Transcript Highlights:

• We'll always have that conversation.
• If we are storing our firearms properly, we don't even have to have this second conversation.
• We don't even have to have this second conversation. Children just simply would not have access.
• What if I, as her mom, want to be able to have that conversation myself?
• This is not the conversations we're having.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee heard and voted on several education-related bills. Senate Bill 1422, which continues the Credit Enhancement Eligibility Board for 10 years to support the state’s credit enhancement program for charter school debt, received a due pass recommendation on an 8-1 vote. Senate Bill 1166, allowing county school superintendents to offer high school equivalency preparation through accommodation schools to 11th- and 12th-grade students age 16 and older, also passed 8-1 after testimony from county superintendents in support and one member opposing expansion to 11th grade. Senate Bill 1684, creating a private cause of action against public schools for failing to address known bullying that results in serious physical injury, drew the most opposition. The sponsor’s comments described it as a response to school inaction in bullying cases, including a referenced Chandler Unified student suicide. Opponents from the Arizona Trial Lawyers Association, Arizona Charter Schools Association, and Arizona Education Association argued the bill was constitutionally problematic, overly broad, lacked a definition of bullying, could expose schools to costly litigation, and could create liability for conduct outside school control. The committee held the bill without a vote. The committee also considered Senate Bill 1424, requiring annual age-appropriate firearm safety instruction in K-12 schools beginning in 2027-2028. Supporters said the bill teaches children to avoid touching firearms and alert an adult, while opponents argued it shifts responsibility from adults to children, should be handled by parents, and creates an unfunded mandate. The bill passed 6-5. Senate Bill 1475, barring students convicted of or admitting to specified serious offenses from participating in school-sponsored interscholastic activities, passed 6-5 after debate over juvenile rehabilitation, public safety, and the role of extracurriculars in helping students succeed. Senate Bill 1572, requiring Celebrate Freedom Week civics instruction, passed 6-5 amid debate over curriculum, age appropriateness, and whether it duplicated existing civics requirements. Senate Bill 1741, requiring districts and charters to allow release-time religious instruction and award credit under certain conditions, also passed 6-5 despite opposition from secular advocates who argued it undermines local control and promotes religion in public schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we are looking forward to ongoing conversations with the sponsors.
• I'm happy to have the conversation, but I don't think that Styrofoam...
• I'm happy to have the conversation, but I don't think that Styrofoam is the same.
• like to have a conversation on Styrofoam.
• And if we don't do this and allow for the conversation, what's a reasonable recommendation?

Summary: The Committee on Environment and Natural Resources met with a quorum present and considered a series of environmental, water, waste, boating, and land-use bills. SB 834 on recreational fishing vessel licenses was briefly explained as aligning licensure rules for freshwater and saltwater captains and was reported favorably. SB 1208 on service lateral assessment and rehabilitation would require periodic CCTV inspections, a seven-year assessment cycle, and a long-term public database for sewer laterals; county representatives opposed it over private-property and cost concerns, but the bill was reported favorably. SB 978 on advanced wastewater treatments, as amended, would require DEP reports and a long-term prioritization plan for upgrading large wastewater facilities to advanced treatment; the committee adopted the amendment and then reported the bill favorably. The committee then took up SB 1822 on auxiliary containers, which would preempt local regulation of certain packaging and define the term in statute. The sponsor argued it would reduce a patchwork of local rules and help businesses, while opponents from environmental groups, local advocates, and some local governments warned it would weaken plastic and foam restrictions, including in parks and coastal communities. Despite substantial opposition and several senators expressing concern, the bill was reported favorably. The committee also approved CS for SB 384 on notice for annexation of state-owned lands, after a technical amendment requiring written or email notice to legislative delegations, and reported it favorably. SB 1008 on waste incineration would bar new ash-producing incinerators or waste-to-energy facilities within a half-mile of residential, commercial, or school property. The sponsor said the bill was aimed at preventing another fire-related incident like the Doral plant and clarified it was intended to apply only to new facilities, not existing ones; waste-to-energy and county representatives opposed it as too restrictive, while several senators sought clarifying changes. The bill was reported favorably. The committee also adopted a substitute amendment to CS for SB 594 on port channel and turning basin buffer zones, reducing the proposed anchoring setback from 5,000 feet to 2,500 feet and allowing ports to create buffer zones after public hearings and rulemaking; the bill was then reported favorably. Finally, SB 830 on lost or abandoned property, aimed at streamlining removal of migrant vessels that pose navigational and environmental hazards, was reported favorably after brief support testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for having us here and for the opportunity to have this conversation.
• So we're going to be continuing to have those conversations.
• “It’s a fair conversation to have.
• “So it’s a fair conversation to have, but we need to be very careful that we also have the conversation
• conversation we should have with the Legislature.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on higher education funding, focusing on how Florida’s university system should be financed and whether a new funding model is needed. University system financial officers and Chancellor Ray Rodriguez discussed major cost drivers, including wages and benefits, utilities, maintenance, financial aid, research, and the effects of geography, institutional mission, and student mix. UF highlighted the cost of research and graduate programs; UCF and FAU pointed to growth, location, and cost of living; FAMU emphasized recruiting top-tier talent while relying on other revenue sources; and UNF noted the challenges of growth and long-term planning. Members also discussed the role of internal controls and audits in addressing excessive spending and questioned whether out-of-state tuition should be adjusted to help offset costs. On revenue sources beyond state appropriations and tuition, the panel described auxiliaries, restricted funds, capital projects, and component units such as foundations and health systems. Several universities noted that some revenues are restricted to specific purposes and cannot be used for general operations. FAMU explained that a large share of its capital project funding reflected active campus construction, while UF said its component-unit revenue is largely tied to UF Health. The Chancellor emphasized that the system’s low tuition and strong state support are central to Florida’s national standing, but also noted that some auxiliary revenues are pledged to debt and must be managed carefully. When discussing the current funding process, witnesses praised Florida’s performance-based funding model for aligning incentives with student success, transparency, and accountability. They also raised concerns about non-recurring appropriations, rising employee benefit costs, unfunded mandates, deferred maintenance, and the difficulty of multi-year planning. Suggestions for improvement included more recurring funding, better coverage of mandated costs, greater flexibility in fee-setting, and possible weighting for mission, geography, and institutional type. The Chancellor said the Board of Governors is considering a “version 3.0” of performance-based funding that would benchmark institutions against peers and Carnegie classifications, but any changes would require legislative action. On out-of-state tuition, most universities said they would prefer local board flexibility, while the Chancellor cautioned that increasing out-of-state enrollment or fees could affect future state support and should be balanced carefully.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we have had some initial conversations with OFM's demographer's office.
• Have you heard any of the conversation regarding that, any one of you?
• I wanted to kind of give our perspective on some of the conversations.
• Having these conversations is to try to stop that divergence or reduce it as much as possible.
• So I look forward to continuing conversations. I don't see any other questions.

Summary: The committee held a work session on local government issues, beginning with an update from the State Building Code Council on four legislatively mandated code amendments now in CR-102 rulemaking: temporary emergency shelters, reduced minimum dwelling unit size, multiplex housing up to three stories and six units, and single-exit apartment buildings up to six stories. Council staff also described a separate embodied-carbon appendix proposal that remains under public review, with testimony both supporting and opposing it. Members asked about the rationale for some of the code limits, including the restriction on connecting multiplex buildings. The committee then heard a panel on annexations from MRSC, Pierce County, and the Association of Washington Cities. Witnesses reviewed annexation methods, including petition, election, and interlocal agreement approaches, and said larger annexations are increasingly using interlocal agreements because they can address infrastructure, revenue sharing, and public process concerns. They described barriers such as inconsistent local standards, the cost of infrastructure, referendum risk, census requirements, and the difficulty of persuading residents and local officials to support annexation. Members asked about the five-year restriction on residential zoning changes in one annexation method and whether a hearing examiner could reduce political pressure on local decision-makers. A second panel discussed subdivision reform. The Master Builders Association urged raising the short-plat threshold within urban growth areas to 30 lots as a simpler first step, citing permitting delays and added housing costs. The City of Spokane described implementation problems with recent housing laws, including uncertainty about how to review plats under HB 1110, lot-splitting administration, and added notice requirements for unit lot subdivisions. AWC said there was broad agreement that subdivision decisions should be more administrative, but public hearings remained a point of disagreement. The committee also heard from FutureWise, the Washington State Association of Counties, and Lewis County on county development regulation and enforcement, with witnesses emphasizing underfunded code enforcement, inconsistent standards between counties and cities, and the need for better coordination, incentives, and possibly stronger enforcement tools. No votes were taken; the chair said the committee would continue working on possible solutions in future sessions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Everybody else, if you would, make your way to the back with your conversations in the back, or audience
• "And state general revenue being tight, and I appreciate those conversations.
• Yeah, I would appreciate having that conversation and understanding a little bit more.
• Okay, I'll just, I'll get an offline conversation with you. Okay, all right, thank you.
• We will have to have a conversation, as I've said, Now, at this time that I had to get moved over.

Summary: The PEER Review Subcommittee met to consider a large agenda of budget, appropriation, transfer, and contract items. Members approved temporary appropriation requests for several agencies, including the Auditor of State, Department of Education, and Labor and Licensing; ARPA return requests from Workforce Services; Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act requests for State Police and Agriculture; restricted reserve transfers for teacher scholarships, school facilities, and economic stimulus; a Commerce reallocation of positions and spending authority; cash fund, budget classification, overtime, and pay plan requests; and 17 methods of finance items for universities and other agencies. Most items were approved without objection after brief explanations from staff and agencies. Several items drew questions and were held or discussed further. A Department of Human Services discretionary grant package for the RSVP program was held over after Senator Irvin raised concerns about whether the grants were an effective use of state general revenue and asked for more information on administration costs and program operations. In the contracts section, Representative Richardson questioned a DHS sole-source contract with EMS Link for document management software and a DHS contract with Presidio; the EMS Link item was held for additional answers, while the Presidio item was clarified as not sole-source and was allowed to proceed. Members also asked for more information on a Department of Education mental health referral contract with Care Solace, which officials said is a statewide concierge/referral service connecting students to Arkansas providers and telehealth options. The committee also reviewed monthly reports, including the Medicaid Trust Fund. DHS and DFA officials said the fund was currently sufficient to finish the fiscal year, though it was being drawn down and would likely require a $100 million transfer from restricted reserves in FY27, with another $100 million set aside in the governor’s budget as a backstop. Members discussed the need to define a minimum reserve level and to better account for ongoing Medicaid costs in the budget. The meeting ended with no further business and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I would be happy to talk, to have a conversation with Access because we've been working on it for
• So we do want to continue to participate in those conversations. We recognize that money is tight.
• We'd love to participate in those box conversations. I'm happy to answer any questions, Mr.
• i'd love to be invited but we would like to be part of that conversation to see if there is a way if
• the concept we understand it's going in the box we'd love to participate in those box conversations

Bills: SB1112, SB1517, SB1537, SB1584, SB1673, SB1776

Keywords: mental health, hearings, acquaintance witnesses, patient rights, treatment evaluation, barbering, cosmetology, appropriation, funding, licensing, board operations, peace officer, training, public safety, traffic offenses, judicial system, corrections, recruitment, state budget, crime victims

Summary: The Appropriations Committee met on March 25 for what was described as its last regular meeting, with a possible special meeting tentatively planned for the following Tuesday. The committee first took up Senate Bill 1112, as amended by a strike-everything amendment that would appropriate $1 million from the Special Services Fund in FY2027 to the Arizona Department of Corrections for holistic, studio-based rehabilitative programming, with a required report due by June 30, 2028 on spending and outcomes such as self-harm, discipline, and recidivism. Testimony from the founder of Art of Our Soul and a formerly incarcerated peer facilitator emphasized trauma-informed art and music therapy, reductions in disciplinary violations and self-harm, and benefits for both incarcerated people and staff. The committee adopted the amendment and then gave SB 1112 a do-pass recommendation. The committee then heard Senate Bill 1776, which would allow urban Indian organizations to provide traditional healing services reimbursable through AHCCCS or the Arizona Long-Term Care System. The sponsor said the bill was intended to align Arizona with federal approval and other states’ models. AHCCCS testified neutral but said the bill would require a waiver change, likely at standard FMAP rather than 100%, and estimated a $1.3 million general fund impact; the chair said a COW amendment and fiscal note were needed. Members raised concerns about cost and access, and the sponsor clarified the bill was meant for American Indians and family members served through IHS-related facilities. The committee ultimately passed the bill out with a do-pass recommendation, though several members voted no or present over funding concerns. Senate Bill 1537, which would rename the Peace Officer Training Equipment Fund as the Public Safety De-escalation and Life Safety Fund and repeal an inactive advisory commission, failed after testimony from a legislative liaison explaining the fund’s history and use for equipment and de-escalation tools. Some members supported the cleanup, but others objected after the Arizona Police Association opposed the change and argued the commission should be reformed rather than repealed. The committee then considered Senate Bill 1584, as amended, which would provide $1 million for Department of Corrections recruitment and training, funded instead from the Peace Officer Training Equipment Fund. Testimony supported the need to address DOC staffing shortages, but some members objected that the fund was restricted to peace officer equipment; the committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill out. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 1673, which would fund the law enforcement crime victim notification system. A chair amendment shifted the source from the general fund to the victim compensation fund and reduced the amount to about $2.5 million. Testimony from the Arizona Sheriffs Association, a vendor, and the City of Phoenix described the notification system as constitutionally required, widely used, and important for victim safety and communication, but several members argued the amendment would take money from victim compensation and “rob Peter to pay Paul.” The committee adopted the amendment and then gave SB 1673, as amended, a do-pass recommendation. The chair closed by noting the committee was adjourned and that a special meeting might be posted for the following week.

Transcript Highlights:

• John Lapel: And miscarriage - it's fascinating, the conversation, because we do it every day now with
• John Lapel: We had a formal conversation about me and how I tend to answer questions, and most of this
• And that conversation prompted a whole series of additional conversations and also actions enhancing
• The data you mentioned, we would appreciate those continued conversations with you.
• I'd be happy to have further conversations. Secretary Hatch, are there any other questions?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Members, please take your conversations to the aisles or the retiring room. >> Thank you, Madam Speaker
• Members, please take your conversations Members, please take your conversations to<00:01:21.280>
• And a delay can only tell Minnesotans one thing. fullthroated conversation around things fullthroated
• conversation around things that<00:02:18.319> are<00:02:18.480> gerine<00:02:18.959>
• that we're having this conversation that we're having this conversation because<00:18:27.840>

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The House considered a motion by Representative Nash to recall Senate File 856 from the Committee on State Government, Finance, and Policy and re-refer it to Judiciary, Finance, and Civil Law. Nash argued the bill, which concerns creating or empowering an inspector general to address fraud, had already received two hearings and should move quickly because time was limited. Supporters of the motion said the bill needed further work on constitutional and data-practices issues in Judiciary, and that holding it in State Government would delay or effectively kill it. Opponents of the motion, led by Representative Cleorne, argued the bill should remain in State Government because that committee was the proper place to address constitutional concerns and other substantive changes. Cleorne said the committee had already considered a delete-everything amendment and nine amendments, with only two adopted, and maintained the bill as amended raised separation-of-powers concerns. Other members said the bill had bipartisan support in the Senate, passed 60-7, and that further negotiations should happen in a working group rather than through floor maneuvering. The debate focused heavily on whether the bill’s structure for selecting an inspector general was constitutional and whether the motion was an attempt to speed the bill along or to block it. Representative Norris said nonpartisan staff, the legislative auditor, and Senate and House authors had all indicated the bill needed fixes to be constitutional. After a roll call vote, the motion failed 67-66, so Senate File 856 remained in the Committee on State Government, Finance, and Policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I'll use the specific number in terms of this conversation about surcharges.
• And I'll use the specific number in terms of this conversation about surcharges.
• You know, we'll have conversations with Caltrans at some point. I get the fiber and the in-ground.
• I would love to maybe have a sit-down conversation to kind of talk about these things more broadly.
• There are good models that exist as it relates to this conversation about affordability.

Summary: The Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee held an informational hearing on the state of broadband affordability in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the committee was examining how broadband prices, access, and affordability are affecting households, especially after the end of the federal Affordable Connectivity Program and amid concerns about federal resistance to state broadband regulation. She noted the committee’s continued interest in policy options for 2026 and referenced prior legislation, including AB 353, that would have required affordable home internet as a condition of doing business in California. Industry witnesses from U.S. Telecom and CTIA argued that broadband and wireless prices have generally fallen in real terms even as inflation and other household costs have risen, citing competition, infrastructure investment, and faster speeds as the main drivers. They said California’s higher costs are tied to permitting delays, taxes, copper theft, and legacy obligations such as COLR requirements, and they urged the Legislature to preserve market incentives, reduce fees and regulatory burdens, and support infrastructure deployment. They also discussed fixed wireless access, federal BEAD funding, and Universal Service Fund reform, arguing that more entities benefiting from networks, including tech platforms, should contribute to support programs. Consumer and public-interest witnesses presented a different view, saying California still has a serious affordability and adoption problem, especially for low-income households. Sunny McPhee of the California Emerging Technology Fund said broadband adoption has improved dramatically over time, but about 500,000 households remain offline or underconnected and many low-income households still pay above the FCC affordability benchmark. Ernesto Falcon of the CPUC Public Advocates Office said California’s market is losing its competitive edge, with prices higher than in other states and meaningful price pressure coming mainly from fiber competition at the gigabit tier. He said roughly 4.8 million Californians are limited to one gigabit option and estimated that more competition could save consumers more than $1 billion annually. Both witnesses emphasized the need for stronger transparency, targeted subsidies, and a permanent affordability solution, including extending and refining the CPUC broadband Lifeline pilot and advancing SB 716. Public commenters, including representatives from cable providers, nonprofits, and digital equity organizations, largely supported SB 716 and a permanent broadband affordability program. Several urged the committee to remove a cap on the Lifeline program, expand the CPUC pilot, and invest in digital navigators, outreach, and enrollment assistance. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, after the chair thanked the witnesses and public commenters for their testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, longer conversations here. I just wanted to clarify the cost, is actually higher.
• I would appreciate a follow-up conversation even in the first few days of session.
• I can I would appreciate a follow-up conversation even in the first few days of session.
• I appreciate the conversation this morning.
• So I've been having those conversations and starting those conversations.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And so there are good actors in this conversation. Thank you.
• without a conversation on that.
• without a conversation on that.
• The conversation continues, as you can see; this ignited quite a bit of interest.
• I do encourage that, and we will continue the conversation.

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2026 session and took up impact fees, with an opening overview from Eric Poole of the Florida Association of Counties. Poole explained that impact fees are one-time charges on new development used only for new infrastructure capacity, not existing deficiencies or maintenance, and must satisfy the dual rational nexus test. He traced their history in Florida and described how comprehensive plans, concurrency, and later mobility fees relate to local infrastructure funding. He argued that impact fees are restricted, tied to capital improvements, and are one tool for paying for growth. Panelists representing counties, cities, builders, and community developers largely agreed that growth creates real infrastructure costs but differed on how those costs should be allocated. County and city representatives said impact fees are a necessary, targeted way to fund roads, water, sewer, fire, schools, and parks without spreading costs across all taxpayers. They pointed to long periods without fee updates, rising construction costs, and examples of large increases justified by studies. Builder and developer representatives argued that fees are often unpredictable, can be doubled or tripled, and contribute to housing affordability problems; they also said the system can be inconsistent across jurisdictions and may encourage sprawl. Several witnesses emphasized that fees must be transparent, proportional, and tied to actual benefits, and some suggested a statewide framework or mobility-fee model with more consistency and peer review. Members asked about how long local governments can hold fee revenue, whether fees can generate profit, what they can be spent on, and whether they can pay for police stations, fire stations, or other public safety facilities. Witnesses said the funds must be used for capital projects and cannot be used for salaries or unrelated purchases, and that refunds may be required if money is not spent within the local ordinance’s timeframe. The discussion also covered examples of local fee increases, the use of impact fees versus direct construction or “pipelining” of infrastructure, and concerns about level-of-service changes and extraordinary-circumstance increases. No votes were taken; the meeting ended after the panel discussion and member questions, with the chair noting the conversation would continue.

Transcript Highlights:

• So my question to you is, did you involve any of those conversations?
• This bill does not encourage open and honest conversations.
• The conversation sexual education was taboo. It wasn't common.
• They can have this conversation with and we're missing.
• Chair this conversation with have this open dialogue. You all already know.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So this PCS for HB 105 is the product of those conversations.
• Without it, this conversation about decoupling wouldn't even exist.
• And without those honest conversations, I don't know where this goes.
• And without those honest conversations, I don't know where this goes.
• Anderson, I had a real good conversation on the bill.

Summary: The Commerce Committee held its first meeting, took roll, established a quorum, and heard opening remarks from the chair, vice chair, and ranking member emphasizing the committee’s broad scope and focus on Florida’s economy and daily-life issues. The committee then considered several bills, with members and staff noting the agenda included four bills and a PCS. The first measures dealt with insurance and consumer regulation. CS/HB 367 on home and service warranty associations was explained as allowing financial requirements to be met through one or more contractual liability policies and reducing certain filing requirements; an amendment adding requirements for liability insurance coverage was adopted, and the bill passed favorably. HB 655 on pet insurance and wellness programs created a regulatory framework for pet insurance and also passed favorably. HB 6015, which deleted the word “reusable” from the wine keg statute, had brief support testimony and passed favorably. The committee spent the most time on CS/HB 105, a strike-all PCS on thoroughbred permit holders and decoupling racing from gaming. The sponsor said the revised bill would decouple racing and gaming while adding protections for the thoroughbred industry, including a notice period before racing could stop, permit transferability, and changes to how breeders’ and owners’ funds are administered. Supporters argued the bill would preserve and strengthen the industry through clearer rules and more direct support, while opponents—horsemen, breeders, trainers, veterinarians, and related businesses—warned it would harm a major rural industry, threaten jobs, and favor casino interests. After extensive debate, the strike-all was adopted and the bill was reported favorably on a divided vote. Finally, HB 11 on municipal water and sewer utility rates was presented as correcting an unintended consequence in surcharge law for utilities owned by one municipality but located in another. Testimony focused on the fairness of the current surcharge structure and the impact on Miami Gardens and North Miami Beach. After debate about negotiation, parity, and local impacts, the bill passed favorably. The committee then adjourned after its first meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Members will please take your seats, clear the aisles, and take conversations off the floor.
• If we're going to have a broader conversation on this issue, then we need to have a conversation at all
• And one issue that continues to rise to the top of those conversations is data centers.
• And one issue that continues to rise to the top of those conversations is data centers.
• I'm one who recognizes that we're going to need balance in this conversation. It cannot be a mob.

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, recognized several guests in the gallery, and then took up a series of committee reports, referrals, and floor actions. Early business included concurrence in committee reports on bills and resolutions from Game and Fisheries, Professional Licensure, Health, and Children and Youth, along with referral of Senate Bill 1377 to Transportation. The chamber also signed House Bill 1344 after the Senate returned it without amendment. Later, members announced caucus and committee meetings, including Rules, Intergovernmental Affairs and Operations, Insurance, and Appropriations, before recessing and then reconvening for floor votes. The House adopted several resolutions, including House Resolution 537 designating Rail Safety Week, House Resolution 449 recognizing the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks, and House Resolution 568 designating Javei Syndrome Awareness Day. The chamber also considered House Bill 2037 on cryptocurrency corruption, where Amendment A03882 narrowing the bill to public officials and immediate family members was adopted, while two later amendments were tabled or failed. House Bill 2198, repealing the sales and use tax exemption for computer data center equipment, was amended to take effect immediately and to bar KOZ use for data centers, then agreed to. House Bill 2559, concerning a university conveyance and other conveyances, was agreed to after out-of-order amendments were ruled on. A major portion of the session focused on data center policy. House Bill 2496, creating a 180-day pause on data center proposals to give municipalities time to update zoning and planning, drew extensive support from members emphasizing local control, environmental concerns, and the need for time to assess impacts; it passed final passage 201-1. House Bill 2650, creating the Governor’s Responsible Infrastructure Development certification for data centers, also generated lengthy debate over energy use, water, community benefits, and tax treatment; it passed 134-68. The House also passed House Bill 2162 on temporary licensing for drug manufacturers before FDA approval, House Bill 2388 on rounding cash payments when pennies are unavailable, House Bill 2437 on county and municipal bridge repair funds, House Bill 2555 on equine dealer recordkeeping, and House Bill 2621 directing a Department of Health survey on maternal and infant outcomes. Other actions included final passage of House Bill 1006 on milk tester and wearer sampler certification periods, House Bill 2014 on opportunities for minors and emergency service organizations, House Bill 2512 prohibiting ride-share pricing based on device condition, House Bill 2644 authorizing itemized capital bridge projects, and Senate Bill 1058 updating the E85 flex-fuel reference. The House also adopted House Bill 2162, House Bill 2388, House Bill 2437, and House Bill 2555 by recorded votes, and several committee reports were agreed to throughout the day. The session ended with additional committee referrals, a motion to recommit several bills to Appropriations, and adjournment until the next morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Everybody will end our conversations and find a seat. I appreciate it. Are we ready, Jane?
• We'll keep this conversation going. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Bentley.
• There have been conversations about whether that should be expanded or not.
• We also always have a conversation of, is there a way to enlarge it?
• Thank the chairs for having this conversation and for letting us be here.

Summary: The subcommittee met to review Department of Human Services hospital payments in Arkansas Medicaid, with DHS Secretary Janet Mann and Deputy Secretary Misty Eubanks presenting first, followed by Arkansas Hospital Association Executive Vice President Jody Ann Tritt and a brief comment from Arkansas Children’s. DHS outlined the main hospital payment streams: fee-for-service per diem payments, upper payment limit (UPL) supplemental payments, cost settlements, and smaller payments such as graduate medical education and disproportionate share hospital funds. Members asked for plain-language explanations of cost settlements, why per diem rates vary by hospital type, and why UPL applies to private hospitals. DHS said cost settlements and UPL are mechanisms to help offset Medicaid underpayment, with SFY 2025 hospital payments totaling hundreds of millions of dollars and no general revenue used for supplemental payments beyond the state share funded through hospital assessments and related financing structures. Committee members focused heavily on whether Arkansas hospitals are adequately reimbursed and why rural hospitals struggle. Tritt explained that critical access hospitals, rural emergency hospitals, PPS hospitals, and specialty hospitals operate under different federal and state rules, and said lower per diem rates for some facilities help with cash flow and later cost settlement adjustments. She said Arkansas hospitals are under financial strain, citing a negative patient services margin statewide and noting that Medicaid, Medicare, and commercial payers all contribute to the problem. She also said the association had just authorized a statewide survey of hospital finances and costs, which she expected would take about a year to complete. A major theme was commercial insurance reimbursement. Tritt argued Arkansas hospitals are paid far less than hospitals in neighboring states even though premiums are similar, and said administrative burdens, prior authorizations, and denials add to the problem. She said hospitals receive about 52 to 53 cents on the dollar for Medicaid costs without UPL and about 78 cents with UPL, still below cost. Members also discussed Medicare wage index issues, Medicare Advantage, and whether hospitals could use technology or alternative arrangements to improve finances. No votes were taken on the hospital presentation. At the end of the meeting, DHS provided a brief update on Living Choices and assisted living reimbursement. Officials said one assisted living facility, Pillars of the Community in Crossett, had announced closure, with nine waiver clients being transitioned to other settings. DHS said the current cost reporting period was underway and that a new rate study could be ready for review before the end of the fiscal year if reports were submitted on time. Members also asked about the broader waiver plan, and DHS said the next waiver iteration would likely be brought back to the committee in the summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll keep this conversation going. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Bentley.
• There have been conversations about whether that should be expanded or not.
• There have been conversations about whether that should be expanded or not.
• We also always have a conversation of, is there a way to enlarge it?
• Thank the chairs for having this conversation and for letting us be here.

Summary: The subcommittee met to review Arkansas DHS hospital spending and reimbursement methods, with Secretary Janet Mann and Deputy Secretary Misty Eubanks explaining Medicaid hospital payments. They described fee-for-service per diem payments, cost settlements, and the upper payment limit (UPL) program, noting that SFY 2025 hospital payments included $688 million in inpatient/outpatient claims, $473 million in UPL payments, $248 million in cost settlements, and about $47 million in other payments such as graduate medical education and disproportionate share hospital funds. Members asked about why per diem rates vary, how cost settlements work, why UPL applies mainly to private hospitals, and how assessment fees are structured and funded. DHS said the hospital assessment fee is broad-based and uniform, used as the state share to draw federal funds, and that supplemental hospital payments after federal match totaled $548 million with no general revenue used. The Arkansas Hospital Association’s Jody Ann Tritt then gave a broader overview of the hospital landscape, explaining the different hospital types in the state, including critical access hospitals, rural emergency hospitals, PPS hospitals, and specialty hospitals. She said Arkansas hospitals face financial strain, citing a negative 5.18% patient service margin statewide and lower reimbursement than surrounding states. She argued that Arkansas hospitals are paid less than hospitals in neighboring states for similar services, that commercial payer rates and administrative burdens are a major problem, and that Medicaid and Medicare rates remain below cost even with UPL support. She also said hospitals are the backbone of community care, provide emergency and public health functions, and are looking for ways to invest in technology and telehealth but often lack the revenue to do so. Members pressed for clearer data on hospital finances, reimbursement adequacy, and the impact of commercial insurers. Tritt said the association had just authorized a statewide survey to gather updated financial information from hospitals, which she said would take about a year to complete. She also explained that Medicaid pays weekly, Medicare and commercial plans can involve delays and denials, and that hospitals often spend significant resources on revenue cycle work. The discussion ended with a brief update on assisted living reimbursement: DHS said one facility, The Pillars of the Community in Crossett, had announced closure, nine Living Choices waiver clients were being transitioned, and the updated rate study would be available after cost reports are collected, likely before the end of the fiscal year. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have had conversations with other states. We've had conversations with our local stakeholders.
• We have had conversations with other states.
• We've had conversations with our local stakeholders. and the conversations with our local stakeholders
• To the best of my knowledge, we have, the conversations we've had have not included direct conversations
• “Happy to come and meet with you, and we can have a longer conversation about this.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services heard presentations on the governor’s proposed fiscal year 2026-2027 budget for the health and human services agencies. Kendall Kelly outlined the overall HHS budget at $48.5 billion, with AHCA accounting for the largest share, and agency heads then highlighted major proposals for Medicaid behavioral health redesign, APD waiver enrollment and facility needs, DCF child welfare, opioid, and mental health investments, DOEA funding for Alzheimer’s, home care, and community services, DOH funding for cancer research, public health initiatives, and lab capacity, and VA funding for facility improvements, cybersecurity, and medication management. Several members praised specific proposals, including increased reimbursement for private duty nursing, Alzheimer’s supports, and the Florida FIRST blood-in-ambulance initiative. Senators also questioned the proposed changes to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), with the Surgeon General explaining that the department expects a reduction in covered patients from about 30,000 to about 20,000 because of funding pressures tied to rebates, federal changes, and premium tax credit issues. Public testimony strongly criticized the ADAP changes, citing lack of transparency and warning that many patients could lose access to medications. Other questions focused on the Office of Minority Health and Health Equity, DCF’s substance abuse and mental health data dashboard, Kids Care/CHIP expansion implementation, APD bed and facility planning, and the FX Medicaid technology project. DCF said about $7 million is set aside for the dashboard system, and AHCA said the governor’s budget includes $124.4 million for FX maintenance and continued module development, with $13.5 million to begin claims processing work. The committee did not take a substantive vote on the budget presentations and adjourned after questions and public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• to do a deep dive on the subject by inviting a panel of experts to join us here today for this conversation
• committee members to certainly engage in a robust discussion, including a question-and-answer conversation
• So again, we appreciate you having us here today and looking forward to a healthy conversation with you
• And having a great conversation with someone last night made me... ...having a great conversation with
• So I guess my question is: Has there been any sort of conversation where the manufacturers have come

Summary: The committee held a panel discussion on micro-mobility device regulation and enforcement, focusing on e-bikes and e-scooters. Sheriff Robert Hardwick and Chief Jamie Cruz described serious injuries involving children, including crashes at high speeds, and argued that current law is outdated because it folds e-bikes into the bicycle statute. They urged a separate statewide framework with clearer age limits, licensing or training requirements, helmet rules, and penalties for modifying devices to go faster. Both also emphasized that parents should bear responsibility and that enforcement should include education, progressive discipline, and, if needed, civil citations. FDOT District 6 Secretary Daniel Iglesias and DHSMV representative Lonnie Groner said their agencies are prioritizing education, outreach, and better data collection. They noted that micromobility devices are increasingly common, create safety and accessibility issues on sidewalks and shared-use paths, and are difficult to track because crash reports often do not identify them consistently. Members discussed whether motorized devices should be barred from sidewalks, whether riders should be licensed and insured, and how enforcement could be made uniform statewide. The panel also said manufacturers have not been meaningfully engaged and that local approaches vary widely. The committee then heard 2026 legislative priorities from FDOT Secretary Jared Perdue and DHSMV Executive Director Dave Kerner. Perdue outlined FDOT’s large five-year work program, ongoing congestion-relief projects, investments in ports, airports, rail, workforce, heavy equipment, facilities, and cybersecurity, and the need to do more with flat revenues. Kerner summarized DHSMV’s agency bill priorities, including requiring a Florida address and proof of residence for vehicle registration, updating identification requirements, aligning tank vehicle and motor carrier rules with federal standards, improving IFTA administration, raising the crash-report damage threshold, and allowing electronic notices. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that'll be the focus of my conversations.
• There are other options, and we just haven't really had those conversations.
• And many phone calls I received, so really great conversations.
• This is just some of the conversation.
• Chair and Members, at this time we don't, but that is a great conversation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, you know, last year, this last session, uh, we had conversations about things that we could bring
• No comments or conversations. All right, Izzy, it's all yours.
• So what you'll hear, what you're likely to hear throughout the and in other tax policy conversations,
• Um, and in future conversations or in questions, we can dig deeper into that, but that's a very unique
• It's at least worth a conversation.