Transcript Highlights:

• > a</c><00:58:35.079><c> program</c> school school districts have a program school school districts have
• So if a school district took out a 20-year bond, every year the state would pay between 30 and 60% of
• So that's what the challenge has been, because these school districts took out bonds.
• districts, individual school districts, for bond payments that they are obligated to the state could
• for Bond payments that school districts for Bond payments that they<01:33:38.239><c> are</c><01:33:38.440

Summary: The Department of Education’s Bureau of Wellness and Nutrition presented an overview of the school meal and child nutrition programs it administers, including the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, Summer Food Service Program, and Special Milk Program. Staff explained which programs are federally funded through USDA, which have state matching funds, and how reimbursement rates are set for different programs and fiscal years. They also walked the committee through a packet showing reimbursement tables, state and federal funding totals, and eligibility data. Members focused much of their questioning on how state and federal reimbursements work for lunch and breakfast, why lunch is shown as a state match while breakfast has meal-based breakdowns, and how the department allocates funds in the budget. The department explained that lunch uses a set state match tied to federal requirements, while breakfast reimbursement is based on meals served. They also reviewed FY 22-24 funding trends, noting higher federal spending during COVID-era waivers and lower amounts as those waivers ended. A committee member asked for the data in Excel and the department agreed to provide it. The discussion also covered summer meal programs and the distinction between the Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT. Staff explained that SFSP provides meals at approved open or closed sites, while Summer EBT is a separate DHHS-run benefit program that provides funds to families; the two programs coordinate through data sharing but are not the same. Members also discussed CEP, with staff explaining that New Hampshire currently has three schools participating, that the qualifying threshold was reduced from 40% to 25% identified students, and that districts must cover the non-federal share with non-federal funds. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• If it's STDs, there's bonding capacity.
• We are also in a general obligation bond year, and the capacity for general obligation bonds is a little
• severance tax bond funding.
• A historic elementary school in Silver City.
• The school district is closing in order to consolidate some of its elementary schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's why this bond is so critical.
• Not nearly adequate enough, and not contained in this bond, not linked to this bond.
• So let's not pay back the schools, the $3 billion that we owe schools.
• They also went to the drive-in movies during high school.
• of all of our Assembly districts in California.

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call, prayer, and Pledge of Allegiance, then handled a series of procedural motions to re-refer bills, suspend rules, and remove items from the consent calendar. The chamber also heard guest introductions recognizing family milestones, a youth leadership program from Assembly District 13, a delegation of Japanese business leaders, and a Michoacan delegation. Later, members adopted several resolutions and consent items, including California Craft Beer Week, the Freedom Flag as a 9/11 remembrance symbol, Probation Services Week, and California Wildfire Week, along with other consent-calendar measures. The main floor debate centered on SB 417, a $10 billion housing bond for the ballot, with supporters emphasizing the state’s housing shortage, homelessness crisis, and funding for multifamily housing, supportive housing, homeownership, farmworker housing, student housing, tribal housing, infrastructure, and preservation of existing affordable units. Opponents criticized the proposal as adding debt without enough reform and objected to the use of veterans in the measure’s messaging. The Assembly passed SB 417 on urgency and on the measure, 54-7, and sent it to the Senate. Members then adopted ACA 20, which would expand and modernize the state Rainy Day Fund by increasing its cap and changing deposit rules; it passed 54-8 and was transmitted to the Senate. The Assembly also approved SB 623, a transportation-related bill addressing rideshare safety and medical lien practices. Supporters said it would curb abusive billing, restrict attorney conflicts and kickbacks, require stronger background checks for TNC drivers, and allow women riders and drivers to request women-only matches. The measure passed unanimously, 67-0. Later, the House adopted ACA 21, which removes ACA 13 from the November ballot, by 62-0, and ACA 22, which amends a ballot measure affecting taxation and local fiscal resources, by 64-0. The session concluded with an adjournment in memory of Dr. Dorothy Viola Calvin, followed by announcements, recesses, and final adjournment until the next scheduled floor session.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's why this bond is so critical. That's why this bond is so critical.
• Not nearly adequate enough, and not contained in this bond, not linked to this bond.
• So let's not pay back the schools the $3 billion that we owe schools.
• They also went to the drive-in movies during high school.
• of all of our Assembly districts in California.

Transcript Highlights:

• their schools very well rather than risking— Schools very well, rather than risking closure.
• The surety bond would be the insurance premium, and the bond premium would be paid by the institution
• Why are all the schools or students enrolled in those schools indiscriminately charged?
• There are so many good schools in your districts. Every district in the state.
• schools.

Transcript Highlights:

• their schools very well rather than risking— Schools very well, rather than risking closure.
• Why are all the schools or students enrolled in those schools indiscriminately charged?
• There are so many good schools in your districts. Every district...
• Members, there are so many good schools in your districts, every district in the state.
• schools.

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Post-Secondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, with committee chairs and members emphasizing the Bureau’s role in protecting students, overseeing private postsecondary schools, and responding to a changing federal higher education landscape. BPPE and the Department of Consumer Affairs reported that the Bureau has modernized data systems, improved enforcement, increased citations and inspections, reduced pending complaints, and is now meeting its statutory inspection mandate. They also said the Bureau faces a structural budget deficit and has reduced costs through staffing cuts, streamlined inspections, and shifting some student-relief functions to the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF).

Transcript Highlights:

• their schools very well rather than risking... ...schools very well rather than risking closure.
• Why are all the schools or students enrolled in those schools indiscriminately charged?
• There are so many good schools in your districts. Every district...
• Members, there are so many good schools in your districts, every district in the state.
• schools.

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 4316 modernizes outdated language related to rural water districts. Move for adoption.
• So this bill came about as— So this bill came about as I was, you know, in the district campaigning,
• You have to apply to your conservation districts, and they're the ones that determine, based on needs
• And so I would put faith in those conservation districts and faith in the landowners.
• mean, it's the district practice to do that, yeah.

Bills: HB4338 , HB3977 , HB2100 , HB2975 , HB3056 , HB3406 , HB3720 , HB4316 , HB3405 , HB1907 , HB3142 , HB3173 , HB3270 , HB3728 , HB2440 , HB2596 , HB3466 , HB3469 , HB4338 , HB3977 , HB2100 , HB2975 , HB3056 , HB3406 , HB3720 , HB4316 , HB3405 , HB1907 , HB3142 , HB3173 , HB3270 , HB3728 , HB2440 , HB2596 , HB3466 , HB3469

Committees: House Energy , House Energy and Natural Resources Oversight

Keywords: HB4338, Oklahoma Brine Development Act, brine unitization, produced water, produced water unit, oil and gas wastewater, produced water recycling, reclaimed water, constituent elements, brine rights, solution gas, Corporation Commission, unitization, royalty interests, surface owner, oil and gas produced water, recycling and reuse, wastewater disposal, mineral extraction, lithium extraction

Transcript Highlights:

• Mary's there all the way through the Silver School District, and graduated from Western New Mexico University
• He's with the Silver City School District. Your daughter, I believe, teaches at La Plata.
• , with the universities, and these great accredited private schools that they have in the district as
• From down south we have newly certified Salvador Melendres from Gadsden Independent School District,
• district for Gadsden Independent School District to have you here on the House floor today representing

Bills: HM3 , HM11 , HM14 , HM15 , HM18 , HM21 , HB10 , HB11 , HB12 , HB13 , HB14 , HB31 , HB50

Keywords: nurses, health care workers, healthcare workers, frontline workers, hospital staff, clinicians, allied health professionals, support staff, public health, workforce shortage, nursing shortage, safe staffing, patient safety, rural health care, frontier communities, behavioral health, mental health, substance use disorder, substance abuse, health care memorial

Transcript Highlights:

• I've had employees put multiple children through school. One employee just had...

Bills: HB 105 , HB982 , HB1483 , HB1508 , HB2575 , HB3646 , HB3993 , HB4083 , HB4580 , HB4725 , HB5169 , HB5511 , HJR73 , HJR102 , HJR174 , HB3746 , HB4240

Committee: House Ways & Means

Keywords: economic development, job creation, energy, tax incentives, technology investment, ad valorem taxes, elderly, disabled, low-income, tax limitation, homesteads, Texas Tax Code, property tax, ad valorem tax, tax exemption, residential real property, home improvement, energy efficiency, energy-efficient upgrades, HVAC

Transcript Highlights:

• The road sees even more traffic as it borders the Frazee school district and is the main access road
• The road sees even more traffic as it borders the Frazee school district and is the main access road
• The road sees even more traffic as it borders the Frazee school district and is the main access road
• </c><01:18:39.000><c> district</c><01:18:39.520><c> and</c> borders the Frazee school district and borders
• the Frazee school district and is<01:18:39.880><c> the</c><01:18:40.000><c> main</c><01:18:40.280><c

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> you the call is out for an early bonding you the call is out for an early bonding bill<00:24:44.080
• </c> looking forward to crafting a bonding looking forward to crafting a bonding proposal<00:25:48.600
• The bill, known as Senate File 334, allows school districts to reduce teachers' instructional time in
• Thank you for joining us, and see you next time. it every District up here talked about it every District
• teachers</c> school districts to reduce teachers school districts to reduce teachers instructional<00

Transcript Highlights:

• district.
• I'm District 1. District 1 encompasses a southwestern part of New Mexico.
• Page 13 continues our local government with our school bus route, our school district cooperative agreements
• I'm the District 6 engineer, and I'm here to present for District 6.
• I'm the District 6 engineer, and I'm here to present for District 6.

Summary: The committee first heard HB 299, a bill to support the Highway 180 project between Deming and Silver City. The sponsors described it as a three-phase road expansion that is already partly complete, but they emphasized rising construction costs, frequent accidents, heavy mining traffic, and the importance of the route to the local economy, tourism, and access to Silver City. A DOT engineer confirmed the project’s phases and cost increases, and the bill drew support from a former DOT official and others. The committee voted do pass, 6-0. The committee then heard HB 325, which would create a railroad crossing safety fund to help improve crossings statewide with lights, gates, overpasses, and other safety measures. Sponsors said the fund would be seeded with a modest amount and could leverage local, federal, and possibly public-private funding, with DOT setting rules and priorities. Railroad lobbyists from Union Pacific and BNSF supported the bill, saying it would help address a major public safety issue, especially for smaller communities. The committee voted do pass. Next, SB 73 was presented to require driver education schools to include at least three hours of instruction on vulnerable road users, such as pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists. Supporters said the bill would improve awareness and safety at low cost, and public testimony included a bicyclist and a parent who lost a daughter in a crash involving a vulnerable road user. Some members asked how the requirement would apply to first-time or older drivers, and sponsors said it would be part of driver education curriculum developed by MVD and DOT. The committee voted do pass, with one member explaining a vote to note the bill should be read as applying to any first-time driver, not just young drivers. The committee also heard SB 111, which would align the Motor Vehicle Division’s confidentiality rules with last session’s SB 36 by protecting personal information such as sex, gender identity, immigration status, and national origin from public disclosure. The Taxation and Revenue Department said the change was meant to close a gap in the law and prevent release of sensitive data in response to public records requests, while still allowing disclosure for law enforcement and other legally required purposes. The bill passed on a 6-1 vote, with one member voting no and saying he was frustrated by last-minute efforts to fix problems he did not see as existing. The meeting concluded with lengthy DOT district presentations from District 1 and District 6, covering budgets, completed and ongoing projects, local road and bridge work, equipment needs, and unfunded priorities. Members asked about specific projects, freight routes, cattle guards, dust and weather issues, striping contractors, and how projects are prioritized under the state’s asset management scoring system. DOT officials said many projects were complete or underway, that some major projects would be funded through Senate Bill 2 or other appropriations, and that equipment and recurring maintenance funding remain major concerns. The committee adjourned after thanking DOT staff and members for their work.

Transcript Highlights:

• So if a school district took out a 20-year bond, every year the state would pay between 30 and 60% of
• So that's what the challenge has been, because these school districts took out bonds.
• wanted to, and also every school district has negotiated specific terms on their bonds.
• c><01:33:37.199><c> Bond</c><01:33:37.560><c> payments</c><01:33:38.000><c> that</c> school districts
• for Bond payments that school districts for Bond payments that they<01:33:38.239><c> are</c><01:33:38.440

Summary: The Finance Committee Division II met with the New Hampshire Department of Education to review school nutrition programs and related funding. Department staff Melissa White and Kelly Rambo walked through a packet covering the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility (CEP), After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, and Summer Food Service Program, explaining that these are federally funded USDA programs, with some state supplemental funding in certain areas. They also reviewed reimbursement rates for lunch, breakfast, child/adult care, and summer meals, noting that summer rates follow calendar-year timing while most others follow the state fiscal year. Members asked several questions about how the funding works, especially the difference between federal reimbursements and the state match. Staff explained that the state lunch line in the budget is a fixed match amount tied to federal participation, while breakfast funding is broken out by meal type and reimbursement category. They also discussed why FY 2022 federal spending was much higher during COVID, when USDA covered meals at the free rate for all students, and why FY 2023 and FY 2024 dropped as normal income-eligibility rules returned. A committee member also asked about the “severe need lunch” two-cent rate, and staff said they did not know USDA’s formula. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on summer meals and the distinction between the Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT. Staff explained that SFSP provides meals at approved sites, which can be open or closed sites, while Summer EBT is a separate DHHS-operated benefit program that provides funds to families. They said some schools or sites may not qualify under USDA rules, but eligible children can often use another nearby open site, and the department posts an interactive map and phone line to help families find locations. The committee also discussed the Community Eligibility Provision. Staff said New Hampshire currently has three CEP schools, that the eligibility threshold had recently been lowered from 40% to 25% identified students, and that the program allows participating schools to offer free meals to all students while the local district covers the non-federal share. Members asked whether any districts in the 25% to 40% range had joined; staff said no. The department offered to provide the eligibility report in Excel and noted that the CEP intent is to reduce application burden, though the lower threshold can make the local cost share harder for some districts to absorb.

Transcript Highlights:

• School districts are successfully screening is really important to me.
• Is that position a special position that's given by the school district, the principal?
• districts, and how can we better address some of the fiscal challenges that our local school districts
• , which is in the Pioneer Union Elementary School District up in Butte County, and had lost its school
• I'm a kindergarten teacher in the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because when these school districts do these bonds and they do advertising, they'll say the average house
• Well, the bond is passed, and the majority of your property taxes are to the school district.
• You know, there's a local school district that just approved 20 additional general fund mills.
• You know, I guess I'm asking a county person what a school district or how they do it.
• You know, I guess I'm asking a county person what a school district or how they do it.

Summary: The subcommittee met with a quorum, approved the prior minutes, and focused primarily on property tax statement issues tied to the primary residence credit and the 5% early-payment discount. North Dakota Association of Counties representatives said the current special-session language creates problems because the discount is being applied even when no taxes are ultimately owed, and because the discount is calculated before the PRC funds are actually received. They recommended reverting to the prior law so the discount is applied after the PRC, and noted that all four programmers said they could revert the software to the earlier version if needed. The committee also reviewed a bill draft to remove the legislative tax relief line item from the required contents of the property tax statement. Members agreed the current line item is not especially accurate or useful on the statement, and several members said the committee should go further by adding clearer taxpayer education, such as a pie chart or other supplemental breakdown of where property taxes go. County officials said some counties already provide supplemental charts or explanatory material, but others would need help with printing, mailing, or formatting. To support that idea, staff presented a second bill draft creating a grant program, administered through the Association of Counties with OMB as a pass-through, to reimburse counties for supplemental property tax statement information and related administration. After discussion, the committee voted unanimously to combine the two bill drafts into one recommendation and forward it to the full Tax Reform and Relief Advisory Committee. The subcommittee then voted to adjourn after directing staff to prepare its summary and recommended bill draft for the interim report.

Transcript Highlights:

• School districts are successfully screening is really important to me.
• Is that position a special position that’s given by the school district, the principal?
• districts, and how can we better address some of the fiscal challenges that our local school districts
• , which is in the Pioneer Union Elementary School District up in Butte County, and had lost its school
• I'm a kindergarten teacher in Los Angeles Unified School District.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals on dual enrollment, reading difficulty screeners, special education, school facilities, and Commission on Teacher Credentialing programs. On dual enrollment, the Department of Finance described a $100 million one-time Proposition 98 investment to expand the Dual Enrollment Opportunities Grant Program, along with changes to make regional occupational centers eligible, add funding for justice-involved youth, prioritize higher-need LEAs, support teacher professional development, and reduce daily instructional minute requirements for some dual enrollment students. The LAO recommended rejecting the new funding as not clearly addressing implementation barriers, while CDE supported the proposal and suggested reserving $10 million for technical assistance. Committee members and public commenters generally supported the expansion, with some asking for technical assistance and broader access, including adult dual enrollment. The committee also reviewed a $40 million one-time Proposition 98 proposal for reading difficulty screener implementation and related trailer bill language that would require screening after 91 school days for kindergarten and 46 school days for grades 1-2. Finance said the timing was intended to reduce over-identification and align with evidence from preliminary data; the LAO recommended rejecting the funding and redirecting it to a discretionary block grant. CDE supported the funding and the general approach but acknowledged the need for local support and training. Several committee members and public witnesses raised concerns that the proposed timing restrictions were too rigid and could delay early intervention, while others supported the delay as a way to improve accuracy and avoid misidentification. For special education, Finance proposed ongoing Proposition 98 increases to adjust for COLA and enrollment changes and to raise the statewide special education base rate to $99 per ADA, equalizing rates across SELPAs. The LAO said the proposal should be adopted but estimated it could be funded for less than the Governor’s figure. CDE and multiple local education representatives strongly supported the increase, citing rising special education enrollment, cost pressures, and large local funding gaps. The committee also heard a brief overview of the school facilities proposal, which continues $1.5 billion in Proposition 2 bond funding for the School Facility Program; OPSC reported significant remaining bond authority but also substantial pending demand, and explained that natural disaster school rebuilding draws from the broader new construction and modernization pools. Finally, the committee reviewed Commission on Teacher Credentialing proposals, including the already-funded $300 million Student Teacher Stipend Program, new state operations resources for misconduct investigations and grant administration, and a $250 million one-time continuation of the Teacher Residency Grant Program. CTC said its grants management system is ready and that it expects better data tracking; public testimony broadly supported the educator workforce investments and urged continued funding for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and additional support for rural and leadership pipeline programs. No votes were taken, and the hearing adjourned after public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• And school district co-ops, $213,930 to four different schools. worth of projects fiscal year 2028 105
• And school district co-ops, 213,930 to four different schools. ...930 for different schools.
• On page 13, you have the legend there with the municipalities, counties, and school districts.
• Can you give me an example of what the school district would be partnered with, or what projects they
• I appreciate that because I need to make sure my school districts start using that funding, too.

Summary: The committee heard a District 5 New Mexico Department of Transportation presentation from Rhonda Lopez, who reviewed the district’s FY26 budget, staffing vacancies, and the status of special appropriations from 2020 through 2025. She described numerous completed and ongoing projects across the district, including roadway overlays, bridge work, intersection improvements, ADA upgrades, and maintenance projects, and also summarized STIP, TPF, LGRF, and equipment needs. Members asked about a guardrail issue near U.S. 64 in Hogback, the 5% local match for TPF projects, and the status of the New Mexico 371/U.S. 36 intersection funding agreement with the Navajo Nation; DOT said the match is secured or waived where applicable and that the Navajo agreement is nearly finalized. The committee then heard House Bill 270, which would amend the Public Works Apprentice Training Act to require contributions to apprenticeship and training programs for certain public works contracts, including highway-related work, while creating an exception where no approved apprenticeship program exists for a trade classification. The sponsor said the bill was intended to strengthen workforce development and support apprenticeship training. Contractors and asphalt industry representatives opposed the bill, arguing it would raise road project costs and duplicate existing training contributions. A motion to table failed on a tie, and a later motion to pass also failed on a tie, leaving the bill in committee. Next, the committee heard House Bill 322, which would create a transportation trust fund and transportation program fund, dedicate additional revenue sources including a portion of electricity GRT and motor vehicle excise tax, and begin annual distributions for federal matching funds in 2029. The sponsor and supporters said the bill would help address a multi-billion-dollar road funding gap, improve maintenance, and provide a stable source for matching federal dollars. Some members raised concerns about the electricity tax component, its effect on utility bills, and overlap with recently enacted transportation financing measures; others supported the concept but questioned timing and funding priorities. A motion on the bill resulted in a tie and failed, leaving the bill in committee. The meeting concluded with a District 4 NMDOT legislative presentation. The district outlined its geography, budget, staffing vacancy rate, completed special appropriations, active construction and maintenance projects, wildfire-related recovery work, local government funding allocations, and equipment replacement needs. Members asked about school district uses of local funding and the impact of aging equipment and weather on maintenance costs. The presentation ended without any formal action on District 4 items, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, bonded program.
• Um, we have a, actually a whole bond website that you can go to and see what our bond, who owns our bonds
• We buy a lot of school bonds, water system loans.
• Um, and school districts, we're buying down a lot of interest rates on school district loans.
• Solar energy systems happen in public buildings, including tribal land grant, uh, school districts, municipalities

Committee: House New Mexico Finance Authority Oversight Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• School District.
• School District, uh the Anoka-Hennepin School District, uh<00:19:23.520><c> those</c><00:19:24.120><
• a referendum and school bonds.
• each school district each schools each school district regional<00:26:40.680><c> area</c><00:26:41.000
• </c><00:26:43.080><c> One</c> Anoka-Hennepin School District. One Anoka-Hennepin School District.

Committee: Senate Taxes