Transcript Highlights:

• totaling just under $7 billion under contract right now, planned for 2025.
• rail contract that's coming up.
• We engaged with the industry because we know this is a large and significant contract.
• How does this contract impact that one way or another?
• Well, the way this contract would be structured and the terms of the contract are built to ensure that

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Transportation

Summary: The Joint Committee on Transportation held an informational hearing with invited testimony from MassDOT leadership, the MBTA, Massport, and the state’s Federal Funds and Infrastructure Office. MassDOT officials outlined work across highways, rail and transit, the Registry of Motor Vehicles, and aeronautics, emphasizing major capital spending, bridge and roadway programs, transit grants, rail expansion, airport safety, and modernization efforts. They highlighted Chapter 90 and municipal grant programs, the Compass Rail and West-East Rail efforts, RMV upgrades such as electronic titles and driver licensing systems, and aeronautics work on airport pavement, drones, and advanced air mobility. Committee members focused on safety, service access, and project implementation. Questions to MassDOT covered automated enforcement and rising roadway fatalities, the Allston multimodal project’s federal funding, Complete Streets access for rural communities, and South Coast Rail staffing and future electrification. The RMV was asked about the Work and Family Mobility Act, Real ID demand, and appointment access, especially in Metro West. Members also raised concerns about South Coast Rail operations, Keolis staffing, and whether the Stoughton route remains part of future plans; MassDOT and MBTA officials said they are working on staffing, service reliability, and long-term expansion, while noting that nothing is off the table for future rail improvements. MBTA General Manager Phil Eng reported progress including workforce growth, elimination of subway speed restrictions, expanded reduced-fare access, bus network redesign, South Coast Rail launch, and commuter rail signal upgrades. He said the agency is pursuing a new commuter rail operating contract designed to support future regional rail, electrification, and higher-frequency service, while maintaining service and workforce stability amid funding uncertainty. Members also asked about fare collection data privacy and the impact of state funding levels; Eng said the MBTA needs the governor’s proposed funding to preserve service and staffing, and that the fare system’s data are encrypted and handled through a secure vendor system. Massport CEO Rich Davey reported record activity at Logan, Worcester, and the cruise and maritime facilities, along with major capital and climate investments such as sustainable aviation fuel planning, shore power at Flynn Cruiseport, renewable diesel, and expanded ground transportation. He said Massport is planning for continued passenger growth and managing congestion through parking, HOV, and curbside changes, while monitoring federal policy, tariffs, and air traffic control staffing issues. Federal Funds Director Quentin Palfrey described the administration’s efforts to secure federal infrastructure dollars, citing about $9 billion in federal awards since the start of the administration, including major transportation grants for the Cape Cod Bridges, Allston, West-East Rail, North Station drawbridge replacement, roadway safety, and clean school buses. He warned that changing federal policies, grant delays, and possible future congressional actions create uncertainty, but said the office is working case-by-case with municipalities and agencies to protect awarded funds and find alternative financing where needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we run about 30 of these contracts a year.
• So we run about 30 of these contracts a year.
• Do you all negotiate the contracts? Do you all negotiate the contracts? Which contracts?
• The contracts with the health plans?
• And I've watched these contracts; we approved these contracts, and we have to be expert negotiators because

Bills: HB12 , HB145 , HB222 , HB291 , HB430 , HB821 , HB874 , HB909 , HB951 , HB979 , HB1193

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: survivor benefits, law enforcement, reserve officer, auxiliary officer, public safety, firefighters, medical expenses, dental expenses, disability benefits, Medicaid, dental coverage, healthcare access, medical necessity, Louisiana Department of Health, health insurance, survivors benefits, Lafayette, school security, nonprofit security, emergency preparedness

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. and for healthcare, speaking of the medical contract.
• Contract inflation is $4.6 million on all funds.
• Bybee, on the contract inflation, is that written into the contracts, or have we gone out and rebid those
• Historically, what you would see under this contract inflation line are the actual contract increases
• What you would see under this contract inflation line are the actual contract increases there.

Summary: The committee received a broad budget overview from Legislative Services staff on the state’s fiscal position, focusing on the general fund, structural balance, cash reconciliation, and the governor’s budget recommendations for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Staff explained that projected revenues are below the current budgeted level, creating a need for either budget reductions or the use of cash balances and reserve funds to maintain balance. They reviewed major drivers of spending growth over recent years, including Medicaid expansion, public schools, the State Public Defender, IT services, and water resources, and noted that these statutory and ongoing obligations are crowding out other spending. Members also discussed the governor’s proposed use of interest earnings and reserve balances from several funds, the Budget Stabilization Fund cap, and the policy question of whether changes to fund interest allocations would require legislation or could be handled through appropriation language. The committee also reviewed current-year adjustments, including supplementals, rescissions, deficiency warrants, and the governor’s proposed holdbacks. Specific items discussed included public school enrollment adjustments, the proposed rescission of Empowering Parents funding, Medicaid growth and provider rate changes, Department of Corrections costs tied to inmate placement and medical services, invasive species treatment funding, and a possible tax conformity impact tied to federal law changes. Members asked about fire suppression deficiency funding, the use of reserve balances, and the difference between current-law and governor-recommended spending levels. Staff emphasized that the governor’s budget relies on short-term money and reserve transfers to smooth the current deficit, while the legislature must decide whether to follow that approach or make deeper structural changes. Later, staff provided an overview of the budget hearing process and the Legislative Budget Book, explaining the standard reports, agency organization charts, fund analyses, performance measures, and five-year snapshots that committees will use during hearings. Another presentation clarified the difference between deficiency warrants and supplemental appropriations, noting that deficiency warrants cover certain last-year expenses authorized by statute, while supplementals adjust the current-year appropriation and can apply to general, dedicated, or federal funds. The committee then heard a detailed presentation on state health insurance costs, including rising medical claims, reserve balances, the 80/20 employee-employer cost split, and projected FY 2027 premium increases. Members asked about school district participation in the state plan, the role of the insurance carrier contract, and whether broader participation could lower costs. No votes were taken during the meeting, and the committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• them because of these drastic, draconian cuts and, of course, the cancellation of hundreds of VA contracts
• What are those 585 contracts for?
• that we have no transparency whatsoever on what these contracts are.
• But that was one of the contracts that was just terminated recently, and this is really to Mr.
• Yeah, Senator, unfortunately I can't address that specific contract. I'm happy to take that back.

Bills: SB124 , SB201 , SB275 , SB410 , SB478 , SB607 , SB610 , SB611 , SB654 , SB702 , SB787 , SB831 , SB892

Committee: Senate Senate Veterans' Affairs

Keywords: Department of Veterans Affairs, disciplinary procedures, accountability, personnel actions, whistleblower protection, cancer, military, aircrew, veterans, health study, toxins, morbidity, mortality, service members, mental health, community care, accessibility, treatment programs, substance abuse, appointments

Summary: During the meeting, various members engaged in extensive discussions surrounding 15 proposed bills related to veterans' affairs. Notably, concerns regarding recent VA workforce changes sparked debates, particularly about potential cuts and their implications for veterans' care and benefits. Chairman Moran emphasized the need for thoughtful reforms and coordination with stakeholders, urging responsible measures to prevent negatively impacting service delivery. The meeting highlighted a significant bipartisan effort to enhance veterans' access to essential health services, particularly in light of recent challenges faced by the VA workforce. Senator Blumenthal's assertions about the urgent plight of veterans due to cuts in personnel drew strong reactions, showcasing the deep concern among committee members regarding the current state of veteran services.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Integrity contract Integrity contract ctor<00:30:29.600><c> um</c><00:30:29.720><c> third</c><00
• So what kind of oversight or contract monitoring activities are taking place with the single PBM contract
• and also the FFS PBM contract.
• They can pay more, but they typically contract with providers for an agreed-upon rate.
• The Medicaid agency is not part of those contracts.

Summary: The subcommittee met to review the Department for Medicaid Services’ program integrity work. Commissioner Lisa Lee and Program Integrity Director Jennifer Dudinsky outlined Kentucky Medicaid’s structure, funding, enrollment, and spending, including FMAP rates, the size of the Medicaid and KCHIP populations, the number of providers, and 2024 expenditures. They also described the managed care and fee-for-service populations, noting that managed care serves most members while fee-for-service is concentrated in long-term care and waiver populations. Most of the discussion focused on fraud, waste, abuse prevention, and provider oversight. The department described its provider enrollment and certification checks, revalidation requirements, site reviews, fingerprinting for some high-risk providers, and termination grounds such as false application information, Medicare actions, unreported ownership changes, and abandonment of a provider number. Members asked about nonprofit ownership reporting, MCO fraud oversight, and how the department tracks unusual CPT code utilization, especially in behavioral health. The department said it uses data analytics, audits, policy review, and collaboration with behavioral health staff to monitor those trends. Dudinsky explained the division’s four branches: provider licensing and certification, audits and compliance, recovery, and third-party liability/estate recovery. She described prepayment and postpayment audits, referrals of credible fraud allegations to the Attorney General, monthly meetings with the AG’s office, and coordination with the Office of Inspector General, CMS, HHS OIG, MCOs, and other partners. She also explained payment suspensions, stand-downs during law enforcement investigations, and recovery efforts for overpayments, provider/member fraud, and third-party liability. The department said its recovery and avoidance efforts produced more than $251 million in savings so far in 2025. No votes or formal actions beyond approving the minutes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• So here's a slide that just shows the contracts that are completed and the contracts that are ongoing
• Contract 5C, Oscar Renda, has 7.5 miles in the ground of an 8.1-mile contract.
• of those contracts were.
• So this is just a look at the contracts, Contract 5C, Oscar Renda.
• of those contracts were.

Committee: Joint Water Topics Overview Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Grants and contracts are also important.
• We refurb them with a contract we have in Bismarck.
• The last page is also grants and contracts.
• The last page is also grants and contracts as well.
• We have executed our contract as of October 1st.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:33:52.880><c> cabinet</c> contract consists of the cabinet contract consists of the cabinet providing
• Once during the terms of this contract.
• Uh provide the education contract.
• that accumulate... teacher contracts are what 180 185 days teacher contracts are what 180 185 days &
• Um, usually it's those that have the 240-, 245-day contract, 225-day contract, receiving other people

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Rep. Ashley Tackett Laferty on a bill to extend minimum line-of-duty hazardous duty retirement benefits to certain CERS and KERS non-hazardous members who are injured in the line of duty and cannot return to that work. She used a video and examples from Eastern Kentucky first responders, including a deputy who lost a leg and an emergency management director who lost an eye, to argue that some injured officers and responders fall through the cracks because their employers did not elect hazardous-duty coverage. She said the proposal would provide 25% of pay to the disabled officer, plus 10% for dependent children and minimal health benefits, and noted estimated actuarial costs of about $2.9 million for CERS and $0.542 million for KERS, funded through small employer-rate increases. Members asked how far back the bill would reach, how many people might qualify, and whether the benefit would apply only to active employees or also to past injuries. Laferty said the bill would include a five-year window for recent situations and could potentially cover a total of 3,333 positions statewide that could be certified as hazardous, though benefits would only apply if the person was injured in the line of duty and disabled from returning to that work. Questions also focused on whether a non-hazardous employee could qualify if injured in a hazardous situation; Laferty said yes, if the position could be certified as hazardous, but only for the bill’s minimum benefits. Rep. Josh Calloway and others noted that local governments choose whether to pay the higher hazardous-duty contribution rates, which they said often drives the coverage decision. The committee then heard Rep. Daniel Gberg present a separate bill revising school leave rules so teachers and school employees may use accumulated sick leave to observe religious holidays not on the school calendar, with a required personal statement and advance notice. He said the change would address a longstanding inconsistency for teachers who observe non-Christian holidays and currently may have to choose between unpaid leave or improperly using sick days, and he said prior concerns about retirement service credit and maternity leave were reduced by other policy changes. The discussion ended without a vote, with members indicating they had the relevant materials and that the bill would be revisited later.

Transcript Highlights:

• So while this union has been around, there actually haven't been any contracts signed between the union
• because the way that they strike is a little unique, as they basically ensure that all members' contracts
• They, if I remember correctly, first unionized in 2024 and they just ratified their first contract in
• To have the protection of a contract.
• And so we need the protections of a contract that we bargained for.

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 2522 / H. 5909, which would amend state labor law to treat the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS) as a public employer and allow its employees to seek collective bargaining rights. The chair explained the Article 48 initiative process, noted that no opponents or members of the public had signed up to testify, and said written testimony would be accepted through March 20. The hearing focused on whether CPCS staff should be brought within the public-sector bargaining framework and how that would interact with the agency’s statutory duties. Expert testimony began with an NCSL analyst, who gave a national overview of public employee bargaining rights and examples of public defender unions in other states and localities, including Colorado, New York City, Indianapolis, Cook County, Maryland, and Illinois. Department of Labor Relations officials then reviewed prior failed organizing efforts at CPCS and its predecessor, explaining that earlier petitions were dismissed because the agency was not considered a public employer under existing law. They said passage of the initiative would not automatically unionize employees, but would allow a union to petition for an election or written majority authorization, with normal unit-appropriateness and supervisory/confidential employee issues still to be resolved. CPCS Chief Counsel Anthony Benedetti testified that the agency supports providing information to the legislature but is not taking a position for or against unionization. He described CPCS’s statutory responsibilities, size, and current efforts to expand staffing after recent indigent-defense crises, and said any new bargaining framework would need to operate alongside the agency’s obligations to provide counsel. Proponents from SEIU Local 888 and allied labor groups argued that CPCS employees have long been denied the same collective bargaining rights as other public workers, and that a union would provide just-cause protections, a voice on staffing and working conditions, and better support for recruitment and retention. CPCS attorneys and staff testified in favor of the measure, citing heavy caseloads, rapid expansion, inadequate supervision and office support, and the need for representation in disciplinary and workplace disputes. Committee members asked about bargaining-unit composition, the role of the DLR, the effect of unionization on attorneys’ ethical duties, and the use and cost of paid signature gathering. The hearing ended with no votes taken and no opposition testimony presented.

Transcript Highlights:

• So contract inflation that needs to be negotiated.
• That's quite adding an extra million dollars to these contracts every year. That's quite a bit.
• But now that one's in a lawsuit in regards to contracts.
• I've seen too many times where they walk away from a contract and there's no accountability.
• But how do you get those contracts written and get that done right?

Committee: House Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• For families, this ensures contracts.
• </c> contract. So, yes, it would help us. contract. So, yes, it would help us.
• So, leaving open the option for a contract.
• . contract. contract.
• There's either contracts boxes, right?

Bills: SB3123

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The Judiciary Committee took up three measures in decision-making. SB 2678, which would create a Judiciary working group to improve family court processes and youth access to legal representation in the child welfare system, was recommended for passage with amendments. The amendments would clarify that members with lived experience are those who have navigated the state child welfare system, replace an actively serving guardian ad litem with a former GAL, allow co-chairs to invite additional experts, and provide compensation for lived-experience members. The committee report would also recommend a $20,000 appropriation, and the motion passed without objection. SB 2528, a Campaign Spending Commission proposal to expand the partial public financing program and raise expenditure limits, was also recommended for passage with amendments and adopted without objection. The committee’s changes would increase the public-funds match to 4:1, raise the maximum public funding available to 20% for statewide executive offices and 25% for legislative and certain county offices, blank out the appropriation in the bill, and instead recommend $7.2 million in the committee report. Technical amendments would also rename the program for consistency and set the bill’s effective date to March 22, 2075. In a joint Judiciary/Education hearing, SB 3123 drew extensive testimony in support from the Governor’s office, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the Hawaii Association of Independent Schools, Hawaiian Council, Kamehameha Schools, and many private-school and community representatives. Supporters said the bill would clarify that donor-funded scholarships, grants, and tuition-free educational programs are charitable gifts rather than contractual obligations, giving donors and schools greater certainty and preserving educational access. Some members questioned whether the bill could affect Kamehameha Schools’ admissions practices or allow schools to avoid donor conditions; witnesses responded that the measure is intended to clarify donor intent, not change admissions, and that an opt-out clause would preserve the ability to create contractual agreements if the parties choose. The discussion ended with the bill still under consideration, with no final vote reflected in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Contracts with those insurers.
• The contracting mechanism is something that we identified in our 2022 report.
• Mercer had been contracted by the state to do a secret shopper survey.
• When they did so, they ended up contracting with an Administrative Service Agency (ASA).
• Again, it was still relying on contracting, and one of the people...

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• It has to be completed by June 30th, and that is when the contract ends.
• We contract, and then I want to get into a little bit, we contract with Marion Technical College for
• We just recently were able to finalize that contract and begin to implement that.
• This is a contract extension.
• And that goes to the contracting side of the house.

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations from the Department of Financial Services and the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, then returned to its ongoing budget workshop with the Department of Management Services. DFS’s Division of Risk Management described its role as the state self-insurance fund, covering about 200,000 employees and 27,000 vehicles, paying roughly $150 million in claims last year, and managing a pilot ETS treatment program for veterans and first responders that had 49 patients and 804 treatments as of the latest report. The Division of State Fire Marshal outlined its fire prevention, training, emergency response, and grant programs, including hurricane deployments, the Florida State Fire College, and several capital and grant requests for roof, courtyard, memorial, and equipment needs. The Division of Rehabilitation and Liquidation explained how it handles insolvent insurers under Chapter 631, currently administering 14 estates with $1.2 billion in assets and $3.7 billion in liabilities, and said no new receiverships had been opened since February 2023. Members asked about grant backlogs, fire truck procurement delays, memorial repairs, and whether affiliate transfers were occurring in insurer liquidations. Secretary Griffin then updated the committee on DBPR’s implementation of House Bill 1021 on community associations. He said the department had used the new authority to expand education, complaint handling, and ombudsman services, including 10 free standardized courses, a new condo website, and a four-hour board certification course that had already drawn more than 12,000 attendees. He reported that outreach to condominium communities had increased by more than 60%, that complaint filings were up 39% while jurisdictional dismissals dropped to 11%, and that about 81% to 82% of the 65 new positions had been filled. Members pressed him on whether the department had enough authority and funding, how condominium counts are determined, how self-reported structural integrity reserve study data is verified, and whether more public-facing complaint tracking and better reporting from local governments or developers would improve the system. The committee then resumed questioning Secretary Allende of DMS about outstanding budget and operations issues. Members focused on the delayed People First contract extension required by statute, with the secretary saying the delay involved technical and contractual complexity in moving a legacy hard-coded system to the cloud. They also revisited the state data team and data catalog project, asking why a statutory 2022 deadline had not been met, how the four-person team and broader data staff were organized, how many applicants were considered for key positions, and what each role was doing. The secretary said the catalog work was being simplified into six metadata fields and supported by a broader community of practice, but no firm completion date was given during the exchange.

Transcript Highlights:

• I pulled this contract. Let's get to some specifics here.
• You call them contacts under your contract.
• For every email or phone call, this contract, this no-bid contract with a left-wing advocacy group costs
• I think it's time to cancel the contract.
• I think it's time to cancel the contract.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard an informational presentation on the May Revision’s proposed reorganization of the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into separate housing-focused and consumer/business-focused entities. Administration officials said the split would improve oversight, streamline decision-making, and create a dedicated California Housing and Homelessness Agency with a new housing development and finance committee. The Department of Finance said funding was needed in 2025-26 to begin implementation, while the LAO recommended rejecting the proposal without prejudice because the Little Hoover Commission review was still pending and the plan would require ongoing General Fund costs. Members raised concerns about the timing, the lack of alignment with the budget process, and whether the reorganization would improve accountability for homelessness spending; several public witnesses supported the concept but stressed it could not substitute for new housing and homelessness dollars. The committee then took up the Department of Veterans Affairs. CalVet requested funding for phase three of its electronic health care record project and a trailer bill to preserve authority for federal background checks, but the May Revision withdrew requests for deferred maintenance and additional administrative support. The LAO noted deferred maintenance can prevent larger future costs, and the chair criticized the withdrawal of less than $1 million for veterans’ homes as short-sighted given existing repair needs. No vote was taken. Next, the Department of Housing and Community Development presented its budget. HCD said the May Revision provides no new affordable housing or homelessness funding, but does retain existing rounds of funding and proposes a $31.7 million reversion from undersubscribed housing programs. Members from both parties expressed concern about zeroing out ongoing housing and homelessness investments, especially for LIHTC, the Multifamily Housing Program, and HAP. HCD also defended its homelessness accountability and compliance work, saying the unit includes about 30 program staff and six attorneys, with three additional attorneys requested mainly to handle public records and litigation workload. Public commenters largely opposed the lack of new funding and urged continued support for housing and homelessness programs, while some supported the reorganization and accountability efforts. Finally, the committee heard Go-Biz proposals. The administration requested authority to increase funding for a federal trade program match if needed, plus reappropriations for administrative funds tied to the Containerized Ports Interoperability Grant Program, zero-emission vehicle operations, and the Women’s Business Center Enhancement Program. It also proposed withdrawing the Cal Competes grant request and reverting remaining funds from the Performing Arts Equitable Payroll Fund. The LAO said Cal Competes is generally effective but could be cut as a budget solution, while warning that the performing arts fund was close to awards and should be considered carefully. Members objected to pulling back committed funds for performing arts organizations and questioned why the state would withdraw support after applications had already been submitted.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 7.1 applies the reporting requirements established in the section of Medicaid managed care contracts
• Section 21 revises the section on Medicaid managed care contracting to establish that any entity that
• to establish that any entity Contracting to establish that any entity that<00:03:13.000><c> failed</
• receive a RS hb6 shall be ineligible to receive a new<00:03:20.360><c> MCO</c><00:03:21.000><c> contract
• in section 22 the new MCO contract in section 22 the committee<00:03:23.200><c> substitute</c><00:03

Summary: The Appropriations and Revenue Committee met to consider House Bill 695 and first adopted a committee substitute. The substitute made a number of Medicaid-related changes, including adding the Medicaid Oversight Advisory Board, exempting federally required Medicaid changes from needing separate General Assembly authorization, revising the treatment of University Hospitals payment programs, clarifying that the community engagement program is mandatory, moving the Medicaid pharmaceutical rebate fund to the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, and narrowing reporting requirements. It also removed provisions on Medicaid coverage for psychoeducational services and replaced them with reporting on behavioral health and substance use disorder service utilization and expenditures. The substitute further added language allowing the Medicaid program to be administered through fee-for-service, managed care, or other federally permitted delivery systems, incorporated the Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Bill, authorized a state plan amendment if needed, and made entities that failed to comply with prior Medicaid managed care reporting requirements ineligible for new MCO contracts. It also shifted responsibility for a behavioral health and substance use disorder treatment scorecard from MCOs to the Department for Medicaid Services. The sponsor noted that all language related to long-term managed care in the waiver program had been removed. After the explanation, Senator Richardson moved to adopt the substitute and Senator Nunn seconded. The committee then voted to pass the measure favorably; the transcript reflects a roll call with no nays and the bill reported out with favorable expression.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this contract, is it a year-long contract? Is it per session? What does that look like?
• Okay, so there's no other contract? There are these partnership contracts that you have?
• This is an add-on to those contracts, so we have an established budgeted contract.
• I think it's probably worth looking at those contracts because all TxDOT contracts go through AGC.
• It's a commodity bid contract.

Committee: House Homeland Security, Public Safety & Veterans' Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• works or a contract for purchasing.
• of less than $40,000 and for purchasing contracts of less than $20,000.
• if it is a purchasing contract.
• And the idea that direct contracting could occur if no bid is received on the first call.
• We estimate that we process 400 contracts under $100,000 each year.

Summary: The committee first heard HB 2517, which would give regional transit authorities, especially Sound Transit, more flexible permitting tools for high-capacity transit projects. Staff and the bill sponsor said the goal is to let permit applications and technical reviews proceed concurrently with property acquisition and land use decisions, reducing delay and uncertainty for large transit projects. Sound Transit testified that the bill could save as much as nine months, while a city representative from Bothell asked for an amendment requiring notice to property owners before permits are advanced on land not yet owned or controlled by the agency. The committee then took testimony on HB 2313, concerning publicly owned grocery stores in underserved areas. The bill would let cities acquire land, build or rehabilitate stores, seek capital grants, and create tax increment financing areas for grocery access projects, with annual reporting requirements. Supporters, including the sponsor, Food Lifeline, and Northwest Harvest, argued that grocery closures and food deserts are real problems and that local governments need tools to fill gaps when private grocers leave. Opponents, including grocery industry groups and several students, warned that public stores could undercut private grocers, burden taxpayers, and create operational and property-rights concerns; some testimony also questioned the need for government ownership and the use of tax increment financing. A proposed substitute removed eminent domain and tax increment financing provisions and narrowed the bill to grant-funded stores in underserved areas. Next, the committee heard HB 2451, a major rewrite of local tax increment financing rules. The bill would tighten notice, consultation, reporting, and mitigation requirements for TIF areas, strengthen the “but-for” test, limit where increment areas can be located, and protect existing taxing districts by excluding certain levies and requiring negotiation, mediation, or arbitration when impacts are significant. Cities, ports, counties, libraries, fire chiefs, and hospital districts largely described the bill as a negotiated compromise that improves transparency and addresses unintended impacts, though some local governments said they still wanted more flexibility or protections for existing projects. One city testified against the bill, arguing the new restrictions would make TIF much less useful for large redevelopment efforts. The committee then heard HB 2298, which would authorize county auditors to create voluntary property title protection programs to help prevent land-record fraud by allowing owners to record a protection instrument that delays recording of a title transfer for up to five business days unless identity verification is provided. Auditors, treasurers, and county officials strongly supported the bill as a practical response to rising deed fraud, while title and foreclosure industry representatives said the proposal was too limited, could interfere with foreclosures or other transfers, and would only delay—not prevent—fraud. The final bill heard was HB 2566 on local government procurement, which would raise certain small-purchase and small-public-works thresholds for counties, remove some differences between larger and smaller counties, and give counties more options when no bids are received. County representatives supported the bill as a needed update to procurement rules and a way to reduce bureaucracy and keep pace with inflation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Secure and sustainable contracts can be vital to ensuring predictable reimbursement and steady patient
• Secure and sustainable contracts can be vital to ensuring predictable reimbursement and steady patient
• plans are contracted with are for-profit entities, and it's trended up to 67%.
• And of that, approximately 13 or 15% are those that are getting contracts out of the state.
• We want to make it easier for them to contract with them.

Summary: The committee heard several health-related bills, with extensive testimony on maternal health, prenatal safety, privacy, valley fever, Medi-Cal contracting, anti-discrimination protections, and health data sharing. SB 32 would require time-and-distance standards for labor and delivery units in health plan networks; the author and supporters said it would address maternity care deserts and improve access, while health plans opposed. SB 646 would require testing and public disclosure for toxic elements in prenatal vitamins; supporters emphasized fetal and maternal safety and transparency, while industry opponents warned it could confuse consumers or lead to reduced nutrient content. Both bills drew broad support from medical and public health groups, and both were advanced on party-line or near-unanimous votes after committee discussion. The committee also approved SB 313, which moves a parent’s birthplace on birth certificates into the confidential section to protect privacy, and SB 297, which directs CDPH to identify high-incidence valley fever regions and publish them for screening and awareness; valley fever experts and supporters stressed rising cases and the need for earlier diagnosis, while local health jurisdictions raised concerns about mandates. SB 324, dealing with Medi-Cal enhanced care management and community supports, would prioritize local community-based organizations and clarify contracting and data practices; it received strong support from nonprofits and community health advocates, with children’s hospitals and health plans seeking amendments, and it was sent forward after amendments were discussed. The committee then considered SB 418, which would codify ACA nondiscrimination protections in state law and allow up to a 12-month prescription supply for hormone therapy when medically necessary. Supporters framed it as protecting continuity of care for transgender patients and others using hormone therapy, including IVF and menopause patients, while opponents argued it would conflict with federal policy and promote harmful treatments. The bill passed to the next committee. Finally, SB 660 would strengthen the California Health and Human Services data exchange framework by creating governance and accountability for data sharing across health and social service entities; supporters said it would reduce duplication and improve care coordination, while some providers and hospital groups raised concerns. It was approved and sent to the Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee. The consent calendar and the other measures were also voted out, with the committee recording the required roll-call votes and sending the bills onward.

Transcript Highlights:

• These stay-or-pay contracts, also known as debt traps, are usually hidden in employment contracts or
• Hospitals recruit new nurses in these stay-or-pay contracts with the promise of high-quality training
• written when you, from a traveling nurse, when you come into contract with any type of hospital?
• If they break that contract, like how does that play out in practicality?
• We were contracted by Julio Rodriguez Janitorial.

Committee: House Labor and Employment

Summary: The committee heard several labor-related bills, with testimony largely focused on workforce development, worker privacy, wage theft, and workplace safety. AB 296 would require schools and districts to host apprenticeship fairs at least once per year; supporters said it would expose students to skilled-trades careers, while school administrators opposed the mandate as too broad, especially for elementary schools and districts without local apprenticeship programs. AB 1221 and AB 1331 both sought to curb invasive workplace surveillance, with labor groups arguing that AI, biometric, and algorithmic monitoring can be discriminatory and chill worker rights, while business and industry groups warned the bills were too broad and could interfere with security, cybersecurity, and ordinary workplace operations. AB 1181 would require firefighter turnout gear to be free of cancer-causing chemicals, and AB 1198 would require prevailing wage rates on public works to reflect the wage in effect when work is performed; both drew support from labor and construction witnesses, while local governments and other stakeholders raised cost and implementation concerns. AB 1251 would require private employers to disclose whether a job posting is for an actual vacancy, and AB 692 would prohibit employer debt agreements that require workers to repay training or other costs if they leave employment; both bills were supported by worker advocates and opposed by employer groups who said the measures were overly broad or unnecessary under existing law. The committee also heard AB 552, AB 1110, AB 1136, and AB 1234, which respectively would allow the Agricultural Labor Relations Board to locate its main office outside Sacramento, update Cal/OSHA poster information, expand high road training partnership eligibility, and strengthen the wage claim process by encouraging employer participation and allowing judgments when employers fail to respond. Several bills were voted out on due-pass motions, including AB 1198, AB 1251, AB 1221, AB 1331, AB 552, AB 1110, AB 1136, and AB 692; AB 1181 was approved by the committee but remained on call, and AB 296 was heard in subcommittee without a vote. AB 963 was pulled by the author.

Transcript Highlights:

• They contract with those prices.
• So, they're contract with the PBMs.
• They contract with those prices. Okay? They contract with those prices.
• </c> negotiations, they're not contracts. negotiations, they're not contracts.
• And those have these contracts.

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 47, sponsored by Sen. Regina Birdsell at the request of the Insurance Department. The bill would codify the department’s interpretation that a birth mother’s health insurance is the primary coverage for a newborn, unless the mother has no insurance or coverage under an employer-sponsored plan. Birdsell and Insurance Commissioner DJ Benton Court said the measure is a clarification of existing practice and intended to protect vulnerable newborns; a question from Rep. Miles clarified that if a young woman is on her parents’ policy, the newborn would generally be covered under that family coverage. The hearing on SB 47 was then closed. The committee then took up Senate Bill 121, introduced by Grant Bosi for Sen. Kevin Avard, which would require insurers to notify the Insurance Department when they stop writing an entire line of business or, in some cases, Medicare Advantage plans. Commissioner Benton Court said the bill arose from disruption in the Medicare Advantage market, where consumers, brokers, and the department were confused by carriers changing or ending offerings; he said the department wanted a simple notification requirement so it could better advise consumers. Members discussed network adequacy, county-based service areas, and the fact that the bill would make notice a condition of licensure, with possible fines or license action for noncompliance. Witness Paula Rogers of AHIP said her group supported the bill if amended, and the department indicated it would support a change from a 120-day notice period to 90 days to align with state rules; the committee planned to work on an amendment in subcommittee. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 247, introduced by Rep. Brian Cole, which would prohibit network exclusion of pharmacies that refuse to dispense prescriptions when PBM reimbursement is below acquisition cost. Cole argued the bill is meant to stop pharmacies from being forced to sell drugs at a loss, describing PBMs as middlemen and saying the measure is a compromise that protects local pharmacies. Members questioned whether consumers would pay more and whether pharmacies voluntarily enter PBM contracts; Cole responded that the bill would let pharmacies refuse unprofitable fills while consumers could still obtain the drug through mail order or other channels. He also said the issue has changed over time because the practice now affects a much larger share of generics and is concentrated among a few PBMs. The hearing remained open as questions continued, with no vote taken in the excerpt.