Transcript Highlights:

• is no longer enforceable, and this measure ensures our code accurately reflects current legal requirements
• is no longer enforceable, and this measure ensures our code accurately reflects current legal requirements
• The current law does have residency requirements in it, which is in conflict with federal statute.
• House Bill 3674 requires all school resource officers to complete sexual assault and sexual violence

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

Committee: House Appropriations and Budget

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any sort of piece in this, or could there be a piece that requires that the home has been inspected

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

Committee: House Appropriations and Budget

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any sort of piece in this, or could there be a piece that requires that the home has been inspected

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

Committee: House Appropriations and Budget

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• Could a venue require the solicitors to use a particular product? Mr.
• That language is really loosely based on the surplus property law that requires the proceeds of the sale
• The current concession law requires competition at 25,000 and requires concessions to be awarded to the
• The statute still requires the contract to be reviewed by legal counsel.
• And then section three is regarding the reporting requirements.

Committee: Joint Legislative Task Force on Government Efficiency

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> federal health and safety requirements federal health and safety requirements uh<00:04:43.120><c
• Without requiring legislative approval is a key here because it will not require an amendment every time
• </c><00:15:01.480><c> certain</c> Authority um that requires certain Authority um that requires certain
• to use all financial surplus to develop more housing in the state.
• </c><00:22:17.520><c> to</c> required to use all Financial Surplus to required to use all Financial Surplus

Committee: Senate Housing

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Committee on Housing heard testimony on several housing-related measures. Senate Bill 65 would appropriate funds to the Hawaii Public Housing Authority for rehabilitation and repair of public housing units. Testifiers from the Department of Human Services, HPHA, Catholic Charities Hawaii, and Roar Cares supported the bill, emphasizing that repairing vacant units is a fast, cost-effective way to increase available housing for homeless and elderly residents. HPHA later told the committee it had 139 vacant units, with an estimated average repair cost of about $73,000 per unit. In decision-making, the committee recommended passage of SB 65 with amendments, including an appropriation of $10,147,000, and the motion passed. The committee also considered Senate Bill 40, which would allow HHFDC to secure a line of credit or other indebtedness for the bond volume cap recycling program. HHFDC supported the measure and explained that Act 35 had provided a $150 million line of credit for fiscal year 2025 only, so this bill would extend that authority; HHFDC said the bonds involved would be revenue bonds. Roar Cares supported the bill, while the chair asked whether the Legislature would need to pass such a bill annually. In decision-making, the committee recommended passage with amendments to specify revenue bonds and noted the administration should study other ways to secure the line of credit without annual legislation. For Senate Bill 35, which would create a Housing Efficiency and Innovation subaccount within the rental housing revolving fund and allow fund transfers without legislative approval, HHFDC and several others supported the measure, arguing that more flexible fund movement would improve efficiency. The committee adopted a recommendation to pass SB 35 with amendments, including language prioritizing projects on state or county land or projects by entities required to reinvest surplus into housing, and noting nonprofit developers could qualify for prioritization. Senate Bill 42, which would repeal certain 30% AMI set-aside and preference requirements for rental housing revolving fund projects, drew opposition from Catholic Charities Hawaii, which argued the bill would reduce the supply of the most vulnerable housing units, while HHFDC warned it could reduce production of 30% AMI units. The committee deferred SB 42. The final bill discussed was Senate Bill 75, which would establish a working group to revise the state’s qualified allocation plan and related rental housing revolving fund loan terms and report back to the Legislature. HHFDC and others offered comments, while Catholic Charities asked that the bill be deferred, saying HHFDC already had the capacity to work with the community without a new law. Roar Cares supported the concept but urged broader stakeholder inclusion. In decision-making, the chair said the committee report would note concerns about prior QAP revisions and the need for more transparent, ongoing stakeholder participation, and the committee recommended passage of SB 75 without amendments. All recommendations were adopted, and the hearing adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It requires electric corporations to publicly share what's needed to approve or deny a post-entitlement
• that was mentioned between our requirements and local government requirements about what the right things
• General Order 131-E, with our changes, would also require pre-filing consultation.
• With our changes, General Order 131-E would also require pre-filing consultation.
• Surplus interconnection would be another. Advanced conductors and grid-enhancing technologies.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1026 by Assembly Member Wilson, which would require investor-owned utilities to provide clearer front-end information and follow more consistent timelines for post-entitlement energization applications tied to housing projects. The author and supporters from the Housing Action Coalition and Mission Housing said utility delays can hold up approved housing, add costs, and create uncertainty, and they argued the bill would align utility processes with recent state efforts to streamline local permitting. PG&E and Southern California Edison opposed the bill, saying existing CPUC timelines and the ongoing energization rulemaking already address the issue, that the bill could be duplicative or premature, and that some proposed timelines were too short. The committee discussed the bill’s relationship to the CPUC’s September 2024 decision, and AB 1026 was ultimately approved on a 15-0 vote, with the consent calendar also passing. The second half of the hearing was the committee’s annual oversight hearing on electric reliability. Representatives from the CPUC, CEC, CAISO, and DWR reviewed lessons from the 2020 and 2022 heat emergencies, emphasizing that California has since added significant resources, improved planning, and created backstop programs such as the strategic reliability reserve. They said the summer 2025 outlook is cautiously optimistic, with no expected shortfalls under traditional planning conditions and a projected surplus, though wildfire and extreme heat remain risks. The agencies also described major changes in planning and operations, including more battery storage, updated resource adequacy rules, expanded transmission planning, and reforms to the interconnection queue. Members asked about data center load, Diablo Canyon’s future, the strategic reliability reserve, demand response, wildfire mitigation costs, affordability, and regional market expansion. Witnesses said data center demand is a major variable but can be managed through better forecasting, flexible service arrangements, and siting in areas with existing capacity; they also said firm clean resources remain valuable while planning continues around Diablo Canyon’s scheduled retirement. On affordability, they said the agencies try to balance reliability with least-cost procurement, and that new resources can lower market prices even as they require upfront investment. CAISO also highlighted the value of the Western Energy Imbalance Market and the planned day-ahead market, saying regional coordination improves both reliability and cost savings.

Transcript Highlights:

• that surplus properties be prioritized for land banks, and the competitive grant program administered
• reporting requirement, and also adds a real estate excise tax exemption.
• The proposed substitute removes several provisions, including the requirement that the county formally
• reporting requirement.
• reporting requirement, and also adds a real estate excise tax exemption.

Bills: HB1974 , HB2118 , HB2236 , HB2269

Committee: House Housing

Keywords: land bank, land banking authority, affordable housing, housing crisis, housing supply, public corporation, public housing authority, nonprofit housing, tax-foreclosed property, blight remediation, redevelopment, anti-displacement, equity, redlining, racial segregation, deed restriction, affordability covenant, property tax exemption, excise tax exemption, predevelopment

Transcript Highlights:

• The first being the bond capacity, the second being surplus funds from last year.
• The state general fund non-recurring, which is the surplus dollars, is $288 million.
• The state general fund non-recurring, which is the surplus dollars, is $288 million.
• The surplus dollars of $288,536,935 in the governor's executive budget spent $269.6 million, leaving

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and took up House Bill 2, the comprehensive capital outlay budget. The bill sponsor explained the funding sources and the committee’s approach to allocating limited remaining dollars, including trimming some first-year project funding, redirecting money from dormant projects, and using project bundling for LSU, Southern, UL Lafayette, and DOTD to improve flexibility and free up funds. The sponsor also noted efforts to keep the five-year plan from growing further, especially on the local side, and said the committee was able to add about $15 million in member projects, with additional savings from bundling and dormant-project funding. The committee adopted Amendment Set 3727, which related to cash funding for projects. After a brief question from Representative Baralt about whether the large member-request total reflected House requests only, the sponsor clarified that it was mostly House requests with a few Senate crossovers. The committee then passed HB 2 with amendments without objection, reported it favorably, made it special order number 2 for April 16, and authorized staff to make technical corrections to adopted amendments. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• As chairman, I'm committed to a thorough review of nominations pursuant to statutorily required checks
• But on that, how can you think that requires legislation?
• Salazar case, the First Amendment prohibits the government from requiring gender-affirming...
• State law requires the department to... ...requires the department to reject rates that are excessive
• If you fall further, there's going to be action taken or requirements that need to be met.

Summary: The Committee on Director Nominations met with four members present and approved the prior minutes without objection. Chair Jay Kaufman outlined the committee’s role in reviewing executive nominations and explained the hearing process for three nominees: Mary Foote for the Office of Economic Opportunity, Debbie Johnston for the Department of Health Services, and Chuck Bassett. Foote did not appear for her hearing, and members discussed her absence and alleged omissions in her disclosure materials, including prior service with Planned Parenthood-related organizations. The committee then moved to reject her nomination, and the motion passed 3-2, recommending that the full Senate reject Mary Foote. Debbie Johnston, nominee to lead the Department of Health Services, appeared and gave an opening statement describing her Arizona background, prior Senate staff work, and more than 20 years with the Arizona Hospital and Health Care Association. She said her priorities at ADHS include rebuilding trust in public health licensing, improving stakeholder engagement, standardizing rulemaking communication, addressing alleged religious discrimination and retaliation concerns in licensing, and using technology and AI to improve efficiency. In questioning, senators pressed her on her management style, conflict-of-interest safeguards given her prior industry role, enforcement priorities, budget pressures, behavioral health and assisted living oversight, and the department’s response to COVID-19. Johnston said she would follow statutes, recuse herself from enforcement matters involving former contacts, and resign if directed to carry out an unlawful policy. She also said the department does not regulate therapy itself, only facilities, and that it would rely on legal counsel regarding the governor’s conversion-therapy executive order and related federal civil-rights allegations. Several senators focused on public health trust and the department’s pandemic response, with Johnston acknowledging concerns about closures, data collection, and communication during COVID-19 while saying she would review past after-action materials and be better prepared in the future. Public testimony from stakeholders in aging services and health care strongly supported her confirmation, praising her accessibility, responsiveness, and collaborative approach. After testimony, the vice chair moved to recommend Johnston’s confirmation to the full Senate. The roll call was underway when the transcript ended, with several members voting aye and one member expressing reservations about her not reviewing the pandemic after-action report before another crisis occurs.

Transcript Highlights:

• California requires prior approval on every single rate.
• California requires prior approval on every single rate.
• It removes the requirement to include out-of-state factors in rate modeling, requires annual meetings
• Removes the requirement to include out of state factors and rate modeling, requires annual meetings to
• Established a 2/3 vote, board vote requirement to set the PML.

Committee: House Insurance

Summary: The committee first took up several bills and voted them out favorably without amendment: SB 2857, relating to prescription drug purchasing proof for certain health benefit plan issuers and employers; SB 1307, relating to the biennial health coverage reference guide; and SB 527, relating to health benefit coverage for general anesthesia for certain pediatric dental services. Each of those motions passed on a 7-0 roll call. The main discussion centered on SB 1643, which would require prior approval from the Texas Department of Insurance for property and casualty rate changes above 10% from a previously filed rate. The chair framed it as a response to rate volatility and rising homeowners and auto premiums, while several members questioned whether it would slow a market that is already stabilizing and could encourage insurers to file repeated increases just under the threshold. Witnesses from consumer groups supported tighter oversight and argued for a lower threshold, while insurance industry representatives opposed the bill, saying Texas’s file-and-use system and competitive market work better and that the proposal could increase costs or create uncertainty. After testimony, SB 1643 was left pending. The committee then heard SB 1642, which would replace the single Texas Department of Insurance commissioner with a three-commissioner structure and an executive director. Supporters said it could improve accountability and transparency, while opponents argued the current single-commissioner model is more efficient and avoids confusion and added cost. Witnesses also raised concerns about open meetings issues, administrative expense, and the lack of a clear model from other states. SB 1642 was also left pending. Finally, the committee heard SB 2530, the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association omnibus bill. The bill would make a number of changes to TWIA’s governance and finances, including exempting TWIA from certain taxes, moving its headquarters to a coastal county, changing board composition and voting rules, and lowering the probable maximum loss standard from 1-in-100 to 1-in-50. Supporters said the bill would strengthen TWIA’s reserve funding and improve local relevance, while opponents warned it could increase assessments, reduce reinsurance protection, and create operational risks by relocating the headquarters to the coast. The bill was left pending, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It outlines various requirements for electronic monitoring.
• Madam Whip, members, Senate Bill 1497 requires a school district governing board that employs at least
• The Senate amended the bill by requiring the organization to file the models.
• The Senate amended the bill to clarify that ADE must review each statutory requirement and for ADE to
• It also requires DHS to allow for general supervision of a radiologist's assistants...

Summary: The meeting reviewed a long list of Senate and House bills, mostly from Appropriations and Education, with staff describing strike-everything amendments and whether the amended language matched other bills. Topics included electronic monitoring in care facilities (SB 1041), dental board complaint forwarding and licensure exemptions (SB 1168), revitalization district contracts (SB 1189), timeshare salesperson licensing (SB 1274), veterinary telemedicine prescriptions (SB 1286), insurer zero-estimated-exposure policies (SB 1428), advanced air mobility funding for border security (SB 1457), death benefits for law enforcement pilots (SB 1503), ATV definitions (SB 1519), pet and fowl restrictions in planned communities (SB 1582), pharmacist independent testing and treatment (SB 1713), school district self-insurance quotes (SB 1497), and a housing/historic district measure tied to SB 1118. Most of these were presented as technical or policy changes, often noting that the strike-everything language was identical to a House bill already passed. The caucus then moved through several blue-sheet concurrence items. HB 2120 received a technical Senate amendment to align property-tax disability language with updated statute, and the sponsor concurred. HB 2174 was amended to require a modeling and data organization to file models used by insurers, with concurrence noted. HB 2203, aimed at reducing duplicative ADE and school reporting, was amended so ADE must review each statutory reporting requirement and report back to the legislature; the sponsor concurred. HB 2383 was amended only to name a trampoline court law as “TIE’s law,” with no substantive policy change, and the sponsor concurred. On the remaining House bills, HB 2877 was changed from timeshare licensing to create an alternative education pathway for certified veterinary technicians, and the sponsor concurred. HB 2875, dealing with unmanned aircraft and drone delivery, was amended to adjust airport-related local authority limits from one mile to 2.5 miles and to reference consultation with airports; members raised questions about FAA preemption and local authority. HB 2428 on emission reduction credits was amended to emphasize voluntary participation and limit new credits if participation later becomes mandatory, and the sponsor concurred. HB 2176 on health care institution licensing and complaint investigations was amended to allow older abuse-related complaints, and the sponsor concurred. HB 2050 on radiologic technology standards and radiologist assistant supervision drew the most discussion; the Senate narrowed the supervision change to rural counties under 500,000 population and critical access hospitals, and the sponsor concurred while members questioned the geographic scope. Finally, HB 2010 on refunds for digital goods was amended to shorten the refund window from 10 years to five, but the sponsor refused concurrence due to a drafting error, indicating a conference committee would be needed. The caucus then concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> had a giant surplus. had a giant surplus.
• The bill requires the Department of Revenue to annually value every asset owned by affected taxpayers
• You remember what you guys, what the Democrats did last time when we had a 18-plus surplus and found
• And that was with an $18.5 billion surplus, we raised taxes by 10 billion.
• </c> surplus, we raised taxes by 10 billion. surplus, we raised taxes by 10 billion.

Bills: HF4621 , HF4123 , HF4616 , HF1183

Committee: House Taxes

Keywords: child tax credit, financial assistance, low-income families, state revenue, tax policy, net investment income, taxation, business income, self-employment, tax increase, wealth tax, fairness, public services, high-income earners, economic equity, Internal Revenue Code, employee classification, federal law, Minnesota statutes, 1183

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a constitutional requirement in the state of Minnesota, as it is in just about every other state
• c><00:01:58.000><c> state</c> constitutional requirement in the state constitutional requirement in the
• </c><00:07:53.759><c> They</c> $18 billion surplus last year. They $18 billion surplus last year.
• ><c> for</c><00:15:29.680><c> reinstatement</c> all the requirements for reinstatement all the requirements
• Um, when people are on it, they're required to drive only that vehicle.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Federal aviation facilities are required to meet this under federal law; they will be required under
• it was required as some sort of federal grant requirement?
• it was required as some sort of federal grant requirement?
• This amendment requires some sort of clarity.
• It makes technical changes to fingerprinting and background check requirements to better align with requirements

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Between 1951 and 1990, requiring higher levels of care and maintenance.
• ; capital projects greater than $10 million or requiring any amount of borrowing require approval of
• Each project receives a minimum of two approvals, each requiring specific information.
• That requires labs that we have.
• So we know we'll have another surplus even this year.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on the BRIGHT Act, a higher education capital bill that would use Fair Share surtax revenue to fund major repairs, modernization, and decarbonization projects across UMass, state universities, and community colleges. UMass leadership described a $4.8 billion deferred maintenance backlog, aging buildings, and the need to modernize facilities, improve accessibility, and reduce emissions. Administration officials said the bill would authorize $2.5 billion in capital funding, split roughly 50-50 between UMass and the rest of public higher education, plus additional targeted funding for housing planning, smaller modernization projects, campus master plans, and workforce skills grants. They emphasized that the financing structure is modeled on the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and would not raise student costs, while also supporting affordability through financial aid and free community college. Members raised questions about regional equity, the distribution of funds among the five UMass campuses and the 24 state university/community college campuses, project labor agreements, whether the bill would unlock private or federal matching funds, and how the system is preparing for AI and changing workforce needs. UMass officials said project selection is data-driven, based on deferred maintenance, safety, accessibility, sustainability, and programmatic needs, and that the flagship campus in Western Massachusetts would likely receive a large share because of its size and needs. They also said UMass Boston would receive its own share and would not be shortchanged by the Bayside project. On labor, they said PLAs are commonly used and they would follow existing board and building authority policies. On affordability, they said the university has shifted hundreds of millions into need-based aid and that the state’s recent support has helped keep tuition low for many students. DCAMM and higher education officials said the state’s public campuses account for a large share of state-owned building space and a disproportionate share of operational carbon emissions, making decarbonization a major driver of the bill. They said the legislation would allow larger, more comprehensive projects that can address deferred maintenance, energy efficiency, and program needs at the same time, while also making some projects shovel-ready through the Fair Share supplemental funding already appropriated. A later panel from the State Universities Council of Presidents argued the bill’s authorization is still too small to meet long-term needs and urged the committee to increase the bond cap and ensure a more equitable distribution among segments. No votes or final actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• But until it's a done deal, the money stays in the state surplus.
• The money stays in the state surplus, the current surplus that we're in.
• This is talking about the current surplus that we had at the end of last fiscal year is what we'll be
• What is the surplus? All right. The current year? Yes.
• And then we've got $300 million already this year in our projected surplus.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, quorum call, leave requests, and routine business, including reading gubernatorial approval letters for several recently enacted acts. Members also recognized guests in the chamber. The body then took up a motion to send House Bill 1034 back to the Joint Budget Committee, which passed, with Representative Jean explaining the bill would be revised to remove pay raises and address cybersecurity and bank fees later. On the red and budget calendars, the House passed House Bill 1103 to increase the homestead property tax credit by $75, with supporters noting it would be the fourth straight annual increase and total $300 per household over four years. The chamber also adopted amendments to House Bills 1007, 1022, 1036, and 1064, then passed Senate Bill 76, a $2 million appropriation for county extension office capital improvements. Several appropriation bills were then considered in batches and individually, with mixed results: House Bills 1005, 1051, 1089, 1090, 1093, and Senate Bills 8, 10, 16, 20, 23, 36, 43, 55, 58, 63, 67, and 30 passed; House Bills 1023, 1035, 1053, 1066, and Senate Bills 41 and 59 failed; Senate Bills 10 and 24 were initially passed over for later consideration. A major portion of the meeting focused on Amendment 1 to House Bill 1100, the RSA/one-time funding package. Representative Jean outlined increases for corrections, state police, LEARNS/freedom accounts, Medicaid, vehicle purchases, and other set-asides, plus a proposed $300 million economic development reserve for a confidential project with clawback provisions. The amendment drew extended debate: supporters argued it could bring major job creation and broader economic benefits, while opponents criticized the secrecy, size of the subsidy, and opportunity cost. The amendment ultimately passed 54-36-3. The House then adjourned until 1 p.m. the next day after announcements about upcoming budget and House Management meetings.

Transcript Highlights:

• But until it’s a done deal, the money stays in the state surplus.
• The money stays in the state surplus, the current surplus that we’re in.
• What is the surplus? All right. The current year? Yes.
• Well, where this $518 million is going to be found: our balance in the surplus that we're working out
• And then we've got $300 million already this year in our projected surplus.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• . $269 million in surplus funds is also dedicated in the bill. Right now, the available money...
• Just real quick, is there an expenditure requirement when these entities receive the funds?”
• Yes, it would require legislation to do that. But, you know, to me, it's a grant program.
• , and it had an expenditure requirement.
• “The statutes do not require it, and then, therefore, we haven't required it.

Summary: The committee met informally to receive a detailed briefing from the Division of Administration’s Facility Planning and Control on House Bill 2, the state capital outlay bill. Staff explained the bill’s size and structure, including the current original bill of about $11.1 billion, the role of Priority 1 and Priority 5 funding, the $574 million annual cash line-of-credit capacity, and the large amount of reauthorized or dormant Priority 1 funding that remains in the bill from prior years. Members focused heavily on how projects are selected, how cash-flow estimates are made, and how much of the bill is tied up in long-term Priority 5 placeholders versus money that can actually be spent in the near term. No votes were taken, and the chair emphasized the meeting was informational only. The committee also heard from Higher Education Commissioner Kim Hunter-Reed, who outlined the higher education capital outlay process, the number of requests submitted, and the deferred maintenance program supported by prior legislative funding. A major theme was concern about dormant projects and over-appropriation of Priority 1 funds. Committee members repeatedly asked how much money is sitting unused, why projects remain in the bill for years, and whether legislators can help remove obsolete or overfunded projects. FPC officials said dormant projects are identified when they have had no expenditures for roughly two years, and that last year some projects were not reauthorized, freeing funds for active projects. They said legislators can help by reducing or eliminating dormant projects and by being cautious about adding new projects during session, since small initial cash amounts can create large future Priority 5 obligations. Members also discussed whether non-state entities, including municipalities, parishes, ports, and nonprofits, should have stronger reporting or expenditure requirements; staff said the current statutes do not require a formal expenditure mandate, though the cooperative agreements allow the state to take back funds if no contract is entered within the required period. Higher education officials said the systems and campuses work year-round with the Board of Regents and FPC to prioritize projects and determine realistic cash needs. Commissioner Hunter-Reed said higher education accounts for a large share of state buildings, that 154 requests were received and 79 were submitted, and that 38 projects have new FY27 funding in the current draft. She also noted that the legislature has provided $100 million over two years for deferred maintenance against a backlog exceeding $2 billion, and that $10 million of that has been set aside for third-party campus reviews of deferred maintenance, space utilization, and preventive maintenance. Overall, the meeting centered on improving capital outlay efficiency, reducing dormant funding, and aligning project requests more closely with what can actually be spent in a year.

Transcript Highlights:

• that surplus properties be prioritized for land banks, and the competitive grant program administered
• reporting requirement and a real estate excise tax exemption.
• The proposed substitute removes several provisions, including the requirement that the county formally
• reporting requirement and a real estate excise tax exemption.
• reporting requirement and a real estate excise tax exemption.

Summary: The House Housing Committee met to executive several bills, with staff outlining proposed substitutes and key changes before members took a caucus break. House Bill 1974, the land bank bill, was described as removing several original provisions such as county authorization requirements, advisory boards, planning strategies, annual audits, surplus-property prioritization, and a grant program, while adding annual reporting and a real estate excise tax exemption. House Bill 2118, which would limit common interest community associations from imposing more restrictive use covenants than those in place when a unit was acquired, had no amendments but was not moved forward at this time. House Bill 2236, dealing with Housing Finance Commission authority, was explained as clarifying that the commission may not act as a retail mortgage lender or make loans for owner-occupied home purchases or refinancing, except for certain down-payment assistance loans, while adding an intent section to emphasize that the commission is not meant to compete with private lenders. Members debated whether removing language about using public funds could create taxpayer risk or a de facto state bank, but supporters said the changes modernize outdated law and clarify the commission’s role. House Bill 2269, concerning middle housing and on-site sewage systems in LAMIRDs, would restore broader county authority for middle housing in LAMIRDs while limiting sewage-system options based on whether the county is rural or non-rural. The committee voted to report House Bill 1974 out with a due pass recommendation by a 10-7 vote, with several members opposing or voting without recommendation over tax concerns. House Bill 2236 also passed out of committee with a due pass recommendation by a 13-4 vote after similar debate over public-funds language. House Bill 2269 passed unanimously by voice vote, and the committee adjourned after completing its executive action.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:49:41.840><c> uh,</c> listing service um, doesn't require uh, listing service um, doesn't require
• So it all came off the surplus statement. It's just a big negative number.
• So it all came off the surplus statement. It's just a big negative number.
• So it all came off the surplus statement. It's just a big negative number.
• So it all came off the surplus statement. It's just a big negative number.

Committee: Senate Ways and Means

Keywords: 1191, senate, all