Transcript Highlights:

• Are truly obligated, because if they aren't, then those would go and be moved over.
• in place, as long as the obligation was fully obligated by December 31st, then... ...of 2024, you have
• So this may fall into the — it's not obligated element.
• So that's the areas where they would need to have those funds obligated, have had them obligated by the
• My concern was whether it was truly obligated fully.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee took up Senate Bill 2025, the Veterans Home/Veterans Affairs budget, and worked through the long sheet line by line. Members discussed base payroll, salary and health insurance increases, FTE pool adjustments, IT rate increases, operating expenses, transportation grants, the PTSD service dog program, salary equity requests, temporary help/intern funding, a Veterans Benefit Specialist FTE, accrued leave, and several one-time or carryover items including the Fisher House, document scanning, and veterans medical transportation. The committee also reviewed proposed policy language that would shift governance authority for the Veterans Home and Department of Veterans Affairs from the Administrative Committee on Veterans Affairs to the governor, and would remove board authority over salary-setting and related hiring powers. A major portion of the meeting focused on clarifying the commissioner salary equity line and how the agency had shifted operating dollars to fund the commissioner’s current salary increase. After discussion with agency staff and Lonnie, the committee voted to remove the separate commissioner salary equity increase line and instead restore operating funding, ultimately setting the operating line at $50,000 above the prior amount rather than fully funding the executive request. The committee also approved funding for the Veterans Benefit Specialist FTE, approved a carryforward/exemption for accrued leave, approved authority to accept $200,000 in federal transportation grant funds, approved the $500,000 transfers related to veterans homelessness, and approved the exemption language for certain federal/state fiscal recovery funds after discussing whether the funds were properly obligated. On the governance amendment, members expressed concern about making a major policy change in an appropriations bill, but also frustration over the board’s salary actions. After debate, the committee adopted the amendment transferring governance authority to the governor by a 7-1 vote. The committee also approved a smaller amount for veteran service officer salary equity than requested, and rejected funding for temporary salaries and an intern. The chair then directed staff to prepare the amended bill for further action, with the committee planning to revisit it once the revised version was ready.

Transcript Highlights:

• But I'll finish up your de-obligation question.
• And/or they will de-obligate money that they have paid.
• One such example of that, of a de-obligation, there was...
• We are now proactive at preventing the obligations.
• And do they understand the obligation, the financial obligation they may be setting themselves up for

Summary: The Economic Development Budget Subcommittee received a lengthy presentation from Kevin Guthrie, Executive Director of the Florida Division of Emergency Management, on disaster costs, recovery operations, sheltering, and major capital projects. He reviewed the 2024 hurricane season impacts from Debby, Helene, and Milton, explaining how FEMA public assistance and state reimbursement work, how cost shares can shift from 75/25 to 90/10 after a federal threshold is reached, and how Florida uses prior storm data and inflation to estimate recovery costs. He also described the state’s faster reimbursement timelines, crediting legislative investments in technology and digital field documentation, and said the division is working to reduce disaster closeout timelines from decades to about seven years. Members asked about debris removal, FEMA de-obligations, local preparedness, and whether regional shelters or co-located emergency operations centers could be used more efficiently. Guthrie said debris assistance is complicated and should generally remain tied to local contracts and planning, though the state will help fiscally constrained communities when needed. He explained de-obligations as FEMA clawing back previously approved funds after later review, and said Florida’s FROC program is helping local governments reduce those risks through standardized documentation, procurement review, and training. He also urged more mandatory emergency-management training for local and state officials and cautioned against weakening the FEMA 50% rule for rebuilding damaged structures. Guthrie provided updates on the new central Florida warehouse in Auburndale and the new State Emergency Operations Center in Tallahassee. He said the warehouse will improve logistics, include cold and ultra-cold storage, and be run by a private vendor with virtual inventory tracking, while the new EOC is designed for Category 5 conditions and expanded partner capacity. He acknowledged budget pressures that reduced the size of the EOC project and said an additional IT request was needed because those costs were not originally included. The meeting ended with praise for FDEM’s work and no votes or formal actions beyond adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Only certificates of obligation.
• So a bond is a certificate of obligation or a general obligation bond.
• and the, um, certificates of obligation are additional tools for us to use.
• OK, which voter approved debt are you referring to the general obligation bonds.
• If we put a, a general obligation, uh, bill before the voters, they reject it.

Transcript Highlights:

• Currently the city pays into four obligations related to the stadium."
• Currently the city pays into four obligations related to the stadium.
• This bill does not change the city's commitment to pay those first three obligations, which actually
• The bill only eliminates the fourth obligation to the stadium, which was providing the excess revenue
• So I'm sorry I'm on a rant obligations. So I'm sorry I'm on a rant about<00:09:57.800> this.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• and that the state of Minnesota passes, and they need to provide low-cost medications as they're obligated
• and that the state of Minnesota passes, and they need to provide low-cost medications as they're obligated
• Um, if Pharma was to shirk that obligation Have any evidence that pharmaceutical companies, you know,
• Um, if Pharma was to shirk that obligation Um, in some of these rural hospitals?
• Um, if Pharma was to shirk that obligation HCMC. Senator Murphy was correct that we HCMC.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The meeting focused on a Minnesota Senate floor debate over a bipartisan 340B enforcement bill, with supporters arguing that the measure would require pharmaceutical companies to comply with federal and state law and continue providing discounted drugs to safety-net and rural hospitals. Senators and other speakers said the program is essential to hospital finances, especially for facilities facing operating losses and federal Medicaid cuts, and warned that without enforcement language hospitals such as Hennepin County Medical Center and rural hospitals could face severe financial harm or closure. Supporters also said pharmaceutical companies had spent heavily on media and lobbying to oppose the bill and that the Senate’s bipartisan vote showed the issue had broad support. Several speakers described how 340B revenue is used to sustain hospital services, including addiction treatment, trauma care, and other essential care in vulnerable communities. They said the program was designed to let hospitals buy drugs at low cost and bill insurers at standard rates, using the difference as a funding stream. When asked about claims that hospitals made large sums from the program, supporters said that was consistent with the program’s purpose. They also said some drug companies were not complying with 340B obligations, particularly around contract pharmacies, and that enforcement language was needed to ensure compliance. The discussion also addressed HCMC’s financial situation, with speakers saying 340B funding is not a full solution but is an important support and should not be reduced further. They rejected a proposed transparency/reporting amendment as too burdensome, while noting that federal authorities already have audit power over 340B dollars. The speakers urged the House to pass the same language, said eight Republicans joined the Senate vote, and expressed hope that the bill would advance despite concerns about House support and ongoing pharmaceutical industry opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving on to number two, the obligation to serve.
• Some LDCs appear to characterize the obligation to serve as an obligation to provide gas service to new
• Because of the obligation to serve, Because of the obligation to serve, the gas companies’ efforts to
• Nor should we obligate the gas company to offer a product that’s no longer in the public interest.
• We have substantially amended the obligation to serve, John and Talia.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on two related issues: gas utilities’ climate compliance plans filed with the Department of Public Utilities and the recent DPU orders reforming the Gas System Enhancement Program (GSEP). Chair Creem and other senators emphasized that Massachusetts must reduce gas use, shrink the gas distribution footprint, and move customers to alternatives such as heat pumps, network geothermal, and non-gas pipeline alternatives (NPAs). DPU Chair Jamie Van Nostrand said the new GSEP orders lower the annual revenue cap from 3.0% to 2.5%, phase it down toward 1.5%, eliminate carrying charges, require more rigorous risk prioritization, and push utilities to consider advanced leak technology, relining, repairs, and NPAs. He also described the climate compliance plans as the start of a longer process covering decommissioning, stranded costs, line extension allowances, integrated energy planning, and targeted electrification demonstrations. Senators pressed the DPU and utility witnesses on the lack of specificity in the climate compliance plans, especially the absence of numeric goals for gas usage reduction, customer conversions, and near-term deployment of NPAs. Utility representatives from Eversource and National Grid said their plans include NPA frameworks, integrated energy planning, targeted electrification pilots, network geothermal, and workforce transition efforts, but argued that implementation takes time, requires customer participation, and depends on coordination with electric utilities and communities. They said some NPA and electrification projects are being evaluated now, while larger-scale deployment is expected later in the decade. Senators also raised concerns about line extension allowances, with utilities explaining that new customers may be charged based on whether existing ratepayers would otherwise be harmed, while National Grid said it has begun increasing customer contributions to send stronger price signals. Attorney General Mary Gardner supported the DPU’s GSEP reforms and said the office favors eventually stepping the GSEP cap down to zero by 2030, with repair and replacement costs recovered in base rate cases instead. She argued that the utilities’ plans still rely too heavily on business-as-usual approaches, do not adequately quantify scope 3 emissions, and leave unresolved questions about the obligation to serve and the future of line extension allowances. Advocacy witnesses from the Conservation Law Foundation and Acadia Center were more critical, saying the plans lack the detailed modeling, targets, and transparency needed to show how the utilities will help meet the Commonwealth’s heating and cooling sublimits and broader climate goals. No votes were taken; the hearing consisted of testimony and questioning.

Transcript Highlights:

• All ARPA funds related to these projects have been obligated.
• , or is the obligation met, as you mentioned previously?
• Percentage of that obligation is a placeholder for services that were yet to be defined, or is the obligation
• That's all contracts signed to obligate.
• Typically, obligate means that a contract is signed, so that's how those dollars are obligated.

Transcript Highlights:

• But in D2, it addresses unpaid child support obligations. Obligations under 154.015. Excuse me.
• I believe that this bill equally supports those obligations.
• Excuse me, when the bill talks about unpaid child support obligations, it's referencing...
• But the child support obligation could come after the loan was granted.
• And then there's an outstanding child support obligation. How often is this coming?

Bills: HB368, HB3311, HB1734, HB2495, HB2716, HB793, HB3376, HB2524, HB3421, HB3446, HB3181

Keywords: electronic devices, family violence, criminal prosecution, protective orders, tracking, harassment, family allowance, decedent's estate, surviving spouse, minor children, inheritance, child support, maintenance, HB 1734, Family Code, Section 155.207, suit affecting the parent-child relationship, SAPCR, continuing exclusive jurisdiction, jurisdiction transfer

Transcript Highlights:

• . obligations. obligations. obligations<00:16:10.320> like<00:16:10.560> if<00:16:10.800
• no obligations incurred. no obligations incurred.
• Is it all of the obligations?
• the financial obligations or the um<00:23:31.919> curriculum<00:23:32.480> obligations<
• <00:23:33.520> So, um curriculum obligations maybe? So, um curriculum obligations maybe?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The work session began with HB 656, as amended, which would treat federal funds received by school districts as unanticipated money unless already listed in the annual report, and would require notices and school board minutes to identify the grant and summarize any obligations attached to accepting it. Supporters said the bill was aimed at transparency so voters would understand the “strings attached” to grants, while opponents raised concerns that the amendment was new, potentially vague, and could require districts to publish lengthy or redundant information, increasing costs and administrative burden. Several members suggested alternative approaches, such as a state-level list of common grant obligations or posting grant documents online. No vote was taken, and some members argued the bill was not ready for action. The committee then moved to HB 665, which would expand eligibility for free school meals to households at up to 300% of federal poverty guidelines and use education trust fund money to cover the added cost. Representative Damon strongly supported the bill, citing food insecurity and arguing the fiscal note likely overstated costs because the bill requires at least one free meal, not necessarily both breakfast and lunch. The discussion was just beginning when the transcript ended, and no vote or final action on HB 665 was recorded in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is a serious obligation.
• <01:09:16.560> on it this places a unique obligation on it this places a unique obligation
• <01:22:26.320> for Constitutional obligation for Constitutional obligation for prosecutors
• constitutional and ethical obligations constitutional and ethical obligations are<01:44:29.920><
• are and their ethical obligations.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The obligated that we really looked at was this is what you’ve signed and sealed saying we are obligated
• The obligated that we really looked at was this is what you've signed and sealed saying we are obligated
• obligated.
• Fully obligating the $260 million line of credit, which we show here about 150 has already been obligated
• And more detail, more discussion, we talk about carryover obligated, none obligated.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You have an obligation if you take these minerals, you produce them, and you sell them; you have an obligation
• Okay, um, and that's why I pointed out the law says that the obligation is only there if there's an obligation
• If there's no obligation, there's no obligation.
• So if there's an obligation to pay.
• Obligation means there's a contract to pay something. That's the obligation to pay.

Bills: HB3619, HB3652, HB4572, HB4891, HB4941, HB5103, HB5105, HB5106, HB5224, HB5600

Keywords: surface estate, well plugging, Railroad Commission, landowner rights, liability, strategic reserve, gas supply, petroleum products, disaster response, Railroad Commission of Texas, energy security, emergency planning, oil and gas waste, environmental regulation, waste management, mining pits, groundwater monitoring, regulation, commercial disposal facilities, environmental standards

Transcript Highlights:

• About 44% of Wazaa's line item has been obligated, and then 58% of Southwest's line item has been obligated
• The obligated that we really looked at was this is what you've signed and sealed saying we are obligated
• The obligated that we really looked at was this is what you've signed and sealed saying we are obligated
• obligated.
• And more detail, more discussion, we talk about carryover obligated, none obligated.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to review several interim studies and receive updates from the Department of Water Resources. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and welcomed Representative Hansen to the committee. Staff then reported that the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study had both satisfied the presentation requirements in their study directives, with no further required testimony unless members wanted additional information. The department’s main presentation focused on major water projects and agency operations. Reese Haas and staff updated members on the NAWS project, the Southwest Pipeline Project, Devils Lake outlet operations, low-head dam safety work, floodplain management repository implementation, data center water use, and the 2027 Water Development Plan. Members asked detailed questions about NAWS funding sources, remaining project costs, capacity concerns for All Seasons and other users, and whether current construction is being designed for future demand. The department said NAWS remains on track for substantial completion by October, that remaining NAWS funding will come from a mix of federal, state, and local sources, and that current construction is designed for ultimate capacity while some future components will be adjusted for increased demand. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to the department’s cash management, Resources Trust Fund revenues, carryover balances, and the State Water Commission’s cost-share program. The department reported $340.6 million in carryover remaining, explained that much of it is already obligated to long-term projects, and noted that oil price forecasts and stripper-well exemptions will affect future revenues. Members raised concerns about large carryovers, affordability for local sponsors, and whether the state should continue obligating money multiple bienniums ahead. The department said it is working with the commission on a revised prioritization framework, including high/moderate/low project categories and a two-tier pre-construction/construction approach, to better manage obligations and affordability. The committee also reviewed Deloitte’s finalized studies on regional governance/finance and cost-share policy. Deloitte presented options for Southwest, NAWS, and Red River governance, with stakeholders generally favoring keeping NAWS largely as is, using the current Southwest model with improvements, and pursuing a more structured governance option for Red River. On cost share, the department said Deloitte’s recommended package would cover projected needs through the 2030s, but would require policy changes such as lower percentages for some project types, a 25% replacement-project rate with a cap, and possible bonding or delayed reimbursement strategies. No votes were taken on these policy questions, and the chair indicated the committee would continue the discussion at future basin meetings and the September Water Topics meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• About 44% of Wazaa's line item has been obligated, and then 58% of Southwest's line item has been obligated
• They obligate the dollars toward a project.
• The obligated that we really looked at was this is what you've signed and sealed saying we are obligated
• obligated.
• And more detail, more discussion, we talk about carryover obligated, none obligated.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to receive interim status updates on several water-related studies and Department of Water Resources projects. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and then heard updates on the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study. Staff reported that the committee had already received the testimony contemplated in the study plans, including input from state agencies, local governments, and out-of-state entities, and that any further action would be at the committee’s discretion. The Department of Water Resources then provided project and budget updates on NAWS and the Southwest Pipeline Project. Reese reported NAWS is expected to serve about 81,000 users, with a total projected cost of about $571 million and about $96 million remaining, while the Southwest Pipeline Project is estimated at $1.06 billion total with about $409 million remaining. Members asked about funding sources, capacity needs, and whether current and future construction is being designed for increased demand; department staff said current work is designed for ultimate capacity, but some future components may need redesign based on new requests. The committee also discussed local cost shares, Minot’s role in NAWS funding, and whether the system is adequate for peak demand. A major portion of the meeting focused on the department’s cash management, carryover, and long-term water funding outlook. The department said Resources Trust Fund revenues are tied to oil extraction taxes and are affected by stripper well exemptions and future oil price declines. Members expressed concern about large carryover balances and whether the state is obligating more money than can realistically be spent in a biennium. The department reported about $340.6 million in remaining carryover and said it is trying to reduce that through a two-tier pre-construction/construction process and closer project vetting. The department also summarized the Deloitte studies on regional governance and finance and on cost-share policy. Stakeholders generally favored keeping the current governance structures for NAWS and Southwest with improvements, while Red River stakeholders leaned toward a different option; the department said it will bring an implementation plan back in September. On cost share, Deloitte’s recommendations would reduce some percentages, prioritize projects differently, and use other measures to close a projected long-term funding gap. Members debated affordability, local burden, deferred maintenance, and whether statutory changes may be needed to allow the commission more flexibility in prioritizing and funding projects. No formal votes or final actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this is the bond cap credit, not special obligation bonds.
• If you shifted off to the special obligation credit, it's a separate credit.
• Certainly, if you're adding special obligation bonds, they'll look at the special obligation bonds and
• The Commonwealth's special obligation credits are double-A-plus, and so that would be what we would be
• No special obligation bonds are paid from a very specific revenue source, so the Fair Share comes in

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, State Assets, and Capital Expenditures held its first public hearing on House Bill 4257, a transportation bonding bill. The administration testified in support, describing the bill as a $1.185 billion authorization: $300 million for Chapter 90 municipal road funding and $885 million for statewide transportation capital programs. Officials said the bill would increase municipal aid by 50%, with $200 million distributed under the traditional Chapter 90 formula and $100 million based solely on road mileage to better help rural communities. They also highlighted $500 million for bridge and pavement lifecycle asset management, $200 million for culverts and small bridges, and $185 million for congestion, safety, ADA, sidewalk, and multimodal improvements. Committee members asked about how municipalities would apply, how the road-mile formula would affect rural towns, and how the bill would interact with federal funding uncertainty and debt financing. Administration witnesses explained that projects would be administered through MassDOT district offices and Grant Central, that the bill would not backfill rescinded federal funds, and that the proposal would likely use special obligation bonds backed by Fair Share revenues to reduce pressure on the Commonwealth’s general obligation debt limit. Members also pressed the administration on the shift from general obligation to special obligation financing and on whether the Chapter 90 increase keeps pace with inflation. Administration officials said the special obligation structure would be credit-rated separately and was intended to expand available capital without affecting the GO bond cap, while acknowledging that the Commonwealth’s debt portfolio would grow. They said the Chapter 90 increase would roughly restore purchasing power lost since 2012, though construction inflation has outpaced general inflation. Several members and witnesses emphasized the importance of the road-mile formula for rural communities and the need for technical assistance for small towns. The Massachusetts Municipal Association testified in strong support of the bill, calling Chapter 90 and the new infrastructure authorizations critical for cities and towns facing federal uncertainty and rising costs. The Massachusetts Aggregate and Asphalt Pavement Association also supported the bill, citing the importance of the funding for road and bridge work, the construction season, and the industry’s economic impact. A committee member asked about asphalt price inflation, and the witness said liquid asphalt costs rose sharply after COVID, including increases of around 20% in some years. At the end of the hearing, the chair said members would receive a poll by email to move the bill out quickly, and the committee then voted to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to make sure that it's clear that we still have a delivery obligation to Elephant Butte.
• Obligation to Elephant Butte.
• Our delivery obligation to Texas is an obligation, so it's some percentage of what comes in.
• These are two separate obligations.
• Also, it'll help us meet our delivery obligations sooner by achieving those depletion reductions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Over $146 million in obligated public assistance funding has been passed with Debbie.
• We allowed some landfills to meet their obligations.
• We allowed some landfills to meet their obligations.
• We were able to prioritize and secure $386 million in obligated public assistance funding.
• You know, do you see that we need to make any more changes to the obligation of funds?

Summary: The committee received a program review from the Florida Division of Emergency Management on the 2024 hurricane season and FEMA reimbursement process. Deputy Director Keith Pruitt described the impacts of Hurricanes Debby, Helene, and Milton, including major storm surge, flooding, tornadoes, debris removal, power restoration, flood-control deployments, sheltering, and logistics missions. He emphasized that Florida’s approach is “federally funded, state managed, locally executed,” and said the division has already obligated large amounts of public assistance funding and mitigation dollars while continuing to work on remaining missions and reimbursements. A major focus of the discussion was how local governments can better document and vet debris-removal and other disaster costs so they are eligible for FEMA reimbursement. Chair DiCeglie and other senators raised concerns about local planning, commercial debris collection, and whether counties and municipalities that spend money up front will be reimbursed. Pruitt explained that eligibility depends on documentation, scope of work, insurance, and FEMA rules, and that the state’s FROC process is intended to help counties identify eligible work before costs are incurred. He also said commercial debris may be eligible in some cases but is not guaranteed, and that counties should coordinate early with FDEM and FEMA. Senators also asked about possible FEMA reforms, the age of outstanding reimbursement claims, and a proposed state fund to advance money to fiscally constrained counties while they wait for FEMA payments. Pruitt said Florida’s system is a national best practice, but that more county-level training and clearer coordination would help reduce de-obligations and audit problems. He said the reimbursement-advance idea is still being developed, and that the state continues to look at ways to streamline mitigation through programs like Elevate Florida. The committee took no formal action beyond hearing the presentation, and the meeting adjourned after closing comments from senators praising FDEM’s work.

Transcript Highlights:

• The $12.3 billion includes both funds that have been awarded and obligated from the federal government
• The $12.3 billion includes both funds that have been awarded and obligated from the federal government
• are inclusive of all taxback obligations are inclusive of all taxback obligations that<00:43:15.760
• <00:52:25.480> bonds general obligation bonds general obligation bonds in<00:52:27.319>
• looking at all state general obligation looking at all state general obligation bonds<00:59:31.319

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Capital Investment held its first meeting of the 2025 session with members and staff introducing themselves and describing their priorities. Senators from both parties repeatedly emphasized the goal of passing a strong bipartisan bonding bill this year, with several members noting that local projects were delayed after no bonding bill passed the previous year. Chair Housley also said the committee would not meet later that week and previewed an upcoming presentation from MMB on federal funds. The committee then heard a presentation from MMB’s Leah Corey and Anna Ming on Minnesota’s federal funding efforts. Corey explained that MMB’s federal funds team coordinates state efforts to maximize funding from IIJA, IRA, CHIPS, and related federal programs. She said Minnesota has secured about $12.3 billion in federal funding so far, including roughly $3 billion more since the last presentation, supporting about 1,800 projects statewide. Most of the funding is going to transportation, roads, and bridges, with other major areas including clean energy and weatherization. She also highlighted an interactive public dashboard showing projects by region and noted that much of the data reflects funds flowing through the state enterprise. Corey also discussed state match programs that helped unlock federal dollars, including the IIJA discretionary match fund, the State Competitiveness Fund, and the Forward Fund. She said $180 million in state match has unlocked about $1 billion in federal investment through the IIJA discretionary match fund, nearly $17 million in state investment has unlocked nearly $90 million in federal funding through the State Competitiveness Fund, and $124 million for the Forward Fund has unlocked nearly $1 billion in federal and private investment. Members asked whether more state dollars could have brought in more federal funds; Corey said she was not sure, but noted the IIJA match fund is expected to run out in the coming months. The presentation also focused on direct pay tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act, which allow tax-exempt entities such as governments, nonprofits, school districts, and tribal nations to receive payments for eligible clean energy projects after they are completed. Corey said the state is building awareness and technical assistance around direct pay, including educational sessions and a tax expert resource. She also described Minnesota’s Green Bank, the Minnesota Climate Innovation Finance Authority, which is beginning to issue loans for projects such as community energy, nonprofit geothermal systems, and solar-plus-battery installations.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's really funds that have not yet been obligated, so there's about $4 million of NEVI funds that we
• <00:24:06.120> about not yet been obligated so there's about not yet been obligated so there's
• And so once you've obligated the funds in FIS, then you're really guaranteed to get those funds.
• uh you know are actually obligated uh you know are actually obligated eventually<00:40:34.680>
• <00:43:38.720> the dollars and so once you've obligated the dollars and so once you've obligated

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So $597 million of obligation will remain, $62 million of obligation will be eliminated. >> Thank you
• obligation will be eliminated. obligation will be eliminated.
• stadium obligations still remain. stadium obligations still remain.
• and operating obligations.
• and operating obligations. and operating obligations.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all