Transcript Highlights:

• We are also proposing an increase in the snow and ice allocation to $85 million in the budget.
• We're going to pay our fee, our costs under the contract. Not relying on the world markets.
• We're going to pay our fee, our costs under the contract.
• But if they're prohibited because of these interconnection fees, we're going to lose this battle.
• But if they're prohibited because of these interconnection fees, we're going to lose this battle.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Ways and Means held a hearing at UMass Amherst on Governor Healey’s fiscal year 2027 budget, focusing on energy/environment-related transportation issues and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. The chairs and members opened with thanks to UMass, university leadership, court officers, and legislative staff, and Chancellor Javier Reyes highlighted UMass Amherst’s research, workforce, sustainability, and transportation contributions, including energy research, transit operations, and partnerships with MassDOT. The hearing then moved to MassDOT and MBTA testimony on the administration’s transportation funding package, including House 2, the FY26 Fair Share supplemental, and a proposed four-year Chapter 90 authorization. MassDOT officials described the budget as part of a broader multi-year transportation investment strategy, citing funding for operations, snow and ice removal, regional transit authorities, the MBTA, the Merit Rating Board, sustainable aviation fuel credits, micro-transit and last-mile grants, unpaved road improvements, bridge and pavement work, and housing-related transportation infrastructure. They emphasized workforce expansion, capital delivery capacity, safety improvements, and local aid, including the new lane-mile-based Chapter 90 formula intended to benefit rural communities. Officials also discussed major projects and programs such as Grant Central, culvert and unpaved road grants, work zone speed cameras, congestion hotspot fixes, the Sagamore and Bourne Bridge projects, and MBTA operating support and safety upgrades. Testimony from the MBTA and rail/transit staff focused on improved ridership, service frequency, accessibility, and safety, including progress on the Green Line Train Protection System, reduced delays, expanded bus and commuter rail service, and the South Coast rail extension. Regional transit authorities reported increased ridership and described new fare-free, connectivity, and community transit grants. Aeronautics testimony covered airport capital work, drone and data programs, sustainable aviation fuel efforts, and workforce development in aviation maintenance. Committee members then asked questions, especially about Western Massachusetts priorities, Chapter 90 funding, bridge repairs, snow and ice costs, Cape Cod bridges, Buzzard’s Bay rail, and Compass Rail/West-East Rail. Officials said several federal rail grants were moving forward, that Sagamore Bridge procurement would begin soon, and that the administration remained committed to pursuing federal funding and multi-year transportation investments.

Transcript Highlights:

• for 19 FTEs and the criminal Investigations Division and then item five is a new rider for contingent fee
• untracked payments that would allow the agency to pay contingent fees based on. on recovered amounts
• Item nine is an agency request for new Writer that would provide the authority to charge a rental fee
• of tax credit review fees.
• At that time, there was a $2 fee assessed on each transaction that went through the Texas.gov account

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And, of course, the problem there is that there... ...aren't very many spaces allocated for curbside
• Committee Substitute House Bill 42 relating to the amount and allocation of the annual constitutional
• Committee Substitute House Bill 42 relating to the amount and allocation of the annual constitutional
• Committee substitute for House Bill 1211 relates to tuition and fee exemptions at public institutions
• We removed the requirement that legal fees pertaining to suits that get.

Bills: SB801, SB867, SB2717, SB2919, HJR7, HB4, HB14, HB27, HB42, HB46, HB100, HB111, HB112, HB121, HB126, HB146, HB186, HB223, HB229, HB322, HB367, HB500, HB521, HB640, HB705, HB783, HB1052, HB1056, HB1105, HB1106, HB1178, HB1211, HB1234, HB1306, HB1403, HB1449, HB1506, HB1661, HB1690, HB1871, HB1960, HB2017, HB2078, HB2128, HB2240, HB2243, HB2348, HB2407, HB2512, HB2820, HB2844, HB2853, HB2854, HB2885, HB3000, HB3005, HB3053, HB3057, HB3181, HB3333, HB3372, HB3425, HB3441, HB3516, HB3749, HB3783, HB3812, HB3848, HB3923, HB3963, HB4070, HB4134, HB4157, HB4158, HB4211, HB4449, HB4623, HB4638, HB4687, HB4690, HB4748, HB4749, HB4795, HB4848, HB5093, HB5115, HB5129, HB5138, HB5294, HB5616, HB5629, HB5646, HB5661, HB5672, HB5674, HB5699, HCR40, SJR5, SJR27, SJR59, SB4, SB6, SB8, SB9, SB10, SB12, SB22, SB23, SB25, SB27, SB34, SB36, SB37, SB38, SB40, SB57, SB140, SB261, SB293, SB441, SB447, SB467, SB512, SB650, SB777, SB785, SB924, SB1188, SB1281, SB1318, SB1333, SB1398, SB1448, SB1566, SB1579, SB1621, SB1723, SB1838, SB1862, SB2167, SB2405, SB2406, SB2407, SB2878, SB3059, SB3070, SB1, SB17, SB21, SB260, SB379, SB509, SB1198, SB1405, SB1506, SB1637, SB1833, SB2155, SB2308, SB2601, SB2778, HB300, HB2011, HB2525, HB5246, SJR36, SJR50, SJR63, SCR12, SCR39, SB2023, SB62, SB666, SB847, SB284, SB854, SB810, SB1505, SB583, SB507, SB1434, SB1772, SB2016, SB1122, SB731, SB397, SB508, SB1436, SB287, SB1882, SB393, SB1791, SB209, SB2429, SB1085, SB1975, SB2717, SB1262, SB636, SB2056, SB884, SB1200, SB1845, SB2458, SB801, SB3014, SB3013, SB758, SB2797, SB2076, SB2876, SB1640, SB1449, SB1181, SB1234, SB2926, SB2841, SB1528, SB1854, SB317, SB1250, SB2082, SB1237, SB2819, SB629, SB2608, SB1602, SB2009, SB867, SB640, SB1698, SB2680, SB913, SB1071, SB1086, SB1087, SB1483, SB1444, SB1553, SB1556, SB1703, SB2133, SB2297, SB2298, SB2622, SB2955, SB2334, SB1367, SB2044, SB2363, SB2565, SB1888, SB3036, SB3057, SB3043, SB3063, SB3035, SB203, SB2688, SB2522, SB2459, SB2655, SB2251, SB1884, SB2928, SB2566, SB2549, SB2553, SB2919, SB1944, SB1232, SB1798, SB2603, SB2607, SB2683, SB1319, SB3045, SB3071, HJR7, HB5115, HB3053, HB1403, HB223, HB748, HB5652, HB3395, HB180, HB1306, HB322, HB126, HB5650, HB4894, HB1629, HB5698, HB3171, HB2694, HB5664, HB4690, HB4464, HB3623, HB2520, HB2213, HB252, HB146, HB5596, HB3619, HB5320, HB5651, HB5670, HB5665, HB5437, HB5679, HB5699, HB5661, HB5662, HB5654, HB5672, HB5656, HB3812, HB3057, HB2035, HB721, HB346, HB2512, HB5695, HB5694, HB5674, HB3185, HB2348, HB1871, HB1135, HB101, HB5666, HB5677, HB5682, HB5658, HB4144, HB3642, HB3815, HB2686, HB2012, HB1960, HB227, HB654, HB1690, HB2128, HB4158, HB4630, HB1523, HB2078, HB1973, HB3333, HB3697, HB3546, HB3225, HB3181, HB2820, HB1506, HB1234, HB640, HB521, HB229, HB186, HB119, HB4795, HB4466, HB3749, HB1106, HB4, HB4170, HB3909, HB4081, HB4145, HB4157, HB4285, HB4463, HB4995, HB5138, HB5624, HB1449, HB2598, HB3629, HB4361, HB824, HB1868, HB4848, HB2243, HB40, HB117, HB3686, HB500, HB3793, HB112, HB104, HB1056, HB42, HB3000, HB100, HB2240, HB718, HB27, HB4904, HB4202, HB2853, HB5129, HB5093, HB4765, HB4748, HB4559, HB4350, HB4214, HB3388, HB3112, HB5196, HB4211, HB3516, HB3092, HB4233, HB4687, HB705, HB1094, HB2037, HB3005, HB3848, HB1105, HB121, HB3372, HB367, HB783, HB3336, HB3441, HB4449, HB5616, HB2407, HB2854, HB3425, HB5294, HB1178, HB4623, HB14, HB3963, HB1211, HB5646, HB5629, HB3783, HB4236, HB46, HB4638, HB1052, HB4070, HB5509, HB5435, HB4134, HB3923, HB3520, HB3320, HB2517, HB2488, HB5663, HB2731, HB3073, HB2655, HB2399, HB541, HB4099, HB111, HB1532, HB3483, HB2963, HB4580, HB3748, HB713, HB632, HB426, HB4730, HB127, HB5690, HB5689, HB5655, HB3385, HB2757, HB4359, HB5381, HB20, HB123, HB549, HB5606, HB2217, HB2594, HB796, HB150, HB1057, HCR141, HCR40, HCR59, HCR76, HCR81, HCR46, HCR111, HCR83, HCR84, HJR7, HB4, HB14, HB27, HB42, HB46, HB100, HB126, HB150, HB322, HB367, HB500, HB640, HB705, HB783, HB1105, HB1178, HB1211, HB1234, HB1506, HB1690, HB1871, HB2078, HB2128, HB2240, HB2243, HB2407, HB2512, HB2853, HB2854, HB3000, HB3057, HB3181, HB3372, HB3425, HB3441, HB3749, HB3783, HB3812, HB3923, HB3963, HB4070, HB4134, HB4157, HB4211, HB4449, HB4623, HB4638, HB4687, HB4748, HB4795, HB5093, HB5129, HB5616, HB5629, HB5699, HB229, HB521, HB1056, HB1106, HB5138, SR583, SCR52, HB223, HB229, HB521, HB1056, HB1106, HB1403, HB3053, HB5115, HB5138

Keywords: SB 801, birth certificate, birth record, certified copy, homeless, homelessness, unhoused, vital records, state registrar, local registrar, county clerk, fee waiver, identity documents, ID access, housing insecurity, shelter, transitional housing, Health and Safety Code, HHSC, Health and Human Services Commission

Transcript Highlights:

• , but it's taking the fee and putting it where it should be.
• So my next question is more about resource allocation.
• I think it's based on the fee per barrel. Mr.
• The EIB could grant a fee increase. However, Mr.
• This 10 cent fee is consistent with other states' fees, including Texas.

Transcript Highlights:

• And while campuses fund some repairs each year, the state General Fund allocation can't meet the needs
• Other revenue, student fees and other student tuition and others, to pay for that? Yeah.
• According to LAO, a best practice is campuses should allocate an amount equal to 2 to 4% annually for
• It's hard for us to allocate sort of our share.
• So there's actually a very interesting dynamic, and that is because in prior allocations, the number

Summary: The committee’s first major discussion focused on higher education facilities across UC, CSU, and the community colleges, with Chair Alvarez framing the issue as a final budget hearing before the May Revise. The LAO presented findings that campuses have grown substantially in buildings and square footage, while classroom and lab utilization remains below legislative standards and deferred maintenance backlogs continue to rise. The LAO also emphasized that the state and segments lack comprehensive data on capital renewal spending and recommended better reporting, clearer funding targets, and long-term planning for renewal and maintenance. UC, CSU, and community college representatives each described large five-year capital plans, aging facilities, seismic and deferred maintenance needs, and the role of student housing, while noting that construction costs are rising faster than inflation. Members questioned the segments about debt service, utilization rates, and how projects are prioritized. UC said its debt service tied to state support is about $665 million annually and described a $30 billion five-year capital financial plan, including housing, medical centers, and building renewal. CSU said it has about $31 billion in five-year needs and more than $8 billion in deferred maintenance, with funding coming from a mix of state-related and one-time sources since the state shifted capital responsibility to CSU. Community colleges said their unmet facilities needs total about $33.5 billion and explained their use of a scoring matrix and FUSION system to rank projects. The chair and members pressed all three systems to better distinguish between projects that are truly shovel-ready and those that are long-term needs, and discussed whether facilities condition data, total cost of ownership, and more standardized metrics should guide future bond proposals. The committee then turned to Proposition 2 and the Governor’s proposed community college capital outlay projects. The Department of Finance said Prop. 2 provides $1.5 billion for community colleges and that the Governor’s budget proposes 29 projects, with two continuing Prop. 51 projects also included. The LAO supported the overall use of the funds but raised concerns about the current 65/35 split between modernization and growth, the unusually large share of gymnasium projects, and some scoring metrics that favor larger campuses and certain regions. Community college officials said the scoring system was developed through participatory governance and would take one to two years to revise, but they supported the funding and agreed to follow up on questions about project categories and the rationale for the weighting. Members also suggested giving more weight to modernization, regional access, and intersegmental or collaborative projects. A final item addressed the CalKids program. The Department of Finance proposed $56,000 ongoing General Fund for three positions, while the LAO recommended approving two positions but rejecting a manager position until the current $7.5 million marketing campaign is evaluated. ScholarShare’s executive director said CalKids has enrolled more than 5 million children, with nearly 600,000 claims and over $45 million distributed, and argued that additional staff and outreach are needed to reach a goal of 1 million claimed scholarships by the end of 2025 and to implement AB 2808. Members asked about marketing effectiveness, data sharing, and eligibility rules, and the program said it is expanding partnerships with Cradle to Career and CSAC. No final vote was taken in the hearing, and the chair indicated the facilities item would be held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• So some of the changes we make here work to address that. fees next you will see a change for our fees
• Next, we have our GR license fees.
• Thus, the request is for increased fees.
• reduce the proposed cost of license fees reduce the proposed cost of license fees and<01:21:08.360
• <01:21:18.960> as months to two years the fees as months to two years the fees as presented

Bills: HF2446, HF2878, HF2667, HF1795, HF2683, HF2916

Keywords: agriculture finance, broadband development, Department of Agriculture, Board of Animal Health, Agricultural Utilization Research Institute, Office of Broadband Development, food safety, food handler license, cottage food, home processed food, livestock dealer, meat packing company, milk marketer, milk marketing license, grain buyer, grain storage, beginning farmer, emerging farmer, farm down payment assistance, livestock investment grant

Transcript Highlights:

• We used to have a litter program. program that worked with the cities, and the cities were allocated
• The remainder is allocated between General Revenue and the TXDMV Fund. Mr.
• The bill also establishes a $7.50 inspection replacement fee that's charged at all counties.
• The only cost that I can speak to is the $35 million that was allocated for implementation of the bill
• The legislature made an investment to enhance port infrastructure, the funding was promptly allocated

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Students with waivers do still pay institutions tuition, fees, housing, and food.
• The net tuition plus housing and food and fees collected from students with a waiver was $110.9 million
• So this is for the next... ...and fees, as well as the tuition rates.
• General funds, of course, is based on the amount allocated to the institutions.
• That budget is allocated in response to the legislative intent.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed the 2024-25 tuition waiver report for the North Dakota University System. Staff explained that waivers were reported for degree-seeking students and broken out by residency, institution, and waiver type. Members asked about partial versus full waivers, institutional discretion, athletic waivers, and whether campuses have published guardrails or transparency requirements. Staff said most waivers are set by institutions, with some statutory and board-required categories, and that athletic waivers are a small share of total waiver dollars. The report showed total gross tuition of $354.5 million, tuition waived of $38.9 million, and 11,193 of 42,040 students receiving some waiver. Members also discussed how waivers affect net tuition revenue, housing and food collections, and whether campuses are using waivers strategically compared with scholarships and other funding sources. The committee then heard a presentation on tuition rates by campus and State Board policy. Staff explained the board’s tuition factors for resident, Minnesota reciprocity, contiguous-state/U.S. nonresident, and international students, and noted that campuses often seek exceptions based on program-specific competition and enrollment goals. Members asked whether rates are based on cost or competition, and staff said campuses typically bring forward estimates and market comparisons when requesting special rates. The presentation also reviewed general fund appropriations versus net tuition revenue by campus, and members discussed how local tuition decisions and waivers do not directly affect the state funding formula, though they do affect institutional revenue and reserves. Questions were also raised about the Higher Learning Commission’s financial composite indicator and how it differs from the more intuitive reserve and revenue figures. The committee next received a broad overview of non-higher-education entities affiliated with the State Board of Higher Education, beginning with NDSU agriculture-related units. Dr. Greg Lardy described the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, the NDSU Extension Service, the Agricultural Experiment Station, and the branch research centers, emphasizing their statewide role in crop and livestock research, extension education, and county-based outreach. He outlined funding mixes for extension, the experiment station, and branch stations, noting that grants and contracts support both research and education, while the agronomy seed farm is self-funded through seed sales. Members asked about the new and vacant FTE pool, R1 research status, matching requirements for grants, and whether state appropriations count toward research expenditures. Dr. Lardy also highlighted major research impacts, including crop varieties, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, and NDAWN weather data. The Northern Crops Institute and the Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute also presented. NCI described its role in market development, technical services, and education for regional agriculture, its governance through the Northern Crops Council, and its funding from state appropriations, other states, and earned revenue. Members asked about the source of out-of-state funding, intellectual property, and the institute’s international reach. UGPTI then outlined its transportation research, federal and state funding structure, and work on road and bridge condition assessments, travel demand modeling, and workforce training. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• , also known as ASO fees, which are calculated on a per-employee-per-month cost basis and paid directly
• An additional $3.9 million is allocated for employee health savings accounts, while $10.9 million...
• $3.9 million is allocated for employee health savings accounts, while $10.9 million funds the shared
• Administrative expenses, which include shared savings and ASO fees, totaled $64.4 million.
• If we can't raise taxes, we may need to cut services to allocate more funds for liability coverage and

Summary: The Budget Committee met with a quorum and took up several bills. HB 677, relating to state-covered fertility preservation for employees undergoing cancer treatment, was introduced as coverage for egg and sperm preservation for up to three years, with an estimated fiscal impact of about $813,000. After brief questions and no public testimony or amendments, the bill passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then considered CS/HB 59, which would reform Florida’s wrongful incarceration compensation process by extending the filing deadline from 90 days to two years, removing the clean-hands requirement, and allowing exonerees to choose between the state compensation process and a civil lawsuit; it was supported by the City of Flagler Beach and passed unanimously. CS/HB 1313, which recreates the Resilient Florida Trust Fund in the Department of Environmental Protection before its scheduled termination in 2025, also passed unanimously after supportive testimony from advocacy groups. The committee received a lengthy presentation from the Department of Management Services on the State Group Insurance Program and the recent Revenue Estimating Conference. The presentation covered enrollment, revenues and expenditures, rising medical and pharmacy costs, emergency room utilization, GLP-1 drug spending, and options for tighter formulary and utilization management. Members asked about ER cost growth, GLP-1 coverage and copays, PBM oversight and potential conflicts, avoidable ER visits, cancer screening claims, dental and vision costs, specialty drug biosimilars, and possible savings from more restrictive pharmacy models. DMS said it would follow up on several questions and noted ongoing work on cancer coordination, preventive screening, biomarker testing, and a proposed member-facing benefits platform. The committee also heard extensive testimony on HB 301, which would raise sovereign immunity caps from $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident to $1 million and $3 million, align limitations periods with private claims, and allow government entities to settle above the caps without a claims bill. Local governments, school-related entities, and county and city associations opposed the bill, warning of major fiscal impacts, higher insurance costs, and pressure on services; several speakers urged smaller increases or a tiered approach. Proponents, including families affected by catastrophic injury or death, argued the current caps are too low and the claims bill process is inefficient and unfair. After debate, the bill passed on a recorded vote, with some members voting no, and was reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• and it's really designed to create opportunities for individuals to gain 100% of their tuition and fees
• And it's really decided to create opportunities for individuals to gain 100% of their tuition and fees
• Again, it also provides 100% of tuition and fees, and it can also provide an additional scholarship of
• It also provides 100% of tuition and fees, and it can also provide an additional scholarship of $1,000
• Here in Florida, we receive an allocation of about $82 million, with the majority of that going straight

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education received an overview of Florida’s career and technical education (CTE) system from Chancellor Kevin O’Farrell, who described the state’s CTE pathways, program types, enrollment and completion growth, quality audit metrics, and the Master Credentials List used to identify credentials of value. He highlighted record postsecondary CTE enrollment and completions, strong statewide performance in talent attraction, and several funding tools supporting expansion, including Open Door, the Florida First Responder Scholarship, Workforce Development Capitalization grants, Perkins funding, CAPE performance incentives, and apprenticeship grants. Senators asked about eligibility for Open Door and first responder aid, top industry certifications, and the teacher apprenticeship initiative. A panel of college and technical school leaders then described how state and federal funding has supported local program growth and facility expansion. Santa Fe College, Palm Beach State College, North Florida Technical College, Lake Technical College, Florida Gateway College, and Manatee Technical College each cited increases in enrollment, high placement or licensure pass rates, and new or expanded programs in nursing, welding, CDL, automotive, manufacturing, public safety, and apprenticeship. Several speakers emphasized partnerships with hospitals, employers, school districts, and local governments, and noted that grants helped fund equipment, renovations, and new training hubs. Palm Beach State also raised a request to broaden line funding beyond nursing to other health science fields, and multiple presenters asked for more flexibility, multi-year support, and continued or increased funding to sustain growth. Members discussed broader challenges, including the difficulty of sustaining grant-funded growth after initial awards, the lag between enrollment growth and funding formulas, and alignment problems for dual enrollment and technical programs with high school schedules. Senators also noted the need to balance support for high-demand core programs like nursing and welding with the ability to respond quickly to emerging industries such as AI and space. The meeting ended with no formal action beyond adjournment after Senator Davis moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• If we take a look at that specifically, that is allocated based on...
• It's a straight per-pupil allocation. That's right. It's one-time money.
• What would you fund with your allocation? What types of activity?
• methodology as the best way to proportionally allocate those funds.
• methodology as the best way to proportionally allocate those funds.

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the May Revision’s Proposition 98 changes for K-12 and community colleges. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee rises by $6.4 billion over the Governor’s Budget across the three-year window, with higher guarantees in each year, full payment of the prior settle-up, and larger deposits into the school rainy-day fund. The LAO said the revenue and LCFF updates were reasonable, but urged caution about the settle-up approach and recommended using more of the available funding to protect ongoing programs and build budget resilience. Members focused heavily on the size of the proposed $3.9 billion settle-up, the $10.3 billion reserve deposit, declining K-12 enrollment, and how much of the new funding should be ongoing versus one-time. The committee then reviewed the community colleges portion of the budget. Finance described the May Revision’s higher SCFF COLA, additional funding for enrollment growth, a student support block grant, apprenticeship adjustments, and continued funding for deferred maintenance, Calbright, Common Cloud, and credit for prior learning. The Chancellor’s Office supported the core investments but asked for more funding for enrollment growth, changes to the growth formula, and a COLA for Student Equity and Achievement. The LAO recommended prioritizing the statutory COLA increase, noted that more than half of districts are already above current-year growth targets, and said the new adult learner demonstration project should be rejected because districts already have tools to support similar services. Members also discussed a $52 million current-year apportionment shortfall, which Finance said was discovered too late for the May Revision and would need to be addressed later. Finally, the committee took up the proposed implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance proposed one-time funding for the California Student Aid Commission and Cradle to Career to build eligibility and data systems, along with trailer bill changes to set up state approval processes. CSAC said the program is promising but highly complex, that California lacks the needed infrastructure, and that the state will need emergency regulations, data linkages, and ongoing funding beyond the one-time proposal. The LAO agreed that some initial funding is needed but warned that the amounts and ongoing costs remain uncertain and that the Legislature should carefully draft the trailer bill language. Members asked about timing, other states’ actions, and how the state would ensure the program is ready for students and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 4 would limit late fees in manufactured home parks to no more than 8% of the delinquent rent
• ><00:08:56.280> would<00:08:56.520> limit<00:08:57.040> late<00:08:57.400> fees
• <00:08:57.800> in Section 4 would limit late fees in Section 4 would limit late fees in manufactured
• So, looking at line 64 for the Housing Taxes and Fees Task Force, while there is no appropriation in
• Task Force, while the Taxes and Fees Task Force, while the there<00:21:47.520> is<00:21:47.640

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The conference committee on the housing omnibus bill began with member introductions and a staff walk-through comparing House and Senate provisions. House Research staff reviewed major policy differences affecting Minnesota Housing Finance Agency operations, including limits on how much the agency may retain from state appropriations for administrative costs, new reporting requirements, restrictions on transfers between appropriated accounts, and House-only language requiring annual expenditure of investment income from state appropriations. Senate provisions were also summarized, including tighter rules on when appropriations may be placed into Housing Development Fund bookkeeping accounts, updated operating-cost reporting, and Senate-only changes to how investment earnings may be used. Staff also described shared and differing provisions on program-money transfers, a lived-experience earnings exemption, and a long list of Senate-only policy changes, including manufactured home park tenant protections, low-income housing tax credit and bond-related changes, a task force on housing taxes and fees, and repealers affecting Housing Development Fund authority and certain older programs. Fiscal staff then reviewed the budget impacts. The House side included one-time appropriations for workforce housing development, family homeless prevention and assistance, a Minnesota Nice Home Share pilot, and homebuyer education, along with debt service for $100 million in housing infrastructure bonds and transfers/cancellations that produced a net zero general fund impact across the budget window. The Senate side noted a fiscal note for the housing taxes and fees task force and a smaller housing infrastructure bond authorization, with corresponding debt service costs and a total Senate budget-window impact of about $1 million in general fund debt service. After the staff presentations, the committee moved to public testimony. Commissioner Jennifer Ho of Minnesota Housing said the bill’s housing infrastructure bonds and continued support for family homeless prevention were important, and she supported the lived-experience earnings exemption, while noting concerns about the interest-earnings provisions. Testifiers from Greater Minnesota groups praised the workforce housing investments and Senate updates to the state housing tax credit and infrastructure grant program, though they suggested changes to the geographic distribution language. HOME Line urged funding for statewide tenant hotline services, citing rising demand and asking for $1 million if additional money becomes available. The Minnesota Consortium of Community Developers supported the bill’s investments and emphasized the need to pair housing development with supportive services. Housing First Minnesota praised housing infrastructure bonds and other investments but criticized the omission of the Minnesota Starter Homes Act. The Minnesota Multi Housing Association began testimony opposing certain rent-control-related provisions in the House bill. No votes or final actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It also makes sure that the definition of the 10% doesn't apply to an administrative fee, which some
• governments now deem to be encumbered when they apply that administrative fee of 10%.
• The $7 billion that we're talking about in capital outlay, yes, it's been allocated by members of the
• to administer those fees, but goes actually towards the project, that project can get that one-time
• to administer those fees, but goes actually towards the project, that project can get that one-time

Bills: HB111, HB61, HB43, HB156, HB70, SB3, HB103, HB109, HB128, HB247, HJM2, HJM3, HM7, HM17, HM4, HM22, HM23, HM24, HM26, HM2, HM16, HM32, HM11, HM14, HM21, HM34, HM50

Keywords: water law, state engineer, civil penalty, compliance order, water rights, overdiversion, illegal diversion, groundwater storage and recovery, well license, permit violation, water enforcement, New Mexico water code, irrigation district, conservancy district, water diversion, unauthorized water sales, measuring device, district court appeal, water resources, water compliance

Transcript Highlights:

• Unless it is amended to explicitly allocate 10% of bond proceeds to the CalHome program, California's
• It is an allocation of bond funds that is completely consistent with past funding levels for CalHome
• They should not have to worry about surprise fees, unclear rules, or arbitrary enforcement.
• Our late fees were $1,500. And we did, in fact, file a request for reconsideration.
• Some folks may have these fees stacked up so much that they actually end up losing their home.

Summary: The committee heard a long housing agenda with several bills presented before quorum was established. AB 1725, as amended, would require disclosure of nearby oil wells and methane monitoring issues in a specific district; the author and community witnesses described serious health and safety risks in Vista Hermosa Heights, while the California Apartment Association, California Building Industry Association, and California Chamber of Commerce opposed, arguing the bill targeted the wrong industry and that the state should instead fix abandoned wells directly. AB 2110, a local finance tool to create tax increment districts for workforce housing for education, health care, manufacturing, and public safety workers, drew no witnesses in support or opposition and was presented as a way to help workers live closer to jobs. AB 1732 would expand CEQA streamlining for public university and college housing projects; UC and several housing and labor groups supported it, while housing advocates raised concerns about amendments affecting existing 100% affordable housing exemptions. AB 1771, amended into a study bill, would direct HCD to report on the long-standing resident manager requirement for apartment buildings with 16 or more units; the rental housing industry supported studying the issue, while the chair emphasized the need to consider tenant protections and the impact on current resident managers before changing the law. The committee also heard AB 2185, which would direct state affordable housing programs to update guidelines to better support factory-built housing; it drew broad support from housing, labor, technology, and local government groups, with no opposition. AB 2748 would delay new EV-readiness requirements for 100% affordable housing developments, keeping the prior 40% standard through 2035; supporters said the higher standard would add significant costs and threaten project feasibility, while clean air and transportation advocates argued the code changes are modest, important for equity, and should not be rolled back. Members split along those lines, with some emphasizing housing production and others urging more public subsidy for EV infrastructure rather than delaying the code. SB 417, a proposed $10 billion affordable housing bond for the November ballot, received extensive support from housing organizations, local governments, labor, and business groups, but Habitat for Humanity and the Los Angeles mayor’s office asked for specific allocations for CalHome and interim housing; the bill was ultimately moved to Appropriations on an 8-0 vote, with members noting ongoing negotiations over funding priorities. Finally, AB 1740 would create an urban multimodal community designation for Santa Monica, allowing local approval of certain low-impact coastal-zone activities—such as some housing, bike and bus lanes, outdoor dining, and building changes—without Coastal Commission review. The author and Santa Monica officials said the bill would reduce delays and uncertainty for infill housing and local economic recovery while preserving protections for sensitive coastal resources; supporters included housing, business, and city groups. The Coastal Commission and environmental organizations opposed, saying the bill would carve out broad exemptions, weaken public access and appeal rights, and bypass the local coastal program process that Santa Monica has not completed. Committee members debated the Commission’s role, with some criticizing it for opposing legislation and others arguing the bill was a common-sense way to modernize coastal permitting. A motion and second were made on AB 1740, and the bill was left pending with the committee’s action to be taken when appropriate.

Transcript Highlights:

• And of the funding projections that we use, the department receives a statutory allocation of that.
• So there's just no revenue left there after everybody else gets their allocation of a motor fuel tax.
• And we're starting to see some revenues realized there based on a registration fee on an electric vehicle
• And we expect to have those funds, with the exception of about 20 million dollars, completely allocated
• the state election board revolving fund that consists mainly of two Things: one, candidate filing fees

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Up until 2021, the agency was totally run on fees, but we had been seeking fee increases there.
• Had not been a fee increase for 17 years.
• You mentioned fees and the.
• Could you also tell us how fees are approved?
• fees?

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• the board, whether it was wastewater, water, um, water fees are going to be increased, uh, DMV fees,
• even our golf fees.
• seen the details of any of the green fee seen the details of any of the green fee proposals<01:30
• So, the green fee proposal is to drain.
• today my understanding is impact fees are close to 27% of the housing cost.”

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Here again, we’re just going to balance this on fees, and we go back to a fee that was pre-TABOR like
• I mean, fees are a legitimate idea. A fee for service is a legitimate idea.
• create a fee to fund who knows what grift.
• And what is this fee going to be? Because it’s for printing documents. It’s for a document fee.
• It’s for a document fee.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with a color guard presentation by Colorado Military Academy cadets and the pledge led by Olivia and Owen Curry. After roll call established a quorum, members approved the journal of Friday, March 6, 2026, as corrected. Several committees then announced upcoming hearings, including Agriculture, Water, and Natural Resources; State, Civic, Military, and Veterans Affairs; and Finance. The chamber then took up House Joint Resolution 1020, designating March 8, 2026, as International Women’s Day in Colorado. The resolution praised women’s contributions across history and society, highlighted Colorado’s early adoption of women’s suffrage, and recognized trailblazing women in the General Assembly. Sponsors and supporters spoke at length about women’s leadership, economic and civic contributions, and the need to continue advancing equality. The resolution also drew recognition of women and advocacy organizations present in the chamber. Representative Bradley and other Republican members criticized the resolution as partisan and said Republican women were not included in drafting or sponsoring it. They argued the measure should have been more inclusive and should have better reflected women’s roles in the home and the broader bipartisan history of women’s history observances. Bradley announced she would vote no. In response, Representative Ricks said an amendment would be accepted from the minority caucus to address concerns about traditional roles of women, and he moved Amendment L002 for consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to focus on accountability to the taxpayers and, in the case of data seam, misguided allocation
• of their funding from Kentucky taxpayers, whether it's general fund appropriations or millions in fees
• of resources from the allocation of resources from the program's<00:03:33.599> purpose,<00:03
• So the allocation is not just a per-teacher breakdown. >> Um, so thank you.
• Um so the allocation is support as well.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met without a quorum and did not approve minutes, but heard testimony on budget line items for Data Seam and Teach for America. Andrew McNeel of Kentucky Free and representatives from the Commonwealth Policy Center argued that both programs rely heavily on recurring taxpayer support and should be re-evaluated. McNeel cited a 2020 Office of Policy and Audit examination of Data Seam, saying the program had received more than $30 million in state support since 2006, including $3.5 million in the current budget, and that the audit raised concerns about administrative overhead, alleged threats to districts, and the use of line-item language to justify sole-source contracting. He recommended suspending Data Seam funding this biennium, directing a new special audit, and requiring reimbursement of audit costs. The witnesses also urged the committee to withhold funding for Teach for America, saying the organization’s materials and history showed a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion that they opposed. They pointed to past statements, leadership titles, and program language as evidence that DEI concepts remained embedded in the organization, and suggested any funding should be redirected directly to school districts instead. Mike Harmon and Richard Nelson echoed those concerns, while also saying long-running programs should be periodically reviewed for efficiency. Teach for America Appalachia representatives then testified in support of the program. Executive director C.D. Morton described the organization as a teacher-preparation and leadership-development program serving rural eastern Kentucky, saying it had recruited and supported more than 325 teachers since 2011, with about 30 current core members in several counties and roughly 2,800 students impacted daily. He said the program helps fill hard-to-staff vacancies, that about 80% of teachers stay for a third year, and that many alumni remain in education. In response to questions from Representative Bojanowski about retention and cost, Morton said more than 60% of alumni are still in education, but he could not give a precise classroom-teacher retention number beyond the program’s broader alumni data.

Transcript Highlights:

• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the
• This measure will allocate an additional $55 million, in addition to other allocations, to expand the

Keywords: 910, house, all