Transcript Highlights:

• Despite this, less than 20% of the solid waste management tax revenues are allocated to SCORE grants
• <00:18:30.360> to<00:18:30.520> score<00:18:30.960> grants revenues are allocated
• to score grants revenues are allocated to score grants to<00:18:31.919> fund<00:18:32.320>
• allocations.
• mandates due to inadequate score Grant mandates due to inadequate score Grant allocations<00:20:

Bills: HF1359, HF1829, HF290, HF1933, HF926

Keywords: solid waste management, resource management account, environmental fund, taxation, Minnesota statutes, homestead, property tax, classification, disability, resort properties, recreational use, commercial property, tax refund, estimated tax, interest on refunds, income tax, corporate franchise tax, S corporation, partnership, corporation

Transcript Highlights:

• few years ago, all of the federal grant few years ago, all of the federal grant review,<00:09:15.880
• It was asked for and it was granted.
• It was asked for and it was granted.
• It was asked for and it was<00:14:17.040> granted.
• <00:14:18.600> Thank was granted. So please continue. Thank was granted.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up Senate File 856, relating to creation of an independent Office of Inspector General to fight fraud in Minnesota. Representative Norris presented a DE6 author’s amendment that he said fixed constitutional appointment language, expanded the office’s fraud-prevention role, and made other noncontroversial cleanup changes. He emphasized that the bill was still not finished and that more work remained before it would be ready for final House passage. Members raised several concerns. Representative Joy questioned language about who has primary investigative authority in Medicaid-related cases and whether the bill could create confusion over who may freeze funds; Norris responded that federal rules require administering agencies to be primary investigators and said the language was intended to comply with those rules while still ensuring investigations happen. Representative Bahner said the bill was improved, especially on constitutionality and prevention, but noted remaining concerns about agency expertise, duplication of effort, and funding. Representative Quam argued the state already has the Office of the Legislative Auditor and other processes in place, while Norris said an executive-branch office working directly with agencies could help ensure best practices are actually implemented. Several members, including Representative Cleborne and Representative Craft, said they remained concerned about duplication, cost, and language they believed still placed the new office above state law, though they acknowledged the bill was improved and constitutional issues had been addressed. The chair moved the DE6 amendment, which was adopted, and then the committee voted on Senate File 856 as amended. The bill passed on a roll call vote of 13 ayes and 1 nay and was referred to the Judiciary Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• An applicant may claim the credit or grant or a combination of credit and grant.
• The grant to the designed taxpayer.
• data basis or as specifically allocated data basis or as specifically allocated in<00:19:14.799>
• prescribe how the grant is paid. prescribe how the grant is paid.
• 20<01:06:47.920> personal has granted approximately 20 personal has granted approximately

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• only our grant processes followed well in terms of vetting etc.
• this healthcare workforce grant program. this healthcare workforce grant program.
• um ensure that uh not only our grant um ensure that uh not only our grant processes<00:04:19.359
• was in the minority of advancing a grant was in the minority of advancing a grant program<00:04:
• <00:05:04.080> those expertise and how to best allocate those expertise and how to best allocate

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 3732, with the author moving both the bill and two separate amendments. The DE1 amendment would create a healthcare workforce grant program to let the Department of Employment and Economic Development identify and fund healthcare workforce shortage areas, while the A1 amendment would establish an Office of Community Investment to provide strategic grant management and help align grants with legislative priorities. Both amendments were adopted, and the bill was laid over for later consideration. The bill author explained that the healthcare workforce proposal is meant to address shortages that market forces alone have not solved, citing examples such as CNA training and rural oncologist recruitment. The Office of Community Investment was described as a way to improve grant oversight, set clearer goals, and strengthen collaboration between agencies and the legislature, drawing on the model of the Office of Justice Programs. Testimony from the Mong American Partnership strongly supported the healthcare workforce grant program, describing successful CNA and phlebotomy pathways, but also noting long waitlists and the need for flexible funding. Members discussed the importance of locating training opportunities in greater Minnesota and in communities with workforce gaps, so distance and travel barriers do not limit access. Several legislators said the proposal would help create good-paying jobs, strengthen healthcare access, and support overworked healthcare workers. The bill’s sponsors also emphasized that codifying grant programs can speed up future funding decisions and improve accountability, and they said the measures would return for further consideration in a few days.

Transcript Highlights:

• Are you going to choose how to allocate the funding into what locations?
• So how are we going to be able to allocate the funds for this bill? You're recognized.
• Permission granted.
• Permission granted.
• Permission granted. Why did you choose 10%?

Summary: The Arkansas Boys State House convened with a quorum, heard opening remarks from legislative leaders and guests, and then considered a series of bills focused on rural services, education, taxes, and zoning. House Bill 1001 would have increased rural health care funding through a 10% tax on individuals earning at least $300,000; supporters argued it would improve access and quality in rural areas, while opponents raised concerns about fairness, long-term funding, and whether it would drive away doctors and taxpayers. The bill failed by a vote of 24 yeas, 51 nays, and 1 present. House Bill 1002 would have limited the number of subjects rural teachers could be assigned and offered sign-on bonuses to recruit more teachers; supporters said it would reduce burnout and improve specialization, while opponents questioned funding and whether it would worsen inequities. After immediate consideration, it passed narrowly, 38 yeas, 36 nays, and 2 present. The House then debated House Bill 1003, which would regulate AI data centers through county zoning authority and a 10% tax on corporations to fund conservation efforts. Supporters said counties should be able to decide whether data centers fit local needs, while opponents warned about lost jobs, higher costs, and federal-state jurisdiction issues. The bill passed 62 yeas, 7 nays, and 3 present. House Bill 1004 would have reduced motor vehicle registration fees to offset high fuel costs, but critics argued it would reduce highway and road funding and strain the state budget; it failed 20 yeas, 46 nays, and 4 present. The chamber then took up Senate bills. Senate Bill 1 proposed incentives tied to SNAP benefits to encourage healthier food purchases and address food insecurity and obesity; supporters framed it as a way to improve access to healthy food, while opponents objected to taxing junk food and burdening SNAP users. It passed 43 yeas and 27 nays. Senate Bill 2 would require reading tests in middle school and state tutoring for students who fail; supporters said it would address literacy problems early, while opponents wanted clearer provisions for older students and implementation. It passed 67 yeas, 6 nays, and 1 present. Senate Bill 3 would cut individual and corporate income taxes to promote economic growth and ease cost-of-living pressures; supporters cited prior tax cuts and business attraction, while opponents said the benefits would mostly go to wealthy corporations and CEOs. It passed 53 yeas, 15 nays, and 16 present. Senate Bill 4 created a mixed-use zoning grant program funded by a 1% hotel tourism tax to encourage affordable housing and downtown redevelopment; it passed 51 yeas, 7 nays, and 13 present. The session ended with a motion to adjourn, which carried.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're asking the committee to allocate We're asking the committee to allocate $400<00:10:47.440>
• Granting Road immediately to the west.
• In the '70s, the Highway 61 money was allocated.
• We still pushed hard for the build grant.
• We still pushed hard for the build grant.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For every hour they grab for rest this weekend, grant them refreshment of two.
• For every hour they grab for rest this weekend, grant them refreshment of two.
• Verification is granted. Members, please take your seats. Thanks. Thank you.
• Verification has been granted. Please take your seats.
• So the question is: what’s the proper allocation?

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, offered an invocation, led the pledges, and approved a series of routine motions, including excusing absent members and granting permission for several committees to meet while the House was in session. Members also adopted several memorial and recognition resolutions, including H.R. 1023 honoring Christian Beerbill, H.R. 1033 recognizing International Bereaved Mother’s Day, and H.R. 877 recognizing Urban League Advocates Day. The House also recommitted SB 17 and HB 4211 to committee and postponed SCR 27 and HB 2145 for later consideration. The chamber then took up a long third-reading calendar of bills covering a wide range of topics, including Sunset review measures, health care workforce and pricing, child custody and family law, Medicaid, rural ambulance grants, energy reporting, public information requests, trail development, virtual meeting disruptions, occupational licensing, protective orders, county leave pools, animal cruelty, infrastructure, and higher education. Most bills were explained briefly by their authors and passed with broad support, though several drew notable opposition, including HB 5265, HB 2402, HB 3000, HB 3237, HB 3326, HB 1056, HB 281, HB 3308, HB 1043, HB 1234, HB 1193, HB 294, HB 809, HB 334, HB 2037, HB 285, HB 1353, HB 3960, HB 4044, HB 4264, HB 2807, HB 3349, HB 4406, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 1201, and others. Several bills prompted extended debate or amendments. HB 3237, extending public energy-use reporting for state and higher-education buildings, passed after questions about its public-sector-only scope and energy savings. HB 3326, addressing public service loan forgiveness credit for adjunct professors, initially failed on a 69-70 vote but later passed after verification and machine corrections. HB 3211, concerning optometrists in managed care plans, adopted a Buckley amendment before passing. HB 2213 on Texas Windstorm Insurance Association board composition adopted a Metcalf amendment requiring certain board members to be Texas residents. HB 412, dealing with harmful materials and sexual performance of a child, generated extensive questioning about its scope, existing legal standards, and effects on educators and medical professionals; the excerpt ends during that debate.

Transcript Highlights:

• So right now, if you're a nonprofit, you apply for a grant. You apply for another grant, brand new.
• We administer grants. We have 29 grant programs, 34 subcategories to those grant programs.
• And what they did was they looked at our three... ...past grant cycles, who applied, who received grants
• One of our PRA projects came in for grants and scored number one in two of our grant programs.
• and grant application.

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee heard presentations from the Department of Commerce, the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and a consultant on the School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) study. Commerce officials described their agency’s role in housing, energy, local government, broadband, and other capital programs, and reported on a $5 million pilot under Senate Bill 5200 that used trusted community messengers and technical assistance to help historically excluded organizations prepare for capital funding. They said 18 organizations received direct support and 79 smaller projects were also funded, but emphasized that statutory match rules, reimbursement-based payments, site-control requirements, insurance and audit costs, and extensive contracting rules remain major barriers. Commerce outlined efforts to expand outreach, digital modernization, internal contracting improvements, tribal MOUs, and innovation centers, and members asked about small business support, housing program placement, and outreach to Eastern Washington and communities of color. RCO described its grant programs for recreation, conservation, education, and salmon/orca recovery, and reviewed equity work done before and after a 2021-23 proviso. The agency had already created a small-communities carve-out in youth athletic facilities, piloted stipends for advisory committee members, and reduced match requirements where allowed. Under the proviso, RCO completed an equity review and a planning program that funded 54 projects across 34 counties, with many applicants being new or long-absent grantees. Staff said the review led to changes in scoring criteria, clearer application guidance, more objective data measures, expanded technical assistance, and targeted community engagement. Members asked about application burden, project sizes, outreach, and how the agency is broadening participation and representation on advisory committees. The final presentation summarized a planning study on SCAP, which examined rising construction costs, fragmented grant programs, local funding barriers, and uneven district capacity. The report recommended nine major changes, including stronger planning support, a new minor-modernization category, a mechanism to use unused funds more quickly, an education-specification prototype, a SCAP enhancement program for low-capacity districts, acceptance of non-SCAP funds, phased modernization, streamlined D-form and reimbursement processes, and revisions to the SCAP formula to better account for grade-band differences, enrollment projections, and regional cost factors. Additional recommendations included ongoing monitoring and evaluation, facilities-impact reviews, matching SCAP increases to construction-cost inflation, earlier locking of funding estimates, flexible program spaces, and updated statewide building-condition assessments. No votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• CSBG is more than a grant.
• Currently, none of our other grants cover the personnel costs for essential functions like grant writing
• We would have no grant writers without CSBG.
• I just want to emphasize CSBG again is more than a grant.
• I just want to emphasize CSBG, again, is more than a grant.

Summary: The Senate and Assembly Human Services Committees held a special oversight hearing on California’s 2026-27 Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) state plan, a federal anti-poverty funding stream. Committee members opened by citing statewide poverty and homelessness data and said the hearing was meant to review how CSBG dollars are used, how local agencies respond to community needs, and how the state is preparing for possible federal funding cuts. Jason Wimbley of the Department of Community Services and Development (CSD) explained that California’s CSBG network works through 60 organizations in 58 counties, serving about 1.5 million low-income Californians in 2023, and that the state received $68.4 million in federal CSBG funds in fiscal year 2025. He described the program as flexible funding used for housing, employment, education, food, health, transportation, and emergency response, and noted that the federal administration had proposed eliminating CSBG, though the Senate Appropriations Committee had voted to fully fund it for the coming year. Representatives from the California Community Action Partnership Association and several CSBG-funded agencies described how the program supports local anti-poverty work and leverages other funding. CalCAPA emphasized local flexibility, workforce development, partnerships, and data systems such as ROMA, while also warning that agencies are preparing for possible reductions by tightening budgets, planning staffing contingencies, and seeking private foundation support. Agency witnesses from Contra Costa County, Northern California Indian Development Council, Proteus, and Sacred Heart Community Service described services including housing assistance, food distribution, utility help, employment training, youth programs, and culturally specific services for Native communities and migrant farmworkers. They repeatedly said CSBG is essential because it funds staffing and infrastructure that allow them to braid other grants and serve people who do not qualify for standard safety-net programs. Members also asked about the impact of federal staffing changes and the Los Angeles fires. Wimbley said federal layoffs had affected some CSD programs but not CSBG administration, and that the department coordinated disaster response with state agencies and used CSBG-funded supply distribution, food, water, clothing, and documentation support during the fires. Witnesses said they were preparing for possible future cuts by diversifying funding, reducing expenses, and considering service changes, while county officials warned that state and federal reductions could not be backfilled locally. During public comment, one speaker urged stronger oversight of community action agencies and raised concerns about transparency and compliance with state law. The chair then thanked the witnesses, emphasized the importance of CSBG for low-income seniors, youth, and people with disabilities, and adjourned the hearing without any votes or formal action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• School resource officer allocation, so I came on in... Early '22, this—I want to call it a grant.
• It's more like an allocation of security money for school resource officers that came about in '23.
• full disclosure on all that is going on with this passing May 2023 House Bill 2903 funds for SRO allocation
• That superintendent reached out and wanted to talk about the grant, and he said, 'Man, I'd love for you
• You had a mental health professional dedicated, initially paid for by a special grant.

Summary: The meeting focused on school safety funding and security practices in Oklahoma schools, especially how districts have used school resource officer (SRO) allocation money and related security grants. Kevin Rey of the Oklahoma State Department of Education’s Office of School Safety and Security explained that the program, created under HB 2903, allows districts to use funds for SROs and physical security improvements such as cameras, access control, fencing, window film, bollards, metal detectors, and vape detectors. He said more than 170 districts used the money to hire SROs in 2024-25, and that the 2024 change allowing retired officers and armed security guards to qualify was a major help. Members questioned whether the money should also support prevention and mental health services, and Rey said the current program is mainly for security hardware and related measures. Mark Stout, chief of police for Putnam City Schools, described the district’s layered security approach, including weapon detection at middle and high schools and the ZeroEyes AI camera system, which monitors existing cameras for visible guns and sends alerts to trained monitoring staff and then to district police. He said the system is used as one layer among others, alongside officers, weapon detection, and school procedures, and noted the district is expanding coverage at athletic facilities. He also explained that the system is more economical than full weapon-detection setups, with annual costs based on the number of cameras. Tecumseh Superintendent Kinsey, Chief Kennedy, and Pottawatomie County law enforcement described the October threat investigation involving a student who posted a photo with a handgun and knife and discussed violence online. They said the FBI tip, rapid coordination among agencies, and an SRO already embedded in the district helped lead to a search warrant and arrest within hours, preventing a possible attack. Kinsey also described the district’s safety measures, including secure entrances, cameras, ALICE training, crisis communication planning, mental health support, clear backpacks, and a new staff alert system. He said community feedback after the incident favored more law enforcement partnership, limited entry points, handheld metal detectors, more SROs, stronger training, and more mental health support. Matt Riggs, former superintendent of McComb, said smaller districts face different security challenges because of limited local law enforcement and long response times. He explained that McComb used its funding for facility upgrades rather than hiring a full-time SRO because the district wanted improvements that would last beyond the three-year funding window. Throughout the discussion, several members emphasized the tension between visible security measures and prevention, with repeated calls for more counselors, mental health supports, and threat-assessment efforts alongside hardening measures. No formal votes or actions were taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• The original bill established a $10 million annual funding baseline for Brownfields' grant program by
• allocating $8 million from the realty transfer tax.
• back. ...enormous amounts of money that will then need to be allocated back and are supposed to be allocated
• You'll have to deal with cost allocation.
• Delmarva needs this to fairly allocate project costs.

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on energy, public safety, and environmental cleanup. House Bill 455 would create a historic preservation license plate to raise funds and awareness for Delaware preservation efforts, and House Bill 471 would tighten rules and penalties for off-highway vehicles on shared private roads, with golf carts excluded. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 439, the Truth in E-Bike Marketing Act, would require clearer disclosures when selling electric mopeds and electric motorcycles so consumers understand classification, power, and licensing/insurance requirements. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 407, related to the Hazardous Substance Cleanup Act and brownfields, would shift funding for brownfield cleanup from the original realty transfer tax approach to a dedicated share of the hazardous substance cleanup fund and raise civil penalties for fraudulent acts. The committee also approved the June 18, 2026 minutes once quorum was reached. Most of the meeting centered on House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 233, as amended, a large-load/data center bill intended to protect ratepayers from costs tied to massive new electricity users. The sponsor and Public Advocate said PJM’s warnings about a coming reliability backstop auction made it urgent to establish a Delaware framework now, requiring large energy users to sign utility agreements, cover their share of transmission, distribution, and capacity costs, and comply with curtailment and other protections. Supporters from environmental groups and some labor and business voices said the bill was needed to prevent cost shifts to households and small businesses, while opponents argued it was being rushed, could deter investment, and might unintentionally affect other industries; several asked for more time and clearer definitions. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee also took up House Bill 470, which would authorize Delmarva Power, with PSC approval, to build and operate utility-owned battery storage and spread costs across the customer base. The sponsor and Delmarva said the bill would improve reliability quickly and help avoid outages, while the chair expressed concern that the state had not yet fully studied whether utility-owned or competitively procured storage is the best model, noting a recent SEU storage study and broader policy questions. Supporters said utility storage could be deployed faster and help with peak shaving, while others urged a competitive process; the transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 470.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:10:00.000> Program Housing Infrastructure Grants Program Housing Infrastructure Grants
• We support the 20 million in Greater Minnesota housing infrastructure grant program.
• Minnesota workforce development grant Minnesota workforce development grant program.<00:28:52.000>
• And then the $20 million in the Greater Minnesota Housing Infrastructure Grant Program.
• Minnesota Housing Infrastructure Grant Minnesota Housing Infrastructure Grant Program.<00:40:30.480

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• grant.
• <00:44:43.119> So grant and now it's a one-year grant.
• So grant and now it's a one-year grant.
• The per-pupil allocation is a lump-sum allocation.
• So allocation is a lumpsum allocation.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• He described the process of vendors submitting bills to the grant recipient, the grant recipient submitting
• So if, for example, we had a grant program or you set up a grant program for rural districts to apply
• That's the flexibility with the block grant.
• The grant will only pay 10% of it. Only allowed 10%; the grant will only pay 10% of administration.
• It would allow, under this grant, this authority, three, would allow under the grant for the state to

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Appropriations Division met in a work session on the draft Rural Health Transformation appropriations bill, 25.1392.01000, with no public testimony taken. Legislative Council and the Department of Health and Human Services walked through the bill, which would appropriate about $397.8 million in federal grant funds over two federal fiscal years, provide transfer authority, allow certain federal funds to be used for salaries and wages without counting against existing transfer limits, and authorize OMB to adjust other agencies’ spending authority if they receive grant awards through HHS. The bill also includes several temporary statutory exemptions to help implement the program, plus recipient acknowledgement/reporting requirements, periodic reports to Legislative Management, and an immediate effective date upon filing. Committee discussion focused heavily on how the federal rural health transformation money can be used and administered. Department officials explained that CMS will review projects for allowability and sustainability, that the state has flexibility to move funds among categories, and that the grant is limited to 10% administrative costs. Members asked about whether the funding could support renovations, equipment, ambulances, bulk purchasing, food distribution, and other rural health ideas, and were told many details will depend on CMS approval and the eventual applications. Questions also addressed cash flow, timing of obligations and reimbursements, FTE funding, and whether grant recipients should be told the program will not continue beyond the federal period; officials said the language is meant to prevent expectations of automatic continuation, not to bar future legislative action. The committee also discussed the bill’s use of a two-year appropriation amount, with staff explaining that the state must appropriate enough authority to cover the federal grant cycle and that unused authority would lapse if the full amount is not received or spent. Members raised concerns about whether the bill’s language could limit creativity or future program design, but department officials and several members emphasized the need for flexibility because CMS may reject overly specific directives. After discussion, the committee voted to recommend the bill draft to the full committee; the motion carried on a roll call vote, and the chair said the full Joint Appropriations Committee would take up the bill at the special session next week.

Transcript Highlights:

• Starting last year, Governor Healey proposed, and this Legislature approved, an increased allocation
• programs: the Municipal Pavement Program and the Shared Streets and Spaces municipal grant program.
• And then, like last year, $100 million would be allocated based on local road mileage only.
• this reauthorization would allow for about 100 more grants to be made.
• It's not a grant program necessarily, though grants could be used.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a public hearing on H. 5279, a bill financing long-term improvements to municipal roads and bridges. MassDOT and A&F testified in support, describing the bill as a more than $5 billion transportation bond package centered on a four-year, $1.2 billion Chapter 90 authorization, plus funding for MBTA rail reliability and modernization, housing-related transportation improvements, a new DCR/MassDOT PRISM program for parkways and other DCR assets, and reauthorizations of the Municipal Pavement Program, Shared Streets and Spaces, and highway programs. They said the bill would support safety, resilience, housing production, and multimodal transportation, and noted that some bonds could be issued as special obligation bonds backed by the Commonwealth Transportation Fund and Fair Share revenues. Committee members asked about the size and structure of the authorizations, the federal match for highway projects, the source of MBTA vehicle procurement, bridge repair needs, and whether the housing-related funds could be used flexibly for items like sidewalks, bike lanes, bus stops, and other local transportation improvements. Administration witnesses said the bill is intended as a temporary refill of existing programs until a larger transportation bond bill is filed next session, that the federal-aid line includes the full spending authority while the state only borrows the 20% match, and that the housing-related program is deliberately broad and not limited to MBTA communities. They also said Chapter 90 includes a road-mile component that especially helps rural communities and that preservation and safety are built into the programs. The Massachusetts Municipal Association also testified in strong support, emphasizing that Chapter 90 is the most important tool municipalities have to maintain the roughly 30,000 miles of local roads and bridges they are responsible for. MMA urged timely passage before construction season and praised the continued $300 million Chapter 90 level, especially the $100 million road-mile distribution that helps communities with large road networks and smaller populations. No votes were taken on the bill, and the hearing concluded with adjournment after testimony ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• and administration, and we were able to award all of those TERP grant funds. through grants.
• That's the statutory allocation.
• So I'm looking at this allocation, so $341 million, let's call it, and about 40% goes to grants?
• We're allocated 15% for administration, the remaining goes to the grant programs.
• grants? So it'll be a reimbursement grant. We award them a grant.

Bills: HB512, HB2248, HB2679, HB2832, HB3112, HB3368, HB3490, HB3512, HB3623, HB3666, HB3700, HB3711, HB3770, HB3963

Keywords: grievance procedures, state agency, employee rights, workplace regulations, employment law, employees, employment actions, appeal, state employees, workplace rights, disciplinary actions, employment conditions, employment disputes, job protections, public information, transparency, government accountability, information access, notification requirements, federal funding

Transcript Highlights:

• We're sort of in one again this year where there's no monies allocated other than those that were allocated
• were allocated to pay off those that were allocated to pay off debt. debt. debt.
• allocating allocating you<00:11:10.240> know you know you know $30<00:11:12.160> million
• within which would be dollars allocated within which would be dollars allocated to<00:49:46.079>
• <00:53:39.760> to know, you know, why we're allocating to know, you know, why we're allocating

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee began its first meeting on retained education funding bills, focusing on HB 366, which concerns school building aid for eligible projects, and HB 295, which would make school building aid program funds non-lapsing. The chair framed the discussion around broader questions about how school building aid should work, noting the state’s limited available funding, the existing debt service obligations, and whether the current formula should continue or be changed. He also raised concerns about the state’s overall revenue constraints and the need to consider renovation, new construction, and possibly leasing within any future program. Members and the Department of Education representative discussed whether school building aid is a state or local responsibility, the current backlog of projects, and the condition of school facilities statewide. Tim Carney of the Bureau of School Facilities described his background and answered technical questions about current programs. Representative Luno argued that under the ConVal decision the state has responsibility for school buildings, including construction and renovation, and that the program also serves an equity function by helping districts with less property-tax capacity. Representative Papich urged the committee to focus on policy structure and fairness rather than just available dollars, saying the current system creates winners and losers and suggesting a simpler per-capita or similar allocation model, while acknowledging a possible transition for projects already in the pipeline. The discussion also covered CTE facilities and leasing. Carney explained that charter schools, and possibly CTE centers, can receive limited leasing aid, and that CTE capital requests are funded through a state capital process, while federal Carl Perkins funds cannot be used for construction. He and others described a separate rotational funding approach for CTE centers, but several members said that model can leave programs waiting too long and may not match changing workforce needs. The chair and others noted that a report from a related study group on CTE policy and funding was still pending, and that its absence could affect legislation for FY28. No votes were taken and no bill was acted on in the portion of the meeting provided; the discussion ended with interest in modeling alternatives, reviewing the waiting list, and examining the tradeoffs of reducing upfront state aid versus funding more projects overall.

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't know the earnings yet, but we know the oil tax allocations.
• We're starting to fill up the social services allocation.
• So we've allocated about $87 million of that $250 million into this fund.
• So that money is coming out at the same time new monies are being allocated.
• There are some states that have a little heavier general fund allocation.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that is affecting this grant.
• We have the grant.
• We have the grant.
• We have the grant.
• break out shared costs and to allocate break out shared costs and to allocate administrative<00:

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The subcommittee met to begin work on HB 742, which would require catastrophic special education aid to be drawn from the education trust fund, and more broadly to study special education aid/differentiated aid and related costing issues. The chair said the group was starting early because the issue has been debated for years without resolution, local districts are being forced to absorb prorated costs, and the committee wants to send the Department of Education and HHS Medicaid a clear request for data and recommendations before retained bills return in the fall. A committee clerk was also selected, with Representative Reverend volunteering to take notes for the meeting. Members reviewed background materials on special education enrollment, high-cost students, and possible funding formulas, including data on students in high-cost brackets and prior ideas such as category-based funding and caseload-based approaches. The chair also referenced research on other states, including Arkansas, which uses a different special education funding structure and audits IEPs. The committee emphasized that it was focused on the funding mechanics and costs, not on questioning whether services should be provided. Henry Lipman of HHS explained how Medicaid-to-schools currently works in New Hampshire. He said 172 school districts participate, but utilization dropped during the pandemic and remains below historical levels, in part because districts need the capacity to bill Medicaid. Under the current system, schools receive reimbursement based on half of the Medicaid fee schedule, with the school district effectively providing the state share. He said the federal government is requiring a shift by July 1, 2026, to a true certified public expenditure model based on actual costs, which should allow schools to recover 50% of their true costs and some administrative overhead. The department has received a roughly $2.5 million grant to hire a vendor and support districts through the transition, and an RFP and stakeholder meetings are underway. Committee members asked about how costs would be determined, whether the new system would use actual district-specific costs rather than averages, and how the department would support districts that do not currently participate. Lipman said the cost model would be based on each district’s own reasonable costs, subject to audit standards, and that the department expects to provide templates and technical assistance through the vendor because its staff is limited. He also said about one in four New Hampshire children are enrolled in Medicaid, that child enrollment has been relatively stable, and that continuous coverage rules should reduce churn. No votes or formal actions on HB 742 were taken during the meeting beyond organizing the subcommittee and beginning testimony and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I was part of the Safe Schools Culture Grant team that implemented and administered the grant.
• The grant concluded on June 30, 2025. Next slide, please.
• We also held office hours about the grant with frequency ongoing throughout the life of the grant to
• We also held office hours about the grant with frequency ongoing throughout the life of the grant to
• That was an attribute of the grant reporting requirements.

Keywords: 907, all