Transcript Highlights:

• I think these are majority federally funded or a large portion of federally funded.
• But what we're pulling out in this particular program is strictly just the state funding.
• All the federal appropriation and all the federal for those fully funded federal positions is going to
• positions, all the federal funding that go with child nutrition programs and other nutritional programs
• And that involves the loss of funding and money when we spend $400 million on another program.

Summary: The committee first considered the Lieutenant Governor’s Office budget and personnel request to move that office onto the state pay plan and increase salaries for its positions. Office representatives said the request was intended to make pay competitive with other constitutional offices and state agencies, that OPM had approved the grades, and that the office did not plan to max out any positions. Members questioned the size of the increase and the office’s workload. A motion to adopt the proposal failed on a tie vote, and the committee then voted to expunge the vote before moving on. The committee then approved a series of Governor’s letters and related personnel transfers, including cuts for Arkansas Educational Television Network, transfers within the Department of Health and several DHS divisions, and a DFA shared services reorganization. The committee also approved moving child nutrition and related nutrition programs from the Department of Education to the Department of Agriculture, with department officials explaining that the programs fit better under Agriculture because the grants come from USDA and the transfer would include the positions and funding tied to the programs. Members raised questions about how the appropriations and positions were split between state and federal funding, and about the broader implications of the transfer, but the committee ultimately approved both the Education and Agriculture sides of the move. The meeting also included extended discussion of the Educational Freedom Account program. Members questioned the $309 million appropriation, whether it matched current participation, and whether future demand could require additional funding. Department officials said the amount covered current participation and that the governor had set aside an additional $70 million in case applications increased, but that any amount beyond the appropriation would require returning to the committee. Some members argued the program’s growth could threaten funding for public schools and adequacy, while others noted that the program is governed by rules under the LEARNS Act. The committee also approved a technical title change at East Arkansas Community College from assistant to the president to assistant to the chancellor.

Transcript Highlights:

• The special funds and the federal funds are at the discretion of the funding agencies.
• Another 36% of the federal funds that we received over the last five years originated from the Federal
• Most of the remaining federal funds come from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
• programs, we don't just go out and compete for funding.
• Question about your federal funding.

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:

• to CASA advocates, to fund Prop. 36, to fund programs that help victims of human trafficking.
• , and appropriating $25.7 million federal funds for this purpose.
• the federal match funding.
• Like to extend our appreciation for the AB 617 Community Air Protection Funding program funding, and
• The federal government just stopped funding a 60-year-old sickle cell program, and health care plans

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The new program builds upon the successes of the limited-term General Funded program, the Clean California
• California's funding will also leverage federal, Nevada, local, and private sector funding commitments
• for state formula funding programs.
• One of those things is the federal funds uncertainty, particularly those unobligated funds, which could
• And how much of that has been federal funding?

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on transportation agency budget proposals and did not take any votes. The first major discussion focused on the Motor Vehicle Account shortfall and a proposed one-time $166 million transfer from the Air Pollution Control Fund and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to offset California Air Resources Board mobile source costs. Department of Finance and the LAO described the account’s long-running structural deficit, driven largely by employee compensation growth and REAL ID-related workload, while members criticized the use of Proposition 4, GGRF, and other one-time or redirected funds as backfills and urged a longer-term solution that addresses both revenues and expenditures. The committee then heard Caltrans’ request for $25 million in General Fund support to create a Clean California Community Cleanup and Employment Pathway Grant Program. Caltrans said the program would build on the prior Clean California effort by funding local litter and graffiti cleanup, community engagement, and workforce pathways for vulnerable populations. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing that local litter abatement is not a core state responsibility and that one-time funding is unlikely to solve persistent local cleanup needs. Several members echoed those concerns, while public commenters split between support for the cleanup/employment model and calls to instead restore funding to the Active Transportation Program and transit operations. The Tahoe Regional Planning Agency requested that California administratively recognize Tahoe’s federally designated population figure for state formula-based transportation funding, which would raise the population count used in formulas from 40,000 to 145,000. The agency said the change would not request new money but would better align state formulas with federal law and support a shared regional funding framework; members appeared generally supportive, though they noted the need to phase in the change to reduce impacts on other regions. The final presentation was on High-Speed Rail. The LAO reviewed the authority’s project update report, noting that it did not fully meet statutory requirements and that key details are still pending in a supplemental report expected later in the summer. The LAO said the Merced-to-Bakersfield segment still shows an estimated roughly $7 billion funding gap, with no specific plan to close it, and highlighted risks from federal review, inflation, and uncertain GGRF revenues. High-Speed Rail Authority staff said they are conducting a bottom-up review of scope, schedule, ridership, and costs, expect to provide updated information by late summer, and are exploring public-private partnerships and other financing strategies. Members stressed that no further funding commitments should be made until the updated analysis is available.

Transcript Highlights:

• , which is a really interesting program as we've seen that zeroed out on the federal and appreciate the
• for our meat including um funding for our meat inspection<00:02:36.720> program,<00:02:37.280
• and early care program to $2.29 million, especially in the face of federal cuts.
• Thank you for the increase in funding for this program and increasing the grant award from $15,000 to
• for this program increase the funding for this program and<00:15:07.680> increasing<00:15:08.079

Bills: HF2446

Keywords: agriculture finance, broadband development, Department of Agriculture, Board of Animal Health, Agricultural Utilization Research Institute, Office of Broadband Development, food safety, food handler license, cottage food, home processed food, livestock dealer, meat packing company, milk marketer, milk marketing license, grain buyer, grain storage, beginning farmer, emerging farmer, farm down payment assistance, livestock investment grant

Transcript Highlights:

• Never mind. programs that are funded by the programs that are funded by the education<00:53:25.000>
• That's actually the largest funding source in the federal funding. Thank you.
• <01:20:03.320> spending federal funding and all local spending federal funding and all local
• We have federal funding specifically to support the programs, and then we have state funding too, called
• The federal funding is specifically to support the programs, and then we have state funding too, called

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Department of Education’s Bureau of School Finance provided an adequacy-funding training for Division II, led by Mark Mello. He walked the committee through the adequacy formula using Albany, Allenstown, and Alton as examples, explaining average daily membership, base adequacy aid, and differential aid for free/reduced-price meals, special education, and English language learners. He also noted a recent change requiring home-education differential aid and emphasized that these aid streams are generally unrestricted district funding rather than money tied to specific students or programs. A major focus was the ongoing litigation over the adequacy base amount and the statewide education property tax, or SWEPT. Mello explained the historical basis of the current base amount, the 2008 legislative report that set the original methodology, and the later court ruling that the adequacy amount should be $7,356, which is now before the Supreme Court. He also described how SWEPT currently raises a fixed statewide amount of $363 million and how that revenue is used to offset the state’s adequacy obligation. For the example towns, Albany and Allenstown receive state adequacy grants because their SWEPT revenue is below their calculated adequacy cost, while Alton is an excess SWEPT community because its local SWEPT revenue exceeds the cost of adequate education. The discussion then turned to the pending “excess SWEPT” issue in the Supreme Court and what would happen if excess collections had to be remitted to the state. Mello said the Department is preparing a hypothetical walkthrough and explained that, if the court upholds the Superior Court ruling, DRA would likely be directed to collect excess SWEPT. Members raised concerns about whether SWEPT must be used for educational purposes and about the cash-flow burden on towns if money had to move from municipalities to the state and then back to districts. Mello and members discussed possible administrative workarounds, such as credits against other state aid distributions, and noted that the committee would continue reviewing the mechanics if the court decision comes down during budget work.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I just wanted to kind of ask a question in regards to funding for that program.
• funding we have from the rebates, the drug rebates, which are a big part of what funds this program
• So the rebates are actually a big part of what funds this program.
• So the rebates are actually a big part of what funds this program.
• , federal Ryan White funds...

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

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:37.400> funds teacher apprenticeship program funds teacher apprenticeship program funds
• program has to have to be federally program has to have to be federally recognized<00:06:56.400>
• Paul Federation of Educators. We have been building an apprenticeship program for teaching.
• programs, ensure program compliance with state and federal regulations, and increase access to technical
• Does the federal designation come with any matching funds from the federal government?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The program is a large federal grant program which states will compete for federal funds for innovative
• It's 100% federal funding. There is no state match involved in this in this grant funding here.
• Can't replace any existing or programs whether at the state County or federal level.
• either through Medicaid or through other federal or state or local programs.
• The timeline and the funding is on a federal fiscal year.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a return of funds from the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program. That's a block grant.
• DHS needs the spending authority to send the funds back because they had administered the program when
• This is to allow a return of CARES funds to federal partners. All right. Thank you, members.
• you Thank you. funding available to educators through the merit teacher incentive program.
• We don’t select who receives that funding; that’s done at the federal level.

Summary: The committee met to review a large slate of fiscal year 2026 and 2027 appropriation, transfer, and continuation requests across multiple sections. Early items included temporary appropriations for agencies such as Health, DHS, Education, Public Safety, State Police, Emergency Management, Aeronautics, Military, Economic Development, and Game and Fish, covering items like maternal health outreach, energy assistance repayments, Wynne High School tornado rebuilding, senior food services, cybersecurity, crime victim reparations, aviation grants, conservation incentives, and emergency tower maintenance. Members asked questions on several items, including DHS aging carry-forward funds and Treasury custodial banking fees tied to COVID-era balances; the committee also approved a disclosure by the chair on the Game and Fish-related item before voting to approve the section. The committee then approved continuation requests, CARES Act and ARPA reallocations, and federal grant appropriations. Notable discussion included the Boonville developmental disability project, ALIGN program reallocations at several universities, a small business technical assistance grant at UA Little Rock, and a Department of Public Safety highway safety grant, for which members requested more detail on operating expenses and professional fees. Additional approvals covered a transfer to the Merit Teacher Incentive program, restricted reserve fund transfers for military medical command and university projects, and a state central services deduction held at 2%. The Department of Commerce also received approval for a reallocation of positions and spending authority tied to its organizational realignment. Later sections included shared technology and higher education transfers, cash fund appropriations for school Medicaid reimbursements, corrections, youth mental health, narcotics detection canines, bike safety equipment, a state motor pool pilot, and law enforcement safety costs. The committee also reviewed budget classification transfers, including a Governor’s Office legal fee transfer related to a California lawsuit, and heard explanations about E-Rate reimbursements affecting the Office of State Technology. Members asked about VOCA funding levels for crime victim services and about the National Security Grant Program for nonprofits and faith-based organizations; officials said federal funding had declined from prior highs but appeared to have stabilized, and that the nonprofit security grant is an annual federal program. The meeting concluded with review of pay plan requests, DHS overtime funding for child protection caseloads, and a year-end adjustment request allowing DFA to make up to $1 million in transfers to close the books, after which the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a federally funded program, and [clears throat] uh want to make sure those federal funds are going
• It's a federally<00:25:46.640> funded<00:25:47.039> program<00:25:48.320> and federally
• funded program and federally funded program and [clears throat]<00:25:48.720> uh<00:25:48.960
• for federal funds for any federal program.
• for federal funds for any federal program.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The funding in the first year would fund startup costs, which would include programming in our revenue
• Our program is specially funded, and so there is no General Fund impact for this request.
• No, not federal funds directly to a local government?
• No, not federal funds directly to a local government.
• Federal funds directly to a local government.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee heard a series of May Revision budget items, beginning with the State Controller’s Office. SCO described requests for Fiscal Book of Record stabilization, payroll system implementation, ACFR reporting support, and unclaimed property outreach funding. Members focused on the Fiscal system’s July go-live, the improved timeliness of the ACFR, and the unclaimed property program’s roughly $15 billion balance and outreach efforts. The Department of Finance and LAO raised no major concerns, and the item was closed after discussion of how the new outreach funding would be used. The committee then considered several revenue proposals. Finance presented a proposal to tax pre-written digital software and SaaS, with estimated General Fund gains of $450 million in 2026-27 and $900 million ongoing; LAO suggested broader digital tax changes and a business-use exemption, while industry groups opposed the measure as a tax on essential digital tools. CDTFA also presented an administrative request tied to the software tax, and later a $10 million budget reduction reflecting lower operational needs. The committee then heard a federal conformity proposal for new children’s tax-deferred accounts, which LAO supported, and a proposal to cut the first-year LLC/LP minimum tax from $800 to $400, which Finance said would aid small business formation but LAO argued was poorly targeted and would reduce revenue. Another major item was a permanent business tax credit limitation beginning in 2027, capping credits at the greater of $5 million per corporation or 50% of pre-credit liability. Finance said it would raise about $850 million in 2026-27 and more in later years, while LAO noted it would mainly affect large firms using the R&D credit and could also touch California Competes and other programs. Public testimony split sharply between business groups opposing the cap and advocates supporting it as a progressive revenue measure. The committee also heard FTB’s CalFile realignment proposal, which would retain a smaller staff to continue improving the free filing system and return most of the prior funding to the General Fund. The hearing concluded with the California Arts Council’s request to reauthorize the Keep Arts in Schools voluntary contribution fund, which brings in about $221,000 to $266,000 annually for arts grants and teacher stipends. Members and advocates supported the item but also urged larger arts funding, including the Performing Arts Equitable Payroll Fund. The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development then presented proposals for the California Civic Media Program, CA RISE reappropriation, and a reversion of unused Chips for America facility funds; LAO supported the latter two but was cautious about new civic media spending. Members raised concerns about the civic media program’s scope, including the exclusion of broadcast and the lack of a specific ethnic media set-aside, while GoBiz said funds would begin going out in the fall if approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• transportation fund, increases from federal<00:01:53.120> funds<00:01:53.400> in<00:01:
• <00:01:54.240> So, federal funds in the general fund.
• So, federal funds in the general fund.
• We have appropriated additional funding for the AHEC Area Health Education program to continue to offer
• We have appropriated additional funding for the AHEC Area Health Education program to continue to offer

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House Caucus of the Whole received a budget review from House Appropriations Chair Rep. Shay on H.951, the FY27 budget. He said the budget totals about $9.334 billion across all funds, with a 1.6% increase overall and a 2.1% increase in the general fund, and stated that it balances, fills required reserves, meets pension obligations, and largely reflects the governor’s January budget requests. He also noted that budget documents were emailed to members and that Appropriations Committee members and Joint Fiscal Office staff would be available in the House well during lunch for follow-up questions. Shay described the budget as divided into ongoing base appropriations and one-time appropriations. Major ongoing investments highlighted included funding for designated and specialized service agencies, home- and community-based providers, Medicaid skilled home health services, Bridges to Health, AHEC primary care loan repayment and provider placement, Vermont screening and referral clinics, VHIP housing support, the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board, a homelessness and housing initiative, a disabilities housing coordinator, the Vermont Access Network, Flood Safety Act positions at ANR, a state mediator position, an attorney for the state ethics commission, an additional attorney at the Human Rights Commission, and funding for the Defender General’s public defense contracting and training. He also emphasized one-time funding for the Volunteer Income Tax Assistance program, a pension and benefits funding task force, provider stabilization grants, Meals on Wheels, Vermont Legal Aid’s immigration attorney and hotline, rental arrears assistance, manufactured home repair programs, HomeShare expansion, NOFA food and farm programs, food banks, conservation districts, VSAC Freedom and Unity scholarships, and the Community Resilience and Disaster Mitigation Fund. No votes were taken during the presentation; the meeting ended after a brief opportunity for questions, with members directed to continue discussion during noon office hours.

Transcript Highlights:

• When federal funding is available and awarded to state forestry, we implement a cost share program similar
• When federal funding is available and awarded to state forestry, we implement a cost share program similar
• c> available<00:10:31.920> and When federal funding is available and When federal funding
• He said the grant funding would provide a unique opportunity to leverage funding from other federal sources
• funding for those leverage some federal funding for those projects,<01:16:45.760> where<01:16

Bills: HB0078, HB0087, SF0070, SF0068, SF0017, SF0043

Keywords: forest health, grant program, state forester, wildfire prevention, environmental conservation, habitat improvement, water development, feasibility studies, appropriations, water management, rehabilitation, irrigation, public works, agricultural supply, municipal water, funding, maintenance projects, tax assessments, state law, forestry management

Transcript Highlights:

• This is ultimately a federal program, of course, to make sure that... ...particularly by federal policymakers
• The reason that we're asking for protection, obviously, we agree this is a federal program.
• This is a federal program.
• So in, according to HRSA, the federal agency that oversees the program, the program had $43.9 billion
• In the most recent federal funding bill, off-campus hospital outpatient departments are now required

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The state and localities were expected to administer the program, but it would be fully federally funded
• Our division administers the Basic Food Program in Washington, which includes the federal SNAP program
• “Our division administers the Basic Food Program in Washington, which includes the federal SNAP program
• and the state-funded food assistance program.
• It's one of the most successful federally funded nutrition programs.

Summary: The House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee held a work session on food systems and food security, with no public testimony. The first panel focused on household food security and data. Marie Spiker of the University of Washington explained what food insecurity means, its health impacts, and the importance of reliable measurement, warning that the federal Census food security data is being terminated and that there is no true replacement. She described Washington’s WaFOOD surveys as a useful complement, not a substitute, and noted that they show food insecurity affects households at a range of income levels. Katie Raines of WSDA described the state’s food systems work, the need for shared data and dashboards, and the role of agriculture in both food production and the hunger safety net. Committee members asked about the $2.2 million state food assistance allocation, the scale of the SNAP gap, and how household size, housing costs, and other factors intersect with food insecurity. The committee then heard from Tracy Roof of the University of Richmond on the history of SNAP and its relationship to agriculture. She traced the program from Depression-era commodity distribution through the modern farm bill, emphasizing that food assistance has long functioned both as anti-hunger policy and as an agricultural and economic stabilizer. She highlighted how SNAP expands during recessions, supports retailers and farmers, and has become more important since the Great Recession because participation stayed high even as the economy recovered. Roof also noted that Washington has relatively high SNAP participation and low payment error rates, but that recent federal changes could reduce eligibility and shift more costs to states. Members asked how Washington compares to other states and why the program is structured as it is. A later panel featured the Washington State Food Policy Forum and a joint systems presentation from the Washington Farm Bureau, Washington Retail Association, and Washington Food Industry Association. The Food Policy Forum described its consensus-based recommendations on food insecurity, climate and water, regional food infrastructure, farmland protection, and farm viability, including more support for producer purchasing, water planning, and farmland conservation. The industry groups presented a systems map showing how agriculture, processing, retail, and transportation are interconnected, and argued that rising costs, regulations, labor and fuel expenses, retail theft, and thin margins make it harder to keep farms and stores viable. They said food security depends on store viability and local agricultural profitability, and promised to provide a more detailed list of policy recommendations. The final panel included state agency staff from DSHS, DOH, and WSDA. Bryce Montgomery said the Basic Food program serves about 920,000 Washingtonians monthly and warned that H.R. 1 could require Washington to pay up to 15% of SNAP benefits, broaden work requirements, and restrict immigrant eligibility. Karen Mullen described DOH nutrition programs, including WIC, farmers market nutrition benefits, fruit and vegetable incentives, and a fruit-and-vegetable prescription program, while noting funding instability and the end of SNAP-Ed. WSDA’s Katie Raines began describing ongoing food assistance and farmer support challenges, including farmer mental health and the need to address food insecurity across both producers and consumers.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to have to fund this program for whatever that dollar amount is.
• And just to clarify, all meals are federally funded in some way.
• happens to the program if we don't fund it.
• , such as the federal 340B program.
• assurance that those federal funds are coming back.

Bills: HB1623

Keywords: HB 1623, North Dakota, rural health, rural health transformation program, medical facility infrastructure loan fund, medical facility infrastructure loan program, rural health loan program, Bank of North Dakota, Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, federal grant, health care infrastructure, rural hospitals, critical access hospitals, nonprofit health care providers, gap financing, loan fund, public health funding, healthcare financing, Medicaid

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 1624, the “Universal Lunch Bill,” from Rep. Mike Nathie. He argued the proposal should be placed in Century Code rather than the Constitution so future legislatures can adjust it if state finances tighten, and said the bill would start the program a year earlier with a $65 million appropriation for one school year. DPI testified that the estimate did not include nonpublic schools that do not participate, and members questioned the impact on Title I, free-and-reduced applications, private-school accountability, breakfast mandates for schools that do not currently serve breakfast, and whether the funding could come from the DPI budget or other sources. Supporters, including North Dakota United, the North Dakota Catholic Conference, a pediatrician, and the American Heart Association, said universal meals improve student health and learning, reduce family costs, and are better handled in statute than by constitutional amendment. No opposition testimony was offered, and the chair closed the hearing for later work-session action. The committee then took up House Bill 1627, introduced by Rep. Tye Dressler, which would raise the income threshold for the state-funded school lunch program from 225% to 300% of poverty, with an estimated cost of about $7 million for 2026-27. Dressler said the bill is intended as a targeted, budget-friendly alternative to the ballot measure and emphasized that the state should maximize federal meal dollars while improving participation in the current program. Members questioned whether raising the threshold would actually increase utilization, whether a dollar amount would be clearer than a percentage, and how the change would affect federal reimbursements and application rates. DPI said it could quickly calculate additional percentage levels, and the chair closed the hearing, directing DPI to prepare more numbers for the work session. Finally, the committee opened Senate Bill 2403, presented by Sen. Schiable, to create a short-term bridge-loan program for financially distressed hospitals, centered on Jacobson Memorial Hospital in Elgin. The bill would authorize up to $5 million per loan, with a $10 million appropriation available on a first-come, first-served basis, and would run only through June 30, 2027. Schiable said the hospital’s debt and operating problems threaten local health care, ambulance service, and the community’s economy, and that the proposal was designed narrowly with Bank of North Dakota review to avoid creating a broad precedent. Committee members asked whether the appropriation could be reduced and whether the bank would still apply commercial feasibility and repayment standards; Schiable said yes, the bank would still evaluate the loan and could reject it if it was not sound.

Transcript Highlights:

• No taxpayer dollars are used to fund this program beyond the cost of oversight of the program by the
• /c> oversight of the program by the federal oversight of the program by the federal health<00:07:44.120
• The community programs that we offer as a result of the savings from the 340B federal program include
• The community programs that we offer as a result of the savings from the 340B federal program include
• 340b program beyond expands the federal 340b program beyond what<00:38:05.160> was<00:38:05.319

Keywords: 00:00 Introductions 02:46 Roll Call 03:35 Discussion on SB 14 46:13 Vote on SB 14 48:07 Discussion on SB 17 50:38 Vote on SB 17, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Health Services opened with the chair welcoming several new members and outlining session rules: hearings would start and end on time, the committee would limit the number of bills heard each meeting, prioritize bills heard during the interim, and generally avoid using the consent calendar except in extreme circumstances. The committee then briefly considered administrative regulations, which were treated as approved if members had no questions. The main item was Senate Bill 14, a measure addressing the 340B drug discount program. The chair said the bill had already passed the Senate in a prior session and had been heard in interim, so he did not present it again. He described the bill as prohibiting drug manufacturers from discriminating against 340B covered entities by refusing 340B pricing when the same drug is offered at that price in the state. He also said the committee would not debate the federal 340B program itself, but would hear testimony on the bill. Hospital leaders and Kentucky Hospital Association representatives testified in support, arguing that 340B savings are essential to rural hospitals, oncology services, transportation support, chronic care, addiction recovery, and new service lines such as chemotherapy and hepatitis treatment. They said the program helps keep care close to home and that manufacturer restrictions on contract pharmacies have reduced access and cost hospitals millions. Opponents from BIO Kentucky and the National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions argued the bill would expand federal law beyond Congress’s intent, create administrative burdens, and not lower patient out-of-pocket costs. The chair repeatedly pressed opponents to address why Kentucky should be denied the same 340B pricing available in other states. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• federal funds under the that one is 100% federal funds under the orid orid orid program<00:03:41.400>
• requires a state contribution to receive the federal funds and run the program itself.
• Mr chair um is the program receiving any federal federal federal funding<00:31:14.639> I<00:31
• We have not before given any general funds to these programs because it's been a federally funded effort
• that the the federal fund so the federal that the the federal fund so the federal funds funds funds

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a work session on the Department of Business and Economic Affairs’ budget, with testimony from division leadership on staffing, funding sources, and program changes. Early discussion focused on vacant positions in the agency, including a senior planner tied to FEMA requirements, a federally funded program assistant, a program specialist to be reclassified during a planning reorganization, and two Housing Champions positions that were authorized but not funded in the current biennium and are requested for 2026-27. The witnesses also explained that temporary welcome center positions are filled as funds allow, and that the agency’s requested general fund increase is driven largely by the Division of Travel and Tourism Development and its formula-based funding. Members then reviewed rest areas, welcome centers, outdoor recreation, economic development, procurement, and workforce opportunity lines. The department said there are 12 rest areas, with 5.8 million foot counts in FY 24, and that welcome centers are generally open year-round, though Sutton is currently closed and staffing relies on a mix of full-time and temporary employees. The outdoor recreation position is federally funded through USDA and supports business outreach, trade shows, and industry promotion. In economic development, the agency said increased dues reflect participation in the Northern Borders Regional Commission, and that a marketing line item is intended to support recruitment and promotion of growth industries such as advanced manufacturing and life sciences. The Apex Accelerator Program was described as a state-federal partnership requiring a state match and providing government contracting assistance to businesses, while the Office of Workforce Opportunity was explained as a federally funded WIOA-related effort administered through multiple agencies and subrecipients. A major point of discussion was the proposed reduction to the Small Business Development Center, which members said had generated significant public concern. The department described SBDC as a highly effective technical assistance program for new and small businesses, but said the cut was one of the few places it felt it had room to reduce funding. Members asked about federal support and matching requirements for various programs, and the department said less than half of its overall budget is generally funded by the state and that some programs require state match. The committee also discussed travel and tourism marketing and the Joint Promotional Program, with the department saying those funds support broader advertising campaigns and grants to chambers and trade associations for events such as Bike Week, Restaurant Week, and the Seafood Festival. No votes were taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• JDC-AEN informational briefing on the impact and legality of recent federal policy changes and funding
• <00:10:07.279> programs of the loss of these uh federal programs of the loss of these uh federal
• in federal funding.
• at receiving $240 million in federal at receiving $240 million in federal funding.<00:15:25.199>
• <01:02:39.520> I funds from our federal delegation. I funds from our federal delegation.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary and Agriculture and Environment committees held an informational briefing on how recent federal policy changes, funding delays, cancellations, and layoffs are affecting Hawaii’s climate mitigation and adaptation efforts, and on the legality of some of those federal actions. Chair Carl Rhodes and Chair Mike Gabbard opened the meeting by framing it as part of an interim series on the rule of law and Hawaii’s response to federal actions. They noted there would be no public testimony, only invited presenters, and that questions would be held until the end. No votes or formal committee actions were taken. State climate change coordinator Leah Laramie described broad impacts from federal actions, including grant cancellations, litigation over terminated funding, staff cuts at NOAA and EPA, and the effect of the federal tax and spending law she said would raise energy costs, reduce grid reliability, and threaten renewable energy and transportation projects. She highlighted the loss or expiration of incentives for EVs and other clean-energy technologies, the termination of the Solar for All program and other rescissions, and the risk to major Hawaii projects such as Carbon Smart Commodities and other energy and land conservation programs. She also said the state’s attorneys general had taken numerous climate-related legal actions, including suits challenging federal cuts and the oil companies’ role in the climate crisis. Retired Justice Michael Wilson focused on the rule of law and climate justice, arguing that Hawaii is on the front line of climate change and that fossil fuel companies pose the greatest long-term threat. He said the state lacks a comprehensive climate protection plan despite the urgency of the crisis, cited UN and scientific warnings about a limited time horizon and severe warming, and pointed to projected local harms such as sea-level rise, beach loss, infrastructure damage, and major economic losses in Waikiki. His remarks emphasized the need for stronger planning and legal accountability, especially in light of federal rollbacks and the influence of fossil fuel interests.