Transcript Highlights:

• ON THE POSTSECONDARY AUDIT METRICS THE FIRST IS ARE WE RETENTION RATE OR SUCCESS RATE?
• SUCCESS RATE AND CONTINUING EDUCATION AND ALSO THE EMPLOYED RATE.
• OR SUCCESS RATE METRIC AND 98.97% ARE MEETING THE CONTINUING EDUCATION OR EMPLOYMENT RATE METRICS AS
• WE MEASURE THE SUCCESS OF OUR PROGRAMS THROUGH GRADUATION RATES, JOB PLACEMENT RATES, AND EMPLOYER SATISFACTION
• A JOB PLACEMENT RATE OF 91 PERCENT AND A LICENSURE PASS RATE OF 98 PERCENT.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• SBA in 2023 had a default rate of 8.1% in 2024, which is more than double the default rate of 7A loans
• Six-year term and a 7.5 interest rate.
• The default rate has almost tripled.
• Delinquency and default rates.
• Our default rate hasn't changed.

Keywords: SBA, 7A loan program, underwriting standards, loan defaults, Community Advantage Program, small business funding, testimony

Summary: The committee meeting focused on discussions regarding the SBA's 7A loan program and its implementation challenges. Members raised significant concerns about recent changes to the underwriting standards, which have been criticized for leading to an increase in loan defaults. Ranking members expressed a desire for a return to stronger guidelines to protect taxpayers and ensure the program remains a viable source for small businesses struggling to secure funding. Testimonies from community lenders highlighted their efforts to support underserved communities and stressed the importance of the Community Advantage Program.

Transcript Highlights:

• if you're even a renter, the cost of insurance, the cost of property taxes, the cost of an interest rate
• As interest rates rise, as the cost of insurance rises, as property taxes rise, all of that is being
• of any mortgage that might exist rate of any mortgage that might exist the<00:01:57.640> cost
• then when it comes to uh interest rates then when it comes to uh interest rates interest<00:05:00.080
• rates are something that's interest rates are something that's that's<00:05:01.600> a<00:05:01.759

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Summary: Senator Eric Lucero testified about Minnesota’s housing affordability challenges, arguing that rising interest rates, insurance costs, property taxes, and construction expenses are being passed on to renters and homeowners. He said the core problem is supply and demand: demand has risen while supply has not kept pace, in part because fewer homeowners are selling or downsizing. Lucero said the legislature should look for ways to reduce costs without creating major new state expenses, especially in a budget year with a projected deficit. Lucero highlighted several policy ideas and bills. He said he has introduced a bill to exempt sales tax on building materials, which he argued would lower the final cost of new homes. He also said he is interested in reducing permit costs and examining other factors that affect construction costs, including materials and labor. On insurance and property taxes, he suggested lawmakers should consider reforms or relief measures, while noting that interest rates are largely beyond state control. The discussion also focused on homeowners associations and common interest communities. Lucero said he has been part of a bipartisan work group for about six months that reviewed public testimony and expert input, and that the group has now issued recommendations. He said he and other legislators plan to turn those recommendations into one or more bipartisan bills aimed at improving transparency, accountability, and reducing costs for homeowners. He closed by saying housing affordability affects everyone and that he believes there is momentum this year for reforms that support homeownership and generational wealth.

Transcript Highlights:

• with regards to setting the tax rate with regards to setting the tax rate under<00:18:37.360>
• <00:22:05.440> we<00:22:05.679> need<00:22:05.840> to rate we need to rate we need
• negative tax rates and you're setting negative tax rates and you're using<00:44:18.800> it<00
• on their municipal rate.
• is applied to the municipal rate.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , federal income tax rate.
• rough tax rate federal income tax rate rough tax rate federal income tax rate that<00:39:46.319>
• <01:46:46.920> interest<01:46:47.280> rate doing interest rate interest rate doing
• So when you stack the two, that's the total tax rate in that community, equalized tax rate.
• of arbitrary rate um or amount to a rate of arbitrary rate um or amount to a rate would<04:18:46.119

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee opened a public hearing on HB 402, a bill dealing with whether Education Freedom Account (EFA) payments should be described in state law as not constituting taxable income. The bill sponsor argued that the current statute is misleading because New Hampshire should not imply a federal tax result, and said the bill would remove that language and could also be amended to clarify that families should consult tax advisors. He emphasized that the measure was not intended to impose a state tax on EFAs, but to avoid giving inaccurate advice about possible federal tax liability. Testimony was divided. A retired representative and a tax preparer both opposed the bill, saying EFA payments are already treated consistently with IRS rules and that the bill would create confusion, administrative burden, and possible tax consequences for low- and moderate-income families. They argued the bill is a solution in search of a problem and warned that requiring 1099s could add costs for the scholarship organization and recipients. A tax attorney supported the bill’s repeal of the state language, saying New Hampshire should not put tax advice into statute and that the current wording is inaccurate because federal law, not state law, controls taxability. He cited IRS Section 117 and Publication 970, explaining that only some scholarship-like payments are tax-free and that many EFA-eligible expenses may not qualify for federal exemption. Members asked questions about what would be misleading, whether the bill was trying to tax EFAs, and the cost of issuing 1099s. The sponsor and witnesses repeatedly said the bill was not a state tax on voucher payments, but a clarification about federal tax treatment. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• From our inception of this, we have been raising rates, and by the time we're done raising rates, they
• Obviously, our rates were low to begin with, but this will put us in the top 15% of rates across the
• done raising rates they will have done raising rates they will have increased increased increased 700%
• will put us in the top 15% of rates will put us in the top 15% of rates across<00:04:58.320>
• Nominally, the 15% rate increase.

Bills: HF220, HF230, HF240, HF241, HF295, HF429, HF490, HF505, HF574, HF576, HF581, HF865, HF918, HF1085, HF1449, HF1452, HF1454, HF602

Keywords: HF220, Minnesota transportation, highway user tax distribution fund, trunk highway fund, Minnesota Department of Transportation, MnDOT, transportation finance, dedicated funds, funding restrictions, arts in transportation, cultural strategies, transportation project planning, project design, project construction, placemaking, public art, infrastructure spending, state statutes 161.045, HF230, Wyoming

Transcript Highlights:

• know at the 2 and a half million rate know at the 2 and a half million rate without<00:28:43.240
• We pay certain rates for them.
• We pay certain rates for them.
• We pay certain rates for them.
• We pay certain rates for them.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It would not go up near the rate.
• and as rates get compressed.
• rates that could be increased.
• What's your attrition rate? Are you?
• So right now our disposition rate... So right now our disposition rate is about 80 percent.

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• undergraduate rate is.
• , you know, on our existing rates.
• But under this, using those rates, those completion rates, the base is about 86 and a half.
• There's not different rates between completion rates between the campuses because the differences in
• We have different completion rates.

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review how North Dakota might identify and address low-producing academic programs and to discuss draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the NDUS explained that the State Board of Higher Education is already developing a system-wide policy, using models from other states such as Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Connecticut. She described how low-producing programs are typically flagged by multi-year enrollment or completion thresholds, then reviewed for workforce demand, mission fit, cost, accreditation, and regional need before any action is taken. Committee members asked about what counts as a program, how costs are analyzed, whether certificates are included, how exemptions work for mission-critical or high-demand fields, and whether the board or legislature should set the rules. Johnson said the board is the appropriate body to lead the process, but legislators could use funding leverage if they wanted to encourage action; the chair asked the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal uses fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder undergraduate rate of $7,000 per FTE and a graduate/professional rate of $10,500, plus incentives for completions in in-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council walked through the projected funding effects, noting that the model would increase funding for NDSU and reduce it for UND in the current biennium, with different results in the next biennium as enrollment changes are recognized. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the definition of in-demand programs, the treatment of research funding, and the exclusion of state-appropriated dollars from the external grants calculation. The chair emphasized that the numbers were illustrative and that appropriators would set the actual dollar amounts later. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. That model uses fall census FTE without a weighted economic factor, applies a higher undergraduate rate, and adds completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other completions. Members noted that the formula would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and discussed whether the nine institutions should be treated more uniformly or split into smaller groups because of their different missions and sizes. Committee members and staff repeatedly stressed that the formulas are still being refined and that some institutions would likely need hold-harmless adjustments or other transition measures. The meeting ended with the chair directing the committee to continue the discussion later and to expect further work on both the low-producing program policy and the funding formulas.

Transcript Highlights:

• We should have some flexibility to change rates.
• Now, what's really frustrating for Blue Cross is we just, change rates.
• Gress, it is very common in designing reimbursement rates for insurers.
• Don't they pay higher malpractice insurance rates though?
• Lussure, so your rate reimbursement rates went down.

Bills: HB2176, HB2333, HB2435, HB2447, HB2617, HB2683, HB2686, HB2725, HB2726, HB2906, HB2953, HB2958

Keywords: health care, licensure, complaints, investigation, safety, patient care, regulatory compliance, prosthetics, orthotics, health insurance, Medicare, medical necessity, disability rights, coverage, reimbursement, internationally trained physicians, medical board, clinical training, provisional license, healthcare workforce

Transcript Highlights:

• The first bill that we will call up is House File 3432, Representative Rower, resident tuition rates
• rates, but a different statute would rates, but a different statute would then<00:03:00.000> have<
• Um, I rates and not state financial aid.
• student tuition resident tuition rate. student tuition resident tuition rate.
• Um as far as resident tuition rates,<00:30:16.240> no.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not set billing rates.
• , workers' comp rates.
• A cash pay rate might be $10,000. The Medicare rate might be $900.
• Comparison to though, what rate medical rates are you comparing it to? Yes.
• To contradict that rate.

Bills: HB4806

Keywords: civil action, damages, health care services, noneconomic damages, negligence, legal standards, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the current tax rate in El Paso?
• Rating agencies look at the same factors.
• If you had interest rates of A rated community, and if it's, it's rating is A by rating agencies, if
• it does certificates of obligation, normally the rating is lower than that A rating of a general obligation
• I would take a look at the components of the tax rate.

Transcript Highlights:

• Since 1993, we have just done a blended rate, which essentially we're setting rates in April or May of
• much in line with the growth rates.
• With the growth rates. Okay, thank you.
• Some contracts list hourly rates for different services, but these rates are paid to contractors.
• Some contracts list hourly rates for different services, but these rates are paid to contractors and

Summary: The Employee Benefits Committee met to approve prior minutes, hear presentations on state employee health insurance, compensation, leave, and related policy issues, and then recess for lunch. PERS reviewed the history and structure of the state health plan, noting the long-standing state-paid family coverage, cost-control measures, wellness incentives, the current grandfathered PPO and high-deductible options, and the effects of recent benefit mandates such as insulin caps, prosthetic coverage, medication management, prescription copay changes, and ambulance balance-billing limits. Committee members questioned the fiscal impact of adding benefits and the possible cost of moving to a non-grandfathered plan, while PERS and HRMS emphasized that health insurance remains the top-ranked employee benefit and that any major plan changes should be considered carefully. HRMS also presented compensation comparisons showing state pay generally below private-market benchmarks, discussed targeted market equity adjustments, identified ongoing recruitment and retention concerns in fields like nursing, IT, engineering, and attorneys, and reviewed leave policies, tuition reimbursement, and family leave comparisons with neighboring states. Job Service provided labor market data showing low unemployment, high labor force participation, and wage growth that still trails some neighboring markets, and OMB explained that prevailing wage requirements apply to federally funded projects under Davis-Bacon, not to ordinary state contracts. After lunch, the committee took up the required process for health insurance mandate bills and adopted an amendment to Joint Rule 211. The amendment clarified that the deadline for submitting mandate measures is intended to allow time for all required reports, including both the cost-benefit analysis and any Employee Benefits Committee actuarial report, while leaving the existing deadline unchanged. The amendment was adopted on a roll call vote, with several members voting yes and a few no votes recorded. The committee then moved into its jurisdiction review of bill drafts, beginning with a bill that would automatically renew pre-tax dental and vision elections; members debated whether it had any actuarial or administrative impact on PERS or the state, and the chair explained that the committee’s role was only to decide whether further analysis was needed before later testimony and recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• and asked for a significant rate and asked for a significant rate increase<00:22:02.559> in
• substantial even with these rate substantial even with these rate increases<00:22:17.679> the
• We're looking at it from rate.
• We're looking at it from rate.
• We're looking at it from rate.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Your follow-up is that you don't know what the rate is until then?
• We know the rate and what we've been working for for the last two years.
• It's local to Oklahoma as to a rate that we want to establish.
• Number two is the school for the Blind graduation rate, and 3 is the school for the deaf graduation rate
• We're hoping to continue that rate moving into 27.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:27:30.320> in premium tax rate in premium tax rate in 20<00:27:32.960> 2010<00:
• <00:33:26.799> for<00:33:27.000> rates what they're negotiating for rates what they're
• or the New Hampshire rate.
• half do you know how those two tax rates half do you know how those two tax rates compared<00:42
• domicile rate or the New Hampshire rate domicile rate or the New Hampshire rate so<00:42:58.920>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Insurance Commissioner DJ Bettencourt on the New Hampshire Insurance Department budget. He said the department is self-funded through assessments on insurers based on New Hampshire premium volume, with about $8 billion in premiums written in the state and a department budget of roughly $15.5 million. He explained that the department has 88 authorized positions, eight vacancies, and that three full-time positions were unfunded after the governor’s requested 4% reduction exercise. He also said the department is trying to balance staffing needs with not overburdening carriers during a hard insurance market. A major topic was the department’s $2.6 million rebate to industry from the prior fiscal year, which Bettencourt described as a credit against the next assessment rather than a direct cash payment. Members questioned why that credit was not reflected as a reduction in the upcoming budget, and Bettencourt and staff explained that the budget assumes full staffing and full spending, with any year-end surplus returned to insurers. The commissioner said the department had added staff in recent years for succession planning and to preserve institutional expertise, and that the rebate reflects careful budgeting rather than excess spending. Members also asked about staffing changes by division, including positions unfunded in fraud, property and casualty examinations, life and health examinations, and tax. Bettencourt said fraud investigations remain strong and that the department can use outside contractors for examinations, with those costs billed to the company being examined. He also described the department’s examination process, including periodic financial exams and targeted market conduct reviews triggered by consumer complaints or trends. Additional questions covered OIT transfers, the department’s oversight of fully insured health coverage, the insurance premium tax and fines going to the general fund, and the department’s limited role in auto repair reimbursement disputes, where he said complaints have recently declined.

Transcript Highlights:

• Miranda, are these rates strictly residential? Residential-commercial? Rates strictly residential?
• The most common ones are meeting household income, water rates, water system size, unemployment rates
• , and poverty rates.
• The most common ones are meeting household income, water rates, water system size, unemployment rates
• , and poverty rates.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to review several interim studies and receive updates from the Department of Water Resources. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and welcomed Representative Hansen to the committee. Staff then reported that the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study had both satisfied the presentation requirements in their study directives, with no further required testimony unless members wanted additional information. The department’s main presentation focused on major water projects and agency operations. Reese Haas and staff updated members on the NAWS project, the Southwest Pipeline Project, Devils Lake outlet operations, low-head dam safety work, floodplain management repository implementation, data center water use, and the 2027 Water Development Plan. Members asked detailed questions about NAWS funding sources, remaining project costs, capacity concerns for All Seasons and other users, and whether current construction is being designed for future demand. The department said NAWS remains on track for substantial completion by October, that remaining NAWS funding will come from a mix of federal, state, and local sources, and that current construction is designed for ultimate capacity while some future components will be adjusted for increased demand. A large portion of the meeting was devoted to the department’s cash management, Resources Trust Fund revenues, carryover balances, and the State Water Commission’s cost-share program. The department reported $340.6 million in carryover remaining, explained that much of it is already obligated to long-term projects, and noted that oil price forecasts and stripper-well exemptions will affect future revenues. Members raised concerns about large carryovers, affordability for local sponsors, and whether the state should continue obligating money multiple bienniums ahead. The department said it is working with the commission on a revised prioritization framework, including high/moderate/low project categories and a two-tier pre-construction/construction approach, to better manage obligations and affordability. The committee also reviewed Deloitte’s finalized studies on regional governance/finance and cost-share policy. Deloitte presented options for Southwest, NAWS, and Red River governance, with stakeholders generally favoring keeping NAWS largely as is, using the current Southwest model with improvements, and pursuing a more structured governance option for Red River. On cost share, the department said Deloitte’s recommended package would cover projected needs through the 2030s, but would require policy changes such as lower percentages for some project types, a 25% replacement-project rate with a cap, and possible bonding or delayed reimbursement strategies. No votes were taken on these policy questions, and the chair indicated the committee would continue the discussion at future basin meetings and the September Water Topics meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And principals rated RPEP, the Arkansas most negative driver.
• So we're going to look at the average teacher retention rates across the state.
• They were also asked to rate programs for retaining teachers.
• Now looking at the map on the left-hand showing retention rates.
• In the darkest shaded regions, the retention rates are higher than 86%.

Summary: The committee first approved the May 18 meeting minutes and then received a presentation from Legislative Audit on Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions. Auditors explained that the fiscal year 2025 report summarizes $4.6 billion in grants from state, federal, and miscellaneous sources, across school districts, charter schools, education cooperatives, and other entities, and that the report only shows amounts distributed, not how recipients ultimately used the money. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance funding; department staff clarified that the Economics Arkansas grant is written into special language and that the CDC-related funding supports student surveys used by state agencies. Questions also focused on bonus and incentive programs such as master principal and National Board Certified teacher bonuses, with department staff saying the bonuses are generally tied to completion of the program or certification rather than classroom performance, though they would follow up on details. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research update on Consumer Price Index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global. Dr. Carlos Silva explained the difference between CPI-U and core CPI and said the estimates show inflation slowing over the forecast period, with some near-term variation between the two data providers. Members asked about the historical accuracy of prior projections, and he said the forecasts generally tend to move toward about 2 percent over time, though recent shocks have caused earlier estimates to understate actual inflation. The bulk of the meeting was devoted to the final adequacy report on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. BLR staff reviewed Arkansas teacher demographics, shortage areas, educator preparation pipelines, licensure exceptions, survey results from teachers and principals, and teacher support programs. They reported that Arkansas had about 32,800 teachers and 473,000 students in 2025, with an average of 11.9 years of experience and a slight increase in National Board Certified teachers. The report found shortages in multiple subject areas, especially special education, math, science, foreign language, and social studies, and identified 65 districts as high-need geographically. Survey results showed school leadership as the strongest positive factor in recruitment and retention, while workload and salary were the biggest negatives; 30 percent of responding teachers said they were considering leaving the profession. The committee also reviewed teacher salary data showing a statewide average salary of $60,254 in 2025, Arkansas ranking 45th nationally by NEA methodology, and a long-term inflation-adjusted decline in district salaries, though LEARNS Act increases improved the trend. Members asked for additional follow-up information on survey methodology, alternative licensure costs, coursework, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, exit data, and how salary comparisons are calculated.

Transcript Highlights:

• two rate reductions recently.
• Our forecast for the federal funds interest rate, this is the rate the Federal Reserve controls, indirectly
• We expect two more rate cuts next year before getting to sort of a background equilibrium rate in the
• And it impacts the overall rate of return on taxes, etc.
• The plan was overfunded, and all of those rates, those 6% rates on both the employees and the employers

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held a work session covering the state revenue outlook, caseload forecasts, wildfire costs, budget balance, tort liability, water supply, and pension policy. The Economic and Revenue Forecast Council reported modest near-term U.S. growth, no near-term Washington employment growth in 2026, continued personal income growth, and elevated inflation, with tariffs and federal policy cited as major risks. Revenue forecasts were slightly improved for the current biennium by about $105 million but down about $185 million for the next biennium. Members asked about income inequality and housing permits; staff said personal income is an aggregate measure and housing production remains below long-term needs. The Caseload Forecast Council then reported that most forecasts were unchanged or only slightly changed, but several programs increased, including Washington College Grant, Working Connections, aged/blind/disabled cash grants, nursing homes, home and community services, and developmental disabilities personal care. The largest policy-driven change was in Medicaid low-income adult caseloads, where federal H.R. 1 was projected to reduce coverage substantially through narrower eligibility, community engagement requirements, and shorter eligibility periods. The committee also heard a wildfire funding update and a 2025 fire season review. Staff explained that the state budgets $93 million annually for suppression and uses supplemental appropriations for costs above that level, with an estimated state supplemental need of about $139 million for the current year. Department of Natural Resources officials said 2025 fire activity remained below the 10-year average in acres burned, but fires were more complex and closer to communities, contributing to higher residence loss. They described expanded use of aircraft, firefighters from other states, corrections crews, and the Arcadia 20 hand crew, and said the state did not need National Guard ground support this year. A budget preview then showed that the near general fund outlook had worsened after vetoes, lapses, and forecast changes, and that maintenance-level costs alone would leave a projected negative balance by fiscal year 2027 and about $4.3 billion by fiscal year 2029, before any policy decisions. Jason Seams, the state risk manager, reported a sharp rise in tort claim costs, with indemnity expenses nearly doubling from fiscal year 2023 to 2025 and DCYF accounting for most of the increase. He said the state self-insurance liability account has run deficits for four straight biennia and is now facing nearly $600 million in deficits, driven largely by a surge in DCYF claims, especially juvenile rehabilitation and long-running sex abuse cases. Members asked about the role of old claims, comparisons with other states, excess insurance, and whether more Attorney General staff could reduce special assistant attorney general costs. The committee then shifted to water policy, hearing from tribal leaders, Ecology, and the Washington Water Trust. Tribal witnesses emphasized overappropriation, declining flows, climate impacts, and the need for legislative oversight and tribal participation in water policy. Ecology described major projects in the Odessa sub-area, Yakima Basin, and Dungeness, along with the need for storage, recharge, conservation, and policy changes to support water supply development. The Washington Water Trust argued that climate change is reducing summer flows and that the state needs more funding, enforcement, and long-term commitment to restore instream flows. The final item was a pension update on LEOFF 1 surplus assets; staff reviewed two 2025 bills that would have merged or restructured the plan and used surplus assets, but neither passed, and instead the budget directed the Select Committee on Pension Policy to study the issue and report back.