Transcript Highlights:

• And it's not the State Land Office that bears the costs.
• Million is aimed towards all of our operating costs.
• Operating reserves that we can pull money out of?
• But under the operating reserves, I just don't understand how you can take it directly out of the operating
• We know it's costing the taxpayers to clean up this.

Transcript Highlights:

• But that does cost some money.
• A Type 5 engine costs more than double what it did in 2009. Standard pickups cost even more.
• In mirroring what Michelle said, cost of equipment, cost of fuel, cost of everything has increased.
• In mirroring what Michelle said, cost of equipment, cost of fuel, cost of everything has improved.
• Cost of equipment, cost of fuel, cost of everything has improved.

Committee: Senate Resources and Environment

Transcript Highlights:

• You'll are the operating adjustments.
• The operating adjustments are on lines 125 and 126, of $1.8 million from the game and fish operating
• The operating adjustments are on fund.
• Um the Senate has an operating Zoo.
• Addressing inflation and operating costs is our primary objective in this budget bill.

Summary: The conference committee on the Environment budget for Senate File 2077 met to introduce members and staff, then walked through the Senate and House budget spreadsheets side by side. Nonpartisan staff explained that the Senate budget was built around a smaller general fund increase and more use of environmental and dedicated funds, while the House met its target through several reductions, including cuts to DNR, PCA, and Board of Water and Soil Resources appropriations. The committee reviewed major agency items for the Pollution Control Agency, DNR, the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Zoo, and other accounts, including operating adjustments, permit-related funding, and transfers between funds. Several major differences were highlighted. For the PCA, the Senate included operating adjustments, permitting efficiency funding, composting grants, outreach funding, and a closed landfill investment fund approach that repeals an expiring statutory appropriation, while the House instead extends that appropriation for four more years. For the DNR, the Senate included operating adjustments, groundwater and AIS fee increases, aquatic invasive species funding, trail grants, outdoor schools for all, abandoned watercraft enforcement, and a sustainable foraging task force; the House had fewer of these fee and policy items and used reductions to meet its target. The committee also noted Senate-only policy provisions on outreach to diverse communities, field citations and mercury certification for skin-lightening products, disabled veteran license fee changes, and a moratorium on foraging rulemaking until July 1, 2027. Agency testimony followed. The MPCA commissioner praised both chambers for recognizing core agency work and urged adoption of operating adjustments, the closed landfill fund access, and the air appropriation increase. The DNR assistant commissioner supported operating adjustments, groundwater and AIS fee increases, and the veteran license proposal, but raised concerns about the Senate’s foraging task force language, saying it overweights consumptive users and could limit the agency’s ability to manage foraging without clear data. He also noted support for the land transfer funding and said the agency would continue working with the committee on unresolved issues. No votes were taken in this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Absent new funding, due to the differences in our labor costs, consolidating the five smaller operators
• We thought it was going to cost one thing and it cost another.
• Those are the planning and design costs. So $1 million per day, planning and design costs.
• So if people opt out, who pays that cost? Like who will pay the cost? Which...
• the costs?

Summary: The committee heard several audit requests and related testimony. The first major item was an audit of Coachella Valley Unified School District’s contract and fiscal management. The author and supporters described long-standing fiscal mismanagement, large budget shortfalls, layoffs, contracting concerns, and questions about the district’s foundation and use of public funds. District representatives and the Riverside County Office of Education said the district is already under fiscal oversight, has a stabilization plan, and is working to reduce deficits and improve student outcomes. After extensive debate and public comment, the motion to approve the audit was put on call because the committee did not have the required votes from both houses at that moment. The committee then approved an audit of East Bay transit agencies in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Senator Wahab argued the region’s many overlapping transit agencies create fragmentation, duplication, and inefficiency, especially amid a fiscal cliff and possible future tax increases. Transit agencies and labor representatives opposed the audit, saying the agencies already undergo multiple audits, serve distinct local needs, and are implementing regional coordination efforts. After testimony from agency leaders and public commenters, the committee voted to approve the audit. The next item was an audit of California Community Colleges’ unrestricted reserves. Senator Archuleta and supporting faculty representatives said reserves have grown substantially and may be diverting resources from student services, instruction, and workforce programs. They argued there is little oversight when reserves become too high. The Chancellor’s Office and Calbright College were invited to respond, and the audit objectives focused on reserve growth, reasons for high balances, oversight by the Chancellor’s Office, and effects on students and staff. The transcript cuts off during the Chancellor’s Office response, so the final committee action on this item is not shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Absent new funding, due to the differences in our labor costs, consolidating the five smaller operators
• We thought it was going to cost one thing, and it cost another.
• Those are the planning and design costs. So $1 million per day, planning and design costs.
• So if people opt out, who pays that cost? Like who will pay the cost? Which?
• the costs?

Committee: Senate Joint Legislative Audit

Summary: The committee began with a status report from the State Auditor on staffing and audit capacity, noting 14 audit supervisors, 14 audits in progress, several audits scheduled for release, and a planned high-risk review of state financial reporting. The committee then approved a consent calendar covering six audit requests, including topics such as kindergarten oral health assessments, prison infrastructure management, Los Angeles fires prevention and response, community college financial aid and enrollment, wildfire management at Chino Hills State Park, and the Chiquita Canyon landfill. The first major item was Assembly Member Gonzalez’s request for an audit of Coachella Valley Unified School District’s contract and fiscal management. Supporters described long-running fiscal mismanagement, a projected $60 million deficit, layoffs, concerns about contracting practices, foundation donations, and weak governance. District representatives said they were already working with Riverside County Office of Education and FICMAT, had adopted a fiscal stabilization plan, and were making cuts to restore solvency. The State Auditor said the proposed audit would examine the district’s financial condition over 10 years, ELOP spending, partnership agreements, foundation funds, and contracting practices. After extensive discussion and public comment, the motion to approve the audit failed because it did not receive the required votes. The committee next approved Senator Wahab’s request for an audit of East Bay transit agency administrative oversight. The senator argued that the Bay Area’s fragmented transit system creates duplication and wastes resources, while agency representatives and transit advocates said the agencies already face extensive oversight and are actively coordinating through existing regional efforts. The State Auditor outlined objectives focused on agency autonomy, coordination, ridership, finances, and the potential effects of consolidation. After debate and public comment, the audit was approved. Finally, Senator Archuleta introduced a request to audit excessive unrestricted reserves at selected California Community College districts and Calbright College, arguing that reserve balances have grown substantially and may be diverting funds from student services and instruction. He said the audit would examine why districts are holding large reserves and whether those funds are being used effectively for students.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have press conferences today on both budgets, or on two of the budgets: the operating and transportation
• So that is firefighters, law enforcement, 9-1-1 operators, and nurses.
• You know, there's a lot of costs involved in expanding PTSD.
• So that is firefighters, law enforcement, 911 operators, and nurses.
• The fiscal note shows a cost of $301,000.

Bills: HB1526 , HB1069 , HB1347 , HB2091 , HB2264

Committee: Senate Labor & Commerce

Keywords: liquor license, snack bar, state regulations, alcohol sales, business licensing, collective bargaining, retirement benefits, employee rights, public sector, supplemental benefits, education, funding, student loans, affordability, higher education, public employers, employee information, bargaining representatives, labor relations, union representation

Transcript Highlights:

• We licensed four site operators, and these are the groups that operate OTB simulcast OTB centers.
• Then we have two site operators. These are the groups that operate the live racetracks.
• We do have charitable organizations that operate those.
• local level and some of the costs that are associated.
• Average cost for county jail, I don't have that as well.

Committee: Joint Judiciary Committee

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to continue its study of charitable gaming, especially the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations and the relationship between charities, site owners, and gaming manufacturers/distributors. Legislative Council reviewed the background memo and Attorney General’s Gaming Division explained the legal framework, including site authorizations, rent limits, allowable expenses, and restrictions on distributors and manufacturers. Members focused heavily on electronic pull tabs, asking about the large gap between gross proceeds and adjusted proceeds, how much is paid out in winnings, how much is retained for expenses, and whether the 60% allowable-expense cap is being used as intended. The AG’s office said e-tabs account for most gaming volume, that winnings make up much of the difference, and that some organizations do not use the full 60% while others may exceed it, though only the capped amount counts as gaming expense. The committee also discussed the number of gaming organizations that appear to own or be affiliated with bars, the ways those ownership structures are formed, and whether some arrangements may create conflicts or site-selection pressure. The League of Cities and the Association of Counties described the local site-authorization process and recent model policies adopted after the 2025 session. Cities said they can require signed agreements, limit games and machines, set qualifications, and charge up to $100 for site authorization, but cannot require charities to donate net proceeds or force a specific charity or site. They said the new policies are meant to add transparency and local control, though the more controversial parts involve requiring a local nexus or community connection. County representatives said the issue is mostly a city matter and that counties generally take a lighter-touch approach. Committee members raised concerns about whether local rules could unfairly exclude larger regional charities or create inconsistent standards across cities. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance said it supports the study and provided information on charities that own or are affiliated with bars, emphasizing that most gaming organizations do not own alcoholic beverage establishments. Its representative said some charities may pursue bar ownership for site stability and diversification, while others decide against it because operating a bar is difficult. He also said a ban on charity-owned bars could raise federal tax-law issues depending on how it is written, and agreed to provide more detail. The committee asked Legislative Council and the Gaming Alliance for additional information on ownership structures and federal-law questions before the next meeting. Later, the Racing Commission gave a separate update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, and related charitable partnerships, and the State Hospital superintendent reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, staffing, and wait lists; no votes were taken on these presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The fee must be set at an amount necessary to cover the annual cost of operating and maintaining the
• The fee must be set at an amount necessary to cover the annual cost of operating and maintaining the
• For stores operating in Oregon, hosting a drop site costs about $75,000 a year and creates serious cleanliness
• costs.
• costs of those sites.

Summary: The committee held a public hearing and briefing on several bills, with House Bill 2441, House Bill 2159, House Bill 2521, House Bill 2531, House Bill 2543, and House Bill 1607 discussed in that order after agenda changes. HB 2441 would expand reimbursement from the LEO retirement fund for survivors of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty, covering Medicare Parts A and B premiums and retroactive health insurance premiums during the period before a death is officially determined to be work-related. Staff described a relatively small number of affected survivors and modest actuarial impacts, and the prime sponsor spoke emotionally in support. A representative from the L&I Board also testified that the board had studied the issue and endorsed the bill. HB 2159 would create the Pre-K Promise Account to receive philanthropic funds for ECEAP expansion. Staff explained ECEAP eligibility and the proposed non-appropriated account structure, noting Governor Ferguson’s budget included $34.5 million in non-appropriated authority for about 2,000 new school-day slots. Testimony was strongly supportive from Ballmer Group, DCYF, Head Start/ECEAP advocates, a Yakima provider, and the governor’s office, all emphasizing the public-private partnership, expanded access, and support for children furthest from opportunity. HB 2521 would remove the $18 cap on the State Patrol’s firearm background check fee and allow the fee to be set to cover total program costs. Staff said the fee could rise to about $33 per check based on current costs, and the State Patrol testified that the cap no longer matches actual expenses and threatens staffing and service levels. One member of the public opposed the bill, arguing the state system should be scrapped or capped and that consumers would face higher costs. HB 2531 would freeze the ambulance quality assurance fee at its July 4, 2025 level to comply with federal law and adjust Medicaid add-on payments accordingly; the Washington Ambulance Association strongly supported it as essential to preserving federal matching funds and improving wages and benefits. HB 2543 would update county clerk fees and modernize outdated references, with county officials supporting the changes as necessary to reflect current electronic-record practices. HB 1607, the Recycling Refund Act, drew the most extensive testimony. Staff described a 10-cent refund system for covered beverage containers, a producer responsibility organization, Ecology oversight, and fiscal impacts tied to program administration and lost tax revenue. Supporters, including environmental groups, youth advocates, Seattle Public Utilities, and some industry voices, argued the bill would reduce litter, increase recycling rates, support reuse systems, and complement the existing recycling reform law. Opponents from recycling haulers, grocers, beverage interests, counties, and solid waste providers argued it would function like a tax, raise consumer and retailer costs, duplicate or undermine curbside recycling and EPR, and create siting and implementation problems. No votes were taken on the bills in this transcript; the hearing concluded with public testimony and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's the $400 cost, so going forward the residents would be on their own for that cost.
• So they operate for 10 to 20 years under their permit, they close, they conclude operations, they're
• First, there will be a bond that is required from the operator for the life of their operation, going
• The operator is going to come in and they are going to conclude injection operations.
• They, the operator is going to come in and they are going to conclude injection operations.

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from the Environment Department on PFAS contamination in private wells in La Cienega, Santa Fe County. Staff said the plume likely came from historic use of firefighting foam associated with airport and National Guard fire-training activities, with possible additional contribution from septic systems and consumer products. They described the contamination as affecting about 200 private wells, the short-term response of providing residential filters through a $2 million legislative appropriation, and ongoing work to define the plume’s full extent, identify responsible parties, and consider longer-term regional water solutions. Members asked about filter costs, replacement schedules, disposal of used cartridges, follow-up testing, health studies, and whether cleanup or containment had begun; the department said cleanup would follow once the plume is fully mapped and that DOH is soliciting interest in a blood study. The committee also discussed the need to track disposal of PFAS filters and the possibility of broader statewide capacity for similar work. The committee then took up abandoned uranium mine cleanup. NMED and EMNRD staff reviewed the new uranium mine reclamation program created by HB 164, the state dashboard tracking sites, and the FY26 appropriation of $20 million for neglected contaminated sites, of which $12 million is being used for neglected uranium mines and the remainder for other contaminated sites. They said six contractors were hired, three priority sites in Grant County are moving forward quickly, and additional sites are being prepared for possible FY27 work. Members pressed for details on how funds are spent, why the revolving fund remains unfunded, how federal, state, tribal, and landowner requirements are coordinated, where contaminated material will be moved, and whether cleanup could also address homes built with contaminated materials. Staff said the work is governed by multiple regulatory layers, that the state is seeking an additional $25 million for FY27-FY28 plus a time extension, and that partnerships with tribes would require longer-term agreements. The committee also discussed federal cleanup efforts and the new Good Samaritan law, with members urging stronger advocacy for New Mexico sites, including tribal lands, and asking whether the Attorney General should pursue legal action against federal parties responsible for legacy contamination. Staff explained that some sites are already covered by settlement funds tied to responsible parties, while neglected sites are those with no responsible party and no other cleanup program. The committee then heard from EMNRD on Class VI carbon sequestration primacy. Staff said New Mexico currently has no operating Class VI wells, about 27 Class II acid-gas injection wells are operating, and only a small number might be candidates for conversion. They explained that the state’s primacy application would require more public outreach than federal rules alone, and that cost estimates for post-injection site care are based on long planning horizons, with some costs borne by operators and some by the state after closure. No votes were taken on the substantive items discussed; the committee approved the prior meeting minutes and took a brief recess between presentations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The state and local intelligence operations to democratic controls.
• development costs, but it's also lost cost savings. ...in the project development costs, but it's also
• lost cost savings from implementing those projects.
• Objective five has us quantify the litigation costs and the settlement costs associated with the board's
• The cost to the state and the cost to the courts have not been estimated here.

Summary: The committee met as a subcommittee for much of the hearing because it initially lacked a quorum, then later established one and began taking votes. The state auditor gave a status update on ongoing audits, including several JALAC-requested audits in progress, other statutory audits, staffing growth in his office, and the number of new JALAC audits his office could start in the coming months. The committee also heard that one audit request on Prop. 28 was held, and another PUC-related request was moved off consent and heard on the regular calendar. Members then heard and discussed several audit requests. Senator Cervantes presented a request to audit California fusion centers, with witnesses from the FBI and ACLU supporting the need for transparency and oversight; opponents argued the request was politically motivated and could interfere with counterterrorism work. Senator Allen presented a request on CPUC enforcement of Rule 21 interconnection timelines for solar and storage projects, supported by industry and school representatives who described long delays and financial harm, while CPUC staff said the issue was being addressed through workshops and a formal proceeding. Senator Perez presented a request to audit Caltrans’ administration of the former SR 710 extension properties and affordable sales program, citing tenant complaints about maintenance, pricing, and transparency; Caltrans said it was working to complete sales and improve administration. Senator Umberg presented a request to audit the Orange County Board of Education over transparency, contracting, litigation spending, charter oversight, and whistleblower issues, while board representatives said there was no factual basis for an audit and that existing legal remedies had not been invoked. After quorum was established, the committee approved the consent-calendar DMV license revocation audit and then approved the PUC utility timeliness audit and the Caltrans SR 710 audit. The fusion center audit was left on call after a split vote, and the Orange County Board of Education audit continued with testimony from the board’s representatives after the committee had already moved on to other business.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, the cost to maintain a building is cheaper than the cost to repair it.
• And when they calculated the cost, the significant rise still in construction cost.
• This is asking for land acquisition costs and seeking a design cost to double that.
• It allows for more efficient operations, reducing disruptions and long-term operational costs.
• and long-term operational disruptions and long-term operational costs<00:52:42.040><c> moving</c><00

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• Banks bear this cost.
• But one cost continues to make absolutely no sense.
• State-specific mandates do not reduce the costs associated with the system's operation.
• Each addresses cost without disrupting a payment system that operates across a global scale.
• So the cost is not just on, you know, we be a significant cost there as well.

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the future of credit card payments and their impacts on small businesses held what was described as its last public hearing. Chair Paul Feeney opened by noting the commission’s mandate under Chapter 238 of the Acts of 2024 and explained that members would continue working on a final report after the hearing. The meeting featured testimony from banks, payment industry groups, restaurant advocates, convenience store representatives, and others, with repeated discussion of interchange fees, surcharging, fraud, and federal preemption issues. Banking and card-industry witnesses, including the Massachusetts Bankers Association, the Card Coalition, and the Electronic Payments Coalition, argued that state-level interchange restrictions would disrupt a global payment system, create compliance problems, and likely apply only to a small share of transactions because of federal preemption. They emphasized consumer and merchant benefits of cards, the role of banks in absorbing fraud losses, and recent federal and state developments, including Illinois litigation, OCC and NCUA actions, and a settlement that they said would give merchants more flexibility. Several witnesses also suggested alternatives such as vendor compensation for tax collection and modernizing Massachusetts’ surcharge ban. Restaurant and convenience-store advocates took the opposite view, saying swipe fees are a major burden on thin-margin businesses and that merchants should not pay interchange on sales tax or gratuities that are not their revenue. Mass Restaurants United and individual restaurant owners described severe financial strain, rising costs, and the need for transparency and relief. NACS supported swipe fee reform and argued that current fees are excessive and inflationary. A few members questioned witnesses about whether industry should share more of the burden and about the feasibility of changing the current system. No votes or formal policy actions were taken. The chair said the commission would meet again to discuss a draft framework and final report, and members of the public were invited to submit additional written testimony before the commission concludes its work.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't see a fiscal note, and yet when no-cost allowances ultimately are reduced, won't there be a cost
• to ratepayers, or what that would cost.
• Using funds generated by utilities' operations.
• Energy costs are not occasional. They are monthly.
• costs, as Dan Fajerly described, or by funding programs.

Summary: The Environment and Energy Committee heard testimony on three bills. HB 2426 would allow the Pollution Control Hearings Board, with unanimous agreement of the parties, to use alternative board compositions for appeals, including a single member or other qualified environmental adjudicators, so long as one member is a Washington-licensed attorney and the panel has environmental law expertise. The bill sponsor and supporters from business and conservation groups said it was a narrow, consensus-based change intended to improve efficiency and predictability. ELUHO’s director supported the concept but flagged technical issues in the bill language about attorney and Growth Management Hearings Board member qualifications. HB 2416 would provide no-cost allowances under the Climate Commitment Act to Spokane’s waste-to-energy facility, which is not currently covered until the second compliance period. Supporters, including Spokane officials, labor, and local partners, said the facility protects a sole-source aquifer, provides waste disposal and electricity for about 13,000 homes, and faces large compliance costs that could raise rates and threaten jobs. Opponents from environmental groups and Ecology argued the bill would give the facility preferential treatment, subsidize most of its emissions through 2050, and fail to ensure real emissions reductions; AWB raised concern about market impacts if new allowances are added. No vote was taken. HB 2373 would require electric utilities to offer monthly bill discount programs with tiered income levels, expanded outreach and enrollment, and updated reporting on low-income energy assistance. The sponsor said the bill is meant to make assistance more consistent and accessible statewide, while utilities and rural co-ops warned it could create unfunded mandates and significant rate increases for non-low-income customers, especially in smaller systems. Supporters from community action agencies, Commerce, and some utilities said monthly assistance is needed because energy burdens are rising and current programs are patchwork, though several urged pairing the bill with state funding or amendments. The committee heard extensive testimony but took no final action on any of the bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• their profits, but also operational cost.
• The costs added in terms of the refinery margin that accounts for their profits but also operational
• The operational costs are still, benefits are still there, but they'll be cheaper to purchase.
• The credits provide much-needed upfront funds for installation and operation and maintenance costs.
• Since the capacity crediting Funds for installation and operation and maintenance costs.

Summary: The hearing focused on California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), its role in reducing transportation emissions, and whether its costs at the pump are justified by its climate, air quality, and investment benefits. The co-chairs and several members framed the discussion around affordability and asked whether the program’s benefits, including cleaner fuels, zero-emission vehicle infrastructure, and public health gains, outweigh any added fuel costs. Members also raised concerns about how the program is understood by the public and whether its benefits are being communicated clearly. CARB and CEC officials explained how LCFS works as a market-based program that sets declining carbon-intensity targets, generates credits for lower-carbon fuels, and requires deficit holders to buy credits or otherwise comply. They said the program has driven billions in annual private investment, expanded alternative fuels, supported EV charging and hydrogen stations, and helped reduce emissions and local pollution. They also argued that LCFS credit prices are not the main driver of gasoline prices, that the recent amendments added only about seven cents per gallon, and that crude oil, refining, and distribution costs account for most pump price variation. Committee members pressed witnesses on credit banking, market effects, the recent rule updates, additionality, and whether the program’s benefits are concentrated in-state or out-of-state. CARB said banking helps keep the program cost-effective and provides investment certainty, while the Energy Commission said LCFS-related costs are relatively stable and separate from the broader gasoline market. The panel also discussed how the 2025 amendments were shaped by the state’s 2030 and 2045 climate goals and by uncertainty over federal actions. No votes or formal actions were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• cost basis is included.
• half that cost.
• Specifically, they were using 2018 cost. costs to calculate their 24 costs.
• Okay, so moving on, we've been talking about Operating revenue, operating expenditures, and operating
• How is this costing us?

Committee: House Delivery of Government Efficiency

Transcript Highlights:

• Return to work order and these last-minute cost-saving measures at the cost of state employees that have
• And how much is the total cost?
• Please do some sort of cost benefit, excuse me, cost benefit.
• Those are all costs.
• There is no operational.

Transcript Highlights:

• You're on the cloud, the related cost operating costs, I mean, is any of that going to be reflected that
• But the operating costs are there; the agency operating costs are there.
• But the operating costs are all in our budget.
• The operating costs are there; the agency operating costs are there.
• But the operating costs are all in our budget, 100% in our budget, as general funds.

Summary: The Department of Administrative Services presented an overview of its budget and operations, emphasizing that it is the lowest-spending agency in state government and that its general fund allocation has declined since 2019. Commissioner Arling House explained that DAS also handles back-office functions for several administratively attached boards, which has affected staffing and spending comparisons. He said the department’s current general fund spending is roughly split between retiree health and other operations, and that the presentation was based on adjusted authorized spending rather than the original budget figures. A major portion of the meeting focused on retiree health benefits and the long-term effort to control costs. Deputy Commissioner Cassie Keane described how the state moved from a projected deficit in retiree health to savings through a series of changes, including higher premium contributions, co-pay adjustments, and shifting Medicare retirees into Medicare Advantage arrangements to capture federal reimbursement. She said the state has about 12,500 retirees and spouses on the plan, with roughly 10,906 Medicare retirees and 1,580 non-Medicare retirees, and that the savings have depended heavily on federal funding and procurement decisions. She also noted that Medicare retirees pay Part B premiums and that the state has grandfathered older retirees from some premium contributions. Members asked about what the expenditures cover, why the state offers retiree health instead of simply giving retirees a payment to buy coverage themselves, and whether out-of-pocket costs changed under Medicare Advantage. Keane said the plan covers actual health claims or insurance premiums, that co-pays and maximum out-of-pocket limits remain in place, and that the state has no authority to change benefit details without legislative action. She explained that retiree health is a long-standing employee benefit that wraps around Medicare and is not collectively bargained in the usual sense, though its eligibility rules and cost-sharing have been tightened over time to better target the benefit to long-term state service. The discussion also covered vendor performance problems. Keane said Anthem recently won the contract back from Aetna, but its pharmacy subsidiary, Caroline, caused serious service disruptions. DAS responded by withholding payments, assessing more than $2 million in performance guarantees, and hiring a third-party auditor to review the pharmacy processes. The current contract runs through the end of calendar year 2026, and officials said they are watching federal Medicare Advantage reimbursement changes closely because future savings are uncertain.

Transcript Highlights:

• Come on up, representing Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System. Just one.
• Come on up, representing Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System. Just one.
• Their analysis anticipates a state cost of $1.8 million in general fund.
• And finally, we'll be bringing operations to Arizona later this year.
• that any significant increase in cost represents a potential increase in the cost of electricity generation

Summary: The committee approved the minutes and then heard several bills. HB 2686, sponsored by Rep. Heap, would require physicians performing surgeries at outpatient surgical facilities to annually and whenever changed provide the facility a call-coverage plan, including hospital coverage if applicable, to ensure patients have a known physician contact for complications; it passed 6-0 with one not voting. HB 2051 would require AHCCCS contractors, subject to CMS approval, to cover breastfeeding and lactation services in inpatient, outpatient, home-based, and group settings; supporters described the bill as improving maternal and infant health and AHCCCS said it was neutral with an estimated $1.8 million general fund cost, and it passed 6-0 with one not voting. HB 2837, a transparency bill for municipal zoning hearings, would require speakers to disclose compensation for testimony and require certain board members or hearing officers to disclose and recuse for recent ties to entities appearing before them; it passed 6-0 with one not voting. The committee also approved HB 2875, as amended, which clarifies local authority over commercial drone delivery systems and related land-use and zoning issues, including near airports; Zipline and industry supporters backed the bill as providing regulatory clarity, and it passed 6-0 with one not voting after adoption of the amendment. HB 2324 would let cities with their own fire codes, through an intergovernmental agreement, enforce those codes on county-owned buildings in city limits, with reporting requirements to the State Fire Marshal; county and fire-management representatives supported the measure as a clarification of jurisdiction, and it passed 6-0 with one not voting. HB 2439 would exempt single-user public or semi-public cold plunges from ADEQ pool rules, but the committee adopted an amendment removing ADEQ rulemaking authority; supporters said the bill would reduce confusion and regulatory burden, while one senator opposed it over public-health concerns, and it passed 4-2 with one not voting. HB 2457 would allow utilities to build certain co-located power plants without a certificate of environmental compatibility after notice and a public comment session, which opponents said would reduce public review and transparency for power plant siting, while supporters said it would streamline power development; it passed 4-2 with one not voting. Finally, HB 2953 would cap certain nondisciplinary and disciplinary civil penalties imposed by the State Board of Pharmacy at $25,000 in specified circumstances; a supporter said it matched limits used elsewhere and gave the board authority to use nondisciplinary actions, and it passed 6-0 with one not voting. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• and cost.
• Uh, it's HB... you lower the costs. you lower the costs.
• Operating costs across the board have gone up over the years, and we do have a variety of contracts that
• Um operating<01:22:13.120><c> costs</c><01:22:13.520><c> across</c><01:22:13.880><c> the</c><01:22:14.000
• ><c> board</c><01:22:14.480><c> have</c> operating costs across the board have operating costs across

Bills: HB1518 , HB1699 , HB1747 , HB1705 , HB1565 , HB1801 , HB1645 , HB2115 , HB2114

Committee: House Human Services & Homelessness

Summary: The committee opened its first meeting of the 2020 session and heard testimony on several measures, beginning with HB 1518, which would allow people incarcerated and nearing release to apply for SNAP benefits before release. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and the Department of Human Services said they support the bill and are already piloting a pre-release application process at two facilities, with plans to expand it. The Attorney General’s Office supported the intent but noted a technical issue: one section of the bill appears to affect TANF as well as SNAP, while the title refers only to SNAP. A wide range of advocates, including Catholic Charities, the Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Hunger Action Network, Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, Hawaii Children’s Action Network, ACLU of Hawaii, and others, testified in strong support, emphasizing food insecurity after release, reentry stability, and reduced recidivism. The committee did not take a vote during the hearing. The committee then heard HB 1747, which would direct the Department of Human Services to seek federal waivers or extensions related to restricting certain SNAP purchases, including sugary drinks. DHS said it had already been approved for a narrow demonstration waiver and was working with retailers on implementation, with a target date of August 1. Supporters of the measure argued it would promote healthier choices, while opponents, including Hawaii Appleseed, the Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Children’s Action Network, and the Hawaii Food Industry Association, said such restrictions are ineffective, stigmatize low-income residents, create burdens for retailers and DHS, and may be difficult to implement. Members asked DHS to clarify the scope of the waiver and confirmed it applies to sugary drinks and beverages containing more than 10 grams of sugar. Finally, the committee took up HB 1705, which would allow licensed mental health counselors to serve as child custody evaluators, but there was no testimony from the relevant agencies and the item was quickly set aside. The committee also heard HB 1565, which would establish a judiciary working group to improve family court processes and legal representation for youth in the child welfare system. The Attorney General’s Office offered minor technical amendments, and supporters from the Office of Wellness and Resilience, High Hopes Hawaii, Hawaii Children’s Action Network, and a social work student described the need for legal representation, citing better reunification and stability outcomes and the importance of youth voice in court proceedings. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Operations is budgeted this year at,... Operations is budgeted this year at $483 million.
• Well, for this year's budget, when we look at operating revenue versus operating expenses, and that's
• For this year's budget, when we look at operating revenue versus operating expenses and debt service,
• of equipment, training, staffing, insurance costs, and emergency response costs.
• operator to be paid in full for recovery operations before payment to the insured.

Committee: Joint Transportation Interim Committee