Transcript Highlights:

• authorizer responsibilities, they have the following ones: to review applications for new schools, determine
• applications for new schools, determine applications for new schools, determine whether<00:03:12.560
• change in authorizers, and determine change in authorizers, and determine whether<00:03:21.680><
• end of the contract to determine end of the contract to determine renewal,<00:03:50.560> non-renewal
• if a charter school is ready determining if a charter school is ready to<00:05:08.880> open,<

Bills: HF3487, HF3421

Keywords: anonymous reporting, school safety, education, crisis intervention, threat reporting, early literacy, reading instruction, teacher preparation, teacher candidates, teacher licensure, educator licensing, Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, PELSB, field experience, supervised practicum, evidence-based reading, science of reading, literacy methods, teacher training, preservice teachers

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:20:43.039> what one person, you know, determining what one person, you know, determining
• <00:28:08.640> work<00:28:09.039> has determination of whether a work has determination
• Those are very subjective determinations. determinations. determinations.
• ,<00:33:49.919> I school making that determination, I school making that determination, I
• <01:05:06.240> risk the position of having to determine risk the position of having to determine

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's hard to determine whether or not you're having a real drought condition.
• So, they would have the authority to determine the drought.
• What are we measuring to determine the route? I'm a little of both.
• So what they want to determine, because you're giving it to a bunch of people, it would be different
• So their role, their responsibility is to determine rules, adopt rules for determining whether Their

Transcript Highlights:

• The council's criteria to determine fields of study for a STEM plus H bachelor's degree. Thank you.
• <00:08:08.800> to ultimately the work group determined to ultimately the work group determined
• <00:09:15.160> the metrics one to one the determin the metrics one to one the determin the
• by the legislation and as determined by the work group.
• by the legislation and as determined by the legislation and as determined<00:20:53.280> by<00

Keywords: 0:01– Meeting start/roll call 0:34 – Approval of minutes 0:48 – Welcome of new committee members 1:34 – Council on Postsecondary Education 25:17 – Teachers’ Retirement System 27:00 – Kentucky Public Pension Authority 29:04 – Board of Veterinary Examiners 31:40 – Board of Nursing 34:01 – Board of Emergency Medical Services 36:15 – Fish & Wildlife Resources 40:34 – Department of Corrections 56:00 – Department of State Police 58:05 – Department of Criminal Justice Training 59:22 – Transportation Cabinet 1:00:18 – Department of Education 1:01:23 – Department of Employment Services 1:04:17 – Department of Workplace Standards 1:05:25 – Department of Housing, Buildings & Construction 1:06:59 – Cabinet for Health & Family Services, Dept. for Public Health (Sanitation) 1:13:50 – Cabinet for Health & Family Services, Dept. for Public Health (Trauma System) 1:17:46 – Cabinet for Health & Family Services, Dept. for Public Health (Radon) 1:18:30 – Cabinet for Health & Family Services, Dept. for Medicaid Services 1:19:15 – Cabinet for Health & Family Services, Dept. of Aging Services 1:20:36 – Other Business/Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met with a quorum, approved the minutes, and welcomed new members before taking up Council on Postsecondary Education regulations 13 KAR 2:120 and 13 KAR 2:130. The regulations, as amended by staff and agency amendments, update public university and KCTCS performance funding models to conform to 2024 Senate Bill 191 and the performance funding work group’s recommendations. Changes discussed included replacing the underrepresented minority metric with an underrepresented students metric defined as first-generation students, adding an adult learner metric, increasing the low-income degree premium, adjusting small-school and nonresident credit-hour weights, revising data aging and progression metrics, and adding STEM+H criteria in 13 KAR 2:120. Travis Pal of the Council on Postsecondary Education explained that the changes reflect the work group’s three-year review process and that the work group ultimately voted to define underrepresented students as first-generation students and to apply half-weighting between research and comprehensive universities for the new metric. Michael Frasier of the Kentucky Student Rights Coalition and Eastern Kentucky University student government opposed 13 KAR 2:120, arguing that the regulation improperly applies weights where the statute does not clearly authorize them and that the funding changes disadvantage comprehensive universities and vulnerable students. He asked the committee to find the regulation deficient or, alternatively, recommend legislative clarification and a revised fiscal analysis. Pal responded that weighting has been part of the model since 2017, that CPE was following the statute and work group recommendations, and that the model could be changed by future legislation. Members asked about the timing of the broader performance funding review, and Pal said the full model is reviewed every three years, with the next work group cycle beginning in 2026. No motion to find the regulation deficient was made, and the committee allowed the regulations to proceed to the committee of jurisdiction. The committee then approved a staff amendment to Teachers’ Retirement System regulations 102 KAR 1:195 and 102 KAR 1:340, which require annual reporting of accumulated sick leave, leave policies, and salary schedules to TRS and make technical changes to the final average salary calculation and related definitions.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's comparing it against the definitions that we just talked about to determine if they qualify as
• How do you all go about determining that?
• <00:15:34.720> a objective criteria determine that a objective criteria determine that a system
• do you all go about determining that? do you all go about determining that?
• Ask if the projects really aren't determined yet.

Keywords: 0:20 Rollcall 2:28 Definition of Legacy system and demands of modern workplaces 10:48 Discussion of funding and planned expenditures 22:26 Contingency funding 23:16 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The House Budget Review Subcommittee on Personnel, Public Retirement, and Finance heard a presentation from the Commonwealth Office of Technology on legacy IT modernization funds and how they are used to address outdated, unsupported, or unsustainable systems. David Carter and Carrie Welch explained the state’s definition of a legacy system under KRS 7A.180, emphasizing not only vendor support issues but also changing business needs, regulatory compliance, and the loss of institutional knowledge for older systems. They described the office’s review process for determining whether a project qualifies, including assessing business risk, comparing options such as upgrades, replacements, shared solutions across agencies, or commercial products, and then matching the project to available funding. The presenters said COT reports twice a year to the Interim Joint Committee on Appropriations and Revenue on progress with legacy modernization projects. They reported 30 projects funded to date, with 18 completed, and said remaining projects are still moving forward while agencies continue to identify modernization needs. They highlighted examples of completed work, including modernized security cameras, replacement of unsupported systems, migration of documents to the Commonwealth Enterprise Content Management Platform, restoration of vendor support, a digital policy acknowledgement portal, replacement of the State Police dispatch system, and digitization of paper records for faster retrieval and better disaster resilience. Members asked for more detail on how the $10 million request would be allocated, including system-by-system spending, the split between software, hardware, vendor contracts, and staff time, and how the office determines when a system needs replacement. COT said it did not have a system-by-system or cost-category breakdown at the hearing but could provide one later, and explained that the funds are intended for development and first-time acquisition costs rather than ongoing maintenance. They also said the $5 million annual request was based on prior years’ experience and that agencies often contribute some funding themselves, so the program could still operate if appropriated less than the full amount. The committee then approved the minutes and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• If different uh monetary determinations.
• you know, could be they're determined you know, could be they're determined not<00:08:44.800>
• >> um and that determines what your WBA is.
• >> um and that determines what your WBA is.
• you were to determine. you were to determine.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• factors of what should determine a resident trust.
• factors of what should determine a resident trust.
• factors of what should determine a resident trust. 1995 as a determinative factor about how resident
• administered in Minnesota is determined administered in Minnesota is determined by<00:59:42.000>
• determinative determinative factor<01:04:00.039> is<01:04:00.160> it<01:04:00.480>

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Tax Committee first approved the minutes from the previous meeting and then took up Senate File 11 at the request of the Judiciary Committee. The bill was removed from the table, recommended to pass, and referred to Judiciary. Members explained that the request was tied to data practices language in the bill and Judiciary’s jurisdiction over that subject. The committee then heard Senate File 268, as amended by the A1 amendment. Senator Nelson said the bill would extend a sales tax exemption for certain physician-prescribed, non-durable medical goods to publicly and privately held health plans, aligning them with treatment already given to Medicare, Medicaid, and other government-paid plans. Testifiers from Corner Home Medical and the industry said current tax rules are confusing, audits are burdensome and expensive, and providers often end up paying tax themselves because insurers do not pay retroactively. They argued the bill would reduce administrative burden and create parity in the tax code. The committee adopted the A1 amendment and laid the bill over. Finally, the committee heard Senate File 88, also amended by an A1 technical change. Senator Klein said the bill is intended to prevent the Department of Revenue from issuing retroactive assessments when taxpayers relied in good faith on prior audit guidance, so long as there was no material change in law, court interpretation, federal adjustment, or written notice from the commissioner. Department of Revenue staff said they had no formal position but explained how the bill would affect sample audits and noted it would require more detailed written guidance; they said normal audits would not change much. Supporters from the CPA Society and several senators said the bill would provide certainty and protect taxpayers from unexpected back taxes, while one senator questioned whether the bill was needed and whether it would bypass settlement or litigation. The bill was laid over after discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• It would require the State Board of Education or the superintendent of the state police to determine
• Income will be determined by the United States Census Bureau.
• The first multiplier is to be determined by the West Virginia median income.
• The first multiplier is to be determined by the West Virginia median income.
• Income will be determined by the United States Census Bureau.

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with a quorum present and approved the minutes from the prior meeting. The committee first reconsidered House Bill 5212, restoring a technical amendment from the Education Committee, then reported the amended bill to the full Senate with a do pass recommendation and adopted the title amendment. It also heard and advanced House Bill 407 on the Industrial Access Road Fund, allowing an additional possible $3 million transfer in some years, expanding eligible uses, and raising county/municipal spending caps; the Economic Development Committee’s technical amendment was adopted before the bill was reported. The committee then took up House Bill 4765, which would raise salary schedules for state police, teachers, and school service personnel and was amended with a strike-and-insert provision creating a market pay enhancement tied to county and regional income data. Several senators objected that the proposal would benefit only some counties, but the amendment was adopted by division vote, 10-6, and the bill was reported. Other bills reported included House Bill 5162 on tax lien sale procedures, House Bill 5382 extending the Neighborhood Investment Tax Credit Program to 2031, House Bill 5685 authorizing up to $150 million in revenue bonds for State Culture Center improvements backed by excess lottery funds, House Joint Resolution 42 raising the homestead exemption from $20,000 to $40,000, House Bill 4010 creating an airport hangar grant program, House Bill 4404 increasing volunteer fire departments’ spending cap for training and promotional materials, and House Bill 4592 requiring standardized campus safety mapping data at higher education institutions after an amendment changed the requirement from permissive to mandatory. The committee also reported House Bill 4784 extending the qualified opportunity zone business tax modification, House Bill 5088 increasing benefits in the DNR police officer retirement system with a $4.25 million cash injection, and several supplemental appropriations: Senate Bill 842 for the Spay-Neuter Assistance Fund, Senate Bill 846 for Culture and History repairs and equipment, Senate Bill 872 for DNR repairs and equipment after reducing the amount to $10 million, Senate Bill 876 for three state hospitals, Senate Originating Bill 1 for Culture and History, Senate Originating Bill 2 for highway spending authority, Senate Originating Bill 3 for corrections IT and special services, Senate Originating Bill 4 for tobacco education, and Senate Originating Bill 5 for the Armory Board. The committee adjourned after reporting all listed measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• This proposal would limit the Legislature's authority to determine how school districts, county offices
• “Is that how we determine 2025–26, in the current budget, that the Tier 2 rate should be $1,579?
• Who is determining?
• a systemwide baseline transferability determination.
• So they’re still determining exactly where and how they would have the curricula implemented.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on three education budget items: the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), differentiated assistance/statewide system of support, and universal school meals plus kitchen infrastructure grants. For ELOP, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to provide $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding and $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended instead fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579, and committee members questioned how the rate was determined, how much funding is actually spent, and whether overlapping funding from ELOP, ACEs, and 21st Century programs is being tracked. CDE said ELOP is showing positive attendance and math outcomes, but some requested data will not be available until mid-2027; members also raised concerns about double-funding, transparency, and whether middle and high school students are being equitably served. On differentiated assistance, CCEE outlined the statewide system of support and the various tiers of universal, targeted, supplemental, and intensive assistance. Finance explained the Governor’s proposal to replace the current DA structure with a more stable universal and targeted assistance model, funded at $131.9 million ongoing, with a three-year support cycle aligned to LCAP and ESSA timelines and broader State Board authority to revise eligibility criteria. The LAO objected to considering the proposal before the State Board finalizes the new performance criteria, and committee members expressed concern that moving to a three-year cycle could delay support for LEAs that newly fall into need mid-cycle. There was also discussion about whether the proposal would weaken subgroup-based equity guardrails or give the State Board too much discretion over who qualifies for support. For school meals and kitchen infrastructure, Finance proposed $1.8 billion ongoing for universal meals and an additional $100 million ongoing plus $100 million one-time for a fourth round of kitchen infrastructure and training grants. The LAO recommended rejecting the new kitchen grant round because prior rounds are still being spent and the unmet need is not yet clear. CDE said prior investments have improved meal participation, efficiency, and menu variety, but many schools still lack the facilities for scratch cooking and face construction, electrical, and procurement barriers. Members asked for more data on how prior grants were used, which schools are benefiting, and whether funds could also support lower-cost food access strategies such as pantries, while noting federal restrictions on some meal-service innovations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Compliance with this policy by municipalities shall be determined by the EOEA Secretary based on the
• DCAM does not have the authority to just go make those decisions or make those determinations.
• Once that determination is made, the proper bill is drawn up for the legislature to determine whether
• That is subject to Chapter 164 that we've been discussing was determined to be Article 97.
• , where I don't have an interest, and were an argument... ...determined to need Article 97 action.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight held an oversight hearing on draft regulations implementing Article 97 of the Massachusetts Constitution under Chapter 274 of the Acts of 2022, the Open Space Act. Chairs Cabral and Collins framed the hearing as a review of how the new process for dispositions or changes in use of Article 97 land would work, including public notice, environmental justice protections, replacement land, appraisals, and the role of the legislature. Under Secretary Stephanie Cooper and Commissioner Adam Bakke testified for EEA/DCAM, followed later by Deputy Inspector General O’Neill and Deputy Inspector General Giles on appraisal review. Much of the discussion focused on how the draft regulations would operate in practice. EEA said the regulations would require advance public notice, define “comparable location” for replacement land, and allow the Secretary to make findings on whether an action would adversely affect environmental justice communities. Members pressed for longer public comment periods, clearer notice to local officials, more frequent updates to the site evaluation tool, and a clearer definition of terms such as “limited duration” for permits and licenses. EEA said the regulations are intended to standardize a process that has been handled through policy and case-by-case review, and that the legislature still retains the final authority to approve any Article 97 disposition. Committee members also questioned whether the draft rules shift too much discretion to the Secretary and whether the proposed “proponent” process could allow private entities to drive Article 97 actions. EEA responded that non-public proponents would still need municipal support and legislative sponsorship, and that the regulations do not create a new avenue to bypass the existing home rule and legislative process. Members raised concerns about the current policy’s unanimous-vote requirements for municipal commissions, the proposed waiver provisions, whether MEPA applies, and the lack of explicit enforcement or penalty language in the act or regulations. EEA and DCAM said the act does not provide an enforcement mechanism and that disputes would generally be handled through the courts or the Attorney General. The Inspector General’s office explained its role in reviewing appraisals for special legislation, including Article 97 matters, to ensure compliance with USPAP standards and to forward its review to DCAM. The hearing did not include any votes or formal committee action; members indicated that the committee may later issue recommendations to the executive agencies based on the testimony and questions raised.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the fix to that will be that we'll address that by moving eligibility determination to the governing
• That would be up to the local school district to determine.
• or would that be determined by the district who the highest paid administrator is?
• Those have to be determined before you can verify eligibility.
• And then, lastly, once they're determined eligible, that's not just in perpetuity, right?

Summary: The Pre-K through 12 Budget Subcommittee met with a quorum and first heard House Bill 731, which would address coach and extracurricular sponsor compensation and change how student-athlete transfer eligibility is determined. The bill would allow local school boards to adopt policies letting booster clubs or similar associations support coaches and activity sponsors, and it would let superintendents treat certain coaches and athletic leaders as administrative personnel for compensation purposes. It would also shift eligibility decisions for transferred student-athletes to the governing athletic association and require clearer bylaws and timelines for those determinations. Members raised questions about booster club oversight, pay equity, the new athletic administrator language, and safeguards against abuse or unequal treatment, while supporters argued the bill would help retain coaches and better support student athletics. The bill was debated and then reported favorably by roll call vote. The committee then received presentations from the Department of Education’s Division of Early Learning and the Florida Association of Early Learning Coalitions on school readiness fraud prevention and mitigation. Speakers explained that Florida’s school readiness program pays providers based on verified attendance rather than enrollment, requires daily parent sign-in/sign-out records, and uses multiple layers of oversight including coalition anti-fraud plans, annual audits, programmatic monitoring, DCF inspections, and referrals to state fraud investigators when needed. They emphasized that Florida delayed implementation of a federal rule that would have required prospective enrollment-based payments, and said the state’s current system makes fraud difficult. Members asked about military and grandparent guardianship situations, audit findings, and the number of fraud referrals; presenters said fraud cases are relatively limited and that the existing controls and public enforcement act as deterrents. The meeting ended after members thanked the presenters and the committee adjourned without further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, if a determination is not made or a notice is not issued within 180 days after the complaint
• Fourth, if a veterinarian determines that the animal is unfit for purchase, any financing arrangement
• This one question: Who determines what is critical, or what is a critical security interest?
• determination.
• determination.

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard a long agenda of bills, beginning with several probate, civil rights, and claims measures. Senators Burgess’s SB 326 on curators of estates was explained as a modernization of probate law; an amendment narrowing the bill was adopted, and the committee reported the bill favorably 10-0 after limited public testimony, including opposition from Ray Contreras. Burgess’s SB 1096, clarifying filing deadlines under the Florida Civil Rights Act, also passed unanimously 11-0. The committee then approved several claims bills, including SB 28 for Reginald Jackson against the City of Lakeland, SB 6 for a child injured after DCF’s handling of abuse allegations, SB 18 for the estate of McKenzie Navarre against the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, SB 26 for the estate of Mark Legata against FDOT, and SB 2 for the estate of Daniel Maudsley against DHSMV, with votes ranging from 10-1 to 11-0 and mostly no debate or opposition. The committee also took up trust and family-law related bills. Leader Berman’s SB 786 created a nonjudicial process for closing uncontested trusts and discharging trustees; after a technical amendment and testimony from Ray Contreras raising notice concerns, it passed 11-0. President Gates’s SB 50 expanded veterans’ courts statewide, drew broad support from veterans’ groups and advocacy organizations, and was reported favorably 11-0. Senator Simon’s SB 538 standardized extracurricular participation rules for public, private, virtual, and homeschool students; after multiple amendments on homeschool eligibility, fees, and coach compensation, it passed 11-0 with support and opposition from education-related groups. President Gates’s SB 1004, aimed at consumer protections in the sale of dogs and cats, also passed unanimously after testimony from humane organizations. The committee then considered broader policy bills. President Pro Tem Brodeur’s SB 1366 on claims against the government proposed raising sovereign immunity caps and adding CPI adjustments; local government, hospital, and school representatives supported the Senate’s lower-cap approach while warning against the House version, and the bill was reported favorably 11-0. Senator Jones’s SB 178 on athletics in public K-12 schools, as amended, would let head coaches provide limited personal support to student-athletes and require reporting of assistance; it passed 10-0. Senator Grohl’s SB 1178 on foreign influence and foreign countries of concern drew extensive supportive testimony from national security witnesses and was reported favorably 11-0 after a technical amendment and withdrawal of another amendment. Finally, SB 1632 on ideologies inconsistent with American principles prompted substantial debate and public testimony over domestic terrorism designations, Sharia law references, due process, and free speech concerns; the committee had not yet completed final action on that bill when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• And special health care needs, it is the determination to be eligible medical service is based on an
• determination for the Medicaid program.
• When it is determined eligible for Medicaid or CHIP, child information is provided to the Department
• of Health to conduct a clinical eligibility determination for the child.
•   94 OF THE CHILD IS DETERMINED TO NOT MEET CLINICAL  ELIGIBILITY FOR THE CMS MANAGED CARE

Summary: The Health Facilities Subcommittee met to receive implementation updates from the Agency for Health Care Administration on three bills passed in prior sessions. First, Deputy Secretary Brian Meyer reported on the transfer of the Children’s Medical Services managed care plan from the Department of Health to AHCA under HB 1085. He said the move was administrative only, with no change to enrollment, providers, services, or clinical eligibility functions, and that it was intended to create efficiencies by aligning procurement and shifting staff resources between agencies. Members then questioned AHCA about reports of reductions in private duty nursing and therapy services for medically fragile children, including concerns about appeals, provider credentialing, and whether families were losing services or being transitioned appropriately. AHCA said it was reviewing denials, monitoring the plan, and using contractual remedies while focusing on maintaining access for members. The committee also reviewed implementation of a bill creating permanent Medicaid eligibility for individuals with permanent disabilities. AHCA staff explained that the agency had submitted a federal 1115 waiver request after public comment and stakeholder meetings, but CMS had indicated it did not anticipate approving the requested authority. Members pressed AHCA on why the waiver was submitted later than the bill’s directive date and on whether the delay was avoidable. AHCA said the waiver was complex and required review, drafting, and public input, and noted that DCF already has a specialized unit to help with redeterminations while the agencies work on operational changes. The committee discussed the practical impact on families who struggle with annual eligibility renewals and the need for clearer communication and faster follow-up from the agency. Finally, AHCA presented on the home health aide program for medically fragile children and related Medicaid eligibility changes. The agency described the 2023 law that created a family caregiver provider type and the 2025 changes that increased the hourly rate, expanded hours, reduced training requirements, and removed caregiver earnings from Medicaid eligibility calculations, subject to federal approval. AHCA said it had completed state public comment, submitted the waiver amendment to CMS, and was awaiting federal action. Members raised concerns that some families may have enrolled or begun work before the eligibility fix was in place and may have lost benefits, especially in Broward County. AHCA said it would work with affected families and plans, review outreach through DCF and the health plans, and continue rulemaking, system updates, and provider training. The meeting ended with the chair noting that the committee had received the updates and adjourned without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• There have been varying criteria prosecutors use to determine who gets put on a Brady Gigglio list.
• how Brady Gigglio process of determining how Brady Gigglio material<00:13:40.399> will<00:13:
• legislature originally determined legislature originally determined warranted<00:52:58.800> those
• <01:04:28.960> not and permit to acquire determinations not and permit to acquire determinations
• determine eligibility. determine eligibility.

Bills: HF962, HF3541, HF2936, HF3762, HF2879

Keywords: Capitol security, public safety, emergency management, state buildings, law enforcement, corrections, legislative approval, rule-making, financial impact, jail regulations, expungement, firearm eligibility, criminal records, organized retail crime, retail theft, supply chain theft, theft enterprise, organized theft, cargo theft, shoplifting

Transcript Highlights:

• So what’s the determination for this?
• hardship determination.
• > determination<00:57:22.839> best educational hardship determination best educational
• <01:04:08.520> by interest of the child is determined by interest of the child is determined
• <01:19:54.280> is than what the state has determined is than what the state has determined

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Most of our jobs are described and determined by our classification system. So we have a process.
• And determined by our classification system.
• is done by the legislature and by your staff and by OFM budget throughout that process to determine
• So all of those will factor into your determination as to whether to fund those contracts.
• The arbitrator reviews the evidence and determines an agreement.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Employment Relations met on May 8, 2026, to receive updates on upcoming collective bargaining for the 2027–29 biennium. OFM’s Jenny Sheehan reviewed the state workforce, noting that most employees are represented, the workforce remains constrained by hiring limits and civil service rules, and bargaining goals include financially feasible agreements, maintaining labor relations, supporting an inclusive workplace, and addressing issues such as AI use, leave, and immigration-related workplace protections. She also outlined the bargaining calendar, the role of the June revenue forecast in determining what compensation proposals can be funded, and the need to reach tentative agreements by September 2026 for October 1 submission and legislative consideration. She described recent bargaining themes from unions, including limits on AI, expanded leave, access to union members in hybrid workplaces, and classification changes, and she summarized prior-cycle costs, including about $1.2 billion in general funds and $1.7 billion in total funds for 2025–27 awards, excluding the delayed WPEA agreements that were later funded after a return to bargaining. The committee then heard from Western Washington University and the University of Washington on higher education bargaining. Western described its locally bargained contracts, the importance of re-opener clauses tied to state budget decisions, and concerns about the instability of the state “fund split,” which shifts compensation costs between state funds and tuition revenue. Western also emphasized that student employees are increasingly central to retention and urged inclusion of student compensation in the wage base. UW similarly described its large and diverse workforce, the split between RCW 41.56 and 41.80 bargaining frameworks, and the reliance on state funding, tuition, and other revenue sources to cover compensation increases. UW highlighted the financial strain of the fund split, the lack of state funding for academic student employee compensation, and the impact of rising ASE costs on class sizes and the university’s teaching and research missions. OFM also presented on Washington Management Service bargaining, explaining that only certain WMS employees are covered, that bargaining began in 2024, and that current agreements include addenda for WMS-specific provisions. The presentation noted that WMS bargaining is still limited in scope, with only a few represented units, and that compensation bargaining generally covers band minimums and maximums rather than all salary levels. Finally, OFM reviewed interest arbitration rules for certain state employee groups, explaining that arbitration is available for some essential-service and statutorily covered employees, that arbitrators decide disputed contract language based on statutory criteria, and that awards still must be found financially feasible by OFM. Committee members asked about PFML treatment, the timing of arbitration, and the budget pressures facing bargaining, and the meeting adjourned without any votes or formal actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill also creates legal confusion: how do we define immediate danger, who determines responsibility
• and liability hard harder to determine and liability hard harder to determine finally<00:27:00.799
• by a reasonable person determined by a reasonable person standard<00:52:50.640> immediate<00:
• of immediate danger the determination of immediate danger shall<00:52:59.920> be<00:53:00.119
• <00:54:40.000> by vehicle conflict as determined by vehicle conflict as determined by enforcement

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The House Committee on Transportation met on March 18, 2025, to hear several measures and later take up amendments and votes. Early items included a budget measure to increase the mass transit special fund expenditure ceiling, a bill extending lapse dates for drug and alcohol toxicology testing laboratory funds, and a measure creating buffer zones for parking near crosswalks and intersections. Testimony on the crosswalk-parking bill was broadly supportive from transportation, law enforcement, planning, bicycling, public health, and advocacy groups, with the Department of Health emphasizing visibility and roadway safety. The committee also heard a bill establishing the Mokai air carrier subsidy program for Molokaʻi, which drew support from the Chamber of Commerce Hawaii and comments from the Department of Transportation. The committee then heard SB 106 on pedestrian rules, which generated mixed testimony: the Office of the Public Defender, Hawaii Appleseed, Hawaii Public Health Institute, Hawaii Workers Center, and the Department of Health supported it, while the Honolulu Police Department and Kīpuka Injury Prevention Coalition opposed it. Supporters argued the bill would reduce inequitable jaywalking enforcement and reflect a broader safety culture; opponents warned it could create confusion and risk. Members also discussed whether the bill would affect other traffic-code provisions and asked about crash data in other jurisdictions; the Department of Health said crashes had not increased in other places and cited California data showing decreased crashes and fatalities. In decision-making, the committee voted to pass SB 934 SD2 with amendments, with Representative Miyake reserving and Representative Cochran excused. It then passed SB 1526 SD2 with amendments. SB 1195 SD1 was also passed with amendments after the chair proposed adding language tying fines for illegal parking near crosswalks and intersections to the Safe Routes to School special fund and establishing a fine range of $100 to $500 per violation, with collected fines dedicated to pedestrian safety improvements. Members voiced support for the dedicated revenue source and community safety rationale. The committee next passed SB 1638 SD2 with amendments to strengthen the constitutional/public-purpose findings for subsidizing air carriers serving Molokaʻi and to add annual audit requirements and penalties for misuse of funds. The amended findings emphasized that affordable air service is essential for health care, employment, education, and overall well-being in remote island communities, and that the subsidy program is intended to improve access and competition while lowering costs for residents. The chair then recessed the meeting after the final vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• If it's determine jurisdiction.
• :39.920> screen<00:16:40.399> cases, determined useful to the screen cases, determined
• At a minimum, the determinations.
• fees<00:20:53.200> are commission determines its fees are commission determines its fees
• Court case that came up to determine Court case that came up to determine whether<00:55:45.760><

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee met to hear the Legislative Budget Assistant Office’s performance audit of the New Hampshire Commission for Human Rights. Auditors said the commission was inefficient and ineffective in investigating discrimination complaints and closing cases in a timely manner during fiscal years 2020 through 2023. The report contained 25 observations; the commission fully concurred with 24 and concurred in part with one. Auditors highlighted major problems with case processing delays, inaccurate case data, lack of a case management system, weak strategic planning and risk assessment, outdated and disorganized policies, confidentiality issues, expired administrative rules, fee-setting practices, incomplete financial-interest filings, and failure to complete required reports and reconciliations. Two recommendations, involving complaint screening and conciliation, may require legislative action. Several observations focused on the commission’s intake and investigation practices. Auditors said complaints may have been screened out before docketing, potentially preventing commissioner review required by statute, and that the investigation process lacked clear rules and guidance. They also found investigators were assigned non-investigative tasks, training was inadequate, interview requirements were unclear, supervisory duties were burdensome, and confidential information was not always protected by encrypted email. The audit recommended clearer administrative rules, better internal controls, more focused staffing, a supervisory investigator position, and improved training and documentation. Commission representatives said they had already made progress on several items since the audit began, including posting overdue biennial reports and moving toward a case management system expected to go live in June. They said they were working with EEOC counterparts and legal counsel, but emphasized staffing shortages and high turnover, noting the commission currently had nine people working out of 15 authorized positions, with three investigator vacancies and a vacant paralegal position. Committee members thanked the auditors and commission staff, discussed the history of the audit request, and raised concerns about how long the recommended corrective actions might take. The committee took no vote or formal action during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, that's what we're here to determine today, Mr.
• So, that's what we're here to determine today, Mr.
• So, that's what we're here to determine today, Mr.
• we learned and then for us to determine we learned and then for us to determine if<00:43:20.640>
• did you and your defense team determine did you and your defense team determine that<00:57:51.560

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If it is a potential unique wetland, then there is a field assessment, and if it is determined through
• Through this process, we determine that they really do deserve some extra protection.
• So I thought you would probably go to a wetland delineator, you know, to a professional to determine
• To determine whether it's vegetation, the soils, and what's the third one?
• So you're saying that they would not be consulted that this group would determine some of these areas

Bills: SB9

Keywords: wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands, Delaware, environmental sustainability, climate change, carbon sink, permitting process

Summary: The House Natural Resources and Energy Committee met to consider two Senate bills. SB 321, with Senate Amendment 1, would change community solar billing so subscribers receive one consolidated utility bill instead of separate bills from the utility and the solar provider. Supporters said the bill would simplify enrollment and payment, improve customer retention—especially for low-income customers—and include safeguards such as guaranteed savings and an escrow mechanism to prevent cost shifts to other ratepayers. After public testimony from solar developers, the Public Advocate, the Sierra Club, and others, the committee initially lacked enough members present to release the bill, so the vote was circulated to absent members and the bill was later reported out for floor action. The committee then heard SB 9, with Senate Amendment 1, a long-negotiated wetlands protection bill. The sponsor and DNREC explained that it would create a state non-tidal wetlands program with exemptions for certain agricultural, conservation, and routine activities, general permits for some lower-impact projects, and individual permits for higher-value wetlands. Witnesses described the bill as a compromise among environmental, agricultural, development, and local government stakeholders, while some members raised questions about flooding, landowner impacts, wetland delineation, and the role of the regulatory advisory committee. Public testimony was broadly supportive from environmental groups, the Farm Bureau, builders, engineers, and affordable housing advocates. The committee then voted to release SB 9 from committee. At the end of the meeting, members offered thanks and remarks recognizing the chair’s service and leadership on environmental and energy issues. Both bills were ultimately released from committee and reported out.