Transcript Highlights:

• Often going back to school.
• We're going to be looking back in 10 years when he's 28, or in 20 years when he's 38, looking back to
• But not everybody pays taxes.
• So we went back on our word.
• How we're going to pay for health care, for example.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:30:59.399> for deserve to choose between paying for deserve to choose between paying for
• <00:39:53.680> for spent what it is that we are paying for spent what it is that we are paying
• <02:03:40.320> their homes because they can't pay their homes because they can't pay their
• They can't afford to pay that.
• They can't afford to pay that.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 115-FN, which would remove the income cap from New Hampshire’s Education Freedom Account eligibility rules. Representative Valerie McDonnell, the bill’s sponsor, said the measure is intended to fund students rather than systems and to expand educational choice regardless of income or zip code. She described the change as a small statutory edit but argued it would have significant benefits, including helping families afford alternative education settings and testing costs such as AP exams. She also cited testimony from families who said EFAs helped children with special needs or difficult circumstances, and she argued the program is popular and cost-effective. Committee members questioned McDonnell about the bill’s fiscal impact and administration. One member asked whether removing the income cap would extend vouchers to families above the statewide median income and whether the change could cost more than $100 million annually; McDonnell said she did not agree with that estimate and pointed to Arizona as a comparison. Representative Wendy Thomas asked whether the bill should require stronger data-sharing from the Children’s Scholarship Fund, which administers the program, so the Department of Education and taxpayers could better track spending; McDonnell said the program already uses ClassWallet and regulated expenditures, and that the question was better directed to the administrator. Several members testified in opposition. Representative Wendy Thomas said the bill would increase costs for public schools, raise local property taxes, and worsen oversight problems. Representative Heath Howard argued the proposal would function as a subsidy for wealthy families already paying private tuition and said public education and special education should be funded first. Representative Megan Murray also opposed the bill, emphasizing the lack of a legal reporting requirement for EFA spending and the need for transparency, accountability, and attention to special education needs. Representative Sam Farrington supported expansion, sharing a constituent story about a student who left public school after harassment and benefited from private school placement. No vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• those bonds back.
• So any money generated, any money to pay back loans is generated from the rates that they...
• Generated, any money to pay back loans is generated from the rates that they charge their customers.
• If they need $50,000 to pay the engineer, they're only paying $50,000, or paying interest on that $50,000
• If you go back to, let me get back to this slide.

Summary: The Water Topics Overview Committee met to receive interim status updates on several water-related studies and Department of Water Resources projects. The committee approved the March 26, 2026 minutes, observed a moment of silence for the late Representative Conmy, and then heard updates on the watershed management study and the stormwater/wastewater study. Staff reported that the committee had already received the testimony contemplated in the study plans, including input from state agencies, local governments, and out-of-state entities, and that any further action would be at the committee’s discretion. The Department of Water Resources then provided project and budget updates on NAWS and the Southwest Pipeline Project. Reese reported NAWS is expected to serve about 81,000 users, with a total projected cost of about $571 million and about $96 million remaining, while the Southwest Pipeline Project is estimated at $1.06 billion total with about $409 million remaining. Members asked about funding sources, capacity needs, and whether current and future construction is being designed for increased demand; department staff said current work is designed for ultimate capacity, but some future components may need redesign based on new requests. The committee also discussed local cost shares, Minot’s role in NAWS funding, and whether the system is adequate for peak demand. A major portion of the meeting focused on the department’s cash management, carryover, and long-term water funding outlook. The department said Resources Trust Fund revenues are tied to oil extraction taxes and are affected by stripper well exemptions and future oil price declines. Members expressed concern about large carryover balances and whether the state is obligating more money than can realistically be spent in a biennium. The department reported about $340.6 million in remaining carryover and said it is trying to reduce that through a two-tier pre-construction/construction process and closer project vetting. The department also summarized the Deloitte studies on regional governance and finance and on cost-share policy. Stakeholders generally favored keeping the current governance structures for NAWS and Southwest with improvements, while Red River stakeholders leaned toward a different option; the department said it will bring an implementation plan back in September. On cost share, Deloitte’s recommendations would reduce some percentages, prioritize projects differently, and use other measures to close a projected long-term funding gap. Members debated affordability, local burden, deferred maintenance, and whether statutory changes may be needed to allow the commission more flexibility in prioritizing and funding projects. No formal votes or final actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and receiving the updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• They are incredibly great, high-paying jobs.
• Average pay across New Core? Yeah, average pay across New Core.
• Right back to it. Yeah, I mean, yeah.
• I do like this going back to the roads.
• The nonprofit itself has to pay the $32,000 to pay for the design fee, for the creation of the template

Bills: HB2003, HB2057, HB2109, HB2111, HB2112, HB2114, HB2256, HB2259, HB2317, HB2323, HB2398, HB2443, HB2446, HB2574

Keywords: driver education, instruction permit, underage drivers, motorcycle licenses, traffic regulations, special plates, centennial, Arizona Department of Transportation, vehicle registration, commercial discounts, Arizona Centennial, distracted driving, portable wireless communication devices, motorcycles, traffic safety, civil penalties, driver license, examinations, motorcycle awareness, public safety

Transcript Highlights:

• You may be paying for phone lines. You may be paying for utilities, electricity.
• It basically goes back into the House budget. House budget? It's not. Hang on.
• The rest of it goes back into the House fund.
• I know I think I pay one of the highest rents in the state.
• I know I think I pay one of the highest rents in the state.

Summary: The committee met briefly, called the roll, confirmed a quorum, and adopted the June 3, 2024 minutes without objection. Staff then reviewed the purpose of the House supplemental allowance resolution, explaining that members receive up to $1,500 per month for reimbursable office and district expenses such as rent, utilities, printing, postage, travel within the district, and related office costs. Members also discussed the existing carryover rules, including a $3,000 general carryover and an additional $6,000 for printed materials, with unspent amounts reverting to the House budget. Several members asked for clarification about what expenses are currently covered and how reimbursements work, including district office rent, phone and internet bills, per diem, out-of-state travel, conference registration, cell phones, and portable hotspots. The clerk and executive counsel explained that some items are paid from the supplemental account, while others, such as certain conference registration fees or appointed travel per diem, are paid directly by the House operating account. Members also raised concerns about whether using supplemental funds for lodging during session would require a resolution amendment and whether it could create tax or ethics issues, including possible double-dipping with per diem. A motion was made to consider allowing excess supplemental funds to be used for lodging costs for members who live more than 50 miles from the Capitol, but after discussion the motion was withdrawn so the committee could study the issue further and consult a CPA. Members also discussed whether the monthly supplemental amount should be increased in light of inflation and rising office rents, noting that any change would have to be made by the executive committee for the next term. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, which was adopted without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• So again, you're talking about paying back out the entire value of the entire property.
• paying back out the entire value of the entire<00:17:23.760> property.
• that, um, pay that back.
• <00:36:11.920> Um,<00:36:12.320> but would pay that um pay that back.
• Um, but would pay that um pay that back.

Bills: HB20, HB2612, HB2404, HB2459, HB2194, HB1880, HB2284, HB1969, HB2458, HB1546, HB2161, HB1721, HB1641, HB2137, HB1782, HB2360, HB1965, HB1897, HB1513

Keywords: lava insurance, homeowners, insurance market, subsidy, Hawaii, mortgage, debt, secured transactions, real property, Hawaii Revised Statutes, cooperative associations, electric utility cooperatives, agricultural cooperatives, mutual help, food innovation, agribusiness, food safety, market access, branding, economic diversification

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 20, which would create a lava zone insurance subsidy/fund. The Insurance Division opposed the bill, arguing that lava zones 1 and 2 are the highest-risk areas, that a subsidy would not reduce the underlying risk or loss costs, that it could invite similar subsidy requests for other hazards, and that the bill may conflict with HICV by diverting funds from the CRF. Members discussed the lack of authorized homeowners insurance in those lava zones, the role of HPIA and the surplus market, and the difference between the proposed lava-zone subsidy and the Hawaii Hurricane Relief Fund. The chair noted 37 submitted testimonies in support and one in opposition, and the committee then moved on without taking a vote on HB 20 in the portion provided. The committee then took up HB 2612, relating to mortgages, which would clarify that a mortgage does not exist independently of the debt it secures and is not independently enforceable from that debt. The Hawaii Credit Union League and Hawaii Financial Services Association opposed the bill, while several individuals testified in support, arguing it would restore Hawaii’s long-standing lien-state rule and prevent so-called “zombie mortgages” after the Hawaii Supreme Court’s White decision. Supporters said the bill would protect borrowers from delayed foreclosures and predatory lending practices, while opponents and the Insurance Division emphasized that foreclosure actions still require proof of standing and possession of the note, and that lenders generally pursue foreclosure without seeking deficiency judgments. Committee members questioned the Insurance Division about how the current market works, whether lenders could wait out the statute of limitations and then foreclose only on the mortgage, and whether equitable tolling or later defaults could allow refiling. The division said it is still trying to attract authorized insurers back into the lava-zone market, but has seen little progress. No vote or final action on HB 2612 was taken in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:17:33.679> And pay yield it to holders. And pay yield it to holders.
• even if they're not themselves pay even if they're not themselves pay paying<00:18:13.120> it
• USD is this way, where it's sort of a mix of crypto backing as well as fiat backing.
• USD is this way, where it's sort of a mix of crypto backing as well as fiat backing.
• I'll pay for it or what you're doing. I'll pay for it or I'll<01:14:38.960> redeem."

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with roll call and introductions of commission members and guests, followed by approval of the agenda and a motion to approve the February 10 minutes with a correction clarifying that one quoted statement was misattributed. The commission then moved into presentations. The main presentation came from the Conference of State Bank Supervisors on implementation of the federal GENIUS Act for stablecoins. The speaker reviewed the OCC’s recent 367-page proposed rule, noting it raises many open questions and design choices for states, and discussed expected upcoming rulemaking from the FDIC, Federal Reserve, and Treasury. The presentation focused on six areas: permissible issuer activities, reserve assets and redemption, risk management and supervision, treatment of state-qualified issuers, capital/operational backstops, and foreign issuers. It also flagged unresolved issues around Bank Secrecy Act/AML requirements and the meaning of “digital asset service provider” activities. A substantial portion of the discussion addressed yield restrictions, with the presenter explaining the OCC’s broad definition of yield and its rebuttable presumption against issuer-affiliated or related third-party yield arrangements. The speaker said this likely forecloses many existing white-label structures but leaves some room for third-party payments depending on distance from the issuer, and noted ongoing Senate debate over similar provisions. The presentation also covered reserve valuation, liquidity and diversification requirements, redemption timing, and supervisory expectations such as third-party oversight, IT security, exam cycles, and reporting. No additional votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the amended minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• to pay them whatever you want to pay to pay them whatever you want to pay them<02:02:05.840>
• It can be electronic, of your current rate of pay, pay cycle, and pay frequency.
• It can be electronic, of your current rate of pay, pay cycle, and pay frequency.
• It can be electronic, of your current rate of pay, pay cycle, and pay frequency.
• Electronic, of your current rate of pay, pay cycle, and pay frequency.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They pay 6%.
• They pay 6%.
• It would allow the department to order somebody to be reinstated and order back pay and other benefits
• It would allow the department to order somebody to be reinstated and order back pay and other benefits
• back they can't ask for their job back back they can't ask for their job back which<05:57:17.280

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We actually had debates on. on density back in Houston as far back as 25 years ago where we were looking
• You're telling me you'll give it back to China.
• And backing up a little bit.
• Because my city pays dues to TML, or my county pays dues to the County Association.
• into a slush fund to pay for these lobbyists.

Bills: SCR5, SCR13, SB3, SB6, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB15, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB24, SB35, SB57, SB65, SB112, SB284, SB290, SB388, SB400, SB402, SB412, SB495, SB499, SB502, SB509, SB621, SB706, SB740, SB815, SB842, SB854, SB875, SB893, SB917, SB974, SB1025, SB1061, SB1073, SB1106, SB1268, SB1281, SB1300, SB1362, SB1379, SB1447, SB1451, SB1555, SB1902, SJR36, SJR12, SCR13, SCR25, SCR5, SCR22, SCR12, SCR24, SB495, SB412, SB10, SB18, SB565, SB372, SB842, SB765, SB62, SB19, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB706, SB847, SB290, SB13, SB1248, SB740, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB917, SB925, SB388, SB1902, SB1121, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB35, SB6, SB815, SB3, SB1281, SB1379, SB1300, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB1451, SB1061, SB15, SB65, SB241, SB304, SB402, SB499, SB621, SB974, SB1023, SB1024, SB1025, SB1106, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB400, SB609, SB1447, SB670, SB502, SB427, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB893, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB509, SB985, SB965, SB17, SB1119, SB1505, SB12, SB24, SB57, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1268, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB840, SJR57, SCR8, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB610, SB918, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB535, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB3, SB6, SB15, SB35, SB290, SB706, SB842, SB917, SB1281, SB1451, SB1902, SB12, SB13, SB17, SB19, SB388, SR261, SR265, SR276, SR277, SR281, SR286, SR293, SCR5, SCR13, SB2425, SB2880, SB10, SB12, SB13, SB17, SB18, SB19, SB388, SB412, SB495, SB2425, SB2880

Keywords: SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame, football coach, school facility naming, education K-16, State Affairs, Texas Legislature, public school tribute, water rights

Transcript Highlights:

• What's the ratepayer paying?
• pay back.
• it back.
• We have never had any sales to pay it back because we only sell 2% of our water.
• Um, expand state-backed funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• , say, a male counterpart is paying, and that frustrates you because you should be paying the same price
• I had no way to get my money back. All I could get back was the portion of the nine pizzas.
• I understand that when you request your money back, because of the scams and requesting money back from
• And so I actually do get my money back.
• He's on his way back. Yes. So we will. And the roll is open. What, Patterson? He's on his way back?

Summary: The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee met with a new membership roster and adopted its committee rules after quorum was established. The hearing then began with AB 412, the AI Copyright Transparency Act, which would require generative AI developers to provide copyright holders notice when registered copyrighted works are used in training data. The author and supporters, including SAG-AFTRA, the Transparency Coalition, voice actors, writers, labor groups, and other creators, argued the bill would give artists a practical way to learn whether their works were used and to vindicate their rights. Opponents, including EFF, CalChamber, RIAA, CCIA, Chamber of Progress, Bay Area Council, BSA, and TechNet, said the proposal was technically unworkable, could burden startups, conflict with existing law and pending litigation, and raise federal preemption concerns. Members discussed the bill’s amendments, including a fingerprinting approach and narrowing the bill to model developers, and the committee voted 8-2 to pass AB 412 as amended to the Judiciary Committee. The committee then heard AB 446, which would prohibit “surveillance pricing,” or the use of personal data to charge different prices for the same product or service. The author and supporters, including Consumer Watchdog, UFCW, labor organizations, and consumer/privacy groups, described examples of differential pricing tied to device type, location, shopping behavior, and digital price tags, and argued the bill would protect consumers from discriminatory and predatory pricing. Business and industry opponents, including CalChamber, grocers, retailers, travel, broadband, and other associations, said the bill could conflict with the CCPA, interfere with loyalty and rewards programs, and create confusion about personalized discounts and dynamic pricing. The discussion focused on how the bill would treat loyalty programs, whether existing privacy law already covers the issue, and whether the proposal would unintentionally affect legitimate discounts and promotions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bringing it back to the dais.
• the rate of pay is higher, and so we do have to pay for additional...
• If their pay goes up, then the amount that we pay for the claims does increase a little bit.
• If their pay goes up, then the amount that we pay for the claims does increase a little bit.
• We like to get that money back.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And back to Alito for a minute.
• Well, folks, but I realize I can't always pay them more. They're always asking me to pay them more.
• They're always asking me to pay them more.
• We pay them $85,000 a year or something like that. We pay them weekly.
• Just back to Senator Campbell's question.

Summary: The Committee on Education K-16 heard several bills focused largely on special education transparency, school safety, and student support services. Senate Bill 1908, by Senator Zaffirini, would direct the Higher Education Coordinating Board to study the feasibility of a statewide system for coordinating clinical training placements, including regional portals for healthcare clinical slots, with a report due by December 1, 2026. A representative of the Texas Nurses Association and the Nursing Legislative Agenda Coalition testified in support. The bill was left pending subject to the call of the chair. The committee then took up Senate Bill 111, by Senator Hall, which in its committee substitute was narrowed to a reporting bill requiring school districts to disclose legal proceedings involving special education due process complaints when legal fees exceed $10,000, rather than capping spending. Several parents and advocates testified that districts spend large sums on litigation against families of children with disabilities and that greater transparency is needed; some senators raised concerns about unintended consequences, including possible pressure to settle cases. The committee adopted the substitute and left the bill pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 1551 on automated external defibrillators in public schools, Senate Bill 865 on CPR instruction requirements for certain volunteers, Senate Bill 1032 on the Governor’s University Research Initiative, and Senate Bill 571 on school employee misconduct reporting and access to the Do Not Hire Registry; each was reported favorably after committee substitute adoption and roll-call votes. Additional bills discussed included Senate Bill 1884, which would formalize and expand dedicated staff support for the State Board of Education and give the board chair hiring authority over that staff; members questioned whether it duplicated TEA functions, while a witness argued the workload increase justified the change, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 625 would replace the current half-credit economics requirement with a half-credit in personal financial literacy; educators and advocates strongly supported making the course required, and the bill was left pending. Senate Bill 582 would make TEA settlement agreements in special investigations publicly available when sanctions are imposed, and Senate Bill 2600 would bar transportation fees for students living within two miles of campus unless districts do not receive state transportation funding; both were left pending. The committee also heard Senate Bill 2751, which would require TEA inspections of non-public special education programs to consider medical standards of care and crisis-prevention training; testimony from a program operator described severe student behaviors and the need for more flexibility, and the bill was left pending after the substitute was adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:16:44.759> to falls back but it all falls back to falls back but it all falls back to
• children and um and my time started back children and um and my time started back in<00:29:49.720
• say well then we're only going to pay say well then we're only going to pay you<00:45:40.200>
• Would the transportation... pay for the speech and language services pay for the speech and language
• We're not—well, we're paying it, yes. We're not tracking it, but we are paying it. Yeah. Mr.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The work session focused on special education, especially the differentiated aid component and special education aid, which members noted is still often called “catastrophic aid.” The chair said the committee was trying to better understand how special education costs are growing, how districts are delivering services through SAUs or internally, and how reimbursement formulas affect local costs. Members also discussed the need for better data before making decisions on several education funding bills, and Representative Brown was tasked with capturing questions for follow-up information from the department or elsewhere. Testimony from the state special education director, Becky Fad, centered on why student counts in various disability categories have shifted over time. She said the categories themselves have not changed much, but autism has increased because of greater understanding and identification, developmental delay has grown because it applies to children under age 10 who may not yet have a clear diagnosis, and some students previously classified under speech/language or other health impairment are now identified in more specific categories such as autism. She emphasized that the IEP is based on a child’s individual needs, so a change in category would not necessarily change services, though it may help educators support the student differently. Members asked about whether the shifts reflect better diagnostic capability, whether the department should gather more data on the reasons for the changes, and whether autism-spectrum data could be broken down further. Fad said the department does not currently have data on the causes of the shifts or on where students fall within the autism spectrum, but that collecting and analyzing such data is on its list of priorities and a new data manager had recently been hired. She also explained that each child is counted only once on the chart by primary disability, that the IEP or eligibility team determines the primary category based on evaluations, and that any child can be referred for special education by a parent, teacher, or doctor, after which the district must meet within 15 days to decide whether to evaluate. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We did not get people back to work when we needed to get people back to work, and we really struggled
• I know that TANF pays for me, so I identify with that program.
• I know that TANF pays for me, so I identify with that program.
• That was one of the goals we had, making work pay.
• That was one of the goals we had, making work pay.

Summary: The committee met to hear consultants Mason Bishop and Cameron Christie discuss Arkansas’s “one door/no wrong door” workforce and social services modernization effort. Bishop argued that the current system is fragmented across multiple agencies, offices, and portals, making it hard for job seekers and employers to access services efficiently. He said the goal is to create a more integrated system that promotes upward mobility, longer labor force attachment, better employer access to talent, greater efficiency, and faster adaptation to changes such as AI and other economic disruptions. Bishop repeatedly pointed to Utah as a model, describing how that state combined workforce and public assistance functions into a single agency, used statewide cost allocation to blend funding streams, and improved customer service and outcomes after reform. He said Arkansas should consider integrating governance, service delivery, and financing, including possible waivers, a statewide cost allocation plan, and a benefits-cliff pilot. He also said Arkansas’s current local workforce board structure creates duplication and weak coordination, and that Launch is a useful tool but not a full service-delivery system. Committee members asked how the proposal would work in practice, including whether TANF could be used to cross-train DHS workers, how federal waivers might be obtained, how local boards would be affected, and how disabled clients would be handled. Bishop said TANF should be treated as part of a workforce strategy, that federal pilot authority for workforce reform nearly passed but did not, and that waivers are now the practical path. He also said Arkansas could either merge functions more fully or at minimum co-locate workforce staff in DHS offices statewide. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with plans to continue the discussion in August, including a focus on case management and whether the state is managing programs or people.

Transcript Highlights:

• But in the out years, it could basically pay for the program. The fees will pay for the program.
• I'm sure that if I went back and did research, I could find some.
• They currently pay their PBM like $5 per claim per month.
• It could, who pays it if it's uh, We've changed the allocations.
• Who pays it if it's determined that they're not able to pay? They're indigent.

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee met with eight members present and deferred HB 127. It then considered a series of bills, most of which were reported favorably without opposition. HB 22 revised COLA rules for the clerks of court retirement system, allowing more frequent COLAs when the system is better funded; HB 324 made judicial stipends permanent and added future COLAs subject to available funding; HB 233 increased jury mileage reimbursement; HB 47 reorganized assessor retirement COLA statutes; HB 533 allowed St. Tammany Parish to transfer unused witness-fee account balances to the 22nd Judicial District Court; HB 980 adjusted eligibility for the Firemen’s Supplemental Pay Board; HCR 45 urged Congress to clarify ARPA deadlines for water projects; HB 559 increased court costs in the 4th Judicial District; HB 290 recreated the Department of Treasury and related entities in statute; and HB 382 addressed Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget review authority over Group Benefits plans. The committee also reported HB 1157 favorably, creating a financing bank mechanism for infrastructure projects, and HB 575 favorably, giving youth aging out of foster care preferred access to surplus state vehicles through the Louisiana Property Assistance Agency. Several measures drew more discussion. HB 1236, dealing with pharmacy benefit managers and professional dispensing fees, prompted extensive testimony from the sponsor, the Legislative Fiscal Office, the Department of Insurance, independent pharmacies, and PBM representatives. Supporters said it clarifies and strengthens enforcement of existing PBM law and protects independent pharmacies; opponents argued the bill’s requirement that PBMs bear dispensing-fee costs would be difficult to implement and could raise premiums. The sponsor said he would work on amendments, including clarifying language and a delayed effective date, and the bill was nevertheless moved favorably. SB 25, on registrar of voters compensation, was amended to a revised pay structure and then reported favorably. HB 47 and HB 533 were also presented as funding and administrative cleanups for retirement and court-related accounts, with local support noted. The committee also heard HB 233 on jury duty mileage reimbursement, which the sponsor said updates a 1961 rate and would be funded locally at an estimated average increase of about $4,000 per judicial district. HB 324 on judicial salaries was described as self-funded by the judiciary and subject to available funding, with no budget impact. HB 575 on foster youth transportation was presented as a non-appropriation measure aimed at helping youth aging out of foster care by giving them preferred access to surplus vehicles. HB 382, which concerns the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget’s role in approving Group Benefits plans, was reported favorably with little discussion. The meeting ended after a motion to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to check back with Mr. Dance again. >> All right. Can you hear me now?
• check back with Mr. Dance again. check back with Mr. Dance again.
• lakes and they sell them to these pay lakes and they sell them to these<00:21:38.640> pay<00:
• these pay lakes and in turn the pay these pay lakes and in turn the pay lakes<00:21:41.760> sell
• And one way we up north to the pays.

Keywords: Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks - Room 210, 2 February, 2026; 3:00 P.M., 925, all

Summary: The committee first took up Senate Bill 2664, which would amend the lifetime hunting license program so anyone under age 18 could buy the license for a $500 fee. After a brief explanation and no questions, the committee adopted a motion for title sufficient and do pass, and the bill was reported. Members then considered Senate Bill 2436, described as a step toward establishing a black bear hunting season in Mississippi beginning with the 2027-28 season. The bill would require the department to set rules based on black bear population data, use a lottery system for tags, create one annual governor’s tag, delay nonresident tags until at least 2032-33, cap those tags at 10%, and add penalties for violations. The committee again moved title sufficient and do pass with a committee substitute, and the bill was reported. The committee also heard Senate Bill 2420, which would clarify last year’s hunting-season extension so that if a season ends on Friday or Saturday, it would continue through Sunday. That bill received a do-pass motion and was reported. Senate Bill 2659, creating a voluntary lifetime conservation legacy license for Mississippians over 65 for a one-time $250 fee, also passed the committee and was reported. Finally, the committee took up Senate Bill 2660, the catfish bill, with testimony from a guest and department officials. Supporters argued the bill was needed to curb commercial harvesting of trophy catfish from the Mississippi River, protect the resource, and support tourism and events such as the Vicksburg catfish tournament. Department staff said a possible approach would be to prohibit transporting live catfish over 34 inches, which they said could help stop the practice without affecting farm-raised catfish. Members discussed concerns about impacts on local fishermen and clarified that the bill was aimed at Mississippi River waters; the committee did not reach a final vote on this bill in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I know we have not—sorry, I had to turn it back on.
• So we're kind of back to 2% now. So that's good to know.
• Paying in, for every year you pay in, you earn 10% of the full benefit.
• It's a system with which we pay providers.
• So every quarter, the WACares Fund keeps certain premium income in our account to pay benefits and pay

Summary: The Pension Funding Council met on October 8 with introductions from council members and staff, then received a detailed presentation from the Office of the State Actuary on long-term economic assumptions and the state pension systems’ financial condition. OSA reported that the combined pension systems are currently 100% funded on a smoothed basis, with open plans above 95% funded, and that legacy Plan 1 systems remain on a path toward full funding under current policy. The actuaries recommended updating assumptions to 3% inflation, 3.5% general salary growth, and a 7.25% investment return, while keeping Plan 1 membership growth at 1%. They also explained asset smoothing, the role of recent strong investment returns, and the expected budget impacts of the recommended changes. Representatives from the Economic and Revenue Forecast Council and the State Investment Board offered supporting perspectives, generally describing the assumptions as reasonable and consistent with their own outlooks. The council also heard an overview of the Long-Term Services and Supports Trust Program (WACares) from DSHS and OSA. Program staff described the program’s social insurance structure, premium collection, benefit eligibility, and upcoming implementation milestones. OSA reported that the program’s first actuarial valuation showed a positive actuarial balance under the base scenario and recommended no change to the current 0.58% premium rate during the program’s early learning phase, noting that future changes would depend on experience and the program’s risk-management framework. OSA also said the recommendation would remain the same regardless of the outcome of the pending ballot measure affecting investment options. During public comment, a representative of the Washington State School Retirees Association urged continued work on Plan 1 funding and related legislation, while the Association of Washington Cities cautioned against increasing pension assumptions in a way that could raise future employer costs and reduce flexibility for current local government services. In action, the council adopted a motion to maintain the current long-term economic assumptions by a 4-2 vote, adopted the recommendation to keep the WACares premium rate at 0.58% by a 6-0 vote, and then elected Katie Chapman as council chair by unanimous vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Here's what we find: students move back and forth.
• And now we pay districts every other week. And we pay scholarship applicants every quarter.
• I won't go back as far as the student tracking.
• And I don't have to pay as much as I used to have to pay to make the homeschool work.
• And so I think we’ll always be back. You’re right.

Summary: The committee first heard the proposed Pre-K-12 education budget for fiscal year 2025-26, totaling $34.7 billion. The chair highlighted major increases for the FEFP, including $29.6 billion for public schools and K-12 scholarships, a $984 million year-over-year increase, along with higher per-FTE funding, $4 billion for the Family Empowerment Scholarship, $431.4 million for VPK, funding for school safety, the Florida School for the Deaf and Blind, school hardening, Jewish day school security, and an education enrollment stabilization fund. With no public comment, the committee adopted a motion for staff technical corrections and then approved the budget proposal as a recommendation to the full Senate Appropriations Committee. The committee then considered SB 1402 on dropout retrieval programs. The bill expands eligibility so any individual who has withdrawn from high school may enroll in dropout retrieval services and clarifies how school grades are calculated for virtual instruction providers that offer those services. An amendment clarifying the grading calculation was adopted, and the committee reported the bill favorably. Next, the committee took up SPB 7030 on educational scholarship programs, a broad measure addressing school choice funding and administration. The bill would fund the Family Empowerment Scholarship as a separate categorical, expand the education stabilization fund, create fall and spring application windows, require a single scholarship application and more documentation, assign student IDs, standardize payment timing to monthly installments, require continued eligibility verification, and add Level 2 background checks for providers receiving state funds. Members raised questions about background-check enforcement, payment timing, data sharing, and the impact on homeschool and private-school families. Public testimony included support from school-choice advocates and concerns from private-school representatives about added regulatory burdens and deadlines. The committee adopted the bill as a committee bill and reported it favorably, with Senator Osgood voting no. Finally, the committee considered SB 508 on the Family Empowerment Scholarship Program, which requires private schools to disclose in writing what accommodations, modifications, and services they will provide to students with existing plans such as IEPs, EEPs, 504 plans, or ELL plans before enrollment. An amendment was adopted to require public schools to consult with private schools about equitable services. Testimony was mixed: supporters said the bill would give parents needed information for informed choice, while private-school representatives said the language could be burdensome and vague. The committee reported the bill favorably.