Transcript Highlights:

• , internship programs, education programs, or other educational assistance that will assist in recruiting
• And then we also have a provision where we're clarifying that employees in the evaluation system won't
• be able to appeal an evaluation that is satisfactory or above, which seems again kind of common sense
• , internship programs, education programs, or other educational assistance that will assist in recruiting
• , internship programs, education programs, or other educational assistance that will assist in recruiting

Keywords: Meeting Start: 00:00 Attendance Roll Call: 00:08 Senate Bill 79 (Sen. McDaniel): 00:48 Senate Bill 67 (Sen. Nemes): 08:09 Adjournment: 12:43, 958, all

Summary: The Senate State and Local Government Committee met and first took up Senate Bill 79, sponsored by Senator McDaniel, with testimony from McDaniel and Deputy Secretary Robert Long of the Personnel Cabinet. They described the bill as a cleanup measure for personnel law that would, among other things, add interns to the definition of employee while excluding them from full-time employee status, remove the Personnel Cabinet secretary as an ex officio member of the KERS Board, clarify personnel board membership and grievance rights, limit appeals of satisfactory-or-above evaluations, address layoffs and reemployment rights, allow leave donation in certain resignations or retirements, restrict remote work from outside Kentucky without approval, permit deductions for unreturned state equipment, and make DJJ facility supervisors non-merit positions. The committee voted on SB 79 and passed it with favorable expression. The committee then heard Senate Bill 67, presented by Chair Nemes, an elder property tax bill. The bill would freeze the assessed value of a primary residence for homeowners age 65 or older until the property is no longer their primary residence, while still taxing at the current rate. Nemes said the measure was intended to help seniors on fixed incomes and noted a fiscal analysis showing little to no direct revenue loss, though it could reduce projected budgeted growth in property tax revenue. Committee discussion noted a local impact and a statewide budget impact estimate of about $4 million for the first two fiscal years. SB 67 also passed with favorable expression, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• evaluation evaluation man<00:01:40.320> manager.
• <00:02:20.080> evaluation auditor for OA's program evaluation auditor for OA's program evaluation
• evaluation manager. evaluation manager.
• There has not been a program evaluation done of this office previously. >> Senator, and it would appear
• c> this been a program evaluation done of this been a program evaluation done of this office<00:48

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Legislative Audit Commission heard a presentation from the Office of the Legislative Auditor on its evaluation of the Office of Ombuds for Families (OBFF). Auditors said the office remains important because of Minnesota’s long history of racial disparities in the child protection system, but they found major problems with how OBFF is operating. The report said OBFF’s statutory duties are very broad compared with its small staff and budget, and that the ombuds persons are not carrying out all required duties while spending substantial time on activities not required by law. Auditors also said the office’s recent impact is unclear and that its complaint-handling work has significant deficiencies, including poor documentation, limited data, few policies, inconsistent handling, and failure to follow best practices. The presentation also focused on oversight and accountability. Auditors said OBFF’s three community boards, which are supposed to appoint and oversee the ombuds persons, have not provided adequate oversight: meeting requirements were often not met, attendance was low, and there was little evidence the boards were fulfilling their statutory duties. The auditors further said OBFF’s unusual structure, with no single designated leader and shared authority among the three ombuds persons, creates unclear lines of accountability. Their recommendations included revising OBFF’s statutory duties to better match legislative goals and resources, improving complaint-handling practices, strengthening board oversight, and establishing a single leadership position for the office. Members asked follow-up questions about racial disproportionality in out-of-home care, spending on nonrequired activities, and whether the ombuds persons met statutory qualification requirements. Auditors referred members to the report for more detailed data, said the office does not track expenditures by function, and noted that while the ombuds persons have relevant professional backgrounds, the evaluation raised concerns about whether they are meeting their duties as expected. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• the payment error rate associated with that program.
• The line item fusion centers fall under is a $4 billion grant program.
• They're evaluating the issue through a proceeding.
• They're evaluating the issue through a proceeding.
• And so what ticks me off is we have a lot of programs.

Summary: The committee met as a subcommittee for much of the hearing because it initially lacked a quorum, then later established one and began taking votes. The state auditor gave a status update on ongoing audits, including several JALAC-requested audits in progress, other statutory audits, staffing growth in his office, and the number of new JALAC audits his office could start in the coming months. The committee also heard that one audit request on Prop. 28 was held, and another PUC-related request was moved off consent and heard on the regular calendar. Members then heard and discussed several audit requests. Senator Cervantes presented a request to audit California fusion centers, with witnesses from the FBI and ACLU supporting the need for transparency and oversight; opponents argued the request was politically motivated and could interfere with counterterrorism work. Senator Allen presented a request on CPUC enforcement of Rule 21 interconnection timelines for solar and storage projects, supported by industry and school representatives who described long delays and financial harm, while CPUC staff said the issue was being addressed through workshops and a formal proceeding. Senator Perez presented a request to audit Caltrans’ administration of the former SR 710 extension properties and affordable sales program, citing tenant complaints about maintenance, pricing, and transparency; Caltrans said it was working to complete sales and improve administration. Senator Umberg presented a request to audit the Orange County Board of Education over transparency, contracting, litigation spending, charter oversight, and whistleblower issues, while board representatives said there was no factual basis for an audit and that existing legal remedies had not been invoked. After quorum was established, the committee approved the consent-calendar DMV license revocation audit and then approved the PUC utility timeliness audit and the Caltrans SR 710 audit. The fusion center audit was left on call after a split vote, and the Orange County Board of Education audit continued with testimony from the board’s representatives after the committee had already moved on to other business.

Transcript Highlights:

• request that a competency evaluation request that a competency evaluation include<00:59:51.840><
• If so, all those in favor, please say aye. forensic program. Thank you. forensic program.
• this<01:53:56.240> program,<01:53:57.200> in It creates a program, this program, in
• working on creating a full program. working on creating a full program.
• It's been evaluated. They can't anymore. It's been evaluated.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House first returned to Senate Bill 71, a consumer data privacy and online surveillance bill. Members debated a proposed amendment that would have removed language allowing companies to rely on consumer consent to sell certain sensitive data. Supporters argued consent pop-ups and terms-of-service notices are not meaningful consent and that sensitive data should be categorically protected, citing Maryland and other states. Opponents, including the committee presenter, said the bill was a carefully negotiated compromise needed to establish Vermont’s first data privacy framework and warned that adopting the amendment could jeopardize passage in the Senate or with the governor. The committee reported the amendment unfavorable on a 9-0 straw poll, the House rejected the amendment, and then approved the committee’s recommended proposal of amendment by roll call vote, 129-3. During questioning on S. 71, members discussed the bill’s applicability thresholds, with the presenter explaining that the 35,000-consumer threshold was modeled on Connecticut, while lower 3,000 thresholds for sensitive data and data sales were based on business testimony and intended to capture smaller entities such as accountants, lawyers, nonprofits, and trade associations that share or sell lists. Members also asked about the bill’s many exemptions, which were described as covering entities already regulated by state or federal law, including health care entities under HIPAA and banking and insurance sectors. The presenter and supporters emphasized that the bill still requires clear privacy notices, limits data collection to what is reasonable and disclosed, and gives consumers rights to opt out, correct, and delete data. After the roll call vote, the House ordered third reading, suspended rules to place S. 71 in all remaining stages, passed it in concurrence with proposal of amendment, and suspended rules to message the action to the Senate forthwith. The House then moved to Senate Bill 193, relating to establishing a forensic facility for certain criminal justice-involved persons. The committee presenter from South Burlington previewed that the bill would create a permanent forensic facility, with a separate amendment expected to address interim arrangements while the facility is being developed. The transcript ends as the House begins second reading of S. 193 and the committee reports are introduced, with further debate not shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• ,<00:04:55.280> but professional development programs, but professional development programs
• for a private neuropsych evaluation to get answers.
• pay for a private neurosych evaluation pay for a private neurosych evaluation to<00:06:46.560>
• That evaluation to get answers.
• So, we are doing a lot within our teacher prep programs.

Bills: HF60, HF3067, HF3730, HF3638, HF3401

Keywords: interchange, bond issuance, transportation, infrastructure funding, Sherburne County, paraprofessional, paraprofessional qualifications, education support staff, teacher aide, teacher assistant, special education, Title I, federal personnel qualifications, Minnesota Department of Education, school district, charter school, cooperative unit, Read Act, reading instruction, math instruction

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, so, we at the city of Buhl do support additional to be allocated to this program, and also that program
• this program, and also that program this program, and also that program requirements<00:04:25.560
• The program such as this infrastructure program provides the opportunity and more stability needed for
• <00:08:22.160> infrastructure The program such as this infrastructure The program such as
• within the programs that they develop. within the programs that they develop.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And for those who are untreated and are not evaluated, they do get an evaluation eventually.
• And for those who are untreated and are not evaluated, they do get an evaluation eventually.
• , and the program no longer received state funding again, and the funding for the program has decreased
• Nurse Home Visitor Program proposed in HB 2828 and the Healthy Families Arizona program. ...and the
• Healthy Families Arizona program.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 2307, as amended, which would require the Department of Health Services to contract with out-of-state secure mental health facilities when Arizona beds are unavailable for certain involuntary commitment cases involving defendants found dangerous and incompetent. The sponsor and supporters framed it as an emergency stopgap to prevent individuals who are deemed non-restorable from being released because Arizona lacks secure behavioral health beds, while opponents argued it would raise due process, disability rights, family access, and cost concerns, and questioned whether the state could even implement such interstate placements. After debate, the committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and advanced HB 2307 on a 6-5 due pass vote. The committee then heard House Bill 2083, which updates diabetes-related coverage language in health plans to include newer devices and supplies such as continuous glucose monitors, insulin pumps, and smart insulin pens. Supporters said the bill modernizes outdated statutes and improves access and outcomes for people with diabetes, while an insurer representative offered soft opposition, warning that writing these items into statute could create a state mandate and potential cost exposure, especially if the language is read to include GLP-1 medications. The committee adopted the strike-everything amendment and moved HB 2083 forward on an 11-1 due pass vote. Next, House Bill 2673 was heard, addressing mental health screening and treatment for incarcerated people. The sponsor said the bill was being reworked into a study committee concept after stakeholder feedback, but the underlying proposal would require prompt evaluation of prisoners showing mental disorder symptoms and faster referral for treatment. A family member testified about her son’s severe deterioration in jail and death, while an attorney opposed the bill as overbroad and legally problematic. Despite the sponsor’s indication that the bill would become a study committee, the committee voted 12-0 to give HB 2673 a due pass recommendation. The committee also advanced House Bill 2923, which revises timelines, procedures, and notice requirements for judicial review of court-ordered mental health treatment; supporters said it clarifies outdated language and improves communication with families, while opponents argued it shifts burdens onto patients and could prolong confinement. HB 2923 also received a 12-0 due pass vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• BUT REQUIRES STUDENTS PERFORMANCE TO MAKE UP HALF THE EVALUATION.
• MONITOR THEIR PROGRAMS SO THEY DON'T NEED THE VPK PROGRAMS TO COME IN AND MONITOR OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS
• BUT NOW THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WILL BE MONITORING THOSE PROGRAMS?
• THAT NOW WILL FALL ON VPK PROGRAMS TO MONITOR THEIR OWN PROGRAMS NOT THE EARLY LEARNING COALITION AS
• I ALSO LIKE THE PROVISION ABOUT THE APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I didn’t mention that in addition to research, we actually also pilot and run programs, and then we evaluate
• But what we do know when we look at evaluations of diversion programs is that youth who participate in
• But what we do know when we look at evaluations of, can I finish real quickly, of diversion programs,
• program.
• Excuse me, the home and community-based adult mental health program is actually a Medicaid program.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Bobby Joe Lewis, assistance program.
• So, um the local assistance road program, also known as LAARP and the county priority projects program
• So there were underruns program.
• um parts of this program that are good. um parts of this program that are good.
• on the road when they evaluated it.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee approved the October 15 minutes and observed a moment of silence for the victims of the UPS Worldport plane crash. The main presentation was from Transportation Cabinet Commissioner Bobby Joe Lewis on the Local Assistance Road Program/County Priority Projects Program (LAARP/CPP), which was implemented under House Bill 546 and now requires rehabilitation projects to restore roads to original condition, cap funding at $500,000 per project, use a new scoring matrix, include a local match, and submit one photograph per 300 feet of project length. He reported that the 2026-2027 cycle ran from June 1 to October 1 and drew 1,215 project applications from 107 counties and 106 cities, with total submitted project costs of about $121.1 million and about $102.3 million requested after local match. He also said 30% of submissions scored 10s and 22% scored 9s, and that the list of requests and required photos had been submitted to the General Assembly and LRC. Members asked about how scores change over time, whether roads can move from lower scores to 10s, and whether the new process gives a better picture of local needs. Lewis said scores can change based on weather and road conditions, but the new system provides more information and a more standardized evaluation than before. Several members raised concerns about the volume and size of required photographs, suggesting drone footage or video as an alternative; Lewis said the photo requirement has caused confusion and large file uploads, and he was open to considering easier ways to document conditions. Members also discussed continuity in scoring across districts, and Lewis explained that district staff appointed by chief district engineers use a handbook and scoring matrix, with the scores entered into a computer system so evaluators do not see the final score while scoring. The committee also discussed funding levels and carry-forward balances for the program. Lewis said the program began with $20 million authorized in HR92, noted underruns from completed projects, and reported a carry-forward amount that had grown to $355,432.42 available for reauthorization as of October 13. In response to questions, he said the current process concentrates applications into a short window, with 63% of applications arriving in the last few days and 417 on October 1, which created a heavy workload but was completed on time. The meeting then moved to multimodal funding priorities, with Jennifer Kersner of Kentuckians for Better Transportation introducing herself and offering condolences for the UPS aviation incident before beginning her remarks.

Transcript Highlights:

• No, this is all state program.
• ed prep programs.
• Programs are cut.
• . essential programs.
• I think that if you fund the program, expand the program, program, so that it applies to more folks,

Bills: HB2, HB2

Keywords: public education, teacher compensation, certification, funding, school finance, educator rights, education funding, charter schools, staff compensation, state aid, retention allotment, disaster preparedness, emergency management, flooding, mass fatality, mass casualty, fatality tracking, body recovery, autopsy, justice of the peace

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, we also did rate increases on line 7 for program, for the program for all-inclusive care, and on
• Those are kind of our really big programs.
• I think that the bottom line is it's important to constantly evaluate these programs to see where we
• Um, doing the evaluations, um, making sure that programs are being implemented to fidelity, making sure
• Um, programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Number two, how effective is this program?
• So, PDMP is a very wonderful program.
• That's beyond the psychiatric evaluation. The patient will have a comprehensive evaluation.
• That's beyond the psychiatric evaluation.
• That comprehensive evaluation is critical.

Summary: The Joint Committee on Administrative Rules met to consider a Missouri Prescription Drug Monitoring Program rule proposal after the Department of Natural Resources withdrew its items. The hearing focused on 1 CSR 60-1.010, which would expand delegate-level PDMP access to additional licensed behavioral health professionals, including licensed clinical social workers, licensed master social workers, marital and family therapists, professional counselors, and psychologists, while also correcting prior rule language involving medical assistants and clinical nurse specialists. Testimony from the PDMP executive director and supporters from Compass Health and the Department of Mental Health argued the change would improve care coordination, medication reconciliation, and safety in multidisciplinary behavioral health settings, especially CCBHCs. They said access would remain limited to licensed professionals working under a prescriber/dispenser relationship, with individual logins and penalties for misuse. Opponents and some committee members raised concerns that the rule would expand access beyond the original statutory framework without legislative change, could be used beyond treatment purposes, and should instead be addressed through statute rather than rulemaking. After public testimony, the committee debated whether the proposal exceeded statutory authority and whether the expansion was too substantive for rulemaking alone. A motion was made to disapprove the rule on grounds including lack of statutory authority, conflict with state law, and arbitrariness. The motion passed by a roll call vote of 7-1, and the committee disapproved Rule 1 CSR 60-1.010 before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• All right, I think that next we have our program evaluation team coming up.
• We have Sarah Rang who's our program evaluator and we'll have Secretary Groginsky. both to provide us
• My name is Doctor Sarah Rang, and I'm a program evaluator with the LFC.
• Which outlines the major findings, this update builds on a 2020 LFC program evaluation which found that
• I just want to highlight the impeccable qualifications and rigor with which our program evaluators do

Transcript Highlights:

• Finally, many programs simply haven't been studied at all, so those fall into the lacking evaluation
• programs are listed.
• Give that a click, scroll on down to 'Program Evaluation,' and you'll see the PIVOT Evidence-Based Program
• A couple of different program evaluation reports.
• The evaluation comes out, and it turns out it's a very effective program.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And this is one of those programs that was a sleeper program when it was created 20-something years ago
• That legislation, one, it funded $10 million into the program, so it made the program more viable.
• : the Behavioral Health Care Program and the Primary Care Facilities Program.
• programs.
• program managers.

Transcript Highlights:

• Annual evaluations become voluntary.
• Annual evaluations become voluntary.
• Um, the second option is a portfolio evaluation by an evaluator.
• <01:51:23.760> And<01:51:24.000> the evaluation by an evaluator.
• And the evaluation by an evaluator.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• state dollars from other grant programs. state dollars from other grant programs.
• ,<00:04:09.360> workers<00:04:09.640> comp, Minnesota state programs, workers comp,
• Minnesota state programs, workers comp, UI,<00:04:11.520> paid<00:04:11.840> leave,<00
• , public programs, public programs, and<00:05:10.560> the<00:05:11.040> the<00:05:11.200
• I think that's the basis of evaluating. I think that's the basis of your<00:08:16.000> bill.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• , prior to the Universal Meals Program, not all schools offered breakfast programs—as well as increasing
• Breakfast programs.
• Universal Meals Program.
• programs now more than ever.
• The KID program is critical to the success of the School Meals for All program.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our plan is to first evaluate.
• So we plan to evaluate that over the next two years and then come back with... To first evaluate.
• and how certain programs would align with other existing programs.
• Issue 12 relates to CDSS's adult programs. Issue. Issue 12 relates to CDSS as adult programs.
• efficient programs that exists.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The hearing opened with Department of Finance and Legislative Analyst’s Office remarks on the May Revision, which both described efforts to reduce large out-year operating deficits through a mix of revenue increases, spending reductions, and reserve use. Finance said the May Revision more than halves projected deficits in later years, while LAO stressed that revenues are at unprecedented levels yet the state still faces a significant structural deficit and is drawing down reserves; LAO urged maintaining at least the administration’s level of budget solutions and adding to reserves rather than new ongoing commitments. The chair echoed concern about cuts to vulnerable populations and noted the tension between service reductions and requests for additional administrative positions. The committee then heard a series of California Health and Human Services and HCAI proposals, including additional legal support for CalHHS to respond to federal HR1 changes; a net-zero transfer of positions for a centralized eligibility/data-sharing platform; 988 crisis line implementation funding and continued work with the Trevor Project to train crisis centers to better serve LGBTQ youth; EMS data system maintenance funding; HCAI implementation of AB 1312 hospital charity care screening; SB 660 data exchange framework funding; CalRx biosimilar insulin reappropriation; and a diaper access initiative that would provide free diapers to newborns in participating hospitals and support a future direct-to-consumer purchasing option. Members questioned the diaper program’s universal design, the use of a Public Contract Code exemption, and the selection of Baby2Baby, with the chair expressing concern about optics and the lack of an income threshold. The committee also discussed distressed hospital funding, with HCAI requesting up to $50 million for another round of grants to hospitals in immediate financial distress. HCAI said it receives annual and quarterly financial reports but the data lag limits real-time monitoring, and the LAO recommended stronger program parameters and turnaround plans. Members argued the repeated need for distressed hospital aid reflects a structural problem, not a short-term gap, and raised broader concerns about hospital reimbursement and patient flow. Other items included reverting $19.6 million in unused opioid settlement funds from HCAI to DHCS for General Fund offset, and a Rural Health Transformation Program request to increase HCAI spending authority to cover the full federal award. Later, DMHC presented funding requests to implement PBM licensing and financial review requirements under AB 116, modernize the managed care complaint system, and build an electronic claims settlement data system under AB 3275. The final major discussion focused on the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission, which opposed the May Revision’s proposed reduction of its Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and a $6.7 million cut to community advocacy grants. The Commission argued these programs are core to Proposition 1’s goals of statewide innovation and community accountability, while Finance said the proposal is consistent with Proposition 1’s maximum funding levels and reflects a broader effort to prioritize direct services and use unspent prior-year funds; members pressed for more information and questioned whether the cuts would undermine the new behavioral health framework.