Transcript Highlights:

• Current poverty level as designated by the federal government is a household income of $32,150 for a
• Increasing the state-subsidized program to 300% of federal poverty level would take the income threshold
• Current poverty level as designated by the federal government is a household income of $32,150 for a
• Increasing the state subsidized program to 300% of federal poverty level would take the income threshold
• So what are the income levels of the remainder of the families? Representative Worry.

Bills: HB1623

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Keywords: HB 1623, North Dakota, rural health, rural health transformation program, medical facility infrastructure loan fund, medical facility infrastructure loan program, rural health loan program, Bank of North Dakota, Department of Health and Human Services, HHS, federal grant, health care infrastructure, rural hospitals, critical access hospitals, nonprofit health care providers, gap financing, loan fund, public health funding, healthcare financing, Medicaid

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 1624, the “Universal Lunch Bill,” from Rep. Mike Nathie. He argued the proposal should be placed in Century Code rather than the Constitution so future legislatures can adjust it if state finances tighten, and said the bill would start the program a year earlier with a $65 million appropriation for one school year. DPI testified that the estimate did not include nonpublic schools that do not participate, and members questioned the impact on Title I, free-and-reduced applications, private-school accountability, breakfast mandates for schools that do not currently serve breakfast, and whether the funding could come from the DPI budget or other sources. Supporters, including North Dakota United, the North Dakota Catholic Conference, a pediatrician, and the American Heart Association, said universal meals improve student health and learning, reduce family costs, and are better handled in statute than by constitutional amendment. No opposition testimony was offered, and the chair closed the hearing for later work-session action. The committee then took up House Bill 1627, introduced by Rep. Tye Dressler, which would raise the income threshold for the state-funded school lunch program from 225% to 300% of poverty, with an estimated cost of about $7 million for 2026-27. Dressler said the bill is intended as a targeted, budget-friendly alternative to the ballot measure and emphasized that the state should maximize federal meal dollars while improving participation in the current program. Members questioned whether raising the threshold would actually increase utilization, whether a dollar amount would be clearer than a percentage, and how the change would affect federal reimbursements and application rates. DPI said it could quickly calculate additional percentage levels, and the chair closed the hearing, directing DPI to prepare more numbers for the work session. Finally, the committee opened Senate Bill 2403, presented by Sen. Schiable, to create a short-term bridge-loan program for financially distressed hospitals, centered on Jacobson Memorial Hospital in Elgin. The bill would authorize up to $5 million per loan, with a $10 million appropriation available on a first-come, first-served basis, and would run only through June 30, 2027. Schiable said the hospital’s debt and operating problems threaten local health care, ambulance service, and the community’s economy, and that the proposal was designed narrowly with Bank of North Dakota review to avoid creating a broad precedent. Committee members asked whether the appropriation could be reduced and whether the bank would still apply commercial feasibility and repayment standards; Schiable said yes, the bank would still evaluate the loan and could reject it if it was not sound.

Transcript Highlights:

• , so under 138% of the federal poverty level.
• above 100% of the federal poverty level.
• When you're talking about a family of four with Medi-Cal income eligibility, the highest income eligibility
• When you're talking about a family of four with Medi-Cal income eligibility, the highest income eligibility
• It is crucial for low-income people and working families.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California’s Medi-Cal program and on community health effects from recent immigration enforcement actions. Committee leaders said H.R. 1 would sharply reduce federal funding, increase administrative burdens, and worsen access to care, especially for Medi-Cal enrollees, immigrant families, rural communities, and reproductive health patients. The second half of the hearing examined how ICE raids and related federal actions are creating fear, reducing clinic and emergency department use, and disrupting children’s access to schools and early childhood education. Department of Health Care Services Director Michelle Bass outlined the main H.R. 1 provisions affecting Medi-Cal: work requirements, semiannual eligibility redeterminations, shorter retroactive coverage, new cost-sharing, limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments, reduced federal support for emergency and lawful immigrant coverage, and a one-year ban on Medicaid funding for prohibited abortion providers. She estimated millions could lose coverage, with tens of billions of dollars in federal funding at risk. Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California warned the defunding provision could force clinic closures, service reductions, and loss of access to family planning, STI testing, and cancer screenings. The California Hospital Association said the financing changes could cut hospital revenue by tens of billions over 10 years and threaten access, especially for rural and safety-net hospitals. The Western Center on Law and Poverty argued the law would increase churn, paperwork, and uninsured rates, disproportionately harming working adults and people experiencing homelessness. Committee members asked about implementation timelines, notification systems, administrative costs, the effect on immigrant eligibility, and whether California could delay or mitigate some provisions. Bass said the state was still assessing federal guidance, planning county and provider outreach, and exploring a possible delay for work requirements and a transition period for provider-tax changes. Members also discussed how state budget actions may need to be revisited in light of H.R. 1, and how California might preserve access through state-only funding or other policy changes. In the second panel, CHIRLA, Los Angeles County Department of Health Services, and the Children’s Partnership described the health consequences of immigration enforcement. Speakers said raids and data-sharing fears are causing anxiety, trauma, and avoidance of care, with Los Angeles County reporting declines in emergency, urgent care, and clinic visits after enforcement actions. The Children’s Partnership said school and early childhood absences are rising in some communities and that enforcement is undermining children’s emotional well-being and access to education. Members asked for more data and discussed possible state protections, telehealth, mobile care, and legal and policy responses to reduce fear and preserve access to health and education services.

Transcript Highlights:

• alternative nicotine products from the definition of tobacco products, exempts any Washington taxable income
• of tobacco products, which are prohibited from being sold online, exempts any Washington taxable income
• specification for certain types of compensation for purposes of calculating the combined disposable income
• as if it were 1989 and that requires a substantial is that looks at their income as if it were 1989
• And I'm particularly happy that, with all of the different counties and income levels in our state and

Bills: SB5994 , SB6244

Committee: House Finance

Keywords: timber tax, school funding, levy failure, tax distribution, education funding, tax exemption, agriculture, hazardous substances, crop protection, warehousing, 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I emphasize those benefits because what we're also seeing at the federal level is cuts to this programming
• We do have limitations on how much we can do at the state level when we combine the federal dollars,
• Everywhere in the state, if you're a low-income student, essentially, you are supposed to be eligible
• Especially if they're low-income.
• Now is the time followed by English learners and students in low-income households.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals for universal school meals, the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), and community schools. On universal meals, the Department of Education supported continued funding for the Universal School Meals Program and a fourth round of Kitchen Infrastructure and Training Grants, citing meal-count growth, improved meal service, and the need to offset federal uncertainty, inflation, and reduced direct certification tied to immigration-related policy changes. The LAO recommended rejecting another kitchen grant round, arguing prior rounds are still being spent and the state has not clearly defined unmet need. Members also raised concerns about the state’s ability to backfill federal meal funding and about how federal requirements affect programs like Summer EBT/SUN Bucks. Public commenters largely supported school meals and kitchen investments, with some urging support for plant-based milk options and continued infrastructure funding. For ELOP, the Department of Finance proposed $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding, including $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended going further and fully fixing the Tier 2 rate, saying rate uncertainty complicates district planning. CDE supported the proposal and said the program has improved attendance and academic outcomes, while noting new CalPADS reporting will provide more data soon. Senators discussed whether ELOP should remain a standalone program or be folded into LCFF, and whether the state should require stronger outcome reporting. Public testimony generally backed stabilizing Tier 2 funding, but some speakers urged more support for older youth and more timely, user-friendly reporting. On community schools, the administration proposed $1 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding to expand the model to thousands more schools and to support existing grantees, along with stronger technical assistance, statewide alignment, and an accreditation/self-certification framework. The LAO recommended continuing the current one-time grant approach instead of creating a new ongoing categorical program, warning about reduced flexibility, administrative burden, and the state’s capacity to support a much larger cohort. CDE supported the ongoing investment but asked for additional county office and technical assistance funding. Senators and public commenters were broadly supportive of community schools, emphasizing improved attendance, graduation, and student engagement, while also debating accountability, accreditation, and whether non-classroom-based charter schools should be eligible. Public testimony strongly favored ongoing funding and highlighted community schools’ role in mental health, family engagement, and wraparound supports.

Transcript Highlights:

• level, their co-pays are waived.
• And he's one of the higher income level earners. Does he need it? No. But does he need help? Yes.
• level?
• They're safe, regardless of an income level.
• At 400% level, you go to 600% level, it's $163,000 a year. That's a pretty good income.

Bills: SB204 , SB241 , HB34

Committee: Senate Senate Education

Keywords: higher education, research funding, federal funding, New Mexico, appropriation, University of New Mexico, New Mexico State University, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, child care, child care assistance, child care subsidy, early childhood education, early childhood care, daycare, preschool, pre-K, Head Start, Early Head Start, Children's Code, early childhood education and care department

Transcript Highlights:

• It serves very, very low income folks who meet specific criteria.
• level, so something to continue to pay attention to.
• It's more categorical in nature than based on the actual premium income.
• That is not sound tax policy, and that is not a level playing field.
• Again, this concerns the income of affiliates, not insurance companies.

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held a public hearing on nine bills. Senate Bill 5872 would create the Pre-K Promise Account to receive philanthropic donations for ECAP preschool slots; supporters, including DCYF, the governor’s office, and early learning advocates, said it would help expand access to high-quality pre-K with a 10-year Ballmer Group commitment for up to 10,000 new seats annually. Senators asked how the money would flow, and staff and witnesses explained it would be governed by an MOU and deposited annually; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5879 would eliminate two JLARC studies, one on lodging tax reporting and one on training benefits; supporters said the reports were duplicative and burdensome, while the hospitality industry warned against losing transparency, and no action was taken. Senate Bill 6047 would permanently codify various capital budget administration rules, including minor works flexibility and early learning grant changes; testimony focused on technical cleanup and on provisions affecting co-located child care and community projects, with no vote taken. Senate Bill 5988 would authorize the Department of Health to charge fees for accrediting opioid treatment programs, with support from DOH and tribal/nontribal providers who want the state to continue providing the service; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5923 would allow Island Hospital in Skagit County to qualify as a critical access hospital, with local hospital leaders and residents supporting the measure to improve reimbursement and sustain rural care; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5832 would raise the Lemon Law arbitration fee from $3 to $6 to fund the Attorney General’s consumer protection work, and the AG’s office, dealers, and the sponsor said the program is effective and underfunded; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5970 would make permanent the property tax exemption for multipurpose senior citizen centers, with AARP supporting the bill as a benefit to seniors and caregivers; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5994 would preserve timber tax distributions for school districts that recently had qualifying levies, and forest industry witnesses supported the bill while suggesting a possible amendment for state forest transfer lands; no vote was taken. Senate Bill 5949 would narrow the B&O tax exemption for insurance-related businesses so it applies only to the entity paying the insurance premiums tax, retroactive to 2019; the Department of Revenue and bill supporters argued it restores tax equity, while insurers, health plans, and business groups opposed it as retroactive, ambiguous, and likely to raise premiums. The committee heard extensive testimony on that bill, but the transcript ends with adjournment and no recorded vote or executive action.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then, of course, since so much has happened at the federal level, trying to mitigate those.
• At the federal level, trying to mitigate those effects.
• So costs are rising while our incoming tax revenue is relatively flat.
• So costs are rising while our incoming tax revenue is relatively flat.
• Most other states use income taxes to fund public schools.

Summary: Senate budget writers, led by Chair June Robinson with Senators Noel Frame and Derek Stanford, rolled out the Senate operating budget and described it as a difficult supplemental budget shaped by flat revenue growth, rising maintenance costs, and uncertainty from federal actions, including H.R. 1 and tariffs. They said the proposal aims to preserve core services such as K-12 education, health care, food assistance, housing stability, and long-term care while making targeted reductions and avoiding broad-based tax increases like sales, property, or B&O tax hikes. A major focus of the discussion was how to pay for the Working Families Tax Credit and how to handle cuts in the Working Connections child care program. Robinson said the Senate budget uses policy changes, especially an attendance-based payment adjustment, rather than the governor’s proposed enrollment cap and waitlist, because lawmakers wanted to avoid destabilizing the child care workforce and reduce harm to families. She also said the Senate is open to negotiating with the House on the Climate Commitment Act use of funds for the tax credit, noting that the statute allows it, though some advocates oppose that approach. The senators defended using $750 million from the rainy day fund, saying it was preferable to deeper cuts and still leaves reserves above $1 billion in the near term. They also argued that Washington’s revenue system is too dependent on property and sales taxes and that a future “millionaires tax” could help stabilize funding, especially for education and other core services. In response to criticism from educators and Republicans, they said the state has made progress on school funding and that rising program costs reflect increased need and utilization rather than waste. No votes were taken in the transcript, and the event was a budget rollout and press Q&A rather than a formal committee action.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:15:19.760><c> students</c> comment on your low low-income students comment on your low low-income
• Um, low-income enrollment too.
• </c><00:47:52.880><c> So,</c> Um, low-income enrollment too. So, Um, low-income enrollment too.
• </c><00:51:21.240><c> degrees</c> So, um those are higher-level degrees So, um those are higher-level
• </c> median household income of $104,000. median household income of $104,000.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Education met for its first summer interim meeting, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, and took roll. The first presentation came from Jerry Gels, principal of Ignite Institute in Erlanger, who focused on the rising cost of dual credit. He said dual credit tuition has increased from about $150 to $290 for a three-credit course over roughly five years, which he argued is discouraging participation, especially for working-class and low-income students. He cited Ignite data and broader college outcomes to argue dual credit improves college persistence, shortens time to degree, and reduces student debt, noting that many of his students enter college with substantial credit and that low-income students at Ignite have increasingly participated after targeted efforts and scholarship use. He also said the instructional labor is largely paid by county school systems, so he questioned the size of the tuition increase and said the committee should examine how the costs are being set and whether college tuition should be stabilizing as more students arrive with credits already earned. Members asked about who pays for dual credit, the role of state scholarship support, and whether tuition varies by institution. Gels said students in his district generally pay the dual credit cost themselves, though some districts may cover it, and he noted the dual credit scholarship now covers fewer classes than before. He said the price appears to be set centrally rather than varying by university, and he emphasized that the higher cost is creating barriers even though the courses are taught largely by local teachers on school payrolls. He also described Ignite’s efforts to expand access for free- and reduced-lunch students, saying participation among that group rose from 27% with no dual credit to about 90-92% taking at least one dual credit class. The committee then heard from the Goldwater Institute, represented by Michael Frazier and Dr. Tim Minella by Zoom. They argued Kentucky’s public universities should face stronger accountability and transparency, citing declining public confidence in higher education, rising costs, and what they described as administrative growth and research spending that does not clearly benefit students or the Commonwealth. They proposed requiring a 10-year accounting of staffing growth by category, comparing it to enrollment and low-income Kentucky enrollment, and limiting non-STEM faculty teaching releases for research unless approved under a baseline consent process. They also criticized certain university-funded research projects as examples of misdirected spending and said public reporting should distinguish Kentucky residents from non-residents more clearly, pointing to a reported decline in low-income in-state undergraduate enrollment. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, we collected data at the national and state levels. Thank you.
• And I'll just share a few very high-level findings.
• It dictates who can build income and wealth over a lifetime, and It dictates who can build income and
• programs at the state level and at the local levels to support specifically folks that don't have status
• Are witnessing the cuts at the federal level.

Summary: The Select Committee on Latina Inequities met at Los Angeles Mission College in Sylmar, hosted by Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez and joined by Assemblymember Mia Bonta. Rodriguez opened by framing the committee’s work around the economic status of Latinas and the effects of federal policies on the economy and social safety net, while the college president welcomed the committee and described campus services for undocumented and housing-insecure students. Rodriguez also emphasized the local impact of immigration enforcement in the San Fernando Valley and said the hearing would focus on Latinas’ economic conditions, immigration enforcement impacts on the workforce and safety, and H.R. 1’s effects on the safety net. The first panel featured HOPE’s Maria Morales and Dr. Elsa Macias, who presented findings from HOPE’s National Economic Status of Latinas report. They said Latinas are a major and growing part of California’s population and workforce, but face persistent inequities, including a large wage gap, higher unemployment, high uninsured rates, student debt, and affordability pressures around child care, housing, and education. They also discussed entrepreneurship, noting both the growth of Latina-owned businesses and barriers such as limited access to capital, technical assistance, and retirement and health coverage. In response to committee questions, they said higher education can still offer a strong return on investment, but only if students can complete degrees without being overwhelmed by debt and care costs; they also pointed to policy solutions such as SB 642, mentorship, financial literacy, CalSavers access, and support for community development financial institutions. The second panel focused on immigration enforcement and Latina safety in the workforce. Luis Nolasco of the ACLU described arrests tied to apparent ethnicity and Spanish-speaking, the chilling effect on families, and the loss of wages, school attendance, and mobility. Dr. Amada Armenta said immigration enforcement harms California’s economy, public health, and mixed-status families, and noted that undocumented workers are concentrated in agriculture, construction, and child care. SEIU’s Jen Baca Beltran said raids and school-based enforcement traumatize children and families and highlighted the need for Know Your Rights trainings. Megan Ortiz of IDEPSCA described repeated Border Patrol raids on day labor centers, injuries to staff, and the need to protect worker centers, domestic workers, and street vendors. Inclusive Action’s Shannon Camacho said raids have forced many informal workers to stop working, prompted emergency cash assistance and rent relief efforts, and strengthened advocacy for vendor protections and CDFI support. CHIRLA’s Jeanette Zanipatine said the rapid response network has expanded, documented widespread arrests and detention conditions, and is providing direct support and legal referrals; committee members asked about detention, maternal health, and what the state can do, and panelists urged stronger oversight, more legal representation, and protections for pregnant and detained people.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it requires that either the money is counted as spending at the state level or at the local level.
• the money is counted as spending at the state level or at the local level.
• In terms of our debt level, Tend to have very high reserve levels.
• of income tax or differing levels of sales tax, Or differing levels of income tax or differing levels
• We’re not going to lower taxes on upper-income people and raise them on lower-income people.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review held an informational hearing on ACA 20, the Save for California’s Future Act, and took no votes. The chair described the measure as a way to strengthen the state’s Rainy Day Fund by increasing reserves during strong revenue years and helping pay down long-term obligations. The vice chair said he preferred a broader spending rule tied to a rolling average of revenues, rather than the proposal’s reserve-focused approach. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained how Proposition 2 currently requires deposits into the Budget Stabilization Account and debt payments when revenues are strong, and how ACA 20 would change those rules by increasing required reserve deposits, raising the BSA target from 10% to 20% of General Fund revenues, creating a “super excess capital gains” deposit requirement, extending debt-payment requirements through 2040, and expanding eligible debt uses to include Proposition 98 settle-up, budgetary borrowing, and federal unemployment insurance debt. The Department of Finance said the administration supports the measure and believes it improves Proposition 2. Members asked about the Gann limit, whether the measure would allow more spending or simply change how deposits are counted, the impact on infrastructure and other programs, the size of the UI debt, and how the proposal would affect future budget flexibility. Several senators supported the goal of saving more in good years and using reserves to avoid painful cuts in downturns, while others questioned whether the proposal was sufficiently simple or whether a larger structural spending rule would be better. Public comment largely supported the measure, with one former legislative staffer arguing it follows earlier reserve reforms and helps address the state’s UI debt. The chair closed by noting the committee would not act that day and that the measure would be considered on the Senate floor the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> median income. median income.
• cap with a home uh household income cap with a home buyer<00:08:48.720><c> income</c><00:08:49.360><
• levels, will never be built.
• </c><00:48:54.559><c> We</c> income levels, will never be built.
• We income levels, will never be built.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> income and corporate franchise taxes. income and corporate franchise taxes.
• :04:40.000><c> it's</c><00:04:40.160><c> split</c> the income article because it's split the income article
• </c><00:05:13.440><c> tax</c> establish new individual income tax establish new individual income tax
• This again is a high-level overview.
• So I'll again is a high level overview.

Bills: HF9

Committee: House Taxes

Keywords: energy policy, renewable energy standard, carbon-free standard, solar standard, hydroelectric, hydropower, electric utility, Public Utilities Commission, PUC, renewable portfolio standard, carbon capture and sequestration, CCS, greenhouse gas emissions, climate policy, nuclear power plant, certificate of need, fossil fuel plant demolition, utility compliance delay, beneficial electrification, sales tax exemption

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:42:56.640><c> of</c> on the level of on the level of right<00:42:58.319><c> um</c><00:42:59.319
• </c> ended um I think I think at a 2% level ended um I think I think at a 2% level in<01:34:26.080><c
• or the 50% claimed at the 65% level or the 50% level<01:43:53.400><c> um</c><01:43:54.400><c> we</c>
• </c> on family income not the child's income on family income not the child's income it's<02:57:05.920
• income.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The House Finance Division 3 work session continued its review of the Department of Health and Human Services’ Medicaid budget and related policy issues, with CFO Nathan White and Medicaid Director Henry Litman presenting updated materials. The discussion focused on a crosswalk between the adjusted FY 2025 Medicaid budget and the governor’s FY 2026 recommendation, plus handouts showing service additions, eligibility changes, dental rates, and other Medicaid changes since 2019. The department also said it would provide a clearer breakdown of the pharmacy cost-sharing item by general, federal, and other funds. Members asked detailed questions about the Medicaid enhancement tax, the 80% plan, and how funds are allocated between hospital payments, directed payments, and DSH uncompensated care. The department explained that the MET is being used more toward rates and directed payments to better align with federal matching rules, while DSH remains important for uncompensated care. They also noted that a pending Senate Bill 249 would keep the 80% structure and move to Senate Finance. On the trigger law, the department identified the governing provision as Chapter 342:12, Laws of 2018, and explained that if the federal match for Medicaid expansion falls below 90%, the state must notify legislative leaders and participants and the program would sunset after 180 days unless the legislature acts. The committee also reviewed current Medicaid expansion enrollment and program trends. Officials said enrollment was just under 59,000 as of March 3, with about 87,000 people enrolled over the past year and more than a quarter-million residents having used the program over its lifetime. They said enrollment has fallen from a post-pandemic high of nearly 97,000 and may eventually settle in the low 50,000s. Finally, the department discussed federal DSH funding risk, saying New Hampshire could face a significant reduction if Congress does not extend current protections, which is part of why the state has shifted more funding toward payment rates and directed payments.

Transcript Highlights:

• So on— For the lower, as your income level goes lower.
• The individuals at the very lowest income levels might be getting something close to an 80% discount,
• but at the highest income levels that might look more like a 20% discount.
• And this affordability fund is here to make health insurance affordable based on income level, so it
• So the level of discount is tied to income. Thank you for that. Mr. Chair, I think this...

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 7, the Apprenticeship Assistance Act, which would keep apprenticeship trust fund distributions at $2.5 million rather than reducing them and remove a reference to the tobacco settlement permanent fund. Labor, construction, business, and environmental groups testified in support, emphasizing workforce development, retention of workers in New Mexico, and expansion of apprenticeship opportunities. The bill was moved and adopted without opposition. Members then considered House Bill 66, as amended, to increase funding for health professional loan repayment and related workforce supports. The amendment struck an appropriation because the funding was already included in House Bill 2. Testimony from health care providers, chambers of commerce, social workers, and physical therapy advocates supported the bill as a way to address provider shortages and improve recruitment and retention. After questions about eligibility, repayment terms, and overlap with similar Senate bills, the committee voted to do pass the bill as amended. House Bill 96, creating a working group to study a possible New Mexico Space Commission, was also amended to strike an appropriation. Support came from the chamber, Virgin Galactic, and aerospace advocates, who said a commission could help coordinate economic development and workforce efforts in the space sector. Members asked about other states’ commissions, workforce pathways, and the working group’s timeline, and the sponsor agreed to add clearer dissolution language later. The committee then passed the bill as amended. The committee then took up House Bill 80, a committee substitute to redirect more of the oil and gas conservation tax to the reclamation fund for orphan well plugging and site remediation. Supporters from industry, environmental groups, tribal advocates, and chambers said the bill would better align the tax with its original purpose and provide stable funding for cleanup, while an opponent argued the bill shifts costs from industry to the public and should instead raise the tax or bonding requirements. After discussion of backlog, phase-in timing, and procurement reforms, the committee voted do pass. The committee also heard House Bill 4, as amended, which phases in a larger share of premium surtax revenue to the Health Care Affordability Fund over three years. Supporters said it would sustain BeWell enrollment and affordability programs, while opponents questioned the burden on private payers and the size of the general fund impact. The committee adopted the substitute and then passed it on a 10-7 vote. Finally, the committee approved House Bill 65, as amended, creating a Foster Care Plus pilot project for children in CYFD custody, with testimony both supporting the need for better services and cautioning that implementation should respect tribal law, cultural practices, and family reunification. The committee also tabled House Bill 68 at the sponsor’s request. The transcript then began discussion of House Bill 88, which would make minor changes to the land grant assistance fund, including capturing reverted payments that currently go back to the general fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just on the expenditure plan, I have a few high-level comments.
• We haven't seen levels this low in five years.
• Why take away the income qualification? Great questions.
• There's money there in the interest and income and rollover funds to do that.
• There's money there in the interest, income, and rollover funds to do that.

Summary: The subcommittee heard testimony on the governor’s proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit, which would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold for use in California from 2026 to 2036. The Department of Finance and CARB argued the credit would help decarbonize aviation, support refinery transitions, and keep fuel production and jobs in California. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, saying it is a relatively expensive way to reduce greenhouse gases, could have uncertain or limited climate benefits, and would reduce diesel excise tax revenue that supports highways, local streets and roads, and other transportation programs. A major point of debate was whether the credit would simply shift limited feedstocks from renewable diesel to SAF rather than create new low-carbon fuel supply. Professor Aaron Smith and the LAO said that because feedstocks such as used cooking oil, tallow, and vegetable oils are limited and already used in other fuel markets, the policy could increase SAF at the expense of renewable diesel, with possible increases in fuel prices and little net emissions benefit. Administration and CARB staff disputed that outcome, saying additional waste-based feedstocks are available and that the policy would not meaningfully raise gasoline or diesel prices. Senators focused on feedstock availability, impacts on road funding, fairness to consumers, and whether the proposal was really aimed at preserving specific refineries such as Phillips 66. Public comment was sharply divided. Labor representatives, refinery workers, airlines, Boeing, airports, and some local residents supported the proposal, emphasizing jobs, refinery investment, and aviation’s need for a liquid-fuel decarbonization pathway. Environmental and transportation groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, World Resources Institute, Earthjustice, California Environmental Voters, counties, cities, and trucking and asphalt associations, opposed it, citing weak net climate benefits, possible fuel-price impacts, and losses to transportation funding. No vote was taken; the chair announced all items would be held open for a future hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So these projects represent various levels of maturity in design.
• levels, you need to find additional funds to support those people.
• And other communities that have lower incomes might need that.
• First, you have a main incoming station. First, you have a main incoming station.
• Are they working in areas that are low income?

Committee: Joint Joint Transportation Committee

Summary: The committee first heard a presentation from WSDOT on balancing uncertainty in capital program estimates and cash flow management. WSDOT explained the differences between design-bid-build and design-build delivery, its tiered risk-assessment process by project size, and how it uses base estimates, inflation, and risk modeling to set budgets. Staff said design-bid-build estimates are generally accurate within about 1% across the program, while design-build projects carry much wider uncertainty and are better communicated as ranges; they cited a P85 budget approach and noted that large, complex projects can be affected by market competition and long procurement timelines. Members asked about the Columbia River Bridge cost growth and about value engineering, and WSDOT said it uses value engineering but has limited scope to cut costs because of project requirements and policy mandates. Troy Swing also discussed cash flow, noting that a few large projects can significantly affect biennial funding needs, and said a risk pool would not reduce overall program risk but could help manage timing if paired with appropriation and cash-flow controls. The committee then received the final presentation in the WSDOT Project Delivery and Innovative Practices study from HKA Global. The consultant said WSDOT’s estimating practices are generally robust and recommended improving transparency by presenting budget authorizations as ranges or estimate classes, better tracking estimate growth over time, and adjusting advertisement timing to avoid competing lettings. The report also discussed surety bonding, suggesting the legislature consider restoring authority for reduced bonding on select large design-build projects or using phased bonding and alternative securities. On indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracting, the consultant said current job order contract rules are restrictive and recommended legislative changes to make such tools more usable, especially for smaller tasks and to help use unspent funds more flexibly. The committee also heard a follow-up presentation on transit-oriented development policy recommendations tied to HB 1491. The Urban Institute’s Yona Freemark said Washington has been a national leader on TOD but that housing construction, especially in the Puget Sound, has slowed sharply since 2022. He said rising construction costs, high financing costs, and local tax and rent conditions are making many TOD projects infeasible, and recommended that the state fill infrastructure funding gaps around stations, revisit MFTE affordability requirements, consider minimum rather than average density requirements near transit, and create a statewide system to track TOD outcomes such as affordability, gentrification, and transit access. Members questioned the study’s developer interviews, the role of rent control and crime, property tax assumptions, and parking needs; the presenter said the study included five private developers, that rent control was not part of the study scope, and that parking was included in the model assumptions. Finally, the committee began a presentation on regulating emissions from ocean-going vessels at berth. Staff and consultants described California-style at-berth rules, which require shore power or equivalent emissions controls so ships can shut off diesel auxiliary engines while docked. The study is examining vessel traffic, emissions reductions, implementation costs, labor and operational needs, and possible effects on port competitiveness and cargo diversion. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it requires that either the money is counted as spending at the state level or at the local level.
• the money is counted as spending at the state level or at the local level.
• In terms of our debt level,... Tend to have very high reserve levels.
• of income tax or differing levels of sales tax, Or differing levels of income tax or differing levels
• We're not going to lower taxes on the upper-income... ...people and raise them on the lower-income people

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The bill does prohibit a participating utility from reducing the level of low-income energy assistance
• Avista serves a service area and a customer base that is well below median income.
• Ceded Low Income 120 blah passed in 2019 was well intended but had unintended consequences.
• pay more than 6% of income on energy costs every year.
• income on energy costs every year.

Summary: The committee first waived the five-day notice rule for several House bills, then took up public hearings on HB 2426, HB 1742, HB 2215, HB 2575, HB 1903, and HB 2606. HB 2426 would allow the Pollution Control Hearings Board, with party consent and board approval, to hear permit appeals in alternative smaller compositions to improve efficiency; the sponsor and supporters from Greater Grays Harbor and FutureWise said it would speed up reviews without harming environmental protections, while the bill was described as cost-neutral. HB 1742 would create a Center for Environmentally Sustainable Urban Design at Ecology to promote sustainable building and design competitions; the sponsor emphasized regenerative, biophilic design and a proposed showcase project, and the bill was presented as budget-neutral through outside funding, though the fiscal note was still pending. HB 2215 would tighten Climate Commitment Act compliance for certain newer fuel suppliers by lowering the emissions threshold for post-2023 suppliers, exempt lubricants, and add procurement and transparency requirements. The sponsor said the bill targets “paper distributors” and loopholes used to avoid coverage; Ecology supported closing the loophole but raised concerns about reporting thresholds, implementation, staffing, and rulemaking. Testimony was mixed: the propane association and Washington Oil Marketers Association were concerned about the two-tier threshold and urged stronger upstream enforcement instead, while Climate Solutions and Washington Conservation Action supported the bill as a way to prevent gaming and strengthen climate policy. HB 2575 would reduce several environmental and energy reporting obligations, including less frequent utility reporting under the Energy Independence Act and state energy strategy updates; Commerce and the sponsor said the changes would reduce duplicative reporting and save money, while preserving core protections and oversight. HB 1903 would establish a statewide low-income energy assistance program in the Department of Commerce, phased in by 2027, to supplement existing utility programs and target households with the greatest energy burden. The sponsor and many advocates described the bill as an affordability measure to address a large unmet need, while community action agencies, utilities, and rural representatives supported the goal but asked for clearer language on voluntary utility participation, funding sources, allocation formulas, and how the program would interact with existing utility and weatherization efforts. Several speakers stressed that the program should not replace local assistance and should be designed to avoid shifting costs onto ratepayers. HB 2606 would update the Office of Privacy and Data Protection’s duties and reporting requirements, including adding review of agency AI projects and aligning the office’s work with JLARC recommendations; the chief privacy officer testified in support, explaining that the bill would formalize AI risk review, human oversight, and existing privacy/security review processes, with no fiscal impact. No votes were taken on the bills during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> payments based on their monthly income. payments based on their monthly income.
• aspects</c><00:40:53.920><c> that</c> um income levels and other aspects that um income levels and other
• one and go after level two.
• one and go after level two.
• </c> uh and to hold a high level of quality. uh and to hold a high level of quality.

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call: 0:00:00 Approval of Minutes: 0:01:45 Federal Education Updates 0:02:12 Dual Credit Updates: 0:43:38 Kentucky State University's Doctoral Program Request: 01:27:08 Postsecondary Accreditation: 1:49:05 Consideration of Referred Administrative Regulations: 2:14:48 Adjournment 2:16:31, 958, all

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the previous meeting minutes, and heard a presentation from Austin Reid of the National Conference of State Legislatures on education-related provisions in the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1). Reid said the law is projected to increase the federal deficit over 10 years, with major savings coming from Medicaid, student loan changes, and SNAP. He focused on how those changes could affect schools, including possible effects on free and reduced-price meal certification, state funding formulas that use SNAP as a proxy for low-income status, and Medicaid-funded school services for students with disabilities. Reid also outlined the new federal scholarship tax credit, which gives a dollar-for-dollar credit for donations to qualifying scholarship-granting organizations. He said families up to 300% of area median income may benefit, the program begins in 2027, and states must opt in and designate eligible organizations. He noted unresolved questions about whether states can add their own criteria and said Treasury regulations will be important. He also described the expansion of 529 plans to cover more K-12 and postsecondary expenses. On higher education, Reid explained a new workforce Pell grant option for short-term programs, with states and governors playing a role in determining eligible programs. He said the programs must meet placement, completion, and earnings measures and that implementation is expected to be tight before the July 1, 2026 effective date. He also reviewed student loan changes, including lower institutional loan limits, prorated borrowing for part-time enrollment, new caps on graduate and Parent PLUS loans, and a new earnings-based accountability standard that could make some programs ineligible for student loans if graduates earn too little. No votes were taken beyond approval of the minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Madam Chair, is there a specific level of vegetation management that your model assumes?
• With that monopoly, they were able to subsidize service for low-income individuals.
• They're qualified at the federal level, and right now they claim $3.50.
• it through Vantage Point at the New Mexico level, and they can distribute the funds.
• But we feel that we can do at that level.

Committee: House Science, Technology & Telecommunications Committee