Bills: HB4421, HB4426, HB4432, HB4329, HB3551, HB3763, HB1411, HB2730, HB3465, HB3649, HB3650, HB3674, HB3941, HB3970, HB3979, HB3980, HB3981, SB1074

Keywords: child welfare, fentanyl exposure, drug endangerment, environmental testing, safety analysis, remediation, child protection, Department of Human Services, violence prevention, HB4426, SIDE tax credit, strategic industrial development enhancement, income tax credit, economic development, tax incentive, qualified economic development expenditures, qualified initial infrastructure expenditures, industrial park, economic development zone, port authority

Summary: The committee heard a bill presented by the Speaker, who said the measure was prompted by a constituent request and was intended to protect children in Oklahoma from fentanyl-related harm. He noted he would file a floor amendment to rename it “Leo’s Law” in memory of a person lost to fentanyl. The chair also announced a work draft, PCS-1, which the Speaker agreed to adopt. Members asked about how the bill would work in practice. One question raised whether the bill could require a home to be inspected and cleaned of fentanyl residue before a child is returned; the Speaker said he liked the idea and was open to working it into a floor amendment with DHS. Another member asked whether the bill simply mirrored current child endangerment law or strengthened it, and the Speaker said it was intended to strengthen existing law in response to fentanyl’s severity. A follow-up question about age and circumstances prompted the Speaker to say the bill was meant to give judges, DHS, and district attorneys tools to protect children in a wide range of situations. After questions ended, the committee moved to a due pass motion. The bill passed the committee 31-0, and the chair reported it out with a due pass recommendation. The committee then stood at recess.

Bills: HB2016, HB2104, HB2105, HB2174, HB2256, HB2289, HB2477, HB2903, HB2939, HB2979, HB2996, HB4103

Keywords: tax penalties, filing, tax returns, administration, Arizona Revised Statutes, agricultural property, classification, county assessor, property inspection, appeal process, property tax, agricultural classification, Department of Revenue, property valuation, inspection notice, inspection report, on-site inspection, full cash value, rural land, farm land

Bills: SB1302, SB1389, SB1401, SB1776, SB1809, SB1858, SB1985, SB2053, SB2148

Keywords: income tax, tax rates, revenue certification, Oklahoma Tax Commission, state budget, education, tax credit, school choice, private school, tuition assistance, income limits, parental choice, accreditation, insurance, taxation, premium, home office credit, healthcare, teacher tax credit, income tax credit

Bills: SB1302, SB1389, SB1401, SB1776, SB1809, SB1858, SB1985, SB2053, SB2148

Keywords: income tax, tax rates, revenue certification, Oklahoma Tax Commission, state budget, education, tax credit, school choice, private school, tuition assistance, income limits, parental choice, accreditation, insurance, taxation, premium, home office credit, healthcare, teacher tax credit, income tax credit

Summary: The Revenue and Taxation Committee met and considered several bills. Senate Bill 1776, by Senator Pugh, would create a $10,000 refundable tax credit for teachers with seven consecutive years of service, as part of a teacher retention strategy; after questions about the seven-year threshold, it passed 8-3. Senate Bill 1858, by Senator Frix, would create a new TIF district financing option allowing developers, rather than cities or counties, to borrow against projected TIF revenues; the committee adopted an amendment changing a filing provision from “may” to “shall,” and the bill passed 7-4. Senate Bill 1985, by Senator Guthrie, would let state retirement systems consider limited investments in regulated digital assets, capped at 5% and narrowed to large-market-cap assets; the committee added an amendment inserting “in” to clarify the language, and the bill passed 9-2. The committee then rejected Senate Bill 1302, by Senator Kirt, which would repeal the “path to zero” trigger tied to future income tax cuts; it failed 2-9 after debate over fiscal stability and tax relief. Senate Bill 1809, by Senator Hamilton, would raise the homestead exemption from $1,000 to $5,000; members debated its impact on local governments and school funding, but it passed 9-2. Senate Bill 1401, by Senator Rader, was amended to adjust the insurance premium tax rate from 1.96% to 2.16% and eliminate the home office premium tax credit; the bill was laid over after concerns about its fiscal impact. Finally, Senate Bill 2053, also by Senator Rader, would allow cities and counties to impose up to a 10% excise tax on medical marijuana dispensaries by local vote, with OTC handling collections and enforcement; supporters framed it as local control and a way to offset public safety costs, while opponents argued it unfairly targeted dispensaries and consumers. The bill passed 7-3. The committee then adjourned and announced it would meet again the following Monday after floor activity.

Transcript Highlights:

• currently, and I won't read the whole synopsis to you, but members of volunteer rescue squads, it's a tuition

Bills: HB3, HB116, HB165, HB178, HB3, HB116, HB165, HB178

Keywords: illegal alien, enhanced sentencing, criminal offenses, minor victims, felonies, Alabama legislature, HB116, Alabama Sunset Law, sunset bill, sunset review, Alabama Professional Bail Bonding Board, bail bonding, bail bonds, bail bond industry, professional bail bondsman, licensing board, state agency continuation, agency reauthorization, regulatory board, criminal justice

Transcript Highlights:

• And along those lines on tuition waivers, do we not have a program for tuition waiver for grandchildren
• When you're identifying students with tuition waivers, they would be among those who have tuition waivers
• Therefore, they might be among those who have tuition waivers.
• When you're identifying students with tuition waivers, they would be among those who have tuition waivers
• And I think the in-state tuition waiver should remain in place.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee met to hear SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. The sponsor described the bill as a response to federal immigration priorities and said it replaces a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, expands local-federal cooperation, increases penalties for crimes committed by unauthorized immigrants, requires detention in certain cases, broadens information sharing, funds detention-bed expansion and law-enforcement training, and ends in-state tuition waivers for undocumented students. The bill also includes provisions related to sanctuary policies, voter fraud, transport of unauthorized aliens, and driver’s license-related offenses. The sponsor said the bill appropriates roughly $300 million overall, including $250 million for grants and $48 million for the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for interdiction and border-related enforcement work. Committee members questioned the bill’s scope, costs, and implementation. Senators focused heavily on the tuition-waiver repeal, asking how many students would be affected and whether the bill would harm students who have long lived in Florida. They also pressed on whether the bill should include stronger E-Verify provisions, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, whether local officials could be penalized for policy choices, and how immigration status would be verified in court and jail settings. The sponsor and Senator Fine said the tuition waiver would be removed for undocumented students, that the bill does not address E-Verify, and that the measure is intended to make immigration status a factor in detention and sentencing. Questions also addressed detention-bed capacity, reimbursement rates, and whether corrections staff would receive bonuses or salary increases; sponsors said bonuses are included for participating law enforcement, while broader salary issues would be handled in the regular budget process. Public testimony was sharply divided. Supporters and information-only witnesses, including Sheriff Bob Gualtieri and former officials, said the bill would help Florida coordinate with federal authorities, expand bed space, and close loopholes in existing immigration enforcement. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Policy Institute, labor groups, and immigrant advocates argued the bill is unconstitutional, likely to trigger litigation, and harmful to families, schools, and the economy. They warned that the pretrial detention provisions could lead to wrongful detentions and that the tuition changes would reduce access to higher education and cost the state tuition revenue. No final vote is reflected in the transcript excerpt, but the committee continued through public comment and extended the meeting to complete the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• And along those lines on tuition waivers, do we not have a program for tuition waiver for grandchildren
• When you're identifying students with tuition waivers, they would be among those who have tuition waivers
• waivers that the provision of removing out-of-state college tuition waivers for these undocumented students
• I actually wanted to speak specifically to the in-state tuition waiver.
• Now, these youth are paying millions annually for in-state tuition with the waiver now.

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee took up SB 2-C, a major immigration enforcement bill sponsored by Senator Gruters and co-introduced by Senator Fine. Gruters described the measure as a broad crackdown on illegal immigration that would replace a single immigration officer with a State Board of Immigration Enforcement, create a $250 million grant program for local law enforcement, fund additional Department of Agriculture interdiction staff and facilities, expand pretrial detention for certain unauthorized immigrants, increase criminal penalties, require more cooperation with ICE, and eliminate in-state tuition eligibility for undocumented students. He and supporters framed the bill as a way to support law enforcement, deter illegal immigration, and align Florida with federal enforcement efforts. Committee questioning focused heavily on the bill’s education, detention, and enforcement provisions. Senators pressed Gruters and Fine on why the bill did not address employer sanctions or E-Verify, whether the tuition changes would affect students who had grown up in Florida, how sanctuary-policy enforcement would work, and whether the bill would create practical burdens for prosecutors, jails, and local officials. Gruters said he was open to working on E-Verify in regular session but not to amending this bill, and Fine argued the tuition repeal would apply to undocumented students who had qualified under existing law. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified in support, saying ICE bed capacity was still insufficient and that county jails needed more resources to honor detainers. Mark Schlachman of FSU Law offered historical context, noting prior state-federal cooperation efforts and warning of unintended consequences, while several public witnesses opposed the bill as unconstitutional, costly, and harmful to immigrant families and the economy. Opponents from the Southern Poverty Law Center, ACLU of Florida, Florida Center for Fiscal and Economic Policy, Florida Policy Institute, AFL-CIO, and immigrant advocacy groups argued the bill would invite litigation, encourage racial profiling, harm the workforce and higher education, and punish law-abiding immigrants and their families. They emphasized that immigration is a federal matter, that K-12 education must be provided regardless of status, and that removing in-state tuition would reduce access to college and hurt Florida’s economy. Some speakers urged the committee to grandfather current students if the tuition waiver is repealed. The meeting ended with continued public testimony and no final vote reflected in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• And along those lines on tuition waivers, do we not have a program for a tuition waiver for grandchildren
• waiver and might that they not be among those 6500 students who are who have tuition waivers. >> Thank
• those who have tuition waivers.
• I think the in-state tuition waiver should remain in place.
• Now these youth are paying millions annually for in-state tuition with the waiver.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's important also to note on this that we're talking tuition waivers here.
• And with that, that would summarize the 2024-25 tuition waiver report.
• And it looks at net tuition revenue and general... and waivers.
• tuition minus tuition waivers and then comes out with an amount.
• The right two charts here, with the dark blue, are the tuition gross revenues and tuition waivers and

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed the 2024-25 tuition waiver report for the North Dakota University System. Staff explained that waivers were reported for degree-seeking students and broken out by residency, institution, and waiver type. Members asked about partial versus full waivers, institutional discretion, athletic waivers, and whether campuses have published guardrails or transparency requirements. Staff said most waivers are set by institutions, with some statutory and board-required categories, and that athletic waivers are a small share of total waiver dollars. The report showed total gross tuition of $354.5 million, tuition waived of $38.9 million, and 11,193 of 42,040 students receiving some waiver. Members also discussed how waivers affect net tuition revenue, housing and food collections, and whether campuses are using waivers strategically compared with scholarships and other funding sources. The committee then heard a presentation on tuition rates by campus and State Board policy. Staff explained the board’s tuition factors for resident, Minnesota reciprocity, contiguous-state/U.S. nonresident, and international students, and noted that campuses often seek exceptions based on program-specific competition and enrollment goals. Members asked whether rates are based on cost or competition, and staff said campuses typically bring forward estimates and market comparisons when requesting special rates. The presentation also reviewed general fund appropriations versus net tuition revenue by campus, and members discussed how local tuition decisions and waivers do not directly affect the state funding formula, though they do affect institutional revenue and reserves. Questions were also raised about the Higher Learning Commission’s financial composite indicator and how it differs from the more intuitive reserve and revenue figures. The committee next received a broad overview of non-higher-education entities affiliated with the State Board of Higher Education, beginning with NDSU agriculture-related units. Dr. Greg Lardy described the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, the NDSU Extension Service, the Agricultural Experiment Station, and the branch research centers, emphasizing their statewide role in crop and livestock research, extension education, and county-based outreach. He outlined funding mixes for extension, the experiment station, and branch stations, noting that grants and contracts support both research and education, while the agronomy seed farm is self-funded through seed sales. Members asked about the new and vacant FTE pool, R1 research status, matching requirements for grants, and whether state appropriations count toward research expenditures. Dr. Lardy also highlighted major research impacts, including crop varieties, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, and NDAWN weather data. The Northern Crops Institute and the Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute also presented. NCI described its role in market development, technical services, and education for regional agriculture, its governance through the Northern Crops Council, and its funding from state appropriations, other states, and earned revenue. Members asked about the source of out-of-state funding, intellectual property, and the institute’s international reach. UGPTI then outlined its transportation research, federal and state funding structure, and work on road and bridge condition assessments, travel demand modeling, and workforce training. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill removes out-of-state tuition waivers for students who are non-U.S. citizens or legal residents
• Working backwards, one of the last things you just said was on the in-state tuition waiver if they're
• waiver?
• Don't fully understand that, but I'm going to move on to back to the tuition waiver, so maybe for Senator
• ... ...but I'm going to move on back to the tuition waiver, so maybe for Senator Fine.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee took up SB 2B, a major immigration bill by Senator Gruters, described by supporters as a Trump-aligned package to strengthen Florida’s role in immigration enforcement. The bill would create a grant program for local law enforcement, expand jail-ICE agreements beyond sheriff-operated jails, establish a chief immigration officer and a state immigration enforcement council, require more coordination on E-Verify and detention-bed reporting, allow immigration status to be considered in bail decisions, increase penalties for certain offenses tied to illegal reentry and voting, and repeal in-state tuition waivers for undocumented students. Much of the sponsor’s presentation and debate emphasized focusing on criminal offenders, improving coordination with federal authorities, and using state resources to support detention and enforcement. Committee questioning focused heavily on the tuition-waiver repeal, reimbursement for jail costs, E-Verify coverage, and whether the bill could lead to street-level immigration enforcement in schools or churches. Senator Smith, Senator Pizzo, Senator Polsky, Senator Sharief, and others challenged the tuition repeal as unfair to students who were brought to Florida as children and argued for grandfathering current students or studying the fiscal impact first. Senator Fine defended the repeal as ending a state subsidy for people who are not lawfully present and argued the change would save tens of millions of dollars. Sheriff Bob Gualtieri testified that the bill was limited to jail-based enforcement, said there was no current street-level 287(g) program in Florida, and stated he did not believe the bill raised concerns for law enforcement or schools/churches. A representative of the Florida Supervisors of Elections supported the voting-related section, while a Florida Highway Patrol representative said state agencies would need additional funding if they were expected to take on more enforcement duties. The committee adopted Senator Gruters’ late-filed amendment correcting a drafting error. Senator Smith’s amendment to require an OPAGA study on the tuition-waiver policy was withdrawn after discussion, and his handwritten amendment to delete the repeal of in-state tuition for undocumented students failed on a roll-call vote. The bill then advanced as amended, with several members speaking in debate both for and against it. Supporters framed it as a focused public-safety and enforcement measure; opponents criticized the special-session process, the cost, and the tuition repeal’s impact on students already enrolled.

Transcript Highlights:

• RESIDENT CAN MARRY SOMEONE FROM OUT OF STATE SO THEIR SPOUSE CAN GET IN-STATE TUITION WAIVER?
• WAIVER?
• IN-STATE TUITION. >> Sen.
• DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT BUT I'M GOING TO MOVE ON BACK TO THE TUITION WAIVERS AND MAYBE FOR SENATOR
• OR A WAIVER OR OUT OF STATE?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , but particularly for out-of-state tuition.
• The grandparent waiver has cost FSU around $3.5 million.
• The state employee waiver cost FSU around $3.1 million.
• The state employee waiver cost FSU around $3.1 million.
• aspects of it, we've got net tuition revenue.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there anything changed on the tuition waiver from yesterday's bill? Senator Gruters, thank you.
• Now I want to go back into the discussion of the tuition waiver. Okay. Thank you.
• Now I want to go back into the discussion of the tuition waiver.
• About 6,500 students who are getting the tuition waiver right now.
• at these schools, because remember it's a tuition waiver.

Summary: The Senate opened with a prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and the reading of an amended joint proclamation expanding the Legislature’s immigration agenda. The proclamation added items calling for financial penalties for government officials, enhanced criminal penalties for offenses committed by illegal aliens, and programs and appropriations to support law enforcement in enforcing federal immigration law. The chamber then took up the special order calendar, beginning with Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2B, the immigration bill. Most of the meeting was devoted to debate and questions on the strike-all amendment to SB 2B. Sponsor Senator Gruters described the bill as a broad immigration enforcement package aligned with President Trump’s agenda. He said it would require greater cooperation with federal immigration authorities, strengthen participation in the 287(g) program, create a chief immigration officer and council, authorize financial penalties for noncompliance, provide bonuses for officers assisting ICE, and direct information-sharing with federal agencies. He also said the bill would bar DHSMV from issuing licenses or ID cards to unauthorized aliens and would end in-state tuition waivers for undocumented students. Senators Polsky, Pizzo, Smith, Jones, Berman, Osgood, and others questioned the scope of the bill, whether it would affect schools, churches, cities, nonprofits, and green-card holders, and how the 287(g) provisions would work in practice. Gruters repeatedly said the operational focus was on jails and detention facilities, not street-level enforcement. A major point of controversy was the bill’s proposed mandatory death penalty for unauthorized aliens convicted of certain capital offenses. Senator Fine said the covered crimes were the most serious capital felonies, including murder, child sexual battery, destructive-device offenses causing death, and certain trafficking offenses, and argued the provision was intended to withstand constitutional challenge. Senator Pizzo raised Eighth Amendment concerns and questioned whether the bill could mandate death sentences. The tuition waiver provisions also drew extended debate: Fine said the state would save about $41 million by ending discounted tuition for undocumented students, while Democrats argued the savings would not return to general revenue and that the policy would harm students who are already enrolled. Fine and Gruters said green-card holders would not be affected and that the bill targeted only students in the country illegally. The discussion also covered appropriations and implementation. Senator Smith asked about the bill’s large funding levels, and Fine broke down the spending as including $375 million for the chief immigration officer, $100 million in grants to local law enforcement, $29 million for the new Office of State Immigration Enforcement, and $10 million for an unauthorized-alien transport program. Gruters said the funds would reimburse local governments and help address staffing shortages, while critics questioned the lack of benchmarks and the fiscal impact. No final vote or disposition on the bill appears in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there anything changed on the tuition waiver from yesterday's bill? Senator Gruber's. Thank you.
• Now I want to go back into the discussion of the tuition waiver. Okay. Thank you.
• Now I want to go back into the discussion of the tuition waiver. Okay.
• About 6,500 students who are getting the tuition waiver right now.
• at these schools, because remember it's a tuition waiver.

Summary: The Senate opened with a quorum, prayer, and the Pledge of Allegiance, then read an amended joint proclamation expanding the special session call to include financial penalties for government officials, criminal penalties for offenses committed by illegal aliens, and programs and appropriations to support law enforcement cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. No committee reports, governor’s messages, or House messages were on the desk before the chamber moved to the special order calendar. The main item was Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 2B, the immigration bill, along with a late-filed strike-all amendment by Senator Gruters. Gruters said the amendment aligned terminology with federal law, increased penalties for crimes by unauthorized aliens, added transnational crime organizations to gang definitions, required stronger participation in the federal 287(g) program, created financial penalties for noncompliance, offered a $1,000 bonus for officers assisting ICE in large operations, directed more information-sharing with federal agencies, and barred DHSMV from issuing licenses or IDs to unauthorized aliens. He framed the bill as supporting President Trump’s immigration agenda and focusing on criminal illegal aliens rather than street-level enforcement. A long question-and-answer period followed, with Senators Polsky, Pizzo, Smith, Jones, Roscoe, Berman, and others pressing the sponsor on scope, legality, costs, and implementation. Questions focused on whether the bill would require participation beyond jails and detention centers, whether schools or churches could be affected, liability and immunity for local agencies, the size and purpose of the proposed appropriations, and the impact on undocumented students receiving in-state tuition waivers. Gruters and Senator Fine said the 287(g) provisions were intended to apply to jails and detention facilities, that green-card holders and lawful residents would not be affected, and that the tuition waiver repeal would end discounted tuition for students in the country illegally while not affecting their ability to attend. Fine also defended the mandatory death penalty provision for certain capital offenses committed by illegal immigrants, acknowledging it would likely be challenged in court but arguing the bill was designed to test and advance the policy. No final vote or other action on the bill is reflected in the excerpt.

Bills: HR202, HB2095, SB2657, SB2138, SB3110, SB3082, SB3109, HB1800

Keywords: Hawaii, Hawaiʻi, house resolution, congratulatory resolution, education, public schools, librarian of the year, middle school principal of the year, school counselor of the year, teacher of the year, library system, blind and print disabled, accessible learning, braille, audio technology, principal, school counselor, agriculture education, culinary arts, student recognition

Transcript Highlights:

• It's just then a question of the cost of the tuition waivers.
• It's just then a question of the cost of the tuition waivers.
• It's just then a question of the cost of the tuition waivers.
• So, you know, the original bill sort of mandates and requires you to give tuition waivers.
• We could add it to the policy you currently give out $62 million in tuitions and waivers, and within

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism and Higher Education heard HB 1494, relating to sports facilities. Testimony was largely in opposition to the bill as drafted from the Stadium Authority, the Department of Accounting and General Services, and the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, with several other written comments also opposing; each asked that if the measure advances, Senate language from related stadium bills be incorporated instead. The University of Hawaiʻi testified in support of the Nāʻid project and said it wants the project delivered at Halawa so the university can have a football facility, though members pressed the university on whether it was effectively supporting both the project and the bill’s current approach. A substantial portion of the hearing focused on the stadium project’s financing, schedule, and oversight. DAGS and Public Works discussed a consultant contract that had grown to about $28 million and an audit that recovered $441,000 after improper travel and expense reimbursements, including first-class airfare and other personal expenses; officials said the audit exposed weak internal controls and led to revised reimbursement policies. Members questioned whether the problems would have been found without media reporting and whether stronger oversight should have been in place earlier. The committee also discussed the current Ching Field setup for UH football, with witnesses describing it as less than ideal and temporary until the new stadium is built. Stadium Authority representatives said the current preferred offeror is Aloha Halawa Development Partners, negotiations have recently accelerated, and the goal remains a contract this summer and a fall 2028 opening. They said the state is committed to $350 million in general obligation bonds, with the overall project expected to cost more, and that the developer is exploring other financing sources such as TIF or CFD while the state and city work to expedite permits and demolition. No vote or final action on the bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• IT REMOVES THE OUT-OF-STATE TUITION. WAIVER FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE NOT U.S.
• THIS AMENDMENT ALLOWS THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO ENJOY THE IN-STATE TUITION WAIVER FOR THE REMAINDER OF
• At the university with the most number of in-state tuition waivers for the undocumented. Shame.
• THE TUITION WAIVER, OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT IT.
• Nelson spoke to us about being a Dreamer and going to Florida's schools, and having a tuition waiver.

Bills: SJR2, SB4, SJR36, SJR2, SB4, SJR1, SJR5, SB9, SB40, SJR2, SB4, SR98, SJR40, SJR41, SJR42, SJR43, SJR44, SJR45, SJR46, SJR47, SCR13, SB6, SB13, SB21, SB826, SB827, SB828, SB829, SB830, SB831, SB832, SB833, SB834, SB835, SB836, SB837, SB838, SB839, SB840, SB841, SB842, SB843, SB844, SB845, SB846, SB847, SB848, SB849, SB850, SB851, SB853, SB854, SB855, SB856, SB857, SB858, SB859, SB860, SB861, SB862, SB863, SB864, SB865, SB866, SB867, SB868, SB869, SB870, SB871, SB872, SB873, SB874, SB875, SB876, SB877, SB878, SB879, SB880, SB881, SB882, SB883, SB884, SB885, SB886, SB887, SB888, SB889, SB890, SB891, SB892, SB893, SB894, SB895, SB896, SB897, SB898, SB899, SB900, SB901, SB902, SB903, SB904, SB905, SB906, SB907, SB908, SB909, SB910, SB911, SB912, SB913, SB914, SB915, SB916, SB917, SB918, SB919, SB920, SB921, SB922, SB923, SB924, SB925, SB926, SB927, SB928, SB929, SB930, SB931, SB932, SB933, SB934, SB935, SB936, SB937, SB938, SB939, SB940, SB941, SB942, SB943, SB944, SB945, SB946, SB947, SB948, SB949, SB950, SB951, SB952, SB953, SB954, SB955, SB956, SB957, SB958, SB959, SB960, SB961, SB962, SB963, SB964, SB965, SB966, SB967, SB968, SB969, SB970, SB971, SB972, SB973, SB974, SB975, SB976, SB977, SB978, SB979, SB980, SB981, SB982, SB983, SB984, SB985, SB986, SB987, SB988, SB989, SB990, SB991, SB992, SB993, SB994, SB995, SB996, SB997, SB998, SB999, SB1000, SJR40, SJR41, SJR42, SJR43, SJR44, SJR45, SJR46, SJR47, SCR13, SB6, SB13, SB21, SB826, SB827, SB828, SB829, SB830, SB831, SB832, SB833, SB834, SB835, SB836, SB837, SB838, SB839, SB840, SB841, SB842, SB843, SB844, SB845, SB846, SB847, SB848, SB849, SB850, SB851, SB853, SB854, SB855, SB856, SB857, SB858, SB859, SB860, SB861, SB862, SB863, SB864, SB865, SB866, SB867, SB868, SB869, SB870, SB871, SB872, SB873, SB874, SB875, SB876, SB877, SB878, SB879, SB880, SB881, SB882, SB883, SB884, SB885, SB886, SB887, SB888, SB889, SB890, SB891, SB892, SB893, SB894, SB895, SB896, SB897, SB898, SB899, SB900, SB901, SB902, SB903, SB904, SB905, SB906, SB907, SB908, SB909, SB910, SB911, SB912, SB913, SB914, SB915, SB916, SB917, SB918, SB919, SB920, SB921, SB922, SB923, SB924, SB925, SB926, SB927, SB928, SB929, SB930, SB931, SB932, SB933, SB934, SB935, SB936, SB937, SB938, SB939, SB940, SB941, SB942, SB943, SB944, SB945, SB946, SB947, SB948, SB949, SB950, SB951, SB952, SB953, SB954, SB955, SB956, SB957, SB958, SB959, SB960, SB961, SB962, SB963, SB964, SB965, SB966, SB967, SB968, SB969, SB970, SB971, SB972, SB973, SB974, SB975, SB976, SB977, SB978, SB979, SB980, SB981, SB982, SB983, SB984, SB985, SB986, SB987, SB988, SB989, SB990, SB991, SB992, SB993, SB994, SB995, SB996, SB997, SB998, SB999, SB1000

Keywords: SJR 2, Senate Joint Resolution 2, constitutional amendment, homestead exemption, property tax relief, school property tax, ad valorem tax, residence homestead, school district taxes, Texas Constitution Article VIII, public school finance, homeowner exemption, elderly exemption, senior tax relief, disabled exemption, tax year 2025, voter approval, November 2025 ballot, local government, Ways & Means

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, but these are the categories of those tuition waivers.
• </c> a tuition waiver reimbursement program. a tuition waiver reimbursement program.
• <00:41:18.319><c> waiver</c><00:41:18.720><c> reimbursement</c><00:41:19.440><c> program</c> tuition
• waiver reimbursement program tuition waiver reimbursement program which<00:41:20.079><c> would</c><00
• This is by institution rather than by tuition waiver category.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its fifth and final Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Education meeting, but did not initially have a quorum and approved the minutes later when enough members were present. The Council on Postsecondary Education, represented by President Aaron Thompson and Vice President Bill Payne, opened with condolences for the UPS crash victims and then presented higher education budget recommendations for the 2026-2028 biennium. Thompson emphasized the return on investment from state support for higher education, citing gains in retention, enrollment, persistence, graduation, reduced time to degree, lower student debt, and expanded dual credit participation, while noting that affordability and access remain priorities. Payne outlined CPE’s operating funds request, including $43.3 million in the first year and $86.6 million in the second year for inflation adjustments, plus $30 million and $45 million for performance funding. He said the inflation request would apply across the board to institutions to offset rising costs, and that the KSU land grant match would not need additional funding because the state has already met the matching requirement. He also explained that state support for educating students has not kept pace with inflation over time, creating pressure on institutional budgets and tuition, though tuition increases have been held to historic lows in recent years. A major portion of the discussion focused on the performance funding model and how it affects smaller institutions. CPE proposed two approaches to address institutions that have received little or no performance funding, especially Kentucky State University and Morehead State University. The first approach would create a $20 million minimum distribution pool, providing $1.95 million to each university and $4.4 million to KCTCS, with the goal of giving smaller and rural institutions a base level of support. The second approach would provide direct appropriations totaling a little over $5.6 million to Kentucky State, Morehead State, and five community colleges that have not been receiving performance funding. Members, especially Representative Tipton and Senator West, questioned how the model had treated small schools over time, and CPE officials explained that the original small school adjustment was not large enough to prevent KSU and Morehead from effectively being left out of the distribution. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• that a foster child must use their tuition waiver by age 25.
• I was fortunate enough to utilize the tuition and fee waiver right after high school.
• Care via the tuition fee waiver.
• The tuition and fee waiver was a significant step forward.
• If they do not do so, they lose the tuition and fee waiver.

Bills: HB173, HB184, HB484, HB678, HB 1211, HB1507, HB1705, HB1868, HB2290, HB2851, HB2856, HB3041, HB3204, HB173, HB184

Keywords: foreign donations, higher education, public institutions, national security, funding, prohibition, Texas law, healthcare, insurance, affordability, access, public health, foreign influence, education policy, student loan repayment, prosecuting attorneys, border prosecution unit, financial assistance, tobacco, cigarettes

Transcript Highlights:

• Next, tuition waiver for children in state foster care or guardianship. Robert Rodler?
• Next,<00:32:12.399><c> tuition</c><00:32:12.880><c> waiver</c><00:32:13.279><c> for</c><00:32:13.519>
• <c> children</c><00:32:13.840><c> in</c> Next, tuition waiver for children in Next, tuition waiver for
• > and</c> of the tuition waiver for foster and of the tuition waiver for foster and adopted<00:32:35.120
• waiver program if through this tuition waiver program if you<00:42:21.440><c> were</c><00:42:21.520>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee met on December 19, 2025, approved the draft minutes from the November 21 regular meeting, and received a DHS commissioners update. Patricia Tilly reported on the state’s rural health transformation application, saying CMS had provided only one question and positive feedback, that the final federal award amount was still pending, and that DHS was preparing an accept-and-expend item for fiscal review using an up-to amount. She also said the new Hampstead YDC facility remains on track, with substantive construction expected by late summer 2026 and move-in likely in early January 2027. In response to questions, she confirmed the playground/outdoor activity area had been in the original design and was added when funding became available. Henry Litman, Medicaid director, discussed the Senate Bill 248 study committee report on palliative and hospice care. He explained the distinction between palliative care, which can be provided while a patient still seeks curative treatment, and hospice care, which involves electing not to pursue curative services. He said the committee’s work pointed to a need for better education for providers and the public, and described ongoing conversations with the Foundation for Healthy Communities and Home Health and Hospice about developing materials and possibly addressing how palliative services are bundled. He also said the study committee itself did not generate future legislation, though members could pursue it separately. Litman then answered questions about Medicaid eligibility and long-term services and supports, including delays in processing, the backlog from pandemic-era redeterminations, and efforts to speed reviews. He said the department is using temporary staffing funded in part by last session’s legislation, working with the New Hampshire Healthcare Association, counties, and UNH Law to streamline policy and training, and relying more on electronic asset verification while still guarding against improper asset transfers. He emphasized the goal of balancing faster access to benefits with compliance and fraud prevention. Robert Rodler followed with the annual tuition waiver update for children in foster care or guardianship. He reported 82 applicants and 65 waivers granted, including 35 for USNH schools and 30 for the community college system, and noted a correction would be issued for inaccurate continuing/new student figures in the report. Senator Gray said he intends to pursue a separate budget appropriation for these tuition waiver costs in the future so the funding would be clearly identified and easier to track. No additional votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.