Transcript Highlights:

• Are you trying to go back and renegotiate those leases?
• I'll turn it back over to Scott. Thanks, Austin.
• Back to you, Vice Chair Muñoz. So, now I forgot my...
• So you're building that money back.
• When we look back.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bring it back to the committee.
• We're asking for a hand getting back to work.
• Bring it back to the committee. Mr.
• Now go back to the committee. [03:16:15] We see none. Now back to the committee members.
• DeMaio coming back? Yes. Anything else?

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation met as a subcommittee and heard several bills, with members explaining that measures with significant fiscal impacts would be held for suspense or taken up later. AB 761 would let the Monterey-Salinas Transit District place a local sales tax measure on the ballot with approval from two-thirds of its board rather than needing approval from each member jurisdiction; supporters said it would preserve transit funding for veterans, seniors, and people with disabilities, while an opponent argued it would make it easier to raise a regressive tax. The bill was voted out 5-2 after being called for absent members. AB 1253, which would clarify property tax treatment for wildfire reconstruction beyond substantial equivalence, drew support from the Los Angeles County Assessor and the California Assessors Association but was sent to suspense. AB 8, dealing with hemp enforcement, intoxicating hemp products, and integration of hemp cannabinoids into the cannabis supply chain and tax system, drew strong support from cannabis operators and labor groups and opposition from small cultivators and public health advocates concerned about supply, tax revenue, and voter intent; it was also sent to suspense. The committee then heard AB 1138, a major expansion and modernization of the film and television tax credit program. Supporters, including entertainment unions, workers, studios, and local officials, said the bill would help keep production and jobs in California amid competition from other states and countries; opponents criticized it as picking winners and losers and argued broader business costs were the real problem. The bill was referred to suspense. AB 829, which would create a California Parkinson’s Disease Research Fund and voluntary tax contribution program to support research and services, received unanimous support from advocates and was approved 6-0 to Appropriations. AB 474 would exempt rental income from nonprofit home-sharing programs for low-income homeowners from state income tax and protect participants’ eligibility for certain benefits; supporters said it could help older adults age in place and address housing shortages, and the bill was sent to suspense after members asked for clarification on the fiscal estimate. The committee also heard AB 376, which would exempt wildfire settlement payments from state income tax for certain disaster survivors; supporters from rural counties said the money is meant to help victims rebuild and should not be taxed, and the bill was referred to suspense. Finally, AB 480 would allow developers using low-income housing tax credits to switch from allocated to certificated state credits after an award, with supporters saying it would maximize private investment and stretch housing dollars further; it too was sent to suspense. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly emphasized the need to balance policy goals with fiscal impacts, and several bills were held or referred to suspense rather than voted out immediately.

Transcript Highlights:

• So getting into the context of the bill and what we're trying to do here: back in 2021, back when Wayfair
• And this would actually come back to ask the legislature to go ahead and change this back.
• And Representative Fowler, did you have your hand back up?
• When the ambulance district lost the sales tax, they had to cut back.
• We can get back in the groove of those that have come in support.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that back pay has always...
• Back pay always did happen.
• But I would be happy to reach back out to those counties and ask them to provide information back to
• ; they come back to the county.
• The legislature two years ago took it back up, or three years ago took it back up to the 5 million, the

Transcript Highlights:

• I was invited to come back to Special Assault earlier this year and have returned.
• “Senator Howard, you're recognized to go back and forth.” “Thank you very much.”
• And I think, again, it kind of goes back to people.
• or to get that child back home with the family.”
• I testified against that issue back then.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Children, Families, and Elder Affairs held a panel discussion on Florida’s child protection teams (CPTs), child advocacy centers (CACs), and the related roles of DCF, DOH, and law enforcement. Testimony from DCF, the Department of Health, a local CAC director, the Florida Network of Children’s Advocacy Centers, a Pinellas County CPT nurse practitioner, and a Jacksonville sheriff’s sergeant described how the system is intended to work: hotline reports are screened by DCF, mandatory referrals are sent to CPT, forensic interviews and medical exams are coordinated through CPT/CACs, and multidisciplinary teams share findings with law enforcement and prosecutors. Speakers emphasized the value of co-location, telemedicine, multidisciplinary staffings, and trauma-informed practices to reduce repeated interviews and improve child safety and case outcomes. Committee members focused heavily on communication breakdowns, staffing shortages, and delays in response times. Senators raised Jordan’s Law and asked what had been done to improve coordination among DCF, CPT, and law enforcement. Several members questioned whether the promised 24-hour response standard is being met in practice, citing reports of delayed referrals, delayed forensic interviews, and bottlenecks that can affect medical evaluations and criminal investigations. Law enforcement testimony from Jacksonville described cases where CPT interviews were scheduled one to two weeks out and reports were not received for weeks, while DCF acknowledged average CPI caseloads of about 12 investigations and turnover commonly occurring within 12 to 18 months. The panel also discussed access gaps and funding concerns. The Florida Network of CACs said Florida has 26 member centers, with some counties lacking CAC coverage and some centers having closed due to funding challenges. Speakers said CACs are voluntary but critical for integrated services, and that workforce shortages in medical and mental health providers limit expansion. DCF and DOH representatives said they would provide follow-up information on the number of CPT medical staff and other requested data. No bills were voted on; the meeting ended with committee members requesting additional information and recommendations for statutory and budgetary changes, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, anyways, back to this legislative branch and executive branch—small back of the budget cuts. talk
• executive branch small back of the executive branch small back of the budget Governor's Commission
• Let me go back.
• Let me go back.
• And we’ll come back to that.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee met to review Division One of a very large budget package, with the chair explaining that the budget was being analyzed in three divisions over multiple days. Members first discussed procedure, including when amendments and line-item votes would be taken, and agreed to proceed with the division’s presentation before questions. Representative Maguire then outlined the division’s approach as a series of tradeoffs to close a large budget gap, emphasizing cuts, some revenue changes, and a focus on overall spending levels as well as individual reductions. The presentation covered a wide range of agencies and policy areas. Major proposed changes included cuts or eliminations to several boards and commissions viewed as costly or duplicative, such as the Housing Appeals Board, Board of Tax and Land Appeals, Human Rights Commission, Commission on Aging, Office of the Child Advocate, and the Personnel Appeals Board, with some functions consolidated into other boards. The division also proposed back-of-the-budget cuts to the Information Technology Department, Judicial Branch, Justice Department, Retirement System, Corrections, and Environmental Services, along with fee increases in several areas. Other notable items included ending marketing for Paid Family Leave, reducing job advertising and tourism promotion, defunding the Arts Council, moving liquor enforcement functions out of the Liquor Commission, and shifting some funds such as the College Savings Commission money to Division Two. Several members questioned specific cuts, especially the elimination of the Council on Aging, the reduction in regional planning commission grants, and the large cut to tourism advertising. Maguire defended the choices as necessary budget tradeoffs, arguing that some programs duplicated work done elsewhere, that regional planning grants were not among the most essential items, and that tourism promotion was a form of spending he viewed skeptically. He also explained that the public defender’s budget was partially restored after a credible claim of a governor’s budget error, and that the committee would continue refining corrections-related cuts because the House was only halfway through the budget process and further changes could still occur in the Senate and conference committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• If you leave five to seven years, you only have to pay back 50%; seven to 10 years, you pay back 25%;
• They don't necessarily have to sell it to pay it back.
• They don't necessarily have to sell it to make the pay it back.
• It's great to be back in your committee.
• It's great to be before you again, back in our 57th session.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2003 and then we had fracking and which allowed it to jump back up.
• So if we're giving it back to anybody, we give it back to the oil companies, it seems to me.
• I, um, I'm looking back historically a little bit.
• We gave everything back and then the next year we got to go take it back because it didn't come in again
• We, we get to forgetting why, why those people put that in place back then.

Bills: SJR 4

Keywords: term limits, state offices, constitutional amendment, governor, lieutenant governor, election reform

Transcript Highlights:

• I seem to remember going back I seem to remember going back some<00:09:41.519> I<00:09:41.760
• goes back to the general fund. goes back to the general fund.
• So with this, let me back up.
• at our cost before we likely came back at our cost before we likely came back and<01:21:59.600><
• >> This this back >> This this back >> Oh, >> Oh, >> Oh, >> on<01

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with approval of partial minutes, with members noting that DHS/HHS material was not yet included and that the minutes would be finalized later. The committee then heard from the General Court about several dedicated funds. Testimony explained the Joint Legislative Historical Fund, which receives a $25,000 annual general fund appropriation and transfers from visitor center sales above a $50,000 threshold, and is used for portrait maintenance, chamber work, Hall of Flags upkeep, and other historical preservation needs. Members also discussed the preservation of the Civil War flags in the Hall of Flags, with the General Court stating the flags are monitored through annual high-definition photos and that no immediate stabilization project is planned. A question about Union cemeteries was raised but the witness said he had no knowledge of federal funding for them. The committee also reviewed the visitor center revolving fund and noted that the accounting presentation is confusing because transfers are netted out so the fund ends each year at $50,000. Members suggested the narrative should clearly identify the transfer amounts and actual revenue, and staff agreed to note that in future reporting. The General Court then described its special legislative account as a stability reserve for capital and emergency needs, citing past uses such as the plaza ADA renovation, the legislative parking garage, and moving operations to One Granite Place. Members asked about interest earnings and were told the account is held in the treasury and any interest goes to the general fund unless statute directs otherwise; no additional funding was recommended at this time. The Department of Administrative Services then presented the law enforcement memorial fund, explaining it is a long-standing leftover construction fund with a small balance that has not been needed because the New Hampshire Law Enforcement Memorial Officers Association privately funds memorial upkeep and plaques. Members discussed whether the state should transfer the remaining money to the nonprofit, but no decision was made; the department said it would research whether such a transfer is legally possible. The department also reviewed the former land conservation endowment fund, now moving to Fish and Game under House Bill 2, and explained that it primarily covers administrative costs, management fees, and investment losses for a long-term conservation program. Members asked about the fund’s large balance and the increase in expenses, and were told the fund is intended to last indefinitely and that future reporting will shift to Fish and Game.

Transcript Highlights:

• I came back, retired, and got called back to serve all the people in Minnesota. Hi, everybody.
• I came back, retired, and got called back to serve all the people in Minnesota.
• I came back, retired, and got called back to serve all the people in Minnesota.
• I came back, retired, and got called back to serve all the people in Minnesota. Hi, I'm Duane Quam.
• So we look back. We're a post-audit shop, and so we were looking back at what happened.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met on January 16, 2025, for an organizational and informational session. Members and staff introduced themselves, and Chair Jim Nash reviewed committee expectations, including that nonpartisan staff are to be used for factual information rather than political arguments. He also noted the committee rules were a blend of prior chairs’ rules and would be posted without a vote. Helen Roberts of House Fiscal gave a high-level overview of the committee’s jurisdiction and budget structure. She explained that the State Government Finance Committee oversees funding for major administrative agencies, the legislature, constitutional offices, and several boards, councils, and commissions. She emphasized that the committee’s general fund base for fiscal years 2026-27 is about $1.31 billion, less than 2% of the state general fund, and that the largest pieces are the Department of Revenue, the legislature, and pension aids. She also described how all-funds presentations differ from general fund views, highlighting internal service funds such as Minnesota IT Services, Department of Administration services, and other chargeback or reimbursement arrangements. Members asked questions about House and Senate budgets, debt service related to the Capitol Area building project and move costs, and how Minnesota IT Services is funded through fee-for-service chargebacks. Colby Sullivan of House Research then summarized a memo in the packet that outlines the entities within the committee’s jurisdiction and the constitutional and statutory provisions governing them. He pointed members to the memo as a reference and noted that the committee also has jurisdiction over the Legislative Coordinating Commission, the legislative auditor, the legislative reference library, the reviser of statutes, the Secretary of State’s budget and certain duties, and three gambling-related agencies, though gambling policy itself is generally handled by another committee. He offered to help members with bill drafting and amendments and to provide a linked electronic version of the memo. The Office of the Legislative Auditor then began an overview of its work. Legislative Auditor Judy Randall explained that the office is nonpartisan, serves all 201 legislators, and provides oversight through financial audits, program evaluations, and special reviews focused on state funds. She distinguished the Legislative Auditor from the State Auditor, noting that the State Auditor is an elected constitutional officer who focuses on county and local government funds. Randall said the office would also present a deep dive into its November performance audit of the Minnesota State Lottery. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I would direct you back to that language.
• I can follow up and get back to you. Apologies. Okay.
• Back to SB 120 on early care and education.
• Back to SB 120 on early care and education.
• And it should not come back up for discussion.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee held an informational hearing on the final three-party budget agreement and related trailer bills, with the Department of Finance outlining the major budget bill and omnibus measures. Finance described a package built around balancing the state budget amid economic uncertainty, preserving core health and safety-net programs, and making significant ongoing reductions in some state programs. The budget bill included major items such as shifting $1 billion from the General Fund to the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund for Cal Fire, funding universal transitional kindergarten, deferring some UC and CSU funding, supporting foster care and homelessness programs, providing Proposition 36 implementation funding, and achieving Medi-Cal savings through changes to benefits and eligibility. The committee also heard that votes on the budget bills were expected later in the week and the following Monday. Finance then walked through the trailer bills, including health, human services, early learning, education, resources, energy, transportation, labor, housing, tax, public safety, courts, general government, cannabis, and energy-related measures. Notable provisions included a Medi-Cal enrollment freeze for certain adults, new premiums and benefit changes for some immigrants, child care COLA changes, education funding for literacy, teacher support, universal meals, and community college student support, as well as resource and climate measures affecting Cal Fire staffing and energy permitting. The housing trailer bill drew the most discussion, with provisions on CEQA streamlining, a vehicle miles traveled mitigation banking program, a renters’ credit trigger, and a six-year moratorium on new residential building standards. Members also discussed a film tax credit expansion, cannabis enforcement funding, a tribal police pilot program, and changes to tax policy, including military retirement income exclusions and wildfire settlement payment exclusions. Committee members largely praised the staff and the budget process, but several raised concerns and asked detailed questions, especially about the housing trailer bill’s new wage standards, tribal consultation provisions, and possible effects on prevailing wage protections. Finance explained that the housing language was intended to set wage floors for market-rate projects receiving CEQA streamlining, with different county-based tiers and a notwithstanding clause preserving existing prevailing wage laws. Members also questioned the size and timing of funding for the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, Clean Cars for All, Proposition 36, and the film tax credit expansion. Other members highlighted support for public safety, veterans’ tax relief, child care providers, housing production, and higher education, while some expressed concern that the budget’s policy changes were being negotiated too quickly or without enough stakeholder input.

Transcript Highlights:

• So again, turning it back over to you, Mr.
• Back is Commissioner Kaufman. Commissioner Kaufman. Thank you.
• I gather we're going to be here when you're back. So thank you.
• So, Commissioner Blanter, we're back to you. Okay.
• So when we come back, we will discuss the DESE rubric.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Commission on Combating Antisemitism met to hear testimony from Chief James Hicks of the Natick Police Department, who chairs the Municipal Police Training Committee, and Chief Thomas Fowler of the Salisbury Police Department. They described the statewide civil-rights-officer model for hate-crime response, the HEART Unit, and MPTC training authority under POST, and urged the commission to recommend incorporating the IHRA definition of antisemitism into police training and to fund that effort. Commissioners asked about how law enforcement should handle antisemitic incidents that may not rise to crimes, the 2022 Mapping Project, masking during protests, and the role of HART; the chiefs said departments can update training quickly, that every department should have a trained civil-rights officer, and that HART’s expertise should be integrated statewide. The commission also approved the October 16, 2025 minutes after correcting an initial procedural error. The rest of the meeting focused on the draft report, especially the prefatory statement and the definition section. Commissioners broadly praised the report’s scope and the chairs’ work, but offered many edits aimed at tightening language, reducing advocacy tone, and clarifying the “Massachusetts way” of combating antisemitism. Several members wanted stronger emphasis on Massachusetts values, education, moral leadership, and the distinction between hate incidents, hate crimes, and statutory offenses; others urged clearer references to constitutional protections, First Amendment limits, and Attorney General review of legal statements. There was also discussion of whether to keep or remove references to alternative definitions of antisemitism: some commissioners argued that only the IHRA definition should be centered, while others said acknowledging other definitions was factually important and would reflect the range of testimony. Commissioners also raised specific substantive edits for later sections, including adding examples such as the 2022 Mapping Project, strengthening language on online intimidation, academic boycotts, and divestment campaigns, and clarifying that some conduct may be hateful even if lawful. In the higher education section, members praised recommendations on mandatory training, bystander intervention, trauma-informed responses, mental health supports, and campus climate surveys, while suggesting a few technical edits and additional best-practice examples. No final votes were taken on the draft report during this portion; the chairs said they would incorporate feedback into a revised draft before the remaining meetings and eventual vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, we'll continue our back discussion. We're going to get it started.
• So I'll give it back to Dan at this point.
• We're doing it on the back end of things.
• You could come back to me in the chair. We could circulate it.
• David back there, good job to you. ...guys.

Transcript Highlights:

• Seeing none, let's come back to the room then.
• And then on Friday, we could bring it back with the amendment.
• And then on Friday, we'll have you back first on the agenda.
• It gives people an opportunity to go back, Mr.
• Seeing no one, let's come back to our room.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Let me get back to you on that.
• I know he has to come back at some point because his bag is in my office. He's going to be back.
• Okay, well, I don't want to take you back then.
• For example, when I got back, I was in leadership for four years before then I got back into leadership
• and then I got back on the legislative council.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll bring it back to the committee. Any questions? Mr. DiMaio.
• This bill puts money back into people's pockets.
• away from the government and gets it back into their pockets.
• I'm just suggesting we shouldn't be taking... ...back away from the government and gets it back into
• And also we can go back three years...

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation held its first regular hearing of the 2025-26 session, adopted its proposed committee rules on a 5-0 vote, and reinstated a suspense file for bills with fiscal impacts over the committee threshold. The chair explained that only AB 418 would be eligible for an immediate vote, while several other measures would be held for suspense consideration because of budget constraints. AB 330 was pulled by the author. AB 418 by Wilson, which would create a clearer process and administrative remedy for county Chapter 8 tax sales, received support from county tax collectors and housing and taxpayer groups. Supporters said the bill would add transparency, due process, and a noticed public hearing for negotiated sales of tax-defaulted properties, while helping counties dispose of low-value or problematic properties more efficiently. The committee voted 6-0 to send AB 418 to Appropriations. Several other bills were heard and then referred to suspense: AB 27 by Chau, which would exclude Chiquita Canyon landfill relief payments from gross income and protect recipients’ eligibility for public benefits, drew strong support from affected residents and environmental advocates; AB 258 by Conley would increase funding for California fairs, with supporters emphasizing fairs’ emergency-response role; AB 397 by Gonzalez would expand the California Young Child Tax Credit into a broader child tax credit for older children; and AB 398 by Aaron would set a $300 minimum refundable Cal EITC benefit. The committee also heard AB 231 by Tye, which would offer a tax credit to microbusinesses that hire formerly incarcerated people, and it too was referred to suspense after supportive testimony from reentry and small-business advocates.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We are back on the bill.
• We are back on the bill.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of member introductions recognizing interns, pages, volunteers, and the retirement of Pastor Gary Austin from the sergeant’s office. Leadership also announced that budget talks with the House were continuing and that senators would not need to plan on being in next week, suggesting progress toward a budget framework. After routine floor business, the chamber took up a major third-reading measure on citizen initiatives and several education bills, followed later by returning messages from the House on health and school-safety measures. The most extensive debate centered on the citizen initiative bill, which sponsors said was intended to protect the constitutional amendment process from fraud and abuse based on election-crime investigations and a large state report on petition fraud. Supporters argued the bill would add reasonable guardrails, prevent misuse of public funds, and preserve integrity while still allowing grassroots participation. Opponents from both parties argued it would make citizen-led amendments much harder by adding costs, deadlines, criminal penalties, and administrative burdens that would chill participation and favor wealthy or corporate interests. After lengthy debate, the Senate voted 28-10 to pass the bill. The chamber then passed several education measures with little or no opposition, including bills tied to Bright Futures, dual enrollment, Florida ABLE, teacher preparation, and other education policy updates, all by 38-0. Later, the Senate concurred in House amendments on a stem cell therapy bill, an EKG requirement for student athletes, and a cardiac emergency bill, each passing 37-0. The House also sent back a school safety bill with amendments affecting child care facility partnerships with law enforcement, temporary door locks during active assailant incidents, supervision windows, and funding for panic alarm systems; the transcript ends as that bill is being explained.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We're back on the bill as amended.
• We are back on the bill.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a series of member introductions recognizing interns, pages, and a retiring Senate employee. Leadership also announced that budget talks with the House were continuing and that senators should not plan to be in next week, with hopes of sharing more budget news soon. The chamber then moved to third reading and took up a major bill on citizen initiatives and constitutional amendments, with sponsors saying it was needed to address documented petition fraud and to protect the integrity of the process. That bill drew extensive debate. Supporters argued that recent investigations showed widespread fraud in petition gathering, that the measure would add reasonable guardrails, and that it would prevent taxpayer-funded government messaging from being used to influence ballot measures. Opponents said the bill would make it much harder for ordinary Floridians to place amendments on the ballot by adding costs, deadlines, registration requirements, fines, and felony exposure, and they warned it would chill grassroots participation and effectively favor wealthy or corporate-backed campaigns. After debate, the Senate passed the bill 28-10. The Senate then adopted several House amendments and concurred on a series of education and public-safety measures, including bills on stem cell therapy, student-athlete electrocardiograms, cardiac emergency planning in schools, school safety, Bright Futures and other education policy items, and educator preparation. Most of those measures passed unanimously or with overwhelming support, and the chamber also recognized additional interns and a long-serving education advocate before recessing and returning to continue with House messages.

Transcript Highlights:

• But can we get back to those that are on Prop. 36?
• Bringing it back to the dais, any comments, questions? Mr.
• Bringing it back to the dais.
• Bringing it back to the dice.
• Bringing it back to the dais. Any comments or questions?

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to jump a little bit ahead on the report and go back to ...go back to December.
• I mean, roughly, I think it's because when we pay back, it's more like 125 when we charge back.
• I mean, roughly, I think it's because when we pay back, it's more like 125 when we charge back.
• back.
• So if you look at, like, on that back to the first page, So if you look at, like, on that back to the

Summary: The Judiciary Interim Committee met to begin its study of charitable gaming and the ownership of alcoholic beverage establishments by licensed charitable gaming organizations, a study directed by Senate Bill 2334. Legislative Council gave an overview of the constitutional and statutory framework for charitable gaming, site authorizations, rent limits, proceeds, and recent legislative changes. The Attorney General’s Gaming Division then clarified the financial flow of gaming, explaining that in fiscal year 2025 North Dakota had about $2.5 billion in gross gaming proceeds, with roughly 88-90% paid back in prizes and about $256 million available to organizations after taxes; most of that activity came from electronic pull tabs. Members asked for more detail on winnings, replays, rent, and the breakdown of manufacturer/distributor revenues, and the AG’s office agreed to provide supplemental information. The committee also heard from the League of Cities and the Association of Counties about local site authorization. Cities said they have a limited role in approving gaming sites, can adopt policies after public hearing, may charge up to $100, and can set certain conditions, including local nexus requirements, but cannot require donations or force a specific charity or site. The League said it had worked with stakeholders on a model policy to provide more consistency, though members raised concerns that local requirements could become too restrictive for charities serving broader areas. Counties said the issue is mostly a city matter, with little county involvement beyond minimal site fees and general site approval. The North Dakota Gaming Alliance testified in support of the study and provided IRS-related material suggesting charities may use asset diversification, while emphasizing it had not taken a position on whether charities should own bars. Members questioned whether bar ownership is being used for site stability or to channel charitable gaming dollars, and whether city policies might disadvantage charities with broader missions. The committee also discussed the relationship between gaming organizations, manufacturers, and distributors, including restrictions on incentives and interference, and asked for more information on those entities and their ownership. Later in the meeting, the Racing Commission gave its regular update on live racing, pari-mutuel wagering, ADW providers, purse and promotion funds, a new TRPB contract, and concerns about cease-and-desist actions from other states. Finally, the State Hospital superintendent briefly reported on the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s support services, including the SORT team, training, and security assistance for the hospital campus.