Transcript Highlights:

• Notably, King County led 11 programs, while Pierce-Snohomish counties led four programs each.
• Even less populous While Pierce-Snohomish counties led four programs each, even less populous rural counties
• Three-quarters of programs receive funding from their fire agency, city, or county, including voter-approved
• I am a fire captain for South County Fire.
• , based on a county-wide assessment and looking at counties across the state.

Committee: Joint JLARC I-900 Subcommittee for SAO Performance Audits

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee’s Initiative 900 subcommittee held a hybrid public hearing on two State Auditor performance audits. The first audit examined efforts to reduce non-emergency use of emergency systems through CARES programs. Auditors reported that Washington has 52 fire-agency-led CARES programs in 26 counties, but many communities without programs said they need one. Major barriers included unstable funding, difficulty hiring qualified staff, volunteer-based rural departments, and lack of statewide guidance. The audit also found that only about half of programs tracked both required performance measures, and it recommended that the legislature consider private insurance reimbursement options and convene a statewide work group to develop guidance, standards, and possible changes to the role of the Department of Health. Agency representatives and fire officials largely supported the findings and emphasized that short-term grants and one-year contracts make programs hard to sustain. Committee discussion focused heavily on financing, especially Medicaid reimbursement and accountable communities of health (ACHs). Auditors clarified that the 10% figure cited in the report referred to direct Medicaid reimbursement for treat-and-refer services, which some agencies do not pursue because the $115 rate is too low relative to the administrative effort. Several fire officials testified that their programs rely on grants and ACH support, but that funding is often year-to-year and uncertain. They also described the value of CARES programs in reducing emergency room use, jail detentions, and long ambulance wait times, while noting barriers to sharing patient records across systems. Members asked whether the new public safety sales tax authority could help, but fire district representatives said it is not a direct funding option for them. The second audit reviewed performance management in the Department of Commerce’s Office of Economic Development and Competitiveness. Auditors found that the division does not yet have a statewide economic development strategic plan and that performance management is inconsistent across its 16 programs. In a limited review, all six sampled programs had goals, but only half clearly identified performance measures and targets, and only three tracked outcomes and published results. The audit highlighted leading practices from other states, including strategic planning, regular progress reporting, aligning program goals with agency goals, and using performance-based contracts and grant monitoring. Recommendations urged Commerce to seek stakeholder input, assess internal and external conditions, set goals and measures, align programs with the strategy, and strengthen monitoring and evaluation. Commerce officials agreed with the audit and said the division is already working toward a strategic plan, with a new assistant director to be hired and a target of completing the work by mid-next year. Members pressed the department on how the plan would connect to workforce, higher education, housing, and other economic development systems, and asked Commerce to return to JLARC next year with progress updates. The meeting ended with instructions for submitting written public comments and notice of the next JLARC meeting schedule.

Transcript Highlights:

• John Kennedy with the rural counties.
• And during that entire time, both the lead agency and the responsible agency are very involved in that
• There are local agencies already on .gov, and there are local agencies like the Desert Water Agency in
• boundaries of a city and county.
• of a city and county.

Summary: The committee heard a long agenda focused heavily on housing, local government, Brown Act teleconferencing, and public agency administration. Early bills included AB 39, which would require larger cities and counties to adopt electrification planning for EV charging and building decarbonization; AB 76, which clarifies Chula Vista’s university innovation district housing requirements; AB 259, AB 409, and AB 467, which extend or modernize Brown Act teleconferencing provisions for local agencies, community college student bodies, and Los Angeles neighborhood councils; and AB 428, which would let water corporations join joint powers authorities for pooled insurance. Supporters emphasized climate planning, housing access, public participation, safety, and cost savings, while several bills were amended to address stakeholder concerns. Most of these measures advanced on bipartisan votes, generally 6-1 or 7-0, and were left open for additional members to add on later. The committee also heard AB 632, which would strengthen local enforcement tools for serious code violations, fire hazards, illegal cannabis operations, and unsafe housing by allowing unpaid administrative fines to be converted into money judgments and liens. Local government and code enforcement groups supported the bill as a way to improve compliance and reduce costly litigation. AB 670 would let local governments count investments in preserving naturally occurring affordable housing toward housing element reporting and require broader reporting of demolitions and replacement housing compliance; supporters argued preservation is essential because many unsubsidized affordable homes are at risk. AB 761 would allow Monterey-Salinas Transit to place a future sales tax measure on the ballot with approval from two-thirds of its board, rather than separate approval from each member jurisdiction, to preserve transit funding for seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities. These measures also moved forward, with the committee noting amendments and sending them to the next committees of referral. Another major item was AB 810, which would require special districts and joint powers authorities to migrate public-facing websites and email addresses to .gov or CA.gov domains by 2031. The author argued the change would reduce fraud and improve public trust, especially after emergency-related scams, while opponents from special districts and IT organizations said the transition would be costly and difficult for smaller agencies. Several school-related opponents withdrew after amendments, and committee members discussed possible aliases and tribal-government language. The bill passed 7-1 to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. Finally, AB 1206 proposed a pre-approved design catalog for single-family homes and small multifamily developments, modeled on a prior ADU bill, to speed rebuilding and reduce design costs; supporters from Habitat for Humanity and housing advocates said it would help both wildfire recovery and broader housing production, and the bill drew at least one opposed-unless-amended position as the committee moved into further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• The road paperwork was originally begun in 1905, and the county commissioners in Shoshone County really
• This is more local agency leadership classes.
• This is the Eckert Road Bridge here in Ada County.
• If a county is seeking funds, you have... Mr.
• , the county, to write the grant.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• If it's in the unincorporated areas of the county, the county shall...
• Williamson County, 9 percent; McLennan County, 13 percent; Grayson County, 10 percent; Gregg County,
• See what Hidalgo County did, and quite frankly, the county.
• So they don't get passed on from agency to agency.
• , the county, urban county governments, they use a similar process.

Bills: SB2 , SB3 , SB5 , SB9 , SB10 , SB14 , SB16 , SB18 , SB34 , SB6 , SB7 , SB8 , SB11 , SB12 , SB13 , SB15 , SB 2 , SB 3 , SB 5 , SB 9 , SB 10 , SB 14 , SB 16 , SB 18 , SB 34 , SB 6 , SB 7 , SB 8 , SB 11 , SB 12 , SB 13 , SB 15 , SB 17 , SB 4 , SB1 , SB2 , SB3 , SB5 , SB9 , SB10 , SB14 , SB16 , SB18 , SB34 , SB6 , SB7 , SB8 , SB11 , SB12 , SB13 , SB15 , SB17 , SB4

Transcript Highlights:

• The city or the county is not...
• We also want to thank King County, Pierce County, and the City of Kent.
• We also want to thank King County, Pierce County, and the City of Kent.
• King County Superior Court did so in 54% of its cases, and Pierce County Superior Court did so in 40%
• county.

Committee: Joint JLARC I-900 Subcommittee for SAO Performance Audits

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee I-900 Subcommittee heard JLARC’s annual update on the status of State Auditor recommendations. JLARC staff said that for the 2024 review period there were three new legislative recommendations and three previously unresolved recommendations from earlier years. They reported that the legislature did not convene the civil asset forfeiture work group recommended by the auditor, and took no formal action on two water-use-efficiency recommendations. Two recommendations related to concurrent Medicaid enrollments were addressed in a bill introduced this session, but that bill was not adopted. The committee then heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on ensuring climate-resilient electricity infrastructure. The audit concluded Washington has opportunities to better adapt new energy infrastructure to climate change by using more site-specific climate information, broader collaboration, and stronger use of vulnerability assessments. The auditors recommended expanding the Climate Impacts Group’s analyses if funding is available, using forecasted information in DNR wildfire maps, designating a non-regulatory coordination office, and expanding vulnerability assessments in Ecology and Commerce processes. Agency witnesses generally agreed with the importance of resilience but emphasized existing efforts, the need to avoid duplicating current planning and SEPA processes, and concerns about funding, staffing, affordability, and preserving regulatory roles. The final audit examined fines for human trafficking and related sexual exploitation crimes. Auditors found courts assessed these mandatory fines inconsistently, collection rates varied widely, some revenues were sent to the wrong local government, and some jurisdictions did not clearly use the money for enforcement, prevention, or survivor services as required. The audit recommended better coordination with prosecutors, improved court coding and templates, and stronger local processes for tracking and spending fine revenue. King County provided testimony thanking the auditors and describing its anti-trafficking work. The meeting ended with no votes taken and the next meeting announced for September 17.

Transcript Highlights:

• Mateo County and Santa Clara County opted in.
• County and into the city and county of San Francisco.
• Santa Clara County and Alameda County are bigger counties that pay a lot of sales tax.
• And then San Mateo County opted in, Santa Clara County opted in.
• Those committees authorize the county funding for the various transit agencies to hold them accountable

Committee: House Transportation

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard SB 63 by Senator Wiener, as amended, a Bay Area transit funding measure intended to avert major service cuts at BART, Muni, Caltrain, and AC Transit. The authors said the region faces a fiscal cliff and that the bill would place a sales tax measure before voters to provide long-term operating support, paired with a third-party efficiency review and new accountability provisions. Supporters, including SPUR, Caltrain, BART, MTC, transit agencies, local governments, labor, and environmental groups, argued the measure is urgently needed to prevent collapse of transit service and broader economic harm. A major focus of the hearing was accountability and governance. The bill’s amended structure would create operator-specific ad hoc adjudication committees made up of commissioners from the counties that fund each operator, with the ability to withhold a portion of funding if problems are not corrected. Senator Wiener and Senator Arreguín said the amendments strengthened oversight and reflected extensive negotiations among the counties. Assemblymember Papan opposed the bill, arguing it still lacked fair representation and proactive oversight for San Mateo County and that the county was being asked to pay without sufficient control. Assemblymember Lackey also opposed the measure, calling it a bailout and criticizing the tax structure. Committee members questioned how complaints would be filed, how the adjudication process would work, whether MTC could override committee decisions, and how often counties could bring complaints. The authors explained that counties may file one complaint per operator per year, that MTC must follow the ad hoc committee’s recommendation, and that withheld funds would be returned if issues are resolved. After debate, Assemblymember Ahrens moved the bill and Assemblymember Harabedian seconded. The committee voted 11-5 to pass SB 63 as amended and send it to the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• Grants to county and tribal agencies provide core child welfare services such as prevention and family
• The county agencies have the primary responsibility for licensing and monitoring of child foster care
• the</c><00:18:43.480><c> uh</c> DCF the county uh agencies have the uh DCF the county uh agencies have
• Chair, I think if you go to the counties, there is specific data on how much the counties pay.
• we</c><01:03:01.440><c> reach</c> say a county agency um could we reach say a county agency um could

Committee: House Human Services Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• the county or the adjoining<00:26:11.279><c> counties.
• That flexibility is not currently prohibited in statute, but many counties and agencies we believe interpret
• That flexibility is not currently prohibited in statute, but many counties and agencies we believe interpret
• That flexibility is not currently prohibited in statute, but many counties and agencies we believe interpret
• That flexibility is not currently prohibited in statute, but many counties and agencies we believe interpret

Committee: Senate Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:

• in Canyon County.
• I am a county commissioner in Payette County, Idaho, in the Greater Treasure Valley.
• So how does a county get all of the beneficiaries of a project such as a county courthouse or a county
• This was Hawaii County.
• He is the county sheriff in the county in which I reside.

Committee: House Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• We had new agency challenges.
• And so the limitations, I think, are Twin Falls County, Canyon County, and Ada County.
• Canyon is waiting on what Ada County does. There's currently a parking issue in Ada County.
• Some counties, for example, we set up four new offices: Jerome County, Benewah County, Shoshone County
• , and Elmore County.

Summary: The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee met with a quorum and first heard a budget presentation for the Department of Parks and Recreation. Legislative analyst Janet Jessup reviewed the agency’s structure, dedicated funds, prior ARPA and general fund infrastructure appropriations, and the department’s FY 2027 requests. Those requests included additional park personnel and trail maintenance staff, one-time project funding, and a supplemental $9.8 million transfer to move grant funds from a consolidated program into the current park operations program. Director Susan Buxton said the agency has no general fund request, emphasized the economic impact of outdoor recreation, and highlighted completed and ongoing capital projects at parks statewide, including Ponderosa, Heyburn, Priest Lake, Eagle Island, Cascade, Harriman, Ashtonia Trail, and Bruneau Dunes. Committee members asked about resident access to campsites, out-of-state pricing, vacancy filling, the new Twin Peaks property in Lemhi County, OHV education, and trail maintenance. Buxton said the agency is filling positions quickly, that higher nonresident fees have increased availability for Idahoans, and that the Twin Peaks acquisition is expected to become revenue-positive within two years. The committee then heard the Office of the State Public Defender budget. Analyst Janica Bicharat summarized the office’s staffing, fund balance, and FY 2027 requests, which included six additional trial attorney positions, secure hosted data storage, and one-time laptop and data migration costs. Director Eric Frederickson described the agency’s transition to a statewide public defense system, noting that it inherited more than 1,300 cases on day one, has since reduced vacancies to about 7%, and is building pipelines for attorneys and social workers. He warned that the pending Tucker v. State of Idaho case could lead to renewed litigation if the system is not adequately funded. In response to questions, Frederickson said the office can absorb the current year’s rescissions through vacancy savings, but future cuts could force reductions in training and contract attorneys, increasing caseloads and risking attorney retention. He also said CPA case costs are running above appropriation, county lease/MOU issues remain unresolved in some counties, and public defenders are generally paid less than county prosecutors and attorney general attorneys. The committee adjourned after announcing the next day’s budget hearings for the Industrial Commission, Public Utilities Commission, and Secretary of State.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think Ada County—we have a couple hundred state prisoners in the Ada County Jail.
• jails. 13 in county jails.
• We have about 1,213 inmates who are currently in the county jail. Take, for instance, Ada County.
• What does it cost for Ada County that, Take, for instance, Ada County, what does it cost for Ada County
• counties that look at it as a potential revenue, the other counties are looking at this as a cost to

Summary: The committee met jointly with Senate Finance and House Appropriations to review the Idaho Department of Correction budget, beginning with an agency overview from Legislative Services analyst Noah Peterson and then testimony from Director Bree Derrick. Discussion focused on the department’s overall funding mix, declining balances in dedicated funds such as inmate labor and probation/parole receipts, vacancy management, and the impact of the governor’s holdback exemption. Members also asked about software and technology costs, the Hepatitis C Fund, replacement items, and why some positions remain vacant or are held open as a budget strategy. A substantial portion of the meeting covered the department’s major divisions and cost drivers. In state prisons, county/out-of-state placement, community corrections, community-based substance use disorder treatment, and medical services, the analyst and director explained enhancement requests, supplemental needs, and rising operating costs tied to inflation, population growth, and contract rates. Members questioned the inmate labor fund’s decline, the loss of work contracts, the cost and effectiveness of recidivism and transparency software, the Pocatello reentry center, body-worn cameras, RFID and drone detection technology, and the medical contract with Centurion. The department said some cuts were made or planned in response to budget pressure, including reduced spending on Recidivis and other contracts, while body-worn cameras and some public-safety tools were retained. The committee also discussed prison population pressures, county jail and out-of-state placement costs, mandatory minimum sentences, and the use of county jails as overflow. Director Derrick said the department is seeing more admissions than releases and that Idaho’s incarceration rate remains high relative to neighboring states. She also said the department is working to expand county and out-of-state options and to pursue more inmate labor contracts. Several members asked for follow-up information on staffing, contract counts, program impacts, and fund balances. The meeting then moved to the Commission of Pardons and Parole budget, where Director Christine Starr testified that commissioners are part-time but effectively work full-time, are not paid for training or all preparation time, and that turnover remains a concern. No votes were taken; the committee adjourned to resume the next day after work groups.

Transcript Highlights:

• But that is paid to the county, and then the county remits it to us.
• But that is paid to the county and then the county remits it to But that is paid to the county, and then
• the county remits it to us.
• So mid-sized counties and urban counties and rural counties that cannot, without the tax base to afford
• The county attorney from Valverde County is also here and is signed up to testify.

Bills: SB 1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee convened for its first hearing of the 89th regular session, confirmed a quorum, adopted committee rules by a 15-0 vote, and began review of Senate Bill 1, the state budget for fiscal years 2026-27. Chair Huffman outlined the committee’s organization, introduced staff, and described the budget as conservative and focused on one-time investments. She highlighted major SB 1 priorities including property tax relief, full funding for public education formulas, teacher pay, school safety, border security, Medicaid growth, dementia research, energy and water infrastructure, transportation, wildfire suppression, and other capital and public safety needs. Comptroller Glenn Hager presented the biennial revenue estimate, saying the state has $194.6 billion available for general-purpose spending in 2026-27, with a projected $23.8 billion ending balance from the current biennium. He cautioned that revenue growth is returning to more normal levels and that lawmakers should avoid committing short-term surpluses to ongoing expenses. He also explained that the Economic Stabilization Fund is projected to hit its constitutional cap, meaning an estimated $5.6 billion in severance tax and related revenue would remain in general revenue in the upcoming biennium rather than flow into the fund. Senators discussed whether to raise or rename the fund and the implications of keeping more severance-tax revenue in general revenue. The Legislative Budget Board then gave an overview of SB 1 and the budget’s major funding changes. LBB staff explained that the bill is essentially flat at $332.9 billion in all funds, but includes large method-of-finance shifts and major property tax relief. They detailed how prior property tax relief enacted in the 88th Legislature grew from an estimated $18 billion to $22.7 billion because of higher property values and hold-harmless provisions, and said SB 1 continues that relief with a total of $51 billion in ongoing and new property tax support. Members asked extensive questions about the automatic growth in school tax compression, the constitutional homestead exemption, COVID-era federal funding, Medicaid assumptions, and the sunset of the non-homestead circuit breaker. No additional votes or final budget actions were taken beyond adoption of the committee rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• or adjacent counties.
• or adjacent counties.
• or adjacent counties.
• or adjacent counties.
• of</c><00:57:02.760><c> the</c> Anoka County Anoka County 47% of the Anoka County Anoka County 47% of

Transcript Highlights:

• A lot of counties actually had to borrow money to get to pay that back, and in my county, Yuma County
• Counties on behalf of the county assessors, said that county assessors are mandated to check agricultural
• , $115,000; Navajo County, $23,000; Yavapai County, $177,000; and Graham County, about $20,000.
• , what we do in Mojave County, as well as Graham County, the two-county. ...to what we do in Maricopa
• County, what we do in Mohave County, as well as Graham County.

Committee: Senate Senate Finance Committee of Reference

Summary: The committee heard several tax, retirement, and property-related measures. SB 1215, the so-called “comma bill,” was described as a technical correction to firefighters’ cancer coverage language: it reorganizes the listed cancers into a column format to avoid comma-delimitation confusion, and an amendment removed unintended police-officer language. The bill was amended and passed 6-1. SB 1180 would codify the Department of Revenue’s practice of assuming federal tax conformity for above-the-line items when preparing state tax forms; DOR said it would not have changed this year’s executive-order-driven changes, and the bill passed 7-0. SCR 1028, a referral to voters, would narrow an existing exception under Prop. 108 for agency-set fees and assessments; supporters said it would curb delegation of taxing authority, while opponents warned it could hinder public services and business operations. The resolution passed 4-3. The committee also advanced several other measures. SB 1292 clarifies that the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System’s 5% ownership cap applies only to publicly traded corporations, to avoid problems with investment funds being classified as corporations; PSPRS supported it, and it passed. SB 1294 restores county assessors’ authority to prorate property value for property destroyed in any manner, while preserving the five-year classification protection for property destroyed by verifiable accident; it passed 6-1. SB 1430, the annual tax corrections act, made minor cleanup changes and codified current practice, and passed unanimously. SB 1270 would allow CORP employers to make optional supplemental defined-contribution incentive payments of up to $5,000 to certain Tier 3 corrections employees to aid recruitment and retention; supporters called it an optional tool, while some members raised concerns about county costs and pension policy, and it passed 6-1. SB 1290 drew the most extended debate. It requires advance notice and inspection reports for property inspections by DOR and county assessors and bars repeat on-site inspections of agricultural property for three years after an inspection. Farm and ranch groups said the bill would improve transparency and reduce repeated disputes over agricultural classification, while county assessors opposed it, arguing it would add costs, create inconsistent reporting, and interfere with their duty to inspect and value property annually. The bill passed 4-2 with one member not voting, and the chair noted it would likely remain a work in progress.

Transcript Highlights:

• Mateo County and Santa Clara County opted in.
• County and into the city and county of San Francisco.
• Santa Clara County and Alameda County are bigger counties that pay a lot of sales tax.
• And then San Mateo County opted in, Santa Clara County opted in.
• Those committees authorize the county funding for the various transit agencies to hold them accountable

Summary: The Assembly Transportation Committee heard SB 63 by Senator Wiener, as amended and coauthored by Senator Arreguín, a Bay Area transit funding measure intended to avert major service cuts at BART, Muni, Caltrain, and AC Transit. The authors said the region faces a fiscal cliff and that without new revenue, BART could collapse and other systems could face severe reductions. They described the bill as the product of extensive negotiations among the five Bay Area counties and transit operators, with San Mateo and Santa Clara counties opting in during the process. Much of the discussion focused on accountability and governance. Supporters said the bill includes some of the strongest oversight provisions in recent memory, including a third-party efficiency review and ad hoc adjudication committees that can withhold a portion of funding if operators fail to correct problems. Assembly Member Papin and Assembly Member Lackey argued the measure amounts to a taxpayer bailout with insufficient representation and too much control left to MTC, while the authors responded that the bill gives affected counties direct complaint and enforcement authority and that MTC must follow the ad hoc committees’ recommendations. Several members asked about complaint procedures, withholding thresholds, opt-in/opt-out issues, and whether the funding would return to the source counties if withheld. Testimony in support came from SPUR, Caltrain, MTC, the Bay Area Council, BART, SamTrans, VTA, San Francisco MTA, transit coalitions, environmental groups, local governments, and labor. Supporters emphasized the risk of severe service cuts, the importance of preserving recent investments such as Caltrain electrification, and the need for regional self-help. There was no registered opposition witness, though some members spoke against the bill. The committee ultimately voted 11-5 to pass SB 63 as amended to the floor, with the committee amendments also removing urgency language.

Transcript Highlights:

• This just simply does not match with now growing an agency or a standalone agency.
• It represents property taxes returned to cities and counties. Excess ERAF to the counties.
• As an entire registry, or is it requiring people in the public to go agency by agency?
• of California's 58 counties.
• of California's 58 counties.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard an informational presentation on the May Revision’s proposed reorganization of the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into separate housing-focused and consumer/business-focused entities. Administration officials said the split would improve oversight, streamline decision-making, and create a dedicated California Housing and Homelessness Agency with a new housing development and finance committee. The Department of Finance said funding was needed in 2025-26 to begin implementation, while the LAO recommended rejecting the proposal without prejudice because the Little Hoover Commission review was still pending and the plan would require ongoing General Fund costs. Members raised concerns about the timing, the lack of alignment with the budget process, and whether the reorganization would improve accountability for homelessness spending; several public witnesses supported the concept but stressed it could not substitute for new housing and homelessness dollars. The committee then took up the Department of Veterans Affairs. CalVet requested funding for phase three of its electronic health care record project and a trailer bill to preserve authority for federal background checks, but the May Revision withdrew requests for deferred maintenance and additional administrative support. The LAO noted deferred maintenance can prevent larger future costs, and the chair criticized the withdrawal of less than $1 million for veterans’ homes as short-sighted given existing repair needs. No vote was taken. Next, the Department of Housing and Community Development presented its budget. HCD said the May Revision provides no new affordable housing or homelessness funding, but does retain existing rounds of funding and proposes a $31.7 million reversion from undersubscribed housing programs. Members from both parties expressed concern about zeroing out ongoing housing and homelessness investments, especially for LIHTC, the Multifamily Housing Program, and HAP. HCD also defended its homelessness accountability and compliance work, saying the unit includes about 30 program staff and six attorneys, with three additional attorneys requested mainly to handle public records and litigation workload. Public commenters largely opposed the lack of new funding and urged continued support for housing and homelessness programs, while some supported the reorganization and accountability efforts. Finally, the committee heard Go-Biz proposals. The administration requested authority to increase funding for a federal trade program match if needed, plus reappropriations for administrative funds tied to the Containerized Ports Interoperability Grant Program, zero-emission vehicle operations, and the Women’s Business Center Enhancement Program. It also proposed withdrawing the Cal Competes grant request and reverting remaining funds from the Performing Arts Equitable Payroll Fund. The LAO said Cal Competes is generally effective but could be cut as a budget solution, while warning that the performing arts fund was close to awards and should be considered carefully. Members objected to pulling back committed funds for performing arts organizations and questioned why the state would withdraw support after applications had already been submitted.

Transcript Highlights:

• My favorite county to discuss, of course, is Harris County.
• **Agency Representative**: I will defer to the agency on that as well.
• **Dave Nelson**: ...agency by agency. How many FTEs are you going to have?
• Y'all the agency?
• I thought it was an institute, not an actual agency level. You just mentioned agency.

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• These are law enforcement agencies, parking and toll enforcement agencies, and transportation agencies
• If you have somebody that's doing human trafficking and they're going from county to county to county
• , every single time that car crosses a county line, that agency may not be able to get access to that
• If you have somebody that's doing human trafficking and they're going from county to county to county
• every single time that car crosses a county line, that agency may not be able to get access to that

Bills: HB2161 , HB2332 , HB2102

Committee: House Civil Rights & Judiciary

Keywords: attorney general, legal authority, state powers, judiciary, civil rights, driver privacy, data protection, personal information, surveillance, consumer rights, legal obligations, financial responsibility, debt management, consumer protection, court systems

Transcript Highlights:

• is intending to submit an agency pre-file bill, If the agency is intending to submit an agency pre-file
• by agency because some of them are very specific to the needs of each individual agency.
• If the agency is intending to submit an agency pre-file bill on this topic, yes or no.
• This law applies to state agencies, counties, and municipalities, and it applies to concessions, which
• Large agencies, like an HHS or a DOT, I don't know how an agency leader can run that agency without their

Committee: Joint Legislative Task Force on Government Efficiency

Summary: The task force met with a quorum and first reviewed a memorandum summarizing a survey of state agencies on possible statute revisions. Levi reported that 20 agencies submitted 70 proposals, with about 33 potentially becoming agency pre-file bills. Common themes included procurement, concessions, architect/engineering services, liability limits, and IT-related efficiencies. Members asked about sharing the survey results more broadly and about cross-agency coordination, especially with higher education and ITD-related issues. OMB then presented three topics from its survey responses: concessions, pre-qualification of architects/engineers/construction managers/land surveyors, and publication of legal notices. OMB said the current concessions law is too rigid because it requires award to the highest responsible bidder and does not fit newer concession models, and it suggested a best-value approach, a higher threshold, and standardized templates. On architect/engineering pre-qualification, OMB said the law is fragmented across several statutes and should be consolidated and expanded for broader use. On legal notices, OMB described the current rate-setting and publication process, noted rising costs and shrinking newspaper availability, and proposed a collaborative effort to modernize notice delivery, improve accessibility, and explore online options. The task force discussed how to move these ideas forward, and a motion passed directing OMB to implement its suggestions and report back at the next meeting. The University of North Dakota then presented several proposed revisions focused on public buildings and procurement. UND recommended raising the threshold for treating routine maintenance and one-for-one replacements as construction, arguing that the current $250,000 threshold forces unnecessary architect/engineer involvement and adds cost. It also proposed changes to bid advertisement language to reflect electronic bidding, revisions to construction manager-at-risk selection criteria, changes to architect/engineer procurement criteria, a higher direct-hire threshold for design services, and an increase in the legislative approval threshold for privately funded projects. Members discussed the need for data, risk and complexity considerations, and collaboration with counsel and industry groups. A motion passed directing Levi and counsel to work with UND on bill drafts based on its proposals for a future meeting. DPI followed with a shorter presentation on credentialing and statutory cleanup. It suggested reviewing the department’s 23 credential categories for relevance, and said DPI and the Education Standards and Practices Board have discussed transferring some credentialing authority to ESPB. DPI also recommended removing outdated school safety patrol language, cleaning up waiver provisions, and updating dyslexia screening reporting requirements so districts are not burdened by obsolete reporting mandates. Members agreed the screening itself should remain in place, while the reporting requirement could be reconsidered. The committee then recessed until the afternoon session.

Transcript Highlights:

• About 28% of the agency request is from dedicated funds.
• I've lost officers to Shoshone County, to Blaine County, to Canyon County.
• They’re still a force multiplier for that county.
• Counties, county sheriffs, city police—I believe Meridian does their own thing.
• The colonel explains why agencies that run their own academies bear different costs than agencies sending

Summary: The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee reviewed the Idaho State Police budget, including the Division of Idaho State Police, POST Academy, and the Brand Inspection Division. Legislative analyst Noah Peterson outlined funding sources, staffing levels, recent budget enhancements, and the fiscal year 2027 requests. For the state police division, the main new request was a $12.6 million commissioned officer pay plan tied to a proposed increase in the vehicle registration “project choice” fee from $3 to $12, along with a $500,000 federal grant increase for commercial vehicle safety, a $551,500 mobile live-scan pilot, and $3.2 million in replacement items. Peterson and Colonel Gardner explained that the pay plan is intended to make ISP compensation more competitive and to fund base pay in a way that allows future CEC increases to apply to the full salary rather than only part of it. Colonel Gardner gave extensive testimony on staffing shortages, vacancy patterns in districts such as Lewiston and Idaho Falls, and the difficulty of retaining trained troopers after three to five years when other agencies offer higher pay. He said the agency is using overtime, reduced travel, and strategic deployment to cover gaps, but warned that vacancies are affecting public safety and that the proposed pay plan is needed to stabilize staffing. Committee members questioned the size of the fee increase, the sustainability of the plan, and the effect on trooper pay. Gardner said the request was based on what is needed to sustain the plan for about 10 years and emphasized that commissioned officers and troopers are the same group in this context. The committee also heard that a trooper injured in a fentanyl seizure the day before was receiving medical evaluation, and members expressed support for ISP personnel. The committee then reviewed POST, where Peterson said the academy has 31 FTP and no ongoing fiscal year 2027 enhancement requests beyond $324,100 for replacement items. Administrator Brad Johnson explained that POST’s basic academy costs about $10,700 per student for a 14-week course, while ISP’s internal trooper training and first-year costs are much higher because they include equipment, wages, room and board, and other expenses. He said students sign a two-year repayment agreement if they leave the profession after training. Members asked about agency-run academies, college programs, and whether the training model could be extended, and Johnson said POST remains the only accredited academy in Idaho and has received top national accreditation scores. Finally, the Brand Inspection Division budget was reviewed. Peterson said the division is funded by the State Brand Board Fund and has no new ongoing requests for fiscal year 2027, only $288,100 in replacement items, including six trucks and computer equipment. Brand Inspector Cody Burlisle said most inspectors are POST-certified and perform both regulatory inspections and law-enforcement duties. Committee members praised the division for keeping vehicles in service for high mileage and for helping livestock producers during gathers and inspections. The meeting ended with instructions for members to attend work groups and a reminder that votes on transfers, rescissions, and reductions would occur later in the week, followed by adjournment until the next morning.