Transcript Highlights:

• This bill establishes lock appropriations and increases fiscal flexibility for, uh, establishes a budget
• Authorizes limited procurement and fiscal exemptions and implements performance-based funding metrics
• Requires annual fiscal and performance reporting to the Legislature and provides a transition framework
• operational and fiscal flexibility that this<00:14:30.160> bill<00:14:30.399> creates<
• requirements their transparency requirements their transparency provisions<00:18:23.039> allowed

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Higher Education met on February 18, 2026, and heard four bills. HB 2519 would shift University of Hawaii funding toward block appropriations, a stabilization fund, limited procurement and fiscal exemptions, performance-based metrics, and annual reporting. UH supported the bill, saying line-item budgeting hampers systemwide efficiency across its 10 campuses; the State Procurement Office commented on the procurement exemption. The chair proposed amendments to address concerns from Budget and Finance and procurement, including capping UH’s retained funds at 10%, requiring lapse after three fiscal years, removing CIP-to-operating transfers, narrowing procurement exemptions while keeping Chapter 103B principles, shifting performance metric-setting to the Board of Regents, and requiring annual reporting. The committee then voted to pass HB 2519 with amendments. HB 2409 would establish the Hawaii Geological Survey in Hilo and designate its director as the state geologist. UH Hilo supported the concept but said it would need sufficient general-fund support, estimating roughly $200,000 to start. DLNR and the Attorney General offered comments, with the AG calling it a matter of statewide concern. The chair said the DNR testimony raised public safety concerns and that UH Hilo had not identified a firm funding amount, so the committee voted to defer the bill. HB 2141 HD1 concerned state enterprise zones and would expand eligible business activities and allow DBED to designate up to two areas as enterprise zones with gubernatorial approval. DBED, the Tax Foundation, and other organizations submitted support or comments. After discussion, the chair said the current version no longer fit the higher education committee’s focus and recommended reverting to the original bill, which would limit the zone to Kakaʻako Makai for a biomedical health innovation hub near JABSOM and the Queen’s Cancer Center, with a defective date. The committee voted to pass HB 2141 HD1 with amendments. HB 2233 HD1 would appropriate funds to continue the SNAP-Ed program through UH and the Department of Health. DOH supported the bill and said it had been working on nutrition education and environmental changes; it estimated about $600,000 each for DOH and SEAR, or $1.2 million total. Testimony in support also came from several organizations and individuals, including a senior advocate who described the program’s practical benefits. The chair said the committee would reflect the $600,000-per-entity estimate in its report, and the committee voted to pass HB 2233 HD1 as is before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Transparency in county spending benefits everyone.
• Transparency in county spending benefits everyone.
• Transparency in county spending benefits everyone.
• The County of Alameda is fiscally responsible and sound.
• And again, it's just transparency.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Local Government met to hear a long agenda of local government, housing, labor, and transparency bills. The committee first adopted the consent calendar for SB 1187 and SB 1388, then heard SB 983, which would authorize the Port of San Diego to use job order contracting for repairs and repetitive maintenance work. Supporters said the bill would speed emergency and small repairs and reduce costs, while opponents raised concerns about construction definitions and project labor agreement language. The bill was ultimately moved forward on a 2-2 vote after discussion of amendments and labor negotiations, and later the committee’s final roll call showed it passing out on a 5-2 vote. The committee also heard SB 1256, aimed at limiting duplicative litigation over a San Diego County housing project, and SB 992, which would make permanent and expand a small special-district audit flexibility by raising the revenue threshold from $150,000 to $250,000. SB 1256 drew support from the author and project counsel, who argued the project had already been litigated and was delaying needed housing, while opponents said the bill would interfere with wildfire and subdivision-map review. SB 992 had support from county auditors and special districts, with no opposition, and was approved 5-0. SB 1115, addressing governance failures at the Tulare County Public Cemetery District by allowing county supervisors to remove an individual trustee for cause, also passed unanimously after testimony describing serious dysfunction and opposition from the California Special Districts Association. The committee then took up SB 1193, which would impose transparency and approval requirements on Alameda County discretionary funding to nonprofits and other entities. The author and supporters described the bill as a response to grand jury findings and alleged conflicts of interest, while Alameda County argued its current process is already transparent and that the bill would add burdens and could harm services. After amendments and discussion, the bill passed 5-0. SB 1383, a density bonus law bill clarifying that local labor standards cannot be waived through density bonus concessions, was supported by labor groups and moved forward despite no opposition, with the final roll call showing it passing out 5-1. SB 1361, intended to prevent local governments from undermining transit projects because of SB 79 density concerns, also passed after support from L.A. Metro and labor and no formal opposition, with the final vote recorded as 5-2. The committee later resumed to hear SB 1272, the CASH Act, which would limit certain sanctions on homeowners for prior unpermitted work by previous owners; the transcript cuts off before that bill’s full testimony and vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• Transparency and county spending benefits everyone.
• The County of Alameda is fiscally responsible and sound.
• The Board of Supervisors fiscal management reward program.
• And that's what the fiscal management reward program is. That's correct.
• Transparency. I think there's got to be a healthy balance of the two.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Local Government met with a quorum and first approved the consent calendar, including SB 1187 and SB 1388. The committee then heard SB 983, which would authorize the Port of San Diego to use job order contracting for smaller repair and maintenance work; supporters said it would speed up routine repairs and reduce costs, while opponents raised concerns about construction language and project labor agreement effects. The bill was moved to the floor but initially remained on call after a split vote, along with several other measures heard later in the day. The committee also heard SB 1256, aimed at limiting repeated litigation against a San Diego County housing project, with supporters arguing it would curb duplicative lawsuits and opponents warning it could weaken wildfire safety review. SB 992, which would make permanent and expand a financial oversight option for very small special districts, drew support from county auditors and special districts and passed unanimously. SB 1115, addressing governance failures at the Tulare County Public Cemetery District by allowing supervisors to remove individual trustees under specified conditions, also passed unanimously after testimony about district dysfunction and insurance concerns. Later, the committee considered SB 1193, which would impose transparency requirements on Alameda County discretionary funding; supporters said it would add guardrails against conflicts of interest, while the county argued its current process is already transparent and the bill is overly restrictive. SB 1383, clarifying that local labor standards cannot be waived through density bonus concessions, passed on a divided vote after labor groups supported it and no opposition testified. SB 1361, intended to prevent local governments from undermining transit projects to avoid SB 79 housing requirements, also passed on a split vote. Finally, SB 1272, the CASH Act, would give homeowners more time to cure certain non-safety code violations; county and code enforcement groups opposed the introduced version but said they were working on amendments, and the bill passed unanimously as amended. The committee adjourned after reporting several bills out, with some measures remaining on call until later votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• for sound fiscal for sound fiscal policy<00:09:38.160> and<00:09:38.320> budget<00
• > and to update fiscal year fiscal years and to update fiscal year fiscal years and such<00:10:22.320
• <00:10:49.120> communication think are a transparent communication think are a transparent
• Do, myself on behalf of Senate Fiscal, and Emily Adrians on behalf of House Fiscal.
• of fiscal provisions.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Finance Committee met for its first 2025 meeting, with co-chairs Senator Marty and Senator Pratt opening the session and members and staff introducing themselves. No bills were heard; the meeting was focused on orientation and on reviewing the committee’s budget rules for the new biennium. Committee members and staff from both caucuses, Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB), and legislative fiscal offices were introduced before the presentation began. MMB fiscal staff Brian D. and committee fiscal staff explained that budget rules are a nonbinding agreement between MMB and House and Senate fiscal staff that guides how fiscal proposals are tracked and understood. They reviewed the history of the rules, noting that the current document reflects the most substantial update since the rules were first adopted in the early 2000s, and that the 2025 version was reorganized into eight sections after extensive interim work by House, Senate, and MMB staff. The presenters emphasized that the rules are updated annually, are intended to promote consistent fiscal tracking and transparent communication, and are used as guidance for budget bills rather than as law. The presentation highlighted several substantive rule areas: general tracking rules and comparison points for budget documents; appropriation drafting guidance; treatment of transfers, revenues, and inflation; planning estimates and “budget tails”; and rules for extending, canceling, or reappropriating existing appropriations. Staff also described new or revised provisions, including guidance on understanding current-law changes, using Department of Revenue estimates for tax revenue, and treating inflation in the forecast as a general pressure estimate rather than appropriated dollars. The committee was asked to review the updated rules, but no vote or formal action was taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:05.920> It transparent with their residents. It transparent with their residents.
• proper transparency. proper transparency.
• the terms, then that's all transparent. the terms, then that's all transparent.
• the end of fiscal year '27. the end of fiscal year '27.
• fiscal year '27. fiscal year '27.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have the HAP fiscal dashboard where you can check on any grantee.
• and it will have round five and spend down in fiscal year of 26.
• and it will have round five and spend down in fiscal year of 26.
• Again, California's mayors welcome transparency and accountability.
• So when we ask people how what I'll call our fiscal reporting system.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on California’s homelessness funding, focusing on the Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention (HAP) Grant and the Encampment Resolution Grant Program. HCD described new accountability requirements, including regional action plans, stronger reporting and expenditure conditions, housing-element compliance, encampment response plans, and public dashboards that track fiscal spending, service outcomes, and encampment resolution status. Officials said the goal is to use the data to identify underperforming grantees, provide technical assistance, and, if needed, withhold or reallocate funds. Local officials from San Diego, Fresno, and Santa Cruz said the programs have helped expand shelter, outreach, and permanent housing, and that state dollars have leveraged local and federal resources. Mayor Todd Gloria said San Diego has used HAP to expand shelter and safe sleeping options, reduce downtown encampments, and increase housing production, but argued the state’s new accountability website is too high-level and does not fully reflect countywide conditions, behavioral health outcomes, or the role of continuum-of-care partners. Fresno officials said HAP and other state funds helped the city add shelter beds and reduce homelessness, while Santa Cruz emphasized that state funding helped build local coordination and draw in federal vouchers. Members pressed the panel on whether HAP is actually reducing homelessness, what the best success metrics should be, and whether the state is getting full, usable data from grantees and subcontractors. Several members asked for more granular jurisdiction-level reporting, better tracking of nonprofit spending, and clearer measures beyond point-in-time counts and “people served.” HCD said it is still improving HMIS participation and data quality, but can already show outcomes such as exits to permanent housing and returns to homelessness. The hearing ended with broad agreement that transparency is important, but disagreement remained over the best measures of success and how much emphasis should be placed on housing, prevention, shelter, and treatment.

Transcript Highlights:

• and Fiscal Sustainability.
• year, fiscal year 25.
• This also shows the most recently closed fiscal year, fiscal year 25.
• fiscal year.
• fund appropriations for fiscal 27, 28.

Summary: The committee held its first meeting, with co-chairs and members introducing themselves and staff outlining the committee’s statutory mandate under the 2025-27 supplemental operating budget. Staff explained that the Joint Legislative-Executive Committee on Budget Transparency and Fiscal Sustainability will receive technical assistance from a nonpartisan organization, with work split into two phases: first on revenue growth, spending assumptions, and cost drivers in the four-year outlook, and later on staffing, overhead, performance management, and public reporting. Members broadly said they hoped the committee would build a shared factual understanding of the state’s fiscal situation, structural deficits, and budget processes, and identify a sustainable path forward for the operating budget. Staff then gave a detailed presentation on operating budget basics. They reviewed the size and composition of the operating budget, noting that most spending is concentrated in grants/client services and salaries/benefits, with K-12, DSHS, HCA, DCYF, DOC, and higher education making up most NGFO spending. They explained the distinction between constitutional, federal, statutory, and discretionary spending, using examples such as K-12, Medicaid, collective bargaining agreements, court-driven obligations like McCleary and Trueblood, and one-time appropriations. They also walked through how the state uses incremental budgeting, carry-forward and maintenance-level calculations, caseload and per-capita forecasting, and the four-year balanced budget outlook, including reserve calculations and the budget stabilization account. Members asked extensive questions about what is and is not included in the outlook, especially future collective bargaining agreements, health care and compensation growth, tort and other liabilities, and whether the state could better distinguish mandatory from discretionary spending. Staff explained that current CBAs and other already-enacted obligations are included, but future CBAs are not; some liabilities are reflected as expenditures when appropriated, while broader long-term liabilities are not fully captured in the outlook because they depend on future policy choices. Staff also noted that the legislature and ERFC can adopt assumptions such as reversions and growth factors, and that an outlook accuracy report is produced every five years to compare projected and actual maintenance-level spending. The committee agreed to follow up on some of the more complex liability and assumption questions. After a short break, Josh Goodman of the Pew Charitable Trusts began a presentation on Pew’s role and approach to state fiscal sustainability. He described Pew as a nonpartisan organization with long-standing state fiscal research, emphasizing its 50-state comparative data, interviews with state officials and experts, and focus on long-term sustainability, reserve policies, and recession preparedness. The presentation was ongoing when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'm just kind of off the cuff, but because I'm the CBO on the fiscal side, we do have fiscal indicators
• I understand that the fiscal part along those lines.
• I understand that the fiscal part along those lines.
• Coherence is impossible without fiscal predictability.
• So true fiscal coherence means disability outcomes are visible in goals, measurable in metrics, and transparent

Summary: The joint hearing focused on coherence in California’s education planning and reporting systems, especially the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) and related grant plans. Committee chairs and members described widespread frustration with duplicative, lengthy, and sometimes conflicting reporting requirements, while emphasizing that the goal was not to reduce accountability but to make planning more useful, stable, and student-centered. State Superintendent Tony Thurmond also previewed the Governor’s education budget priorities, including expanded learning, community schools, universal transitional kindergarten, literacy supports, and concerns about the proposed Prop. 98 deferral. Panelists from the State Board of Education, Fresno County Superintendent of Schools, and the Legislative Analyst’s Office said the LCAP was intended to balance local flexibility with statewide transparency, but has become overloaded by repeated revisions and additional requirements. They argued for fewer core reporting elements, more stability over time, better alignment of planning cycles, and integrated systems that reduce duplication. Fresno County staff described a multi-year calendar and support tools that help districts manage timelines, but said these tools only ease the burden rather than solve the underlying problem. The LAO noted that some newer plans, such as expanded learning and transportation plans, are narrative-heavy and often less informative than separate reporting requirements. Local district leaders and county officials described the practical effects of the current system: staff time diverted from instruction, multiple portals and forms, audit risk aversion, and planning documents that can exceed 100 pages. Several superintendents said coherent systems work best when districts have clear priorities, stable governance, and aligned budgets, and when state requirements are predictable and tied to outcomes like literacy, attendance, and student achievement. The California Federation of Teachers added that coherence also depends on meaningful collaboration with educators, classified staff, parents, and communities. Committee members repeatedly asked whether the state should streamline reporting, create a uniform portal, or develop a more unified grant-reporting structure, and Thurmond said the department was piloting a simplified common form and was willing to work with the Legislature and districts on broader solutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• But despite these efforts, fiscal challenges persist.
• So I know this is a bill to improve transparency.
• I know we involved other agencies for that transparency. Mike was a deputy coroner.
• I know we involved other agencies for that transparency. Yes.
• And when it comes to the fiscal, larger fiscal issue, this is an ongoing human and legal cost of repeated

Keywords: 988, house, all

Bills: SB1265, SB1198, SB2046, SB1415, SB1714, SB1962, SB26, SB172, SB260, SB264, SB1525, SB1332, SB1998, SB1378, SB1771, SB1919, SB2018, SB1936, SB1612, SB1543, SB1260, SB1988, SB1859, SB2041, SB1257, SB1726, SB1236, SB1633, SB1413, SB1317, SB1360, SB1342, SB1477, SB1189, SB1546, SB1524, SB1338, SB1193, SB1812, SB1617, SB1638, SB504, SB2072, SB1283, SB1216, SB1655, SB2011, SB1643, SB1446, SB1256, SB1258, SB1441, SB1224, SB1448, SB1496, SB1597, SB1621, SB1827, SB2066, SB2104

Keywords: healthcare authority, property lien, county treasury, local government, Oklahoma, municipalities, campsite regulation, Department of Environmental Quality, unauthorized camps, public safety, environmental standards, nondisclosure agreements, state employment, employee rights, transparency, government accountability, employee suggestions, cost savings, state agencies, incentives

Transcript Highlights:

• Those sure sound like fiscal implications to me. Is a fiscal note been completed for the bill?
• Those sure sound like fiscal implications to me. Is a fiscal note been completed for the bill?
• Well, fiscal notes usually are requested when we need to assess the fiscal impact of a bill, and I do
• Well, fiscal notes usually are requested when we need to assess the fiscal impact of a bill, and I do
• > it the uh fiscal fiscal components in it the uh fiscal fiscal components in it allow<00:04:21.280

Bills: HF550

Keywords: redistricting, Bipartisan Commission, Minnesota Constitution, census, legislative districts, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:42:13.560> and maximum transparency and maximum transparency and efficiency<00:42:15.359
• and non-fiscal matters.
• would create a more transparent would create a more transparent accountable<01:05:56.079> and
• including the adoption of transparency including the adoption of fiscal<01:06:06.520> notes<01
• <01:06:17.960> and<01:06:18.119> non-fiscal between fiscal and non-fiscal between fiscal

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House convened, completed roll call with 48 members present and three excused, deferred reading of the journal, and received Senate communications noting adoption of House Concurrent Resolutions Nos. 1 and 2. The chamber also recognized several visiting groups and guests, including Congresswoman Jill Tuda, Chamber of Commerce Hawaii participants and students, Okinawan visitors, Farrington High School students, James Campbell High School students, and Waiau High School students, many of whom were introduced in connection with Chamber Week activities and educational presentations. The main business was unfinished business on House Resolutions 6 and 7, which adopted the House rules for the 33rd Legislature, including rules for the Committee on Standards of Conduct. Members generally supported the rules package as a transparency and modernization update, citing earlier public access to testimony, a public list of Speaker appointees, changes to conference committee eligibility, telework for staff, social media guidance, and a public list of bills introduced by request. Several members raised reservations or opposition, focusing on concerns about staff involvement in approving written remarks, budget information timing, the Vice Speaker’s role, social media/free speech issues, and whether some changes reduced public access or conflicted with constitutional open-meeting requirements. No vote on the rules package is recorded in the excerpt. The debate ended with multiple members yielding time and the discussion continuing on the merits of the proposed rule changes, especially the balance between transparency, internal House procedure, and public participation.

Transcript Highlights:

• The next theme is transparency.
• There's increased transparency on the side.
• James Malone, LCB Fiscal, for the record.
• year 2026 to fiscal year 2027.
• year 2026 would be reduced to $4 million in fiscal year 2026, but then an additional $5 million in fiscal

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• year we do not need to current fiscal year we do not need to current fiscal year we do not need to respend
• Get it into the next fiscal year so we Get it into the next fiscal year so we Get it into the next fiscal
• So you got to make sure that we're dealing in our fiscal sure that we're dealing in our fiscal sure that
• year it kicks in in the next fiscal year it kicks in in the next fiscal year versus this same fiscal
• year as the versus this same fiscal year as the versus this same fiscal year as the chairman stood here

Bills: SCR 13, SCR 24, SB 1, SB 12, SB 15, SB 17, SB 24, SB 57, SB 65, SB 213, SB 371, SB 372, SB 378, SB 379, SB 388, SB 400, SB 402, SB 427, SB 495, SB 499, SB 502, SB 509, SB 535, SB 583, SB 610, SB 621, SB 650, SB 706, SB 740, SB 840, SB 854, SB 856, SB 875, SB 893, SB 918, SB 925, SB 974, SB 995, SB 1006, SB 1018, SB 1025, SB 1061, SB 1073, SB 1106, SB 1121, SB 1194, SB 1252, SB 1253, SB 1268, SB 1300, SB 1343, SB 1362, SB 1447, SJR 36, SJR 12, SJR 57, SCR 25, SCR 22, SCR 12, SCR 24, SCR 8, SB 565, SB 372, SB 765, SB 62, SB 666, SB 707, SB 888, SB 687, SB 847, SB 1248, SB 740, SB 14, SB 1006, SB 504, SB 925, SB 1121, SB 995, SB 857, SB 305, SB 296, SB 284, SB 815, SB 1379, SB 1300, SB 1497, SB 1499, SB 1498, SB 1061, SB 65, SB 241, SB 304, SB 402, SB 499, SB 621, SB 974, SB 1023, SB 1024, SB 1025, SB 1106, SB 686, SB 112, SB 371, SB 204, SB 400, SB 609, SB 1447, SB 670, SB 502, SB 427, SB 850, SB 854, SB 413, SB 1555, SB 1362, SB 1346, SB 1033, SB 1220, SB 1073, SB 810, SB 987, SB 1539, SB 893, SB 447, SB 875, SB 406, SB 509, SB 985, SB 965, SB 1119, SB 1505, SB 24, SB 57, SB 1194, SB 1253, SB 1215, SB 1532, SB 1268, SB 1302, SB 856, SB 650, SB 583, SB 673, SB 840, SB 213, SB 681, SB 1172, SB 1252, SB 378, SB 610, SB 918, SB 1343, SB 608, SB 487, SB 955, SB 957, SB 988, SB 990, SB 1019, SB 1021, SB 1120, SB 251, SB 958, SB 535, SB 761, SB 1, SB 541, SB 315, SB 379, SB 1018, SB 1737, SB 266, SB 1415, SB 57, SB 499, SB 974, SB 1025, SB 1061, SB 1268, SR 302, SR 303, SR 304, SR 305, SB 30, SB 1333, SB 1666, SB 30, SB 1333, SB 1666

Keywords: water rights, treaty compliance, Rio Grande, agriculture, drought, international water, Texas water supply, Texas, Israel, trade, investment, partnership, economic ties, technological innovation, bilateral relations, appropriations, budget, state funding, education, healthcare

Transcript Highlights:

• THE FISCAL YEAR 24 25.
• FOR THE 25 26 FISCAL YEAR THAT TOTAL BASE BUDGET FOR HHS IS $46.8 BILLION.
• WHICH ALIGNS WITH MISSION OF QUALITY TRANSPARENCY AND QUALITY ASSURANCE.
• WHAT YOU WILL NOTICE IS THAT IN FISCAL AND THEN ALSO THE DENTAL CONTRACT.
• I LIKE TO SHOW THAT IS THE FISCAL LOOK AND THIS IS OUR FEEDBACK.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• fiscal year 2027 recommendation.
• is projected to be spent for fiscal year 2026, knowing that we are not quite at the end of fiscal year
• For fiscal year 2026, knowing that we are not quite at the end of fiscal year 2026.
• It's transparent.
• It's fiscally responsible.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate opened with the Pledge of Allegiance, adopted two commendatory resolutions honoring the Plimpton Historical Society’s Deborah Sampson Day recognition and Megan’s Light’s Cystic Fibrosis Awareness Month observance, and suspended Joint Rule 12 to refer several House petitions to committee. The chamber also briefly recognized Diane Talk of the South Shore Regional Emergency Communication Center on her retirement after 30 years of dispatch service. Later, the Senate passed two local bills to enactment: House No. 4006, authorizing Dartmouth to grant an additional all-alcoholic beverages license, and House No. 473, relating to the charter of Westwood. The main business was the Senate Ways and Means presentation of the fiscal year 2027 budget, totaling about $63.3 billion. The chair described the budget as balanced, with no new taxes or tax cuts, based on a consensus revenue estimate of $986 million in growth over FY26 (2.4%), and including about $15.8 billion in federal financial participation and roughly $2.7 billion from the Fair Share surtax. The budget emphasized record local aid, including $1.376 billion in unrestricted general government aid, $7.66 billion for Chapter 70 education aid, increased minimum school aid, higher regional school transportation reimbursement, rural aid, and the revival of the Foundation Budget Review Commission. It also highlighted major investments in MassEducate free community college, food security, housing, and support for vulnerable residents. Members then engaged in extended colloquy on the budget’s major cost drivers and policy choices. Questions focused on debt service, pension and OPEB liabilities, MassHealth caseload and rising per-enrollee costs, child care funding, and program integrity in DTA and other benefit programs. The chair said debt service would be about $2.67 billion, pension payments would be $5.1 billion, OPEB would receive a $150 million payment, and MassHealth enrollment was projected at about 2 million with costs driven by acuity and medical inflation. He also said the budget includes no collective bargaining agreements and no state tax changes. Senators supporting the budget praised its investments in education, local aid, homelessness prevention, public health, libraries, and housing, while minority leaders and others stressed the need for fiscal discipline, transparency, and further work on affordability and municipal support. The Senate also received a House message on House No. 5316, which the House had nonconcurred in, and a conference committee was appointed on the disagreement.

Transcript Highlights:

• of $... getting a fiscal note and um for now I'm getting a fiscal note and um for now I'm just<00:02
• as you can see we're going into fiscal as you can see we're going into fiscal year<00:03:35.760>
• So the fiscal note looks like this.
• This is a simple fiscal note.
• practices there's the transparency practices there's the transparency aspect<00:13:17.880> and

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee met for an introductory session focused on committee organization, staff roles, and an overview of the committee’s jurisdiction. Members and staff introduced themselves, and the chair explained that one member was absent due to a meeting with the governor. House fiscal staff member John Walls reviewed the committee’s budget spreadsheet and explained the agencies under the committee’s jurisdiction, including the Supreme Court, Board of Civil Legal Aid, Court of Appeals, district courts, Guardian ad Litem Board, Tax Court, Uniform Laws Commission, Board of Judicial Standards, Board of Public Defense, Human Rights Commission, Office of Appellate Counsel and Training, and the Competency Restoration Board. He also explained how fiscal notes work and how costs or revenue impacts are tracked for bills. Nathan Hopkins then described the committee’s broad civil law jurisdiction, covering areas such as property, torts, contracts, civil rights, consumer protection, employment, family law, remedies, statutes of limitations, damages, burdens of proof, due process, and attorney general enforcement. He also outlined the committee’s role in government data practices under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, emphasizing the distinction between transparency and privacy and noting that bills affecting Chapter 13 are often re-referred to this committee. Ben Johnson added that he handles appropriations and court-related policy provisions, with most budget drafting expected later in the session. A member asked about the Competency Restoration Board, and Johnson explained that it was created to address cases involving criminal defendants found incompetent to proceed, with the goal of coordinating placements and services to restore competency rather than serving as long-term civil commitment. The chair also noted the importance of privacy and technology issues, mentioning past bipartisan work on body cameras, license plate readers, and drones. The meeting ended with a brief announcement about a law school for legislators program and an invitation to attend upcoming Zoom sessions, after which the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• new fiscal year begins.
• It's just for good transparency.
• We also have to submit a bank transparency and accountability report, Proviso 117, to the State Fiscal
• The VR fiscal department remains committed to transparency, accountability, continuous improvement, and
• Honest, transparent answer.

Keywords: 977, all

Summary: The committee met to receive a detailed financial operations presentation from the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agency, with staff walking members through funding sources, budgeting, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and grants management. Sabrina Walker explained VR’s blended funding structure, including federal grants, state appropriations, program income, and interagency contracts, and emphasized that state funds are essential to meeting the federal match and maintenance-of-effort requirements. Members asked repeatedly about transparency, audit controls, and the risk that state cuts could reduce federal drawdowns; staff responded that all reports reconcile back to the SCEIS accounting system, are subject to state audits and internal reviews, and that even modest state reductions could significantly reduce total available funding. The committee also discussed pre-employment transition services for students with disabilities, with staff confirming services are offered through school districts, charters, and private schools, and that contracts are monitored for performance and compliance. The presentation then shifted to budgeting and internal controls. Walker described a zero-based departmental budgeting process, monthly monitoring reports, contingency reserves for unexpected expenses, and a formal annual cycle that culminates in board approval. Members asked about facilities tracking, culture, and how the agency maintains accountability; staff said facilities staff inspect buildings and equipment, supervisors justify line-item requests, and the process has become smoother over time as departments learned the system. Cynthia Johnson followed with an accounts receivable overview, describing invoicing, receipting, aging, customer verification, year-end reporting, and the use of cross-training, shared email inboxes, and spreadsheets as checks and balances. She also explained work training center billing, interdepartmental transfers, and the revolving fund used to issue consumer checks more quickly than standard vendor payments. Olivia Perez presented accounts payable operations, including invoice processing through SCEIS and OnBase, the three-way match, travel reimbursements, revolving fund checks, State Treasury Office interactions, and handling of reversals, rejections, and levy notices. She reported that AP processed 67,723 SCEIS payments, 13,670 case management system invoices, 3,379 travel reimbursements, and 15,693 revolving fund checks in fiscal year 2025, with only 70 payment rejections. The final portion of the meeting covered Grants and Funds Management, where Walker explained federal reporting, drawdowns, payroll allocation, asset tracking, lease and IT contract reviews, cost allocation, and closing packages. She noted upcoming system changes such as S/4HANA, Workiva, and SC Pro, but said the agency is receiving training and feedback opportunities. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the presentation portion beyond approval of the prior minutes and a brief recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• updated fiscal note. updated fiscal note.
• . transparency. transparency.
• federal fiscal year. federal fiscal year.
• So this has a fiscal effect in fiscal year 2029 only.
• in fiscal year 26-27. in fiscal year 26-27.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We have requested a second fiscal note.
• <00:14:48.320> note<00:14:48.600> was fiscal note on it that fiscal note was fiscal
• that we have requested a a second fiscal that we have requested a a second fiscal note<00:14:56.079
• excluded adults and the original fiscal excluded adults and the original fiscal Bill<00:15:03.920
• <00:31:51.679> help guidelines and transparency help guidelines and transparency help everyone

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 27, as amended by committee substitute, which would create a Kentucky Parkinson’s disease research registry. The sponsor said the substitute was developed with UK, U of L, the Michael J. Fox Foundation, and Parkinson’s in Motion to better define a movement disorder center, add Parkinson’s experts from both universities to the advisory committee, require automated reporting, and delay implementation until 2027. Testimony emphasized the need to track diagnoses and testing while protecting confidentiality and allowing people to opt out. The committee adopted the substitute and then voted unanimously to pass SB 27 with a favorable expression. The committee then heard Senate Bill 93, dealing with hearing aid coverage for children. A parent described the high cost of hearing aids for her son and the financial burden created by insurance limits, while a pediatric audiologist explained that early identification and treatment improve language outcomes and that families can spend about $30,000 on hearing aids from birth to age 18. The committee substitute removed adults from the bill and added an in-network requirement for pediatric audiologists, along with a replacement interval consistent with Medicaid guidelines and repair/loss coverage provisions. After questions about costs, replacement timing, and insurer practices, the committee voted unanimously to pass SB 93 with a favorable expression. Finally, the committee considered Senate Bill 153, a transparency and due-process bill concerning Medicaid prepayment review. The sponsor and witnesses from Addiction Recovery Care and Frontier Behavioral Health said prepayment reviews can be imposed with little notice or explanation, disrupt cash flow, and burden rural and smaller providers; they argued the bill would require clearer notice, reasons, and timelines without stopping legitimate reviews. Members asked about managed care organizations, contract issues, and whether the bill would conflict with existing agreements, and the sponsor said it would not. After discussion and an explanation of vote from Senator Douglas, the committee voted to pass SB 153 with a favorable expression.