Transcript Highlights:

• That's not my issue.
• Does this guarantee a... You say a good backing. What guarantee does... It can't guarantee.
• That the state is not guaranteeing that their gold is safe. They're not guaranteed.
• That they have complied, but we haven't guaranteed it.
• This bill, and that's kind of the issue, that's why we're against it.

Bills: HCR66, HB387, HB617, HB797, HB950, HB975, HB1186, HB1222, HB1223, HB1228, HB1256

Keywords: economic development, rural communities, infrastructure, workforce training, Louisiana Economic Development, engineering, land surveying, construction, state fire marshal, plan review, hidden fees, junk fees, drip pricing, price transparency, mandatory fees, surcharges, consumer protection, unfair trade practices, advertising disclosures, total price

Summary: The Senate Commerce Committee met on April 20, approved the prior meeting minutes, and then heard a series of bills and resolutions. It first advanced H. CR 66, which directs Louisiana Economic Development, working with the Governor’s Office of Rural Development, to study rural parish economic assets, infrastructure, workforce, and development opportunities. The committee also moved HB 387, a clarification allowing the fire marshal to review architectural and engineering plans equally, and HB 1223, which seeks to promote clinical trials in Louisiana by having LED market the state’s research capacity and by adjusting internal review board procedures. HB 1228, a cleanup bill for hearing aid dealers that updates definitions, contracts, testing periods, licensing, and related requirements, was also reported favorably, as was HB 950, which would create an elderly consumer perception program through the Office of Elderly Affairs to help seniors recognize scams and fraud. The committee spent the most time on HB 617, a broad “hidden fees” consumer transparency bill. The author and supporters said it would require mandatory fees to be included in upfront pricing so consumers can make informed choices, while opponents from grocery, restaurant, hotel, housing, retail, and business groups argued the bill was vague, overly broad, and likely to create compliance burdens and litigation risk. Housing advocates objected to the bill’s housing exemption, warning it could weaken renters’ ability to bring claims over undisclosed fees. After extensive debate over variable pricing, sales taxes, enforcement, and the scope of the bill, Senator Morris moved to defer HB 617, and the committee agreed without objection. The committee also heard HB 797, which would create a “Bayou Gold” certification program for certain gold vendors and transactional gold products. The sponsor said the program would encourage vendors to keep gold insured, segregated, and closer to Louisiana consumers, with the Treasury administering the certification through participant fees. Several senators and an outside witness raised concerns that the state seal could be mistaken for an endorsement, could create liability or consumer confusion, and would favor a narrow set of vendors. Despite opposition, the committee reported HB 797 favorably, with members noting it still had to go to Finance. Later, the committee advanced HB 1186, which would create a more uniform statewide building code and licensing system for inspectors, add disciplinary authority, and impose a small permit fee to support the program, and HB 1222, which would let LED develop a grocery initiative to address food deserts and food insecurity. The meeting concluded with the committee hearing HB 1256 on abandoned digital assets, which would require dormant digital assets to be held in original form for three years so owners can reclaim them.

Transcript Highlights:

• They've also issued...
• so valuable academia and industry that are working on this issue so valiantly.
• That loan guarantee— is that $5 million right now for small businesses?
• Okay, so there are also other demographic issues we want to...
• Okay, so there are also other demographic issues we want to consider.

Summary: The Select Committee on Alternative Protein Innovation held its second informational hearing at UCLA, focusing on California’s alternative protein sector and the role of public institutions in expanding plant-based, fermentation, and cultivated protein options. Chair Ash Kalra opened by highlighting prior state investments in UC research centers, the importance of student engagement, and the hearing’s three panels: reducing the carbon footprint of institutional meals, addressing market challenges to scaling alternative proteins, and advancing future food research and workforce development. Assemblymember Isaac Bryan also briefly praised the committee’s work and its relevance to climate and health goals. The first panel featured Friends of the Earth, UCLA Dining, and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. Megan Jones described California school food efforts, including technical assistance and microgrants that helped districts expand plant-based meals, reduce water and carbon footprints, and improve student satisfaction. Pete Angelese explained how UCLA Dining uses concept-driven venues, sustainable purchasing, and marketing nudges to increase plant-forward choices, while Dr. Michelle Wood outlined Los Angeles County’s 2024–2025 board motions to expand plant-based options in county food venues and programs, including joining the World Resources Institute’s Cool Food Pledge. Committee members asked about costs, procurement, and how student and consumer behavior can be influenced. The second panel addressed market barriers to scaling alternative proteins. Zach Weston and Daniel Gertner emphasized that the sector faces a cost-and-scale trap, high capital needs, and financing gaps, and they recommended grants, tax credits, loan guarantees, procurement commitments, and workforce development. T.K. Pillen of Beyond Meat argued that the category has faced a recent downturn due to consumer skepticism, industry attacks on “fake meat,” and pricing pressures, and said the key to renewed growth is increasing demand through better taste, health, pricing, and messaging around “plant protein.” Panelists also discussed hidden subsidies and structural advantages for conventional animal agriculture, and committee members raised questions about iBank loan guarantees and supply chain challenges. The final panel highlighted UCLA’s research and training efforts. Dr. Amy Roet described the Future Food Fellows program, which trains students across disciplines in science, communication, leadership, and community-building, and supports research on scalable, safe, and nutritious alternative proteins. Corinne Smith shared her cultivated meat research and student leadership in the Alternative Proteins Project at UCLA. Dr. Janet Tomiyama presented consumer psychology findings showing that disgust, gender norms, and terminology strongly affect acceptance, with “plant protein” and “complementary proteins” testing better than “fake meat.” The hearing concluded with support for continued public investment, clearer messaging, and expanded education and workforce pipelines to help California remain a leader in alternative protein innovation.

Transcript Highlights:

• If your property value goes down enough, even if you vote for the levy, it's not a guarantee that your
• So it is up to us, voters, to be educated on the issues, isn't it?
• existing levy, is not even a guarantee existing levy, is not even a guarantee of<00:07:26.240>
• that your property taxes are guarantee that your property taxes are going<00:07:35.599> to<00
• isn't it so be educated on the issues isn't it so I'm<00:10:28.480> not<00:10:28.640> sure

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• And what are your thoughts on that issue?
• A scoping ruling was issued on February 5th this year.
• A scoping ruling was issued on February 5th this year.
• And I think as chair, I'd say we give up guarantees.
• guarantee that COLR provides us, would be moving towards.

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) to examine its history, current operation, and possible future changes in California. Chair Tasha Berner said the hearing was prompted in part by AT&T’s 2023 request for relief from COLR obligations and by broader concerns about public safety, affordability, universal service, and access to modern broadband and telecommunications. The first panel featured a telecommunications expert who traced COLR back to universal service principles and explained how states have handled COLR differently, including full deregulation, limited rural obligations, or transition pathways tied to competition and customer protections. Members asked about affordability, federal and state processes for service withdrawal, and whether COLR remains necessary given modern competition. CPUC staff then described California’s COLR framework, explaining that universal service rests on access, reliability/quality, and affordability, and that COLR requires carriers to provide basic service, including voice-grade calling, 911 access, relay services, and Lifeline. Staff said AT&T’s application sought relief in nearly all of its territory, but no replacement COLR came forward during the proceeding, and public participation hearings drew thousands of comments and strong concern from rural and vulnerable customers. The CPUC outlined its ongoing rulemaking to reconsider whether the 1996 COLR rules and 2012 basic-service definition still fit current conditions, with workshops and public hearings scheduled and a proposed decision expected later in the year or into 2026. Members pressed staff on geographic outreach, wireless coverage, whether broadband can be part of basic service, public safety during wildfires, and what reporting and complaint processes currently exist. In the final panel, industry and public-interest witnesses sharply disagreed. A U.S. Telecom representative argued COLR is outdated, costly, and copper-focused, and said reform should allow technology-neutral alternatives such as wireless, fiber, and satellite while preserving reliable voice and emergency access. The CPUC Public Advocates Office countered that COLR remains a necessary public safeguard, especially for rural and low-income customers, and argued that any transition should maintain or improve service, with public benefits such as broadband investment and continued protections for 911, disability access, and affordability. Committee members focused on the difference between an obligation to serve everyone and a mere option to serve, and on whether the Legislature should provide clearer guidance as the CPUC’s rulemaking moves forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Like, you know, the purpose of this, as I'm reading here in the law, is to guarantee the payment of a
• Like, you know, the purpose of this, as I'm reading here in the law, is to guarantee the payment of a
• As I'm reading here in the law, is to guarantee the payment of a fee if a person loses.
• or the right of Association guaranteed or the right of Association guaranteed by<00:42:52.280>
• <00:47:25.319> that know the constellation of issues that know the constellation of issues

Bills: HF414, HF768, HF359

Keywords: data practices, filing fee, government transparency, complaints, public access, free speech, human rights, censorship, protected speech, Minnesota Department of Human Rights, real property, partition, eminent domain, transfer on death deeds, property rights, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• The same kind of issues arise in this situation for that agency.
• Community college faculty are also guaranteed a third-party arbitrator paid for by the district.
• Classified employees, however, are not currently guaranteed the same right under current law.
• Classified employees, however, are not currently guaranteed the same right under current law.
• For these matters and for these issues, thank you very much.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement heard several retirement and school employment measures. SB 301 by Sen. Grayson would prevent CERL-covered cities and districts from amending retirement contracts to exclude certain employee groups, closing a loophole similar to one previously addressed for CalPERS. The bill was supported by California Professional Firefighters and received no opposition. SB 443 by Sen. Rubio would clarify that employees transferring into a joint powers authority can retain CalPERS classic status even when the JPA expands later; the city of La Verne, a flood management agency, and AFSCME supported the bill, and it also drew no opposition. Both bills were moved out of committee on unanimous votes and sent to Appropriations, with the consent calendar items SB 521, SB 581, and SB 853 also approved. The committee then heard SB 494 by Sen. Cortese, which would give classified school employees the right to have disciplinary appeals heard by an administrative law judge rather than by the school board. Supporters, including CSEA, AFSCME, and CFT, argued the bill would create parity with teachers and community college faculty and provide a fairer appeal process. Opponents, including the California School Boards Association, county superintendents, school business officials, and community college groups, argued it would remove local control, impose a one-size-fits-all process, and shift costs to districts. The bill was passed out of committee and referred to the Committee on Higher Education. The committee also considered SJR 2 by Sen. Cortese, a resolution urging Congress and the President to enact federal protections for classified school employees, including better wages, benefits, safety, and workplace rights. Support came from CFT, CSEA, and other labor groups, with no opposition. The resolution was adopted and moved forward. At the end of the hearing, the committee reopened the roll to add votes, and all listed measures ultimately passed unanimously or near-unanimously before the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we guarantee that they were going to lose revenue, but we did not guarantee that they could get it
• If the voters approve that, that will be an issue. It could be.
• With that, I guarantee you. And I don't want to from our local folks.
• With that, I guarantee you, and I don't want to overspeak here, I don't, but I guarantee you that if
• That's not the issue here.

Summary: The Missouri House Legislative Rules Committee held a rare public hearing on House Bill 2243, sponsored by Rep. Bryant-Wolfen, which would repeal a local sales tax exemption for certain industries that was enacted in a prior omnibus bill tied to the Wayfair-related tax changes. The sponsor argued the exemption shifted revenue away from counties and onto local residents, and said the bill would restore local tax collections that had been lost without a guaranteed replacement. Several members questioned whether the proposal amounted to a tax increase on manufacturers and whether it could deter investment or job growth; the sponsor responded that the tax burden had already been shifted to Missourians and that other pro-business reforms could address competitiveness. Supporters from Iron County, St. Genevieve County, and Adair County testified that the exemption had reduced local revenue for roads, law enforcement, ambulance, and 911 services. They described budget shortfalls, service cuts, and the impact on counties that had already approved local sales or use taxes by voter approval. One Iron County commissioner said the loss of revenue had forced higher property tax levies and reduced ambulance coverage, while St. Genevieve officials cited large drops in monthly sales tax receipts and rising costs. Adair County officials said the exemption affected revenue from large solar and wind projects and argued that the taxes were intended to support local infrastructure and schools. Opponents, including Associated Industries in Missouri, argued the exemption was originally adopted to keep Missouri’s tax system uniform and compliant with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Wayfair framework for out-of-state sellers. They warned that removing the exemption could create a $35 million annual burden on manufacturers and potentially jeopardize broader local use-tax collections if the state’s system were challenged again. Committee members also discussed the possibility of requiring local voter approval or a replacement revenue source before changing the exemption. No vote was taken during the hearing, and the chair said he planned to execute the bill later in the week.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:39:48.240> those<00:39:48.520> Bonds<00:39:49.000> in issue those Bonds in issue
• when we're going to start issuing when we're going to start issuing additional<00:40:29.560>
• <00:45:44.559> bonds have to um again go out and issue bonds have to um again go out and issue
• So we're not going to issue in 25, but we're going to issue in 26, so it will reflect it.
• So we're not going to issue in 25, but we're going to issue in 26, so it will reflect it.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The Public Works and Highways committee held a capital budget orientation led by Legislative Budget Assistant Office staff, who walked members through the budget materials, the capital budget process, and the committee’s compare sheet. The presentation explained that agencies begin developing capital requests nearly a year in advance, submit them by May 1, and that the governor’s recommended capital budget is a reduced version of the much larger agency wish list. Members were told the agencies initially requested about $1.1 billion in projects, the catalog was trimmed to just over $400 million in general fund projects, and the governor’s recommendation in the pink book totals about $143 million in general fund capital appropriations. The committee also reviewed the prior capital budget and related statutes and committee procedures. Several specific projects drew discussion. The Department of Education’s CTE projects were explained as having been shifted into the operating budget in the prior cycle and now returning to the capital budget recommendation; members asked whether there was a backup CTE project and whether local approval had been secured for the named project. The Cannon Mountain tramway request was highlighted as a $20 million recommendation, with the presenter explaining that an earlier $18 million appropriation would be lapsed back to the general fund to help balance the budget. The Department of Corrections’ new prison project was also discussed; members were told the state has already appropriated $50 million for planning and site evaluation, but the governor’s current capital budget does not include a new prison construction appropriation because the project is not yet ready for that phase and may need to be funded differently, possibly through a separate, staggered appropriation. State Treasurer Monica Mezzapelli then presented on debt affordability and the state’s borrowing capacity. She said the state’s credit position has improved, with the debt-to-revenue ratio falling from 8.2% in 2015 to 3.8% in 2024, and explained that RSA 6-C limits debt authorization to 10% of unrestricted prior-year revenue. She noted that the Treasury’s planning assumes $60 million in annual bond issuance, with the prison-related $40 million now expected to be issued in 2026 rather than 2025 because the project is not ready to spend the funds. She said the state can still borrow more, but additional debt service must be paid from operating funds, and recommended keeping capital bonding in the $120 million to $130 million range to preserve affordability and the state’s credit rating. Members asked for clarification on the CTE funding shift, the prison schedule, and the meaning of the large agency request totals. The chair and treasurer discussed the governor’s $143 million recommendation versus the committee’s usual target range, and the treasurer said $130 million would be more comfortable than $140 million, with $135 million described as a possible compromise. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion provided; the meeting was informational and ended with the presenters offering to answer follow-up questions as agencies come before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Same issue.
• And so these are not separate or disconnected issues. These are the same issue.
• This issue for me is personal.
• These issues drive up costs and add regulatory uncertainty.
• Second, it only guarantees at 1.22% fees. Second, it only guarantees coal exclusion.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the co-chairs explaining committee procedures, testimony limits, submission instructions, and the new deadlines for acting on House and Senate bills. The committee then heard testimony on several bills related to agriculture, land use, environment, housing, transportation, and taxation, with legislators often taken out of turn. No votes were taken during the hearing. The first major topic was H. 3206, a bill to allow fossil fuel-free 529 college savings plans to qualify for the state tax deduction if MEFA does not offer a comparable option. Representative Steve Owens said the bill would not force MEFA or Fidelity to change existing plans, but would create a definition for fossil fuel-free funds and extend the deduction to qualifying out-of-state plans. The committee also heard strong local testimony on a Belmont home-rule petition, H. 3970, to change tax treatment for the Belmont Country Club under Chapter 61B. Belmont residents and officials argued the private golf course receives an unfair tax break that shifts costs to other taxpayers, while Senator Brownsberger and Representative Rogers supported the measure as a way to help the town recover revenue. Committee members asked about town meeting support, the club’s lack of payment in lieu of taxes, and the size of the tax savings. The committee next heard testimony on a vehicle miles traveled tax proposal, S. 1925, from Senator Barrett and economists Gilbert Metcalf and Christopher Knittel. They argued that declining gas-tax revenue and rising fuel efficiency, especially with electric vehicles, require a more stable transportation funding source; they also said a VMT tax could be designed to be revenue-neutral and mildly progressive, though members raised concerns about administration, fairness, EV disincentives, and the possibility of annual tax shocks. The largest block of testimony focused on the Ahead Act, H. 3194/S. 1973, which would double the deed excise fee and dedicate the new revenue to affordable housing and climate adaptation. Supporters from MACDC, MAPC, FICC, Boston Climate Action Network, CLF, 350 Mass, CHAPA, and a tenant advocate said the bill could generate about $300 million annually for housing production, vouchers, weatherization, resilience, and environmental justice communities, and that it links two urgent crises with a stable funding stream. The committee also heard testimony on the Conservation Land Tax Credit bills, H. 3147/S. 2083, which would raise the annual cap on the credit from $2 million to $5 million for three years and then sunset back down. Conservation groups and a landowner said the program has conserved thousands of acres and that the higher cap would reduce delays and help meet state conservation goals. Finally, the committee took testimony on the Fairness for Farm Workers bills, S. 2011/H. 3107 and S. 2012, which would extend overtime, minimum wage, breaks, and paid time off protections to farm workers and include a refundable tax credit to help farmers offset overtime costs. Senator Gomez and advocates described the bills as overdue civil rights and public health measures, citing low wages, long hours, dangerous conditions, and the racial history behind farm labor exclusions. The hearing also included testimony on H. 3240, a bill to give municipalities a local option vacancy tax on chronically vacant shopping malls, with the sponsor arguing it would help towns address blight, encourage redevelopment, and potentially create housing and tax revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• The SRU is a special unit for severe mental health issues.
• You contracted with that company and they have staffing issues.
• or a performance issue which results in liquidated damages?
• They had some different issues, legal issues in Tennessee, and we still chose them.
• And I know that there was some issues with DOC and Corizon.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Here's the issue in a nutshell.
• Here's the issue in a nutshell.
• Here's the issue in a nutshell.
• Here's the issue in a nutshell.
• stance on this issue.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• A contingency that would be a guarantee that that bill would both be passed and enacted.
• And in this in just just a guarantee.
• > are<00:04:51.280> being there specific issues that are being there specific issues that
• No guarantees, though. Senate Republicans seem to be maybe the wild card on that.
• I don't issues in a friendly manner.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Here's the big picture issue.
• guarantee association. guarantee association.
• Guarantee Association. Guarantee Association.
• guarantee fund association. guarantee fund association.
• benefit guarantee corporation. benefit guarantee corporation.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• System institutions is guaranteed the ability to transfer into a state university system.
• It takes that statewide articulation agreement and adds a promise, a guarantee of admission.
• You start with Valencia, you'll be guaranteed admission.'
• And so that's an advising issue, right? So we need to make sure they have that advising.
• But we do have a lot of specialized advising issues that we need to think about.

Summary: The subcommittee began with an informal “college day” exercise in which members described what careers and colleges they would choose if starting over, often citing factors such as program reputation, location, cost, graduation rates, employment outcomes, and family or personal interests. Members mentioned a range of possible paths including law, aviation, education, construction management, psychology, social work, criminal justice, nursing, intelligence studies, and the arts. Several also highlighted the value of historically Black colleges and universities, dual enrollment, and career/technical education. The chair used the exercise to frame the meeting’s broader focus on Florida’s higher education pathways and student outcomes. Dr. Kathleen Plinsky of Valencia College then gave an overview of the Florida College System and Valencia’s role in it, emphasizing Florida’s statewide articulation and transfer framework, open-access mission, affordability, and workforce alignment. She described Valencia’s record enrollment, high retention, large share of first-generation and working students, and partnerships such as Direct Connect to UCF, Osceola Prosper, and Open Door grants for short-term training. Members asked about guaranteed transfer, apprenticeships, enrollment trends, student demographics, out-of-state residency, county scholarship costs, dual enrollment outcomes, and barriers to expanding career dual enrollment. Dr. Plinsky said the system supports transfer and acceleration well, but funding constraints limit growth in some areas; she also noted that dual enrollment participation is high and that Valencia’s affordability and student support efforts have driven recent enrollment gains. Dr. Jim Clark of Florida State University followed with an overview of the State University System, describing its governance, performance-based funding, low tuition, and strong graduation and research outcomes. He highlighted FSU’s enrollment, research profile, transfer student success, FSU Health, the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, partnerships with K-12 schools and Tallahassee State College, and efforts to expand nursing and medical education to address workforce shortages. After the presentations, the committee heard from a panel on student acceleration and mobility: Shannon Mercer of the Department of Education explained the Office of Articulation, the statewide course numbering system, FASTER records, the 2+2 transfer model, specialized AA transfer degrees, and credit for industry certifications, military, medical, and law-enforcement training. Panelists from Kaiser University, Florida State University, and Pinellas County Schools described their institutions’ roles in transfer, advising, career pathways, apprenticeships, and dual enrollment. No formal votes or bills were taken up in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, it is wonderful to continue to work on this issue, but this has been an issue, you know, because
• Like I say many times, the childcare issue is much more than a family issue.
• It is a workforce issue, and it is an economic development issue. Thank you.
• This is not just an animal welfare issue; it's an issue of public health.
• We have a full guarantee.

Bills: HB74, HB175, HB460, HB576, HB2271, HB2294, HB2874, HB3016, HB3133, HB3191, HB3458, HB3929, HB4063, HB4115, HB4394, HB74, HB175

Keywords: Puerto Verde, Port Authority, eminent domain, bonds, tax assessments, economic development, infrastructure, transportation, public welfare, child care, certifications, Texas Rising Star Program, grant program, disability inclusion, family income, affordability, economic impact, state study, cost analysis, government support

Transcript Highlights:

• The Transfer and Mission Guarantee TAG program...
• Obviously, it's an issue that matters personally.
• It's been forced to change a lot because of these budgetary issues.
• I'll take each of those issues one at a time.
• And personally, that transfer is not an abstract policy issue.

Summary: The committee held an oversight hearing on a state audit examining California’s community college transfer process and whether streamlining it could improve access to bachelor’s degrees. Opening remarks from legislators emphasized that California’s transfer system is central to equity and workforce development, but that only about one in five transfer-intending community college students complete a transfer within four years. Members highlighted disparities by race, region, campus, and major, and pointed to confusion created by differing requirements across the UC, CSU, and community college systems, including limits and inconsistencies in the Associate Degree for Transfer (ADT), TAG, and major-specific prerequisites. State Auditor’s staff said the audit found that while UC and CSU systemwide enroll more transfer students than the Master Plan target, individual campuses and high-demand STEM programs often do not. The audit identified barriers including unclear and varying course requirements, limited counseling and education plans, insufficient counselor staffing at some campuses, and weak equity plans. It also found that many students never even apply because they do not accumulate enough units or cannot navigate the process. The auditor described examples where transfer students with strong preparation were denied at selective campuses and noted that articulation alignment across systems remains limited. Representatives from UC, CSU, and the Community Colleges responded that transfer remains a top priority and described ongoing reforms. UC cited a new public dashboard, data-sharing agreements, new transfer pathways, and an ADT pilot at UCLA, while saying campus-level capacity and program differences limit how much can be standardized from the system office. CSU said it admits more than 90% of eligible transfer applicants, is expanding transfer planning tools and direct outreach, and is implementing SB 640’s Transfer Success Pathway Program. Community Colleges said transfer reform must focus on clearer credit mobility, more consistent articulation, and broader ADT adoption. Members pressed the systems on inconsistent major requirements, the need for better coordination, and whether campuses are fully prioritizing transfer students; no votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that's why on the budget level, this is a big, big, important issue.
• That fund is utilized to invest in tier two and tier three issues.
• It is assuming that all the allowances sell, which is not something that's a guarantee.
• The refineries are leaving, and I think that's a real issue.
• So there's no guarantee that any of those allowances would come back into the market.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Environmental Quality Committee and Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 held a joint hearing on CARB’s proposed amendments to the cap-and-invest regulations. Opening remarks from senators emphasized the 2025 reauthorization of the program through AB 1207 and SB 840, and focused on whether CARB’s April revisions faithfully implement legislative intent while balancing climate ambition, affordability, leakage prevention, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). Several senators raised concerns that the proposal could reduce GGRF revenues, weaken funding for transit, affordable housing, wildfire prevention, drinking water, and other community programs, and shift too much support toward industry. Others stressed the need to protect businesses and consumers from higher costs and to avoid leakage and refinery closures. Senator Cortese’s statement, read into the record, warned that the proposal could jeopardize transportation funding commitments. CARB Chair Lauren Sanchez said the amendments respond to legislative direction and public comment, and described four main changes: increased electric bill credits, a larger manufacturing decarbonization incentive (MDI), additional compliance support for industry, and removal of post-2030 allowance allocations from the current rulemaking. She said the proposal keeps the cap aligned with 2030 and 2045 targets, maintains affordability protections, and is intended to reduce emissions while minimizing leakage and supporting in-state jobs. CARB staff also said the MDI would have guardrails, require applications and reporting, and be tied to emissions-reducing facility upgrades. The Department of Finance explained that GGRF revenue estimates are highly uncertain and are updated periodically based on auction data. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the amendments are significant and could materially affect environmental ambition, industry support, utility credits, and GGRF revenues. LAO highlighted that the MDI could add allowances above the cap, potentially reducing certainty that 2030 targets will be met, and noted that the proposal appears to shift more allowances to industry and fewer to GGRF than current regulations. LAO also said the proposed GGRF estimate of about $8 billion through the decade could be insufficient to fully fund lower-priority tiers of programs. In questioning, senators pressed CARB on whether the proposal would raise consumer costs, whether free allowances or MDI funds would actually lower prices at the pump, how leakage is measured, and whether the Legislature’s budget assumptions would need to be revised before final action. No votes were taken during the hearing; the discussion was informational and focused on questioning CARB and fiscal staff ahead of the board’s planned May 28 consideration of the amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, an issue that they are running into is the, uh, long process that it has to go through to be sold
• So I can't guarantee that it would be the full 600, but it would be a large percentage of it. >> I have
• . uh an issue they would like to sell. uh an issue that<00:03:17.440> they<00:03:17.760> are
• So I can't guarantee<00:05:06.320> that<00:05:06.479> it<00:05:06.639> would<00:
• They still have to have a guaranteed savings.

Keywords: Universities and Colleges - Room 216, 3 March, 2026; 11:00 AM, 925, all

Summary: The committee first considered a strike-all related to the Mississippi Upskill Grant Program and a K-12 bridge bill tied to CTE and special purpose schools. Members discussed the alignment of workforce and career-technical education from pre-K through higher education. Senator Hopson moved to add a reverse repealer, which was adopted, and the strike-all was then passed as amended and forwarded to appropriations. The committee then took up Senate Bill 1488, which would authorize the University of Southern Mississippi to sell or enter into a long-term lease for university property in Hattiesburg. Senator Johnson explained that the roughly 600-acre tract, gifted in the 1920s and formerly used as a golf course, has a master plan for redevelopment; the bill would streamline the sale process while preserving requirements such as two appraisals and IHL approval. After questions about the acreage and safeguards, the bill was passed as amended and sent to appropriations. Members also approved a strike-all addressing financial literacy requirements for colleges and universities, including added content on mortgages and real estate, and then passed House Bill 1495, a companion to Senate Bill 2238, allowing Mississippi State University and the Oktibbeha County school district to co-mingle funds by mutual agreement for their partnership school/high school project. Finally, House Bill 1582 on community college energy performance contracts was discussed at length; the chair said it needed further vetting by the public property committee, so the committee added a reverse repealer and passed the bill as amended. The meeting ended with a rise and report.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sometimes, often, if you look at the advertising, just go Google it, they guarantee a result.
• This follows the same playbook, and it's a huge Issue.
• There were two issues raised: both an issue of lawyers, who I heard were both accredited.
• That is one issue that seems very different than the issue of the folks who are not accredited.
• Those are two issues we should talk about, both of them.

Transcript Highlights:

• But if you are guaranteed 30 slots and you're only filling 10, we can't guarantee and hold the funding
• and it's getting to be a bigger issue across.
• They issued a report on September 1, 2003.
• Auden and Picus issued their recalibration report in August 2006, and the subcommittee issued a separate
• And the subcommittee issues a separate report. report in August 2006 and the subcommittee issues a separate

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the previous minutes and then focused on an update from the Department of Education on early childhood programs, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ongoing work to review ABC slots, which have been flat for years at about 23,800 slots and roughly $114 million. They said about 1,000 slots statewide are currently unfilled despite a waiting list of more than 2,000 families, and the department is shifting toward paying based on enrollment rather than guaranteed slots. Members asked about school choice, income eligibility, year-round access, curriculum flexibility, transportation, and whether funding should be increased or rebalanced; the department said it is collecting data, may survey providers more formally, and is considering whether to modernize income thresholds, daily rates, and other program rules. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical information on income limits and other program details. The second major portion of the meeting was a legal presentation on the framework for Arkansas school adequacy by BLR education attorney Taylor Lloyd. She reviewed the constitutional basis for a “general, suitable, and efficient” public school system, the Dupree and Lake View cases, and the principle that adequacy and equity are different but related: adequacy asks what resources are needed, while equity asks whether those resources are distributed fairly. She explained that the General Assembly must define adequacy, study it, and react to evidence over time, and that the current adequacy definition includes curriculum and career/technical frameworks, the 38 mandatory Carnegie units, state testing standards, and sufficient funding. She also described the matrix as a funding tool, not a spending mandate, and noted that categorical funds are separate from the matrix. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum then gave the historical framework, tracing legislative responses from Dupree through Lake View and into the present. She highlighted major changes such as the creation of equalization funding, fiscal distress and academic distress laws, the adequacy study process, the Educational Adequacy Fund, facilities and transportation changes, declining enrollment and student growth funding, and later adjustments to teacher salaries, isolated funding, and categorical programs. She explained that the adequacy study has evolved through committee hearings, surveys, site visits, and outside consultants, and that recent changes include updates to accountability references and the addition or removal of certain funding categories. Members asked follow-up questions about how the matrix is used, whether homeschool or private-school funding raises comparable issues, whether stakeholders include private and homeschool participants, whether school board members should be surveyed, and whether the state should revisit average daily membership versus attendance-based funding. No votes were taken on the adequacy presentations, but the committee did agree to continue the early childhood discussion in a future subcommittee meeting.