Transcript Highlights:

• And again, I think we ought to look at the fiscal notes on all of these issues.
• And again, I think we ought to look at the fiscal notes on all of these issues.
• Chairman, maybe I just think we need a fiscal note on this particular bill.
• Yeah, we looked at it; there's no fiscal note.
• Yeah, we looked at it; there's no fiscal note.

Summary: The committee first approved the April 28 minutes and announced that Senate Bill 499 was voluntarily deferred. It then heard several House bills, beginning with HB 168, a reentry/transitional housing program for female parolees near release; supporters said it would improve public safety and reduce recidivism, and the bill was reported favorably without objection. HB 322, a cleanup bill from the Maggie Grace Act clarifying that victims or families requesting transcripts would not be charged, was also reported favorably without objection. HB 622, which aligns Louisiana criminal history information practices with federal rules, was amended and then reported favorably. HB 821, moving the School for Safe Centers from GOSEP to the Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement, was reported favorably as well. The committee then took up HB 364, which directs State Police to partner on public awareness efforts about the illegality of discharging firearms, especially around holidays. An amendment removed a proposed printing cost and shifted the bill toward PSAs; the bill was reported favorably with amendments. HB 568, which strengthens enforcement of drug-free school zone laws by creating a clearer offense for openly smoking or vaping illegal drugs in school zones and setting a specific penalty for marijuana, drew extensive debate. Supporters, including the author and governor’s office, said it was needed to protect children and families and to give law enforcement a workable deterrent. Opponents argued it would impose harsh, geography-based penalties, sweep in medical cannabis patients and veterans, and worsen racial and fiscal disparities. After roll-call, the committee reported HB 568 favorably by a 3-2 vote. The committee also approved HB 296, a cleanup bill removing long-defunct programs from statute, without objection. HB 823, creating an Orleans Parish DA pilot diversion program for unhoused people accused of nonviolent offenses, was supported by Covenant House and others as a way to avoid criminalizing homelessness and was reported favorably without objection. Finally, HB 1038, a major bill revising the authority and liability structure of city marshals and local governments, prompted extensive testimony. The bill and amendments would limit some marshal powers in smaller jurisdictions, require local approval for certain staffing/insurance matters, and allow local governments to restore powers by ordinance. Supporters said it would reduce liability, clarify authority, and address problems in some marshal offices; opponents, including multiple marshals and law enforcement supporters, said it would undermine elected marshals, hurt small offices, and was too broad and under-studied. The transcript ends amid that hearing, with no final committee action shown on HB 1038.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, one thing to note is that these are the county facilities.
• On that note, could that be part of their report card?
• Fiscal year 2025. There in the teal, I should have said that $262,500 for that fiscal year.
• It wasn't enough to get through the entire fiscal year.
• There was a shortfall in that fiscal year.

Transcript Highlights:

• For fiscal 24 we came in just slightly below estimate for tax revenues.
• And, and for the beginning balance of fiscal 24, 25, do you have that number?
• Uh, we received about 2.2 million, uh, total reports in fiscal year 23 compared to, uh, fiscal year 24
• Uh, the state collected a total of 47.16 billion in sales tax and fiscal 24.
• These, these estimates, um, are for fiscal 27 forecast, but.

Transcript Highlights:

• note.
• note.
• c><00:09:11.640> would longer has a fiscal note but but I would longer has a fiscal note but but
• in fiscal year 27.
• It won't have a fiscal impact."

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first recessed briefly, then took up HB 570, the prescription drug affordability board (PDAB). The chair and several members discussed the House amendment to repeal the board, which removed the fiscal note. The main concern raised was that the PDAB had not yet produced a clear business case showing value for the taxpayer investment, despite several years of work and four annual reports. Supporters of the repeal said the board’s recent report was largely redundant and that the board should either demonstrate a strong return on investment or be shut down; others cautioned against discarding the program too quickly and urged more time to refine the mission and legislative language. No vote was taken, and the committee appeared to agree to retain the bill for further work, with the possibility of revisiting it in a formal executive session on Tuesday. Members also shifted into discussion of HB 2, beginning with Section 85 on opioid abatement trust fund dollars for shelter programs. Department of Health and Human Services officials explained that the provision would provide $10 million from the opioid abatement trust fund, replacing general funds in the governor’s budget, while also noting an additional $2.5 million prioritized needs request for shelter care that was already fully funded. Committee members asked about shelter bed capacity, job placement efforts, and the remaining balance in the opioid fund; DHHS said there are 934 contracted beds and that case management includes help with housing and employment. Officials also said the current proposed budget includes another $1 million later in HB 2 from the opioid fund. The committee then began discussion of Sections 86 through 87, which would preserve the department’s ability to transfer funds between personnel lines. DHHS said the provision is operationally critical and that losing it would make it extremely difficult to manage the department, though it would not have a direct fiscal impact. The next item introduced was Section 88, extending a suspension related to eligibility for services until July 1, 2027; DHHS indicated that if the suspension were not continued, it would likely increase expenditures for Community Mental Health Centers and potentially others. No votes were taken during this portion of the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So as the means test that's already in this bill, is there a new fiscal note going to be suggested?
• Chairman, members of the committee, we can't request a new fiscal note through our system until the full
• So you have to adopt the amendments before we can actually ask for a fiscal note on the amendments.
• Well, and the rationale behind that is, I mean, the fiscal note never changed, but we're totally limiting
• So obviously the fiscal note's going to be less.

Bills: HB1329

Keywords: government spending database, public expenditure transparency, open data, government transparency, school district spending, state spending, local government finance, education finance, budget database, expenditure reporting, salary transparency, benefits data, public records, Legislative Management study, North Dakota, school board training, superintendent, principal, business manager, higher education spending

Summary: The division first discussed Senate Bill 1540 and related amendments involving implementation mechanics, procurement exemptions, and an emergency clause. Bank of North Dakota representatives explained that, based on a timeline review with DPI, the project would be very difficult to implement for the 2026-27 school year without exemptions from state purchasing and IT oversight rules and without an emergency clause; they said the normal procurement process could take about 240 days and that a 15-month implementation window would likely push the start to 2027-28 if those changes were not adopted. Members also raised a separate policy question about a criminal penalty placeholder in the bill, and the committee agreed that the sentence was unnecessary and should be removed. The committee deferred means-testing questions and fiscal-note issues to the next morning, with the understanding that the bill would be drafted in a way that made it workable if it advanced. The committee then turned to the water budget bill and reviewed the latest amended version, which included changes to the Water Topics process, Southwest Pipeline line of credit provisions, Red River supply funding, Mouse River project amounts, general water funding, studies on Missouri River intakes and water governance/finance, and a carryover/transfer adjustment. Chris Cattermas of the Department of Water Resources said most of the carryover funds were already obligated, with the largest unobligated amount in flood control. After review, Senator Thomas moved a do-pass recommendation on the bill as amended, the motion was seconded, and the committee approved it unanimously. The chair noted that other bills would be taken up the next morning, including 1013, 1014, and 1540.

Transcript Highlights:

• > is<00:11:32.000> $7,360 >> So, the fiscal note is $7,360 >> So, the fiscal
• The fiscal note on this was u questions? The fiscal note on this was u >> $1,900.
• Fiscal note on this, um, for the ETF in total would be $161,000.
• Fiscal note on this, um, for the ETF in total would be $161,000.
• Fiscal note on this, um, for the ETF in total would be $161,000.

Bills: HB187, HB98, HB360, HB394, HB398, HB388, HB187, HB98, HB360, HB394, HB398, HB388

Keywords: school safety, emergency response, training, public safety, Alyssa's Law, law enforcement, scholarship, tuition assistance, dependent education, Alabama, blackout license plate, HB360, Second Amendment Sales Tax Holiday, sales tax holiday, firearms, guns, ammunition, bullets, primers, gun accessories

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, the first piece would be just the fiscal note and the fiscal impact as we're considering that.
• I think you have a copy of the fiscal note in your packet, hopefully.
• have the fiscal note from the department have the fiscal note from the department of<00:37:39.599
• note so I any of us got the fiscal note so I anticipate<00:37:59.760> it'll<00:38:00.000>
• I thought you had the fiscal note.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We have fiscal here we've got fiscal.
• line on the spreadsheet of the fiscal line on the spreadsheet of the fiscal impact,<00:45:32.720
• to mention too is that um the fiscal to mention too is that um the fiscal impact<00:46:04.640>
• the the estimated general fund fiscal the the estimated general fund fiscal impact<00:47:24.000>
• Research Fiscal uh for your help today. Research Fiscal uh for your help today.

Bills: HR1, HF387

Keywords: January 6 insurrection, pardon, law enforcement, violent crimes, public safety, justice system, political accountability, Blaine, local sales tax, special tax, restaurant tax, lodging tax, admissions tax, amusement tax, hotel tax, redevelopment, capital improvements, municipal finance, bonding authority, tourism tax

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:02:17.800> year the same as as was spent in fiscal year the same as as was spent in fiscal
• what we would have expected in fiscal what we would have expected in fiscal year<00:31:42.600>
• <03:17:23.840> and 9,955 th000 in fiscal year 2026 and 9,955 th000 in fiscal year 2026 and
• 9,951<03:17:26.080> in<03:17:26.319> fiscal<03:17:26.760> year 9,951 in fiscal
• year 27, making the total amount cut to equal 410,000 in fiscal year 26 and 600,000 for fiscal year

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee reviewed the Department of Corrections budget, with the chair initially noting that the overall numbers looked close to fiscal year 2024 spending, except for federal funds. Department officials explained that prior ARPA expenditures and delayed revenue recognition had distorted the comparison, and that the corrected general fund spend was about $169.7 million. Members then focused on whether the budget’s staffing assumptions were realistic, especially the shift from overtime to full-time lines and the use of vacant positions to offset overtime costs. The department said it is leaning on vacancy savings, but would return for additional appropriations if unforeseen staffing problems arise. A major portion of the discussion centered on recruitment, retention, and staffing levels. Officials reported a 42% vacancy rate in enforcement ranks, down from 51% in January 2023, with 28 new officers headed to the next academy and 33 new hires already tracked. They said overtime is more expensive than regular staffing because of benefits and that it takes about 11 months for a new hire to break even. Members also asked about the split between incarcerated and supervised populations; the department said it oversees about 1,970 inmates in facilities and just over 4,000 people in the community, with 77 positions supervising the community population and the inmate population remaining the most expensive area. The committee also discussed how sentencing and statutory changes affect incarceration levels, including misdemeanor/felony thresholds and theft thresholds, with the department agreeing that such changes can significantly affect prison and jail populations. Members asked about education and recidivism, and the department said base education is the most important foundation, followed by vocational training, while noting that many incarcerated men lack a high school diploma. The department also described a $1.3 million reduction in contracted forensic evaluation services, explaining that these evaluations are court-ordered competency assessments and are not statutorily required to be provided by DOC. Finally, members reviewed victim services funding and staffing, including VOCA-supported positions, and the department explained that a new victim witness specialist would help support survivors at parole hearings and safety planning.

Transcript Highlights:

• or if we had any type of fiscal note response to this.
• or if we had any type of fiscal note response to this.
• this<00:25:34.640> I type of fiscal note response to this I type of fiscal note response
• <00:25:44.399> but<00:25:44.520> it fiscal note has been requested but it fiscal note
• <01:28:24.719> note and we're still a ating a fiscal note and we're still a ating a fiscal

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee approved the March 22, 2024 minutes and then took up House File 3761, the Safety Through Support Act, with a motion to lay the bill over. Representative Lee Finke said the bill is intended to improve re-entry outcomes and public safety by expanding prison visitation, including mentoring and access for mental health and medical professionals, and by creating a task force to support rehabilitation and re-entry. Testifiers in support included Holly Bot, who described how family visits helped her through incarceration and later into successful re-entry and business ownership, and Zeke Caliguri, who argued that consistent visitation and community connection are essential to humanity, rehabilitation, and reducing recidivism. Elliot Bhai of NAMI Minnesota also supported the bill, framing visitation as a form of needed mental health support in prisons. Members raised several concerns and suggestions. Representative Hudson questioned the bill’s strip-search limitation language, asking what would count as a credible, documented security concern, and also worried the task force could create discriminatory access or favor certain viewpoints. Representative Finke said she did not view a conviction as making someone permanently a security risk and said the task force was meant to ensure meaningful visitation for everyone, not to enable discrimination. Representative Hollins and Representative N. supported the bill’s overall goals while suggesting language could be tightened and noting that maintaining outside ties helps people return as productive members of society. Representative Witte asked about the Department of Corrections commissioner’s presence, and the chair said questions for him could wait for a later bill. Representative Mu asked about the fiscal note and the research behind the bill. Staff said a fiscal note had been requested but not yet signed off by the LBO, which was one reason the bill was being laid over. Finke said she could share the visitation study and noted that the bill responds to research linking visitation to lower recidivism; she also said remote visitation data shows value but can be costly. After closing remarks emphasizing that visitation is “medicine” and that most incarcerated people will return to the community, the chair renewed the motion and laid over House File 3761. The committee then moved on to House File 4959, with a motion to re-refer it to the Committee on State and Local Government Finance and Policy.

Transcript Highlights:

• a record-shattering 25.6%. compared to prior fiscal years.
• A couple of notes.
• note that we had on the bill at the time.
• Fiscal year 24, nearly 475,000 calls were handled, and 160,000... 68,000 e-reports.
• And slide 11, this shows for fiscal year 2024. aggregate.

Keywords: budget, House Bill 1, public education, healthcare, border security, federal funding, spending limits

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on reviewing the proposed budget for the upcoming biennium, with substantial discussions around House Bill 1 and its implications for public education, healthcare, and border security. The Comptroller presented a revenue overview indicating a total of $194.6 billion available for general purpose spending, which reflects a slight decrease compared to previous years due to fluctuating economic conditions. Members raised questions regarding spending limits and the impact of federal funding on state programs, highlighting concerns about the sustainability of funding in light of potential changes at the federal level.

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition, at the completion of a fiscal note, there will be some additional revenue that has yet to
• In addition, at the completion of a fiscal note, there will be some additional revenue that has yet to
• In addition, at the completion of a fiscal note, there will be some additional revenue that has yet to
• In addition, at the completion of a fiscal note, there will be some additional revenue that has yet to
• In addition, at the completion of a fiscal note, there will be some additional revenue that has yet to

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I wanted to note here an exciting first for us.
• This is based on the CCA funding awarded through fiscal year 25.
• This graphic represents the projects that have been completed during fiscal year 23 through fiscal year
• We have over $100 million in candidate projects that have been outstanding since fiscal year 25.
• We have over $100 million in candidate projects that have been outstanding since fiscal year 25.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The House Transportation Committee held a work session focused heavily on Climate Commitment Act transportation spending and electrification programs. Staff first reviewed roughly $2.2 billion in CCA transportation allocations over three biennia, noting that the largest shares went to public transportation, active transportation, ferry electrification, ZEV programs, rail freight/ports, and planning, with about half of the electrification and fuel-conversion spending tied to state ferries. Members asked for more detail comparing CCA dollars with the broader transportation budget and for total project costs, not just CCA contributions. The Department of Ecology presented on the zero-emission school bus program. Ecology said the legislature codified the program in 2024 and requires electric buses once diesel and electric costs are equivalent, with exemptions available when electric buses cannot meet district needs. Ecology reported $38.3 million in CCA funding for 2025-27, with $21.4 million already obligated or spent to replace 91 diesel buses in 28 districts, plus additional federal EPA funding leveraged for 13 more buses. Members asked about health impacts, parity timing, rural route exemptions, charging and training costs, and whether the program includes infrastructure; Ecology said the grants cover buses, charging, and sometimes training, and that the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction is developing the cost-equivalency formula. The Department of Commerce described its clean transportation role, including EV rebates, charging infrastructure, tribal electric boats, and the EV Coordinating Council. Commerce said its rebate program was designed to lower monthly payments for low-income households, that 89% of recipients said the rebate was essential to their purchase, and that lease incentives helped draw additional federal dollars. Members asked about tribal boat details, utility interconnection and curtailment, range anxiety, and vandalism at charging stations; Commerce said battery storage and managed charging are being used in some projects, some utilities are more responsive than others, and vandalism remains a challenge. The Department of Enterprise Services reported 567 Level 2 and 46 Level 3 charging ports installed at 82 state sites, with 19 more sites in progress and over $100 million in additional candidate projects. DES said most funding is for new infrastructure, though some VW settlement money is used for replacements, and members asked about charger replacement needs, mobile charging, and EV fleet purchasing data. WSDOT then outlined its EV infrastructure and transit programs. It said the Zero Emission Vehicle Infrastructure Partnership program has funded 23 new charging sites this biennium, including overburdened communities and tribal locations, and has supported 264 DC fast-charging ports statewide. WSDOT also described the new Washington Zero Emission Incentive Program, a point-of-sale voucher program for zero-emission commercial vehicles and equipment with $112 million available this biennium; it reported strong early demand, especially for off-road equipment and heavy trucks, and said technical assistance is being provided to help businesses participate. In public transportation, WSDOT said CCA funds support bus and bus facility grants, commute trip reduction, green transportation capital projects, paratransit, tribal transit, zero-emissions access car share, and other mobility projects, with most awards benefiting overburdened communities. Finally, WSDOT’s rail freight and ports division said port electrification projects are underway but spending is still low because of long design, permitting, utility, and supply-chain timelines; it estimated the $89.8 million program could reduce more than 140,000 metric tons of emissions over 10 years. Members questioned the pace of spending, the Northwest Seaport drayage project, and how state funds can leverage additional federal or port resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• Secretary, please note the attendance. This is loud enough. Can you hear me? Hello? Okay.
• Contributions to various state programs and funds in fiscal year 2024 in accordance with statute.
• I want to note that we did not wait for the audit to be finalized before taking our action.
• years 2021 through 2025 revenues in fiscal years 2021 through 2025.
• In fiscal year 2025, it exceeded its cash reserve requirement by approximately $17.5 million.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The House Commerce Committee of Reference heard sunset reviews and a performance audit presentation for the Arizona Department of Gaming, the Racing Commission, the Boxing and MMA Commission, and later the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The Auditor General reported that the Department of Gaming and the commissions generally met some statutory duties, but identified several problems: the department did not consistently obtain and review independent audits for event wagering and fantasy sports operators; the department and commissions had gaps in conflict-of-interest disclosures; the department and Boxing and MMA Commission lacked comprehensive complaint-handling processes; the department was late distributing some compact trust fund payments; and there were additional issues involving IT security, horse-racing license checks, fee reviews, public records practices, and licensing compliance. The Auditor General said the department agreed to implement all 36 recommendations, the Racing Commission agreed to six recommendations, and the Boxing and MMA Commission agreed to 13 recommendations. The department director said many fixes were already underway, including updated guidance, complaint tracking improvements, and a historical look-back on operator reporting, and she also discussed efforts to combat illegal gambling and educate minors and families about gambling risks. Committee members questioned the department about third-party audits, penalties for underpayments, public records handling, conflict-of-interest screening, and the department’s position on prediction markets and suitability standards for licensees. The director said the department would review past reports, could assess fines if violations were found, and would generally wait for final adjudication or final action in other jurisdictions before taking Arizona licensing action. After discussion, the committee voted to recommend the Department of Gaming be continued for two years until July 1, 2028, the Racing Commission for six years until July 1, 2032, and the Boxing and MMA Commission for six years until July 1, 2032. The Department of Gaming motion passed 7-4, the Racing Commission motion passed 10-1, and the Boxing and MMA Commission motion passed unanimously. The committee then heard the Auditor General’s report on the Arizona Barbering and Cosmetology Board. The audit found the board timely processed many licenses and complaints and had adopted curriculum rules, but it inconsistently applied its disciplinary guidelines, sometimes issuing different sanctions for similar violations without documenting the reasons for deviation. The report also found problems with reciprocity education requirements, application review controls, inspections, and compliance with open meeting, public records, and conflict-of-interest requirements, and it suggested possible statutory changes on aesthetics scope of practice, cease-and-desist authority, and training standards for I-LEST technicians. The board agreed with the findings and said it had already updated disciplinary parameters and documentation policies, with more recommendations in progress; committee members asked about discretion in discipline, audit funding, and service efficiency, and the board highlighted its licensing volume, call response, inspections, and complaint handling performance.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a fiscal note in your packet, and that's about it. I'd be happy to answer any questions.
• note puts the offset level at about $828,000 for this biennium, and over a million into future fiscal
• The fiscal note states that it would be $828,000 for this current fiscal year that will be budgeted,
• <00:37:50.480> note appropriation matched so the fiscal note appropriation matched so the
• fiscal note states<00:37:51.400> that<00:37:51.560> it<00:37:51.640> would<00:37

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And I note that we've heard some new details today around the fiscal planning. ...of the entities and
• fiscal planning.
• And I note that we've heard some new details today around the fiscal planning, and we look forward to
• So I think that's important to note. I think that's important to note.
• So that's on another note, I think it's important also to note that as the Legislature implements, I

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The joint Senate Education and Budget Committee hearing focused on Governor Newsom’s education governance proposal, which would reorganize state K-12 education leadership by shifting day-to-day management of the Department of Education from the elected Superintendent of Public Instruction to a governor-appointed education commissioner, while giving the superintendent a more policy-focused role and voting seats on the State Board of Education and the California Community Colleges Board of Governors. Brooks Allen, for the State Board of Education and Governor’s office, argued the change would reduce fragmented authority, improve accountability, and align California with other states that use appointed chief education officials. Amber Alexander of the Department of Finance outlined the budget-neutral staffing transfers and transition timeline, and LAO analyst Sarah Cortez said the LAO supports the shift to an appointed commissioner but recommends Senate confirmation, clearer statutory duties, preserved legislative oversight, and a cost-neutral fiscal plan. Committee members raised substantial concerns about timing, constitutionality, voter expectations, and whether the proposal would actually improve student outcomes. Senator Cabaldon argued the change would effectively alter the meaning of the constitutionally created superintendent office during an election year without voter approval, and questioned whether governance restructuring has evidence of improving achievement or should instead yield savings. Other senators asked how the new structure would work in practice, who would be accountable if it failed, whether a governor-appointed commissioner was the best model, and whether local districts would truly see clearer lines of authority. Allen responded that the Legislature retains plenary authority over education, that the transition would be minimally disruptive, and that the proposal was designed to create a single line of management and clearer communication for local districts. The discussion also covered the Legislature’s role in curriculum and education policy. LAO staff explained that the Legislature has broad authority over education and can direct curriculum-related policy, though it has generally delegated detailed curriculum work to the State Board and the Instructional Quality Commission. Several senators said the current system already creates confusion for voters and local educators, while others argued the proposal adds another layer of bureaucracy and overpromises on results. No vote was taken at this hearing; members continued questioning witnesses and indicated the proposal would be examined further in later panels, including testimony from local education leaders.

Transcript Highlights:

• All CSU campuses relative to their fiscal health, and we established a fiscal health monitoring process
• How does that make sense fiscally?
• There are significant cost savings, as I noted, as a result of that integration.
• Okay, and that's effective which school year or fiscal year? I believe next fiscal year.
• Next fiscal year, 26-27. 26. I believe next fiscal year. 26-27.

Summary: The joint Assembly Higher Education and Budget Subcommittee hearing focused on the future of the California State University system, with opening remarks emphasizing CSU’s major role in California’s economy, workforce, and degree production. Chairs and members said the hearing was intended to inform 2026 budget decisions and to examine three main issues: declining enrollment at some campuses, cost controls and possible consolidation, and oversight of recent state investments at campuses such as Humboldt and Sonoma. The meeting was briefly delayed by microphone and sound problems before reconvening. The first panel featured CSU Academic Senate Chair Dr. Elizabeth Boyd and Cal State Student Association Vice President Katie Karam. Boyd urged the Legislature to protect academic freedom, strengthen faculty governance, provide stable ongoing funding, end unfunded mandates, support student food and housing security, fund flexible course schedules, improve transfer systems such as ASSIST, avoid over-centralizing academic programs, protect immigrant students, and expand intersegmental collaboration. Karam said students are feeling the effects of budget shortfalls through fewer course sections, reduced advising and services, longer time to degree, and tuition pressure, and she called for transparency, meaningful student involvement in budget decisions, and sustained state investment rather than cuts that harm the student experience. The second panel covered enrollment management and included CSU Chancellor’s Office and campus administrators from Chico State, Cal State L.A., and San Diego State. Dr. Delcy Perez said CSU Forward and the new systemwide enrollment plan are aimed at expanding access, aligning programs with workforce needs, and increasing resident enrollment; she reported systemwide enrollment gains and strong application numbers, including a direct-admissions pilot that expanded from Riverside to more campuses. Campus representatives described local recruitment and retention strategies, including early outreach to high school students, community college partnerships, guaranteed admission programs, and expanded advising and student support. San Diego State highlighted record enrollment and high demand, while Cal State L.A. described efforts to recover from impaction and rebuild enrollment. Members pressed CSU officials on the accuracy of enrollment data, the gap between funded targets and actual enrollment, and the system’s reallocation formula. CSU staff explained that campuses below target will see a 5% ongoing reallocation beginning in 2026-27, with one-time reserve funding also being directed to campuses that can grow, and that fiscal health reviews have been completed for 21 of 22 campuses. Legislators also asked about turnaround plans required by the budget act; CSU said those plans are being developed and will be shared in the spring after campus consultation. No formal votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's also worth noting that this bill's fiscal analysis contains. no significant fiscal implications
• note.
• The fiscal note on this bill is... about $2 million a biennium.
• So the new. the fiscal note may possibly be even less than. And if some of that is already being.
• So how Can you tell us how much is currently covered as far as fiscal note goes under HHSC?

Bills: HB2646, HB3941, HB5153, HB5155, HB5394, HB 1106, HB426, HB4529, HB3984, HB4273, HB 1097, HB3940, HB1941, HB4377, HB3153

Keywords: child care, task force, high-quality care, affordability, prekindergarten partnerships, foster care, transitional living, Medicaid reform, youth assistance, independent living, services for youth, employment training, educational support, mental health services, health care, public health, child health program, reimbursement, local health entities, maternal health

Transcript Highlights:

• The fiscal note, it was going to be $3.6 million this year.
• But the fiscal note talks about the increase. I'm just going to talk about the commissioners.
• So this might not even cost as much as a fiscal note. That's correct.
• But the fiscal note talks about the increase.
• So, so this might you might not, it might not even cost as much as a fiscal note. That's correct.

Bills: SR86, SB491, HB205, HB210, HB228, HB813, HB1045, HB1177

Keywords: Senate rules, Louisiana Senate, Senate Chamber, smart glasses, recording eyewear, audio recording, video recording, wearable technology, covert recording, legislative security, media access, chamber decorum, Senate President, internal rules, public access, lobbyists, official journal, public notices, competitive bid, Louisiana legislation

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll note that this is a look at the state level of funding.
• <00:21:25.679> with aspect to it uh one thing to note with aspect to it uh one thing to note
• 1st of 2024 so that's actually fiscal 1st of 2024 so that's actually fiscal year year year 2025<
• subsequent slides are for fiscal year 2024.
• Appropriations um and I should also note Appropriations um and I should also note that<00:52:52.920

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The Transportation Working Group met on January 15, 2025, with Chair John Kosnik opening by saying the committee expected to pass a transportation bill this year and emphasizing efficient use of transportation revenues, maintenance of roads and transit, and safety. Members and staff introduced themselves, and several representatives noted their interest in roads, bridges, and regional transportation needs. Kosnik also said he had spoken with Representative Kel about leadership arrangements and stressed that bipartisan support would be needed for a transportation bill. House Fiscal Staff’s Andrew Lee and House Research’s Matt Burus then gave an overview of transportation finance, focusing mainly on highways and transit. Burus explained Minnesota’s highway funding structure, including the constitutional Highway User Tax Distribution Fund and the related Trunk Highway Fund, County State-Aid Highway Fund, and Municipal State-Aid Street Fund. He reviewed the main revenue sources: the motor fuels tax, motor vehicle registration tax, motor vehicle sales tax, portions of the general sales tax tied to auto parts, vehicle rentals and leases, and the retail delivery fee. He noted several changes from 2023 legislation, including indexing of the gas tax, creation of the Transportation Advancement Account, and the retail delivery fee, which began in July 2024 and therefore would affect fiscal year 2025 rather than the fiscal 2024 data shown. The presentation also covered how highway dollars flow through constitutional formulas, including the 95/5 split from the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund, with the 5 percent set-aside used for town roads, town bridges, and flexible highway purposes such as turnbacks. Burus distinguished trunk highway bonds from general obligation bonds and explained that both are debt-financing tools for transportation projects, but with different repayment sources and uses. No votes or formal actions were taken at this informational meeting.