Transcript Highlights:

• , but the program cannot exist program, but the program cannot exist program, but the program cannot
• or at programs physical therapy programs or at programs physical therapy programs or at programs of
• engineering program but that's programs engineering program but that's programs engineering program
• run a program and make sure it's program run a program and make sure it's program run a program and
• some program we had last year. programs some program we had last year. programs some program we had

Bills: HJR 4, HJR 6, HB 195, HB 13, HB 143, HB 135

Keywords: occupation tax, securities, financial regulation, tax exemption, legislative amendment, capital gains tax, realized gains, unrealized gains, investment income, asset sale, capital assets, wealth tax, estate tax, trust tax, tax limitation, constitutional amendment, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, property tax, sales tax

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, this program dates back to 1997.
• forgiveness for this program. forgiveness for this program.
• back to the program. >> Okay.
• It goes back into the program.
• <00:09:48.959> going demand on the SRF uh loan program going demand on the SRF uh loan program

Keywords: Finance - Room 216, 19 February, 2026; 1:30 PM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first heard testimony from Dr. Edney on the state revolving fund program for rural community water associations. He explained that the program has operated since 1997 using EPA grant funding and a state match, with low-interest loans, emergency funding, and loan forgiveness. He said the state match has risen in recent years because of increased federal infrastructure funding, but is expected to decline again as that enhanced funding ends. Members asked where repayment money goes, and he said it stays in the revolving fund rather than going to the general fund. He also discussed EPA pressure for consolidation of small water associations, minimum operational standards, and the possibility of using loan forgiveness incentives to encourage consolidation. No votes were taken on this presentation. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2824, which extends the eligibility dates for certain energy projects to qualify for ad valorem tax exemptions, moving the relevant deadlines from 2026/2027 to 2031. The committee adopted the committee substitute and passed it by voice vote. Next, Senate Bill 2867 revised an earlier employer child care tax credit program. Senator Boyd said the bill simplifies the program, allows a 50% income tax credit for employers providing dependent care during work hours or making at least $2,000 per child direct payments to licensed child care entities, and caps the credit at $3,000 per child per year. A committee substitute also placed a $1 million cap on the overall credit program. Members discussed the need for child care support, the role of federal and state funding, and whether the bill would increase employer participation. The committee adopted the substitute and passed the bill by voice vote. Finally, the committee considered Senate Bill 3109, a simple bill affecting Lafleur's Bluff State Park. Senator Blount explained that the park is managed under a lease with a nonprofit and that the bill would exempt the nonprofit from paying property taxes on the leased state park land. The committee adopted the committee substitute and passed the bill by voice vote, then rose and reported the measure out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• on the success of the K-12 program, and $30 million for student success incentives to support college
• career education programs and their 2-plus-2 programs, enabling students to continue their education
• on the success of the K-12 program, and $30 million for student success incentives to support college
• career education programs and their 2-plus-2 programs, enabling students to continue their education
• You know, we have a great program with a nursing program.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education heard a presentation from the Governor’s Office on the proposed education budget, which totals $32.5 billion overall and includes no tuition or fee increases for Florida residents. Officials highlighted major funding for financial aid and scholarships, including Bright Futures, Benacquisto, veteran-related scholarships, EASE, Open Door, law enforcement/first responder programs, and workforce initiatives. They also emphasized increases for workforce education, Florida College System operations, nursing pipeline and line funds, and university operations, performance funding, and faculty recruitment and retention. Committee members asked questions about the Ocoee Scholarship, the proposed post-secondary Guardian program, and how university recruitment and retention funds would be used; officials said the Ocoee Scholarship remains funded at current levels, the Guardian program would offer flexible campus safety options, and the university funds would be distributed to institutions for faculty recruitment and retention without additional directives. The committee then heard from a series of appointees and reappointees to boards of trustees for state colleges and universities, who described their backgrounds and priorities. Testimony consistently focused on affordability, workforce alignment, nursing and allied health programs, dual enrollment, adult learners, and local economic needs. Several trustees highlighted strong nursing NCLEX pass rates, expansion of campuses or programs, and efforts to tailor education to regional workforce demands such as health care, construction, law enforcement, aviation, and hospitality. One appointee from Miami-Dade College emphasized helping adult students return and complete degrees by easing credit transfer and admissions barriers. After hearing from the appointees, the committee took up the full slate of confirmations as a block. A motion was made and the roll was called; the confirmations were approved favorably, with members voting yes and no opposition recorded. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• With the implementation of all the COVID-era infrastructure programs and the BEAD program, ideally all
• With the implementation of all the COVID-air infrastructure programs and the Bede program, ideally all
• It was supposed to run alongside of the BEAD program.
• programs for broadband access.
• on a program that helps find those low-cost options.

Summary: The Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee held an informational hearing on the state of broadband affordability in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the committee was examining how broadband prices, access, and affordability are affecting households, especially after the end of the federal Affordable Connectivity Program and amid concerns about federal resistance to state broadband regulation. She noted the committee’s continued interest in policy options for 2026 and referenced prior legislation, including AB 353, that would have required affordable home internet as a condition of doing business in California. Industry witnesses from U.S. Telecom and CTIA argued that broadband and wireless prices have generally fallen in real terms even as inflation and other household costs have risen, citing competition, infrastructure investment, and faster speeds as the main drivers. They said California’s higher costs are tied to permitting delays, taxes, copper theft, and legacy obligations such as COLR requirements, and they urged the Legislature to preserve market incentives, reduce fees and regulatory burdens, and support infrastructure deployment. They also discussed fixed wireless access, federal BEAD funding, and Universal Service Fund reform, arguing that more entities benefiting from networks, including tech platforms, should contribute to support programs. Consumer and public-interest witnesses presented a different view, saying California still has a serious affordability and adoption problem, especially for low-income households. Sunny McPhee of the California Emerging Technology Fund said broadband adoption has improved dramatically over time, but about 500,000 households remain offline or underconnected and many low-income households still pay above the FCC affordability benchmark. Ernesto Falcon of the CPUC Public Advocates Office said California’s market is losing its competitive edge, with prices higher than in other states and meaningful price pressure coming mainly from fiber competition at the gigabit tier. He said roughly 4.8 million Californians are limited to one gigabit option and estimated that more competition could save consumers more than $1 billion annually. Both witnesses emphasized the need for stronger transparency, targeted subsidies, and a permanent affordability solution, including extending and refining the CPUC broadband Lifeline pilot and advancing SB 716. Public commenters, including representatives from cable providers, nonprofits, and digital equity organizations, largely supported SB 716 and a permanent broadband affordability program. Several urged the committee to remove a cap on the Lifeline program, expand the CPUC pilot, and invest in digital navigators, outreach, and enrollment assistance. The hearing ended without a vote or formal action, after the chair thanked the witnesses and public commenters for their testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are two federal fund programs: the Small Business Innovation Research Program, called SBIR, and
• the Small Business Technology Transfer Program.
• Midland, though, does not currently qualify for the sales tax incentive program, despite its outsized
• tax rebate program for a good.
• , the qualified hotel program, and then an add-on to that program, right?

Bills: SB209, SB529, SB1265, SB1592, SB1728, SCR37, SCR38

Keywords: SB 529, Texas Tax Code, municipality, hotel and convention center, hotel convention center project, tourism development, economic development, tax revenue pledge, revenue commitment, qualified project, municipal finance, local government, special district, hotel occupancy tax, nearby establishments, convention center financing, city population 130000, Section 351.155, Section 351.157, child care

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, that is the incentive of people who own companies. It's what they're supposed to do.
• Again, that is the incentive of people who own companies. It's what they're supposed to do.
• Again, that is the incentive of people who own companies. It's what they're supposed to do.
• Again, that is the incentive of people who own companies. It's what they're supposed to do.
• Again, that is the incentive of people who own companies. It's what they're supposed to do.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, this may be a new program for Minnesota, but there are other states that are using this program
• You know, this may be a new program for Minnesota, but there are other states that are using this program
• This may be a new program for Minnesota, but there are other states that are using this program and they've
• But I'm a little bit trying to understand what is the actual incentive if the buyer or if the builder
• What's the incentive for them to actually pass those savings along to the buyer?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• With the bio incentive program that we spent years on in both ag and environment committees, it just
• um you know with the bio incentive um you know with the bio incentive program<01:31:48.600> that
• bio incentive grant program was specifically, you know, it is not earmarking.
• bio incentive grant program was specifically, you know, it is not earmarking.
• program.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I got great support from the IMG Career Guidance and Support Program at The International Institute of
• Minnesota, and I was accepted then into the bridge program in Minnesota in 2024.
• Minnesota, and I was accepted then into the bridge program in Minnesota in 2024.
• <00:08:35.719> they are going to be in this program they are going to be in this program they
• hadn't worked under them on that program hadn't worked under them on that program so<00:10:07.760

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That is a ratepayer incentive system, a program, a pilot that was created a few years ago.
• That is a ratepayer incentive system, a program, a pilot that was created a few years ago.
• That is a ratepayer incentive system, a program, a pilot that was created a few years ago.
• That is a ratepayer incentive system, a program, a pilot that was created a few years ago.
• That is a ratepayer incentive system, a program, a pilot that was created a few years ago.

Keywords: Senate streaming session for Thursday, April 2, 2026, 960, senate, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, heard an invocation by Reverend J.C. Austin of Woods Memorial Presbyterian Church, and journalized the prayer. Members also introduced several guests and interns, including a shadow from the 45th District, a Legislative Black Caucus fellow, a ninth-grade author from Annapolis High School, a World Autism Acceptance Day group in the gallery, and a student shadowing the Senator from District 30. The chamber then moved to House bills on second reading and Senate bills on third reading. The Senate adopted favorable committee reports and passed several House bills without objection, including measures extending the Maryland Horse Industry Board sunset, requiring housing counseling information for certain first-time homebuyers, expanding the educator expense tax subtraction to full-time pre-K teachers, increasing funding for the State Library Resource Center, extending agricultural use assessment eligibility for community solar projects, allowing the Seat Pleasant Police Department to join the Law Enforcement Officers Pension System, authorizing changes to a tax sale legacy protection program, and granting special taxing authority for the Village of Drummond. The chamber also adopted seven amendments to Senate Bill 1007 on state debt authorizations and ordered it printed for third reading. On final passage, Senate Bill 956 on Maryland Transportation Authority video toll collections passed with 44 affirmative votes. The Senate then took up Senate Bill 841, a major energy affordability and utility reform bill, with two committee amendments adopted. The bill was described as providing short-, medium-, and long-term rate relief, including changes to EmPOWER Maryland, utility cost recovery, data center tariffs, net metering, solar policy, transmission planning, battery storage, nuclear incentives, and low-income assistance. Debate began on the amended report, and a motion to lay the bill over was withdrawn while members discussed waiting on additional amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, Empower, a program that just the debt service alone for that program is $4 a month on a
• proceeding and say that those incentive proceeding and say that those incentive goals<00:31:45.679
• This is about corporate incentives.
• It's a strictly a gas reduction program.
• for any sort of energy savings program for any sort of energy savings program either.<01:09:33.759

Keywords: House streaming session for Friday, February 6, 2026, 957, house, all

Summary: The House convened with 117 members present, then 123 after a quorum call, and proceeded through routine introductions and referrals, including introductory House bills 959 through 1018, House Joint Resolution 8, House Simple Resolution 1, several Senate bills, and bond initiatives referred to Appropriations. The main floor item was House Bill 1, concerning investor-owned electric and gas utility cost recovery limitations, which was on third reading and final passage. Debate on HB 1 focused on whether the bill would meaningfully lower utility bills and whether it was necessary given existing Public Service Commission authority. Supporters argued the bill would prevent ratepayers from bearing the cost of executive bonuses and other compensation above $250,000, saying utilities can still pay those costs from shareholder profits and that the measure would save money for customers, even if only modestly. Opponents argued the PSC already has authority to review executive compensation, warned the bill could be largely symbolic or misleading, and said it might encourage utilities to shift bonuses into base salaries or harm recruitment and service quality. Several members also argued the bill did not address other drivers of high bills, such as riders and program costs, and one member said the General Assembly itself was responsible for rising energy costs. No final vote on HB 1 was shown in the transcript excerpt, but members on both sides stated their intended positions, with supporters urging a yes vote and opponents indicating they would vote no. The discussion ended with another member beginning remarks about taking on concentrated corporate power and standing with working people.

Transcript Highlights:

• Rhode Island has a long history with this program.
• , including authorization of the Brownfields program.
• Once again, the Superfund program uses this policy too sparingly.
• In conclusion, a Superfund program has proven accomplishments.
• The volunteer program of Indiana versus how we did it under the Superfund program, just my consulting

Keywords: presidential nominations, EPA, environmental policy, Fish and Wildlife, committee meeting

Summary: The committee meeting focused on the presidential nominations of Brigadier General Brian Nesvick as Director of Fish and Wildlife and Jess Kramer and Sean Donahue as assistant administrators at the EPA. Each nominee presented their qualifications and experiences in their respective fields, with an emphasis on their commitment to uphold the laws passed by Congress. The discussion highlighted the nominees' dedication to addressing environmental issues and their proactive stances on regulatory matters. After deliberation, votes were held to report the nominations favorably, despite some members voicing concerns regarding their qualifications and potential conflicts with environmental interests.

Transcript Highlights:

• and other incentives that make California's program not competitive, making many key productions no
• longer even apply for our program.
• I'm grateful to Governor Newsom, who, as you know, has proposed to increase the state's incentive program
• Unlike other states' tax credit programs, California's program is not a giveaway.
• Today, our programs are still operating, even as our industry is Today, our programs are still operating

Summary: The committee heard AB 749, which would create a blue ribbon commission to study equitable access to youth sports and recommend a statewide framework, including coaching standards, PE modernization, and funding models to reduce barriers for families. The author and supporters, including youth sports advocates, educators, coaches, and former athletes, argued that sports improve health, school engagement, and long-term opportunity, while noting racial and income disparities in participation. One member raised concerns that a new commission could add cost and regulatory burdens, but the bill was framed as a study measure rather than immediate regulation. The committee also took up AB 549, aimed at coordinating state and local security planning for major upcoming sporting events such as the FIFA World Cup, Super Bowl, and Olympic and Paralympic Games. Supporters said the bill would improve interagency coordination, protect visitors and communities, and help prevent human trafficking and discrimination during mega-events. Members discussed the need to avoid over-policing and to center community values, but the bill advanced on a due pass recommendation to Appropriations. AB 1291 addressed ticket purchasing for concerts, sports, and other live events by requiring electronic proof of purchase and allowing it to be used for entry if a ticket cannot be accessed through no fault of the buyer. Supporters said the measure would give consumers more certainty and help address problems in a monopolized ticketing market, while opponents from venues, sports teams, and entertainment groups warned it could undermine anti-scalping tools, create security problems, and burden venues with duplicate or fraudulent proofs of purchase. The committee approved the bill on a due pass as amended basis to Privacy and Consumer Protection, with the roll held open for absent members. The consent calendar item, AB 644, was also approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• , education programs, supportive programs, treatment programs.
• These programs exist in prison.
• Statutorily, it is called a release program.
• What's the incentive? It's pretty simple. Public safety is the incentive.
• Prison safety is the incentive. Public safety is the incentive. Prison safety is the incentive.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Save program.
• This is a change from the current structure in letting clients choose their incentive program.
• We have been involved in all the incentive programs, the original SREC 1 and 2 programs, and we currently
• When the original programs ended, when the SREC 1 and 2 programs ended, that's when the SMART program
• If they want to continue having an incentive program, they will have this additional cost of the SMART

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 4144, the Governor’s Energy Affordability, Independence, and Innovation Act, with the administration arguing the bill would lower bills in the short and long term while expanding clean energy supply and innovation. The Governor and Secretary said the bill would reduce or restructure charges on customer bills, reform Mass Save, expand securitization as a financing tool, speed interconnection, create energy-ready zones, strengthen consumer protections in competitive supply, and allow broader state procurement of energy resources. They said the package could save consumers billions over time and would help address high energy costs, especially during extreme heat and winter spikes. Committee members pressed the administration on several provisions, especially securitization, asking whether the bill requires an apples-to-apples comparison of total costs over time, including interest and lost tax revenue, versus paying through rates. Administration witnesses said DPU review and public comment would be required and said they would work to clarify the language if needed. Members also questioned the bill’s solar and procurement provisions, including reduced net metering compensation for some large facilities, the scope of all-resource procurements, and whether hydro, solar, and nuclear would be included; the administration said those resources were contemplated and that procurement would still be reviewed by DPU. Other questions focused on the short-term relief from bill changes, the treatment of low- and moderate-income discounts, and whether the bill’s heat pump and Mass Save reforms would help customers who cannot afford upfront costs. Several witnesses and committee members discussed Mass Save reforms, including securitization of program costs, on-bill financing, pre-approval of rebates, and shifting program administration away from gas utilities. Administration witnesses said the changes were intended to reduce volatility, lower administrative costs, and better align costs with long-term savings. Questions also touched on geothermal permitting, municipal participation in offshore wind procurement, and the proposed repeal of the ballot requirement for nuclear power, which the administration defended as preserving future options under heavy review. No votes were taken during the hearing portion described. Supportive testimony came from labor, environmental, business, planning, and development groups. The AFL-CIO, NECA, and the Environmental League of Massachusetts backed the bill, emphasizing lower bills, job creation, labor standards, just transition protections, and cleaner energy. NAIOP, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, and MAPC supported provisions on energy-ready zones, interconnection reform, microgrids, extreme-heat shutoff protections, and Mass Save improvements. A HEET representative praised the bill’s use of securitization, geothermal, and utility financing tools but urged guardrails and workforce protections. Overall, testimony was broadly favorable, with most witnesses calling for refinements rather than opposing the bill outright.

Transcript Highlights:

• national board certification incentive program.
• national board certification incentive program.
• This clarifies charter schools also are eligible for the National Board Certification Incentive Program
• <02:55:32.479> program<02:55:33.200> and<02:55:33.520> also certification incentive
• program and also certification incentive program and also increases<02:55:34.240> the<02:55:34.479

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Education heard testimony on HB 1895, which would add education-worker protections by expanding harassment-related offenses. The Department of Education, HSTA, HGA, and several school employees and principals testified in support, describing increased harassment and threats toward teachers and staff, especially since COVID, and saying the bill would help deter bad actors. The Office of the Public Defender opposed the measure, saying the language was vague and overbroad, could criminalize ordinary parental advocacy or speech, and might not survive constitutional scrutiny. In response to questions, the public defender said existing statutes already cover threatening or assaultive conduct against educational workers, while DOE representatives said the bill was aimed at excessive and repetitive disruptive behavior. No vote or final action was taken in the excerpt. The committee then took up HB 1592, concerning protections for educational workers and sports officials. DOE, the Charter School Commission, HGA, HSTA, school principals, athletic programs, and many individual testifiers supported the bill, with several describing threats, harassment, and aggressive behavior at schools and athletic events. One principal said he had repeatedly involved law enforcement after threats and incidents on campus, and a teacher testified about the need to keep school environments safe and orderly. The Office of the Public Defender again opposed the bill, arguing that current law already enhances penalties for assaults and terroristic threatening against educational workers and sports officials, and that new offenses would have little deterrent effect. Committee members questioned whether the bill should be a separate statute and how to distinguish passionate advocacy from harassment; DOE said the line was crossed when conduct became excessive and repetitive, while the public defender urged clearer drafting and more emphasis on prevention, education, security, and de-escalation. No vote or final action was announced in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• , HMOs to administer the Medicaid program, HMOs to administer the Medicaid program, which<00:01:25.759
• The program apparently not considered.
• Again, these two our public programs.
• and<00:03:38.640> Medicaid, programs, Minnesota Care and Medicaid, programs, Minnesota Care
• Under this bill, these programs may end. program integrity director, Tim Omali, program integrity director

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , tax programs, grant programs of all nature.
• Tax incentives,<04:50:47.840> tax<04:50:48.240> programs,<04:50:48.878> grant<04
• :50:49.280> programs incentives, tax programs, grant programs incentives, tax programs, grant
• net metering program. net metering program.
• The main program or the New Hampshire program?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• incentive for good behavior uh inside. incentive for good behavior uh inside.
• That's why the incentive.
• we've created, the JCAP program.
• <03:10:56.560> here applies to one particular program here applies to one particular program
• So the whole program as it uh there.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the previous day’s journal, and received a long list of bill status reports and enrollments. It also introduced Senate Bill 168, concerning reporting of money handled by legislative caucuses, and Senate Bill 169, a non-substantive revision bill for the Colorado Revised Statutes. The chamber then agreed to proceed out of order for moments of personal privilege and recognized the Denver and Colorado Springs chapters of The Links, Incorporated for Lynx Day at the Capitol. The Senate next took up a special-order consent calendar containing House Bill 1110, Senate Bill 78, and Senate Bill 151. All three committee reports and the bills themselves were adopted without objection, and the Committee of the Whole report was later adopted by a 35-0 vote. As reported, Senate Bill 78 was amended, Senate Bill 151 passed second reading and was ordered engrossed, and House Bill 1110 was amended, passed second reading, and ordered revised for third reading and final passage. The chamber then moved to special orders on Senate Bill 6 and Senate Bill 15, and the transcript focuses mainly on Senate Bill 6, which would require health insurers to offer at least one non-opioid pain medication option. Supporters argued the bill would expand access to safer pain-management alternatives, reduce opioid addiction, and encourage innovation; several members shared personal or professional experiences with opioid harms. Opponents argued the bill would mandate newer, more expensive drugs when less costly alternatives already exist and could raise health care costs. The debate continued in the excerpt, but no final vote on Senate Bill 6 is shown here.

Transcript Highlights:

• This will inherently impact our Tier 3 programs, which include our ASIC program, another flagship program
• grant program.
• grant program.
• grant program.
• grant program.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the 2026 Budget Act, which leaders described as the compromise budget expected to move to the floor later that evening. Opening remarks emphasized that the plan balances the budget over two years, reduces the structural deficit, and builds reserves, while also protecting core programs from federal cuts. Jason Sisney outlined the legislative budget plan, saying it uses higher-than-expected revenues and reserve balances to reject some proposed reductions and fund temporary restorations and new spending in areas such as education, child care, health care, housing, homelessness, and public safety. Department of Finance representatives said the administration appreciated the two-year balanced framework and the effort to address out-year deficits, while noting the plan includes additional spending and revenue changes. Sisney also previewed floor bills including AB 109, SB 110, SB 122, and SB 125, with SB 122 described as a modification to the tax credit proposal and SB 125 as the managed care organization tax proposal. Subcommittee chairs then described the major policy choices in their areas. Health chair Addis said the budget responds to federal health care rollbacks by protecting Medi-Cal, clinics, hospitals, dental care, and other safety-net services, while also supporting reproductive care, gender-affirming care, and county health systems. Education chair Alvarez highlighted increased school funding, expanded learning, special education, teacher support, community colleges, and a change to Cal Grant eligibility for older community college students. Other chairs emphasized child care expansions, homelessness and housing funding, prison closure and criminal justice savings, wildfire mitigation, county support for Medi-Cal and CalFresh administration, and accountability measures tied to homelessness and corrections spending. Several members also raised concerns or priorities, including the impact of the MCO tax on providers, the need for more support for local journalism, transit and climate funding, biotech and R&D incentives, and continued work on Prop 98 and long-term revenue solutions. No formal votes were taken in the portion provided, but members broadly expressed support for the budget framework and the need to continue negotiations with the administration before final passage. The committee discussion repeatedly framed the budget as a response to federal policy changes and a choice to protect vulnerable Californians while maintaining fiscal responsibility. The vice chair, citing LAO warnings about future volatility and limited reserves, pressed Finance on whether the budget represented a record-sized state budget and whether revenues were also at record levels, underscoring concerns about the state’s preparedness for a downturn.