disclosures, and transaction limits, and HB 5366 exempting J-LAP records from FOIA to protect confidentiality for lawyers and judges seeking assistance. Most bills passed with strong bipartisan support, though HB 5074 and HB 5353 drew some dissenting votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, we calculated the revenue splits based on the appropriate, uh, based on how we viewed the revenue
• the</c> revenue splits.
• Um we calculated the revenue splits.
• Um we calculated the revenue<04:59:27.280><c> splits</c><04:59:27.680><c> based</c><04:59:28.000><c>
• </c> revenue stream that the state's created. revenue stream that the state's created.

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:

• </c><00:03:53.200><c> minus</c> balances are the total revenues minus balances are the total revenues
• revenue revenue account.<00:05:24.720><c> Um,</c><00:05:25.120><c> state</c><00:05:25.360><c> grant<
• </c> revenue coming in in totality. revenue coming in in totality.
• </c> Revenue Service at the federal level. Revenue Service at the federal level.
• If the Internal Revenue negative,500.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Higher Education Conference Committee reviewed differences among the Governor’s, House, and Senate proposals for state grant parameter changes and their effects on state grant spending, North Star Promise spending, and average student awards. Nonpartisan staff explained that the proposals use different combinations of parameter changes, with the Governor’s and Senate plans modeled to avoid or minimize rationing, while the House plan would require rationing to balance the program. Staff reported projected biennium balances of a positive $29.836 million for the Governor’s proposal, a negative $60.758 million for the House proposal without rationing, a positive $994,000 for the House proposal with rationing, and a positive $3.623 million for the Senate proposal; North Star Promise balances also varied, with the Senate showing a positive balance and the Governor and House with rationing showing negative balances. Staff also said the Senate proposal would extend availability of the state grant appropriation and suspend surplus procedures through fiscal year 2029, allowing the balance to carry forward. The committee then focused on the House-only tuition and fee cap provision, which would limit the tuition recognized for state grant purposes for four-year programs to the University of Minnesota Twin Cities level, with 1% annual increases in fiscal years 2026 and 2027. House members said the cap was intended to address rising tuition, especially at the University of Minnesota, and to produce savings in the state grant program. The governor’s office confirmed the provision was not included in the Governor’s bill. Representatives from the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Private College Council opposed the cap, arguing it would reduce awards for low-income students and shift costs to students rather than address underlying tuition pressures; they also said it could discourage enrollment at higher-cost institutions. Supporters from Minnesota State argued the cap would improve fairness because students at lower-tuition institutions are effectively capped lower, while students at more expensive institutions receive larger awards, and they said the legislature should intervene in a variable that has grown substantially over time. Committee members questioned how the cap would work and whether it was tied to the Twin Cities campus rate. Testifiers clarified that the state grant formula is tied to the University of Minnesota level, but because Minnesota State institutions are below that level, the cap effectively limits their students to their own lower tuition while allowing higher awards at the University of Minnesota and private colleges. No formal vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the chair indicated the committee would continue with item-by-item review of the remaining parameter changes and hear additional testimony from agencies and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The maximum allowable square footage calculator is intended for that purpose. And the council...
• So, part of this effort is verifying that the revenues and expenditures.
• It clarified the tariff calculation.
• What made the space eligible was when they exceeded that square foot calculator.
• On to the next item, which is somewhere here: gross square foot calculator discussion. Item C.