Transcript Highlights:

• But when government, nonprofits, and communities work together, we don't just rebuild what was lost.
• Leaders, as well as some state leaders and veterans in state government.
• in state government.
• support stronger, more efficient, more effective nonprofit-government partnership.
• Indirect rates on their government contracts. Forty-nine percent received between 6 to 10 percent.

Summary: The joint Senate and Assembly select committee hearing focused on the challenges facing California nonprofits in 2025 and possible state responses. Opening remarks emphasized the sector’s size and importance, the impact of federal funding disruptions and tax policy changes, and the need for stronger public-private partnerships, especially in disaster response and recovery. Witnesses from community foundations, food banks, Cal OES, long-term recovery groups, CalNonprofits, and nonprofit finance organizations described funding uncertainty, delayed reimbursements, reduced indirect cost coverage, staffing strain, and the effects of climate disasters and immigration-related fear on service delivery. Testimony highlighted several policy ideas, including advance payments for state grants and contracts, prompt payment standards, sustainable indirect cost rates, contract flexibility in emergencies, streamlined registration and reporting, and a possible new Office of Nonprofit Empowerment to serve as a central point of contact and coordination within state government. Speakers also described how nonprofits and VOAD networks support wildfire response and long-term recovery, but noted that recovery groups often lack stable operating funding even when they are recognized as best practice. A food bank leader described federal food aid cuts and disruptions to deliveries, while other witnesses stressed that nonprofits are increasingly forced to use reserves, loans, or service reductions to manage cash flow gaps. Committee members generally expressed support for the sector and asked how the state could better partner with nonprofits during both disasters and budget crises. Several members raised the possibility of incremental steps if full legislative changes are not immediately feasible, and witnesses suggested pilots, better sharing of best practices, and stronger state leadership on payment timelines. Public commenters echoed the need for better contracting practices, support for community-based organizations, and attention to nonprofit worker compensation and protections. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the hearing, which concluded with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Three other counties that do have your city government and your county government, and what I find really
• Administered directly to local governments.
• The local government road fund is a little bit more complex.
• They have a 95% state funding to 5% match for the local government.
• Page 13 starts with the local government road fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• Looking at Kansas, Kansas statute dictates that the governing body of any local government must use accounting
• Montana statute dictates that the governing body of all government entities must ensure that a financial
• Standards including a small government financial reporting framework that applies to local government
• It should be the governing body that is the governing body that is making sure that those corrections
• We talk about government transparency.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Government may punish criminal acts.
• The current protests against ICE has created a situation where our government, our federal government
• So the government surveilled Dr.
• The government that can hide its actions is a government that can target without consequences.
• This government and all governments. Um, Lisa Lloyd is our final speaker. Sorry about that.

Summary: The committee first considered CS/SB 536, which updates Florida’s criminal gang statutes to reflect modern gang recruitment and communication methods, including social media and encrypted messaging. Senator Martin said the bill does not criminalize gang membership, but clarifies definitions used for gang-related enhancements and law enforcement investigations. Members raised concerns about the meaning of “observed in the company” of gang members and possible impacts on businesses and bikers; Martin said the language was not intended to reach ordinary business customers and that the bill still requires other criteria. The committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably after debate, with some members supporting it and others warning it was still too broad. The committee also approved CS/SB 762, allowing cross-jurisdictional assignment of conflict capital cases with cost and reporting requirements, after an amendment emphasizing judicial economy and geographic proximity; the bill was described as a cost-saving measure and was reported favorably. CS/SB 1742, creating a new offense for indecent exposure or sexual acts directed at minors under 16, was amended to align with the House version and to cover observing a child for sexual gratification, then reported favorably. CS/SB 1750, increasing penalties and mandatory minimums for serious sex crimes and child sexual abuse material offenses, was amended to restore some current-law provisions and limit reclassification to offenders who were 18 or older at the time of the offense, then reported favorably. The committee also approved CS/SB 1582 on statewide data sharing for secondhand dealer and pawnbroker transactions, along with its companion public-records bill SB 1792, both described as theft-prevention and law-enforcement tools with confidentiality protections and stakeholder support. CS/SB 500, providing FDLE protective security for major-party nominees for statewide constitutional offices, was also reported favorably after a technical amendment. The longest and most contentious discussion was on CS/SB 1632, which would create a process for Florida to designate foreign and domestic terrorist organizations, restrict courts from enforcing foreign or religious law when it conflicts with state or federal law, and bar public funds from supporting designated organizations. Senator Graal said the bill targets conduct, not belief, and creates due-process protections through written findings, public notice, cabinet action, and judicial review. Senator Smith and Senator Polsky repeatedly questioned whether the bill’s use of terms like “promotion” could chill protected speech, academic debate, protest activity, or legal representation, and whether the designation process could be used politically or against religious and advocacy groups. Graal said promotion was meant to cover support for illegal acts, not mere disagreement or academic speech, and said she was open to clarifying language. Numerous speakers opposed the bill, arguing it was vague, unconstitutional, and likely to be used against Muslim communities, students, nonprofits, and dissenting political speech; a few supporters argued it was needed for public safety and to prevent state support for terrorism. The committee did not take a final vote on CS/SB 1632 in the portion provided, and the transcript ends during public testimony on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal government is trying.
• And in reality, governance from the local level is the best governance.
• And in reality, governance from the local level is the best governance.
• we use within state government.
• We have a lot of it in state government, right?

Summary: The committee held its first meeting on artificial intelligence and data centers, established a quorum, and heard introductory remarks from Majority Leader Hogue and the chair about the committee’s charge. Members said the goal was to build a factual foundation on AI, hear from experts and stakeholders, and develop practical North Dakota-focused recommendations rather than simply produce a large volume of bills. Legislative Council also reviewed interim committee rules and procedures before the informational presentations began. Staff and NCSL presenters then gave overviews of AI concepts and the state and federal policy landscape. The background memo and presentations covered AI categories and terms, state laws in areas such as consumer protection, algorithmic discrimination, deepfakes, chatbots, children’s safety, health, education, and government use, as well as data center siting and economic impacts. NCSL described a growing number of AI bills introduced and enacted across the states, with comprehensive laws in places like Utah, Colorado, Texas, California, and Illinois, and noted recurring issues around transparency, privacy, liability, and protections for minors. A major focus of the discussion was federal preemption and the tension between state regulation and national AI policy. NCSL said a recent White House executive order and related federal framework seek a light-touch, innovation-friendly national standard, with possible challenges to state laws and possible funding conditions tied to compliance, though no broad federal preemption has yet been enacted. Members asked about Commerce Clause concerns, industry pushback, oversight models, and whether AI policy is bipartisan; presenters said the issue cuts across party lines, with broad agreement on child safety and deepfake restrictions but more disagreement on broader regulatory approaches. No votes or formal actions were taken at the meeting, and the committee recessed briefly for technical issues during the second presentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll yield back. government contracts and government contracts and subsidies<00:08:58.519> never
• <00:45:45.119> as understand our system of government as understand our system of government
• Statesman and special government Statesman and special government employee<02:37:28.240> uh
• , but a land where a man governs, or a woman governs, a person governs.
• > person governs or a woman governs a person governs or a woman governs a person governs<04:03

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Thursday, February 13, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So combining that local government training with the AAM toolkit, this will set our local governments
• It's being provided to local governments.
• We think that, you know, those local governments want to hear from us as well.
• It's being provided to local governments.
• because there is that local government role.

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee met and first received an update from FDOT on the Sun Trail shared-use nonmotorized trail program. FDOT said the program, created in 2015 and expanded by 2023 legislation, now includes connections to the Florida Wildlife Corridor and received a one-time $200 million appropriation plus increased annual funding. The department reported programming about $180 million of that funding, completing 42 construction projects totaling nearly 95 miles in 21 counties, and installing trail counters and QR-code surveys to measure usage and economic impact. Members expressed support for the program and asked no substantive questions. The committee then heard a presentation on FDOT’s locally administered state transportation funding programs, including SCOP, SCOPM, SCRAP, SIGP, and TRIP. FDOT explained these programs support local roadway resurfacing, bridge repair, drainage, paving unpaved roads, and safety or capacity improvements, with varying state match levels depending on the program and eligibility. FDOT said its adopted five-year work program includes more than $1.4 billion for local transportation improvement projects. A member asked whether toll revenues from Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties fund these programs; FDOT said it would research the funding source and follow up. The committee’s main discussion was a panel on advanced air mobility (AAM), including FDOT and industry representatives from Supernal, Joby, Atlantic Aviation, Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, and Eve Air Mobility. FDOT described its AAM planning work, advisory committee, local government guidebook, and upcoming training, while panelists emphasized Florida’s leadership, the likely use of existing airport and heliport infrastructure first, and the expectation that private investment will fund much of the early vertiport buildout. Members raised concerns about community acceptance, privacy, zoning, airspace congestion, security, and lessons from scooters and drones. Panelists repeatedly stressed a “crawl, walk, run” rollout, local government coordination, multimodal connectivity, and public outreach. No votes were taken, and the committee adjourned after the panel.

Transcript Highlights:

• theft and uh fraud in state government theft and uh fraud in state government programs<00:06:36.080
• > but in fraud in our government programs but in fraud in our government programs but also<00:
• <00:07:15.319> program be whether it's a a government program be whether it's a a government
• Campbell noted was theft of government Campbell noted was theft of government fund<00:08:06.960>
• and within the federal state government and within the federal government<00:43:05.920> to<00

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It also allows local government to establish the registry of qualified contractors with a minimum of
• It also can shorten the administrative cost of local government for the registries.
• But I can tell you that this bill has a lot of features that will really help local government.
• Approval or denial of plats will still rest with local government.
• We work really closely with local governments on their comprehensive plans.

Bills: S0014, S0016, S0024, S0168, S0288, S0548, S0686, S0830, S1138, S1234

Keywords: negligence, settlement, police conduct, municipal liability, personal injury, compensation, injuries, Miami-Dade County, rural electric cooperatives, energy production, Florida law, energy tariffs, regulation, impact fees, transportation capacity, local government, interlocal agreements, growth management, community planning, extraordinary circumstances

Summary: The committee met with a quorum present and took up a series of local claims, public records, growth management, permitting, and nuisance bills. It first heard and approved SB 16, SB 14, and SB 24, all uncontested claims bills providing relief related to injuries or settlements involving the City of St. Petersburg and Miami-Dade County. The committee also approved SB 288 on rural electric cooperatives, which narrows statutory language to protect co-op decisions on generation and power purchases while preserving consumer protections, and SB 830, which creates a public records exemption for certain personal information of county and city managers and their families due to reported threats against local officials. Members then considered SB 1138 on qualified contractors and development review, which would create a registry of licensed professionals to help local governments process pre-application reviews and plats more quickly. Local government groups raised concerns about preemption and preserving quasi-judicial authority, while private-provider supporters backed the bill; Senator Sharief voted no, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee also approved SB 168, expanding public nuisance law to include gambling houses and increasing penalties, and SB 686 on agricultural enclaves, which revises the enclave process, adds a public hearing path, limits it to certain residential projects in urban service areas, and was amended to change a date to June 30, 2026 before being reported favorably. The committee next approved CS for SB 548 on growth management and impact fees, which clarifies plan-based methodology, extraordinary circumstances, interlocal agreements, and refund procedures for improper fee collections. Testimony reflected support for clearer standards but also concerns about fee increases and refund administration. Finally, SB 1234 on building permits and inspections was reported favorably; it would extend permit validity, exempt some low-value work from permitting, create a statewide residential permit form, speed review timelines, and expand private-provider use, drawing opposition from a Miami-Dade building official who argued for continued local oversight and support from private-provider advocates. Senator Jones requested to be recorded as voting affirmatively on several tabs and negatively on tab 9, and the committee adjourned after all bills were disposed of.

Transcript Highlights:

• stand at risk if the federal government stand at risk if the federal government if<00:02:56.120>
• is not a Minnesota state government problem.
• is not a Minnesota state government problem.
• is not a Minnesota state government problem.
• is not a Minnesota state government problem.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think from other units of government I think from other units of government one<01:08:33.359><
• uh quirks of us as a unit of government uh quirks of us as a unit of government is<01:10:41.560>
• <01:19:30.840> and between local units of government and between local units of government
• down here about County governance down here about County governance everything<01:21:01.040>
• c> um<01:23:22.159> we government our County governments um we government our County governments

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard testimony from Jeff Sigerson, executive director of the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, who outlined the board’s mission and core programs: campaign finance disclosure, economic interest statements, and lobbying registration/reporting. He described the board as an independent agency with six members, noted current vacancies and confirmation requirements, and said the board’s budget request was essentially flat, with a base budget of about $1.793 million and most costs tied to salaries, office space, and other fixed expenses. He also reviewed the board’s enforcement structure, emphasizing civil-only penalties, a complaint-driven process, and the availability of reports, enforcement actions, and advisory opinions on the board’s website. Sigerson highlighted several recent and upcoming changes. Local ballot question committees for city, school district, levy, and bond issues now must register with the board if they exceed $750 in activity, and the board is preparing outreach and online registration tools to help local committees comply. He also discussed the public subsidy and political contribution refund programs, saying the board paid out about $2.12 million to 230 House candidates in 2024, that 93% of candidates signed the subsidy agreement, and that 2023 PCR refunds totaled about $447,000 for candidates and $1.616 million for party donors. He noted that the PCR maximum refund was recently increased from $50 to $75 per donation, and that payments could drop significantly in 2026 if the one-time supplement is not renewed. A major focus of the presentation was the board’s lobbying report and related legislative recommendations. Sigerson said the board is moving from tracking marginal expenses to tracking the subjects and entities being lobbied, and that lobbying will be expanded from certain metro-area governmental units to all cities, counties, school districts, townships, and other political subdivisions, potentially adding thousands of lobbyists. He said the board held two public hearings and received 23 written comments on proposed changes. The board’s main recommendations were to broaden the expert-testimony exception so that certain paid experts at local hearings would not need to register as lobbyists, while still requiring disclosure of who testified, before whom, and on what subject, and to adjust the current lobbying definition for local government employees and officials who spend more than 50 hours a month on intergovernmental lobbying work.

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 4011, HOA's duties — Government.
• Regulatory Affairs and Government Efficiency.
• HCR 2013, Celebrate Life Month — Government.
• And this bill says, go right ahead, government.
• And this bill says, go right ahead, government.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The meeting opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, attendance, and several guest introductions, including the Doctor of the Day, realtors visiting for Realtor Day, and a representative from Home of Hope. The Senate then handled a large number of bill referrals and second-reading items before moving into Committee of the Whole on multiple calendars. Several bills were advanced with committee and floor amendments, including SB 1494, SB 1497, SB 1503, SB 1535, SB 1544, SB 1580, SB 1582, SB 1584, SB 1585, SB 1602, SB 1632, SB 1723, and SB 1798. Many of the amendments were described as technical cleanups, but some made substantive changes, such as SB 1535’s provisions on sealing records for sex-trafficking victims and SB 1723’s domestic-violence release and monitoring provisions. The Committee of the Whole also adopted a report recommending several bills do pass as amended. The chamber adopted House Concurrent Resolution 264 honoring former Senator Barbara Leff, followed by a moment of silence and remarks from her family. The Senate then returned to Committee of the Whole for Calendar 1, where it retained SB 1332 and advanced SB 1654, SB 1711, SB 1743, SCR 1047, and HB 2993. HB 2993 drew the most debate: opponents argued it had a single-subject problem, relied on funding from the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Fraud Fund, and could create unnecessary outside-counsel costs for DPS, while supporters cited the need for the supplemental and defended the funding approach. The motion to report HB 2993 do pass carried by division, 16-13. In third reading, the Senate passed HB 4115 and a series of Senate bills, including SB 1012, SB 1213, SB 1416, SB 1474, SB 1511, SB 1549, SB 1573, SB 1634, SB 1647, and SB 1649, with several passing on close 16-13 votes. Debate centered heavily on immigration enforcement, concealed carry in businesses serving alcohol, CDL and driver-license issues, campaign finance disclosure, and a digital asset reserve fund. Members on both sides repeatedly explained votes on constitutional, public safety, fiscal, and civil-rights grounds. The session ended with bills transmitted to the House after passage.

Transcript Highlights:

• governance problem. governance problem.
• It's government transparency.
• It's government transparency. requests. It's government transparency.
• interest from the federal government. interest from the federal government.
• I'm with Open Government.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee continued its hearing on enforcement and compliance with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, first taking additional public testimony from Melissa Zimmerman and Matt Senot of the East Side Corridor residents in Owatonna. They described submitting roughly two dozen data requests across several government entities related to a proposed highway project, saying some agencies responded but others did not, and that even after they substantially prevailed in a data practices complaint and the court imposed a maximum civil penalty, they still did not receive meaningful access to the records. Zimmerman said the lack of access harmed their ability to comment on the project’s environmental review, and both witnesses argued that the law needs stronger enforcement, realistic timelines, better communication, and more accessible remedies for requesters who cannot afford repeated litigation. They also raised practical barriers such as inaccessible file formats, missing software on a county-provided laptop, and the need for electronic delivery options. The committee then heard from Eric Johnson of Anoka County, who testified about Chapter 13 issues involving third-party polygraph data used in probation monitoring. He argued that when the state relies on third-party-generated summaries, the responsible authority’s obligations for access, retention, and correction are unclear, and there is no effective remedy when the third party does not respond. Johnson said the county directed him to seek raw data from the third party, which had not responded, and he warned that short retention periods can make data subject rights unenforceable if the records are destroyed before a request is resolved. Members asked about statutory citations and retention schedules, and several commented that the issue may warrant review of data-retention rules. During member discussion, legislators broadly agreed that the Data Practices Act’s enforcement mechanisms are not working well enough and that many requesters cannot afford to pursue administrative or court remedies. Co-Chair Scott suggested staff compile the testimony into a report to identify possible legislative fixes, while Senator Lucero said there may be some “low-hanging fruit” that could be addressed quickly in the short session. The chair also floated the idea of involving the Office of Collaboration and Dispute Resolution in a mediation role to improve communication and reduce gridlock, though members noted that any process would still need to produce results consistent with the law. The committee then moved on to its next agenda item, a discussion of the BCA Fusion Center and its annual reporting requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the local government must demonstrate an anticipated benefit. So, Mr.
• So local governments began experimenting. ...and sewer.
• places on it, as well as state government and federal government.
• But the government regulations go way beyond that. Those are minor. I don't.
• But the government regulations go way beyond that. Those are minor.

Summary: The Intergovernmental Affairs Subcommittee met for its first meeting of the 2026 session and took up impact fees, with an opening overview from Eric Poole of the Florida Association of Counties. Poole explained that impact fees are one-time charges on new development used only for new infrastructure capacity, not existing deficiencies or maintenance, and must satisfy the dual rational nexus test. He traced their history in Florida and described how comprehensive plans, concurrency, and later mobility fees relate to local infrastructure funding. He argued that impact fees are restricted, tied to capital improvements, and are one tool for paying for growth. Panelists representing counties, cities, builders, and community developers largely agreed that growth creates real infrastructure costs but differed on how those costs should be allocated. County and city representatives said impact fees are a necessary, targeted way to fund roads, water, sewer, fire, schools, and parks without spreading costs across all taxpayers. They pointed to long periods without fee updates, rising construction costs, and examples of large increases justified by studies. Builder and developer representatives argued that fees are often unpredictable, can be doubled or tripled, and contribute to housing affordability problems; they also said the system can be inconsistent across jurisdictions and may encourage sprawl. Several witnesses emphasized that fees must be transparent, proportional, and tied to actual benefits, and some suggested a statewide framework or mobility-fee model with more consistency and peer review. Members asked about how long local governments can hold fee revenue, whether fees can generate profit, what they can be spent on, and whether they can pay for police stations, fire stations, or other public safety facilities. Witnesses said the funds must be used for capital projects and cannot be used for salaries or unrelated purchases, and that refunds may be required if money is not spent within the local ordinance’s timeframe. The discussion also covered examples of local fee increases, the use of impact fees versus direct construction or “pipelining” of infrastructure, and concerns about level-of-service changes and extraordinary-circumstance increases. No votes were taken; the meeting ended after the panel discussion and member questions, with the chair noting the conversation would continue.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're also focused on making government We're also focused on making government actually<00:01:56.200
• Second, making government work.
• <00:04:26.800> for Minnesota state government for Minnesota state government for Minnesotans
• Second, making government work. Second, making government work.
• negatively impact local governments. negatively impact local governments.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: House Republican leaders unveiled their “North Star Comeback” budget plan, describing it as a focused effort to make Minnesota more affordable, reduce government waste, and strengthen the economy. They said the package would include a $3.8 billion tax cut proposal with one-time property tax relief, elimination of taxes on tips and overtime, childcare relief, lower car tab fees, and funding for schools through scholarship-granting organizations. They also framed the plan as a response to rising costs for groceries, housing, energy, insurance, and childcare. A major emphasis of the rollout was government accountability, especially a strong Office of Inspector General bill and IT modernization to reduce fraud. Leaders said the OIG proposal had moved out of committee and was now in Ways and Means, with a working group continuing to reconcile House and Senate differences. On IT modernization, Chair Paul Torkelson said the plan would likely use a two-pronged approach, with about $15 million for near-term needs and a longer-term fund for ongoing technology upgrades; he said many such investments could qualify for federal matching dollars. The leaders also highlighted Medicaid conformity, saying Minnesota should align with federal changes to avoid losing funding, and they discussed a property tax rebate proposal as a one-time $1 billion return to taxpayers to offset higher property taxes. In response to questions, they said many of the budget items were still moving through the process and some had not met finance deadlines, while others were already in bills. They repeatedly criticized House Democrats for blocking or delaying Republican proposals and said they wanted bipartisan cooperation to pass the plan this year.

Transcript Highlights:

• As reported by municipal governments.
• Responsibilities to local governments and the public. Thank you, Stephanie.
• across the state, and this includes local governments.
• Thank you. responsibilities to local governments in the public. Thank you, Stephanie.
• across the state, and this includes local governments.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee met on September 17, 2025, in hybrid format. After roll call, the committee initially lacked a quorum and deferred approval of the July 15 minutes until Representative Berg arrived; the minutes were then adopted. Members also discussed the proposed 2026 JLARC meeting schedule, including possible changes to address crowded July meetings and the annual tax exemption review workload. Staff presented the annual lodging tax expenditures report, noting that 213 municipalities received distributions in 2024, with 91% reporting compliance, $114 million awarded for more than 1,700 activities, and no independent verification of the self-reported data. Several members questioned the value and usefulness of the report, and the executive committee indicated it may recommend removing the statutory reporting requirement. The committee then heard the preliminary performance audit of the Office of Privacy and Data Protection, which found the office meets its statutory responsibilities and has high user satisfaction, but recommended updating the statute to better match the office’s current capacity and focus and improving performance measures to reflect long-term privacy outcomes rather than outputs. Members asked about FERPA and other federal privacy laws, and OPDP staff said they provide general privacy training and consultation but not law-specific training unless requested. The committee adopted the final report on Washington State recreational boating programs without recommendation, after staff reported that boating revenues support both general government and boating activities and that no participating agencies submitted formal comments. Members asked about boater safety education and possible overlap among the six agencies involved; Parks staff said education has reached more than 500,000 boaters and that fatalities and incidents have declined. The committee also reviewed planned study questions for a JLARC review of Labor and Industries’ enforcement of farm worker laws, with members raising scope questions about the term “farm worker” versus “agricultural worker,” and for DNR’s Eastern Washington sustainable harvest calculation, which JLARC will review as DNR completes its recalculation. Finally, staff outlined the 2026 tax preference performance reviews covering seven preferences, and members asked about racial equity, environmental impacts, disclosure of beneficiary savings, and how the reviews will measure effectiveness; the meeting adjourned before noon.

Transcript Highlights:

• The governing body.
• Ten of 11 agencies with a governing board or commission... Committees are.
• Governing charters in place.
• Thank you for inviting us to present on the State of Oregon's Government Waste Hotline today.
• The state's Government Waste Hotline provides a valuable accountability function to Oregonians.

Keywords: 907, all

Summary: The Joint Interim Committee on Legislative Audits met on June 17 for informational presentations. The Department of Administrative Services, through Chief Audit Executive Eli Ritchie, gave an overview of statewide internal audit requirements and the fiscal year 2025 report. He explained the difference between internal and external audit, described Oregon’s statutory and rule-based internal audit structure, and reported that 30 agencies had internal audit functions, with most meeting required standards. He said 73 audits and 49 advisory/consulting engagements were completed statewide, with strong compliance overall, though a few agencies were rebuilding audit committees after vacancies. No committee questions were raised after the presentation. The Secretary of State’s Audits Division then presented its Government Waste Hotline annual report. Director Steve Bergman and audit manager Olivia Rekhed described changes made to align the hotline with statute, including renaming it the Government Waste Hotline, creating a review panel, improving anonymity protections, removing fraud reporting from the hotline’s scope, and adjusting reporting timelines. They said hotline volume increased modestly in 2025, most reports were referred elsewhere or closed for insufficient evidence, and two reports were substantiated, including questioned costs of about $856 for personal use of a state vehicle and about $2.9 million tied to the Preschool Promise program. Committee members asked about hotline staffing, cost, anonymity, and follow-up on findings; staff said the hotline is lightly resourced, uses a contracted intake service, and referrals or recommendations are followed up through management letters and later reviews. The committee also heard an audit of the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department’s safety inspections and asset tracking. The Secretary of State’s office reported that OPRD had not consistently conducted or documented quarterly OSHA safety inspections and had incomplete asset records, including missing acquisition dates and costs for many assets. The audit made eight recommendations covering safety inspection policies, asset management guidance, tagging, reconciliations, disposition controls, training, and a new asset management system; OPRD agreed to all recommendations. OPRD officials said they had already begun training staff, improving inspection procedures, and working toward a replacement asset system, while noting operational challenges from a large, dispersed park system and manual processes. Committee members asked about what kinds of assets are tracked, how tagging works, whether items were actually being lost, and how much tracking is necessary for low-value tools; OPRD said the main issue was inconsistent classification and documentation rather than widespread loss. The meeting ended with no votes or formal actions taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think the bigger issue is why aren't we able to fund government? Time.
• There are lots of fees established at various levels of government.
• It is clear some of the differences relate to this bill about limited government, about the role of government
• And if we're increasing taxes in government or we're increasing fees in government, the elected officials
• Government, the elected officials need to do that, not the administrators.

Bills: SB1142, SCR1028

Keywords: scholarships, tax credit, education funding, nonprofit organizations, Arizona Revised Statutes, constitutional amendment, state revenue, tax policy, legislative approval, two-thirds vote, 1182, all

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee heard Senate Concurrent Resolution 1028, which would send to voters a constitutional change narrowing an existing exception to Arizona’s two-thirds vote requirement for tax increases. The resolution would require legislative approval for increases in state revenue through fees and assessments that are authorized by statute before January 1, 2027, and set by a state officer or agency without a prescribed formula, amount, or limit. The sponsor argued the measure would close a loophole that has allowed agencies to raise fees without direct legislative accountability, while opponents said it would make it harder for agencies to adjust fees for inflation, operations, and regulatory costs and could shift costs to taxpayers or slow services. After testimony and debate, the committee voted 5-3 with one absent to return SCR 1028 with a due pass recommendation. The committee then took up Senate Bill 1142, which would have Arizona opt into a federal tax credit program for donations to scholarship-granting organizations. Supporters said the measure would bring new private scholarship funding into Arizona at no cost to the state, expand school choice, and help students with tutoring, special needs services, transportation, and other educational expenses. Opponents argued the federal program was not yet fully written, lacked clear guardrails, and could further strain public schools by diverting resources away from the majority of students who remain in the public system. Committee members debated whether the program would benefit Arizona students without affecting state funds, and whether more transparency and rules were needed before adoption. After discussion, the committee voted 5-3 with one absent to return SB 1142 with a do pass recommendation. Several members explained their votes on both measures, with supporters emphasizing voter choice, accountability, and limiting fee increases, and opponents emphasizing the need for revenue, public school funding, and caution about the unresolved federal scholarship rules.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that was working with our local governments and also our partners.
• training workshops with our local governments across the state.
• So combining that local government training with the AM tool kit, this will set our local governments
• And then as we think ahead, we the federal government regulator airspace.
• But how do we think about collectively with our government partnership, every level of government?

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The federal government is trying.
• The federal government is trying.
• Let's go to work to create that pathway for good governance.
• Regulating state government use of AI.
• And in reality, governance from the local level is the best governance.

Keywords: 908, all