Transcript Highlights:

• I could list a number of things that this will require that will add additional cost to operations. amendment
• </c> able to operate as an insurance company. able to operate as an insurance company.
• </c> that cost would be. that cost would be.
• It includes a two-year independent cost study to get the real numbers on ambulance costs.
• It includes a two-year independent cost study to get the real numbers on ambulance costs.

Summary: The committee first took up SB 297 and a new amendment, 2462, which combined the original Senate bill with the Carson amendment and added a proposed alternative regulatory system, RSA 420R. The chair and members discussed that the amendment was intended to give the Senate what it had asked for while also creating a dual system for public entity risk pools. Members asked whether the new structure would affect ownership or governance of health trusts, and the chair explained that 420R would be a separate regulatory statute while existing 420J-style arrangements could remain in place. The committee also noted that a paragraph had been accidentally deleted from the amendment and that another amendment would be prepared to correct it, with the subcommittee recessed while that was done. Public testimony focused on School Care, represented by Executive Director Lisa Ducette, who opposed the shift to Department of Insurance oversight under 420R. She argued that public entity risk pools are not insurance companies, that they are accountable to member entities and taxpayers, and that the proposed dual regulation would add unnecessary costs through examinations, higher reserves, and additional accounting requirements. She said the change could threaten tax-exempt status and create an uneven playing field, and she urged the committee to support SB 297 with the Carson amendment instead of moving to 420R. Committee members questioned whether the amendment would actually affect pools that stayed under the Secretary of State model, and one member cited support from the New Hampshire Municipal Association for the dual system. The discussion then shifted to amendment 245 on ambulance reimbursement and contracting timelines. Members reviewed a provision giving insurers 45 days and ambulance providers 60 days in the contracting process, and one member suggested making both periods 60 days. The chair and others said the current language was intentional and part of a broader compromise aimed at ending balance billing and forcing insurers to establish reimbursement rates. Members noted that the measure was unusual and that its effects would be reviewed over the next two years, with one member saying the bill would likely be difficult to roll back later. No final vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• or not going to cost.
• They handle insurance operations among insurance carriers.
• They handle insurance operations among insurance carriers.
• They handle insurance operations among insurance carriers. public.
• They handle insurance operations among insurance carriers.

Summary: The Committee on Banking and Insurance met with a quorum present and took up several bills, beginning with SB 834 on health care sharing ministries and insurance agents. Senator Yarbrough presented the bill to repeal a recent restriction on licensed insurance agents marketing or selling faith-based health care sharing programs. Supporters argued the change restores free speech and consumer education while preserving existing consumer protections; opponents said the bill was unnecessary and could increase confusion or misuse of agents and brokers. The committee adopted a title amendment and then reported the bill favorably after debate, with Senator Pizzo raising concerns about consumer reliance and lack of guaranteed coverage. The committee then approved SB 642 on foreign and alien bail bond insurers, SB 394 on reinsurance intermediary managers, and SB 266 on public adjuster contracts. SB 266 would let vulnerable adults rescind public adjuster contracts at any time without penalty; it drew support from consumer and industry groups, with some discussion about estimates and claim work product. The committee also passed SB 832 on residential property insurance transparency, which requires rate transparency reports and a consumer resource center at OIR, and adds a provision excluding land value from homeowners coverage calculations in most cases. Testimony on SB 832 was generally supportive of the transparency goal, though insurers said some of the required cost breakdowns may be difficult to produce as written. The committee next considered SB 1028 on Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, which would create a commercial lines clearinghouse to move eligible policyholders into the private market and reduce Citizens’ commercial exposure. Supporters said it would lower taxpayer risk and improve competition; a speaker suggested additional changes to deductibles, water-damage caps, and repair practices. The bill was reported favorably after a delete-all amendment and supportive debate from Senator Boyd. Finally, the committee passed SB 540 on the Office of Financial Regulation, which adds cybersecurity requirements for certain licensees, updates oversight of investment advisers and money service businesses, adjusts some charter and meeting rules for financial institutions and credit unions, and includes amendments clarifying repossession/deficiency claims, family office exemptions, and virtual credit union meetings. The meeting ended with all of the considered bills reported favorably and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do think that those are our recurring costs.
• Is it share operating or share ERF funds? Mr.
• If it's not sustainable for that high of a cost in an annual monthly maintenance cost, we need to start
• Do we need to raise the enterprise cost?
• We're really just saying that we're going to operate off reserves; we're not going to operate off of

Committee: Senate Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Here we'll take a look at FY26 existing operating budget.
• There will be costs to the state for that.
• The change in the existing operating budget shows the FY26 to FY27 change.
• expenses of the facilities operated by LSD.
• Representative Tarver asked for the total cost of the transition.

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• Since CDGFA was created, we've cut that cost almost by 30%.
• The Jesse Aru building relocation costs. Unruh. Sorry. Jesse Unruh.
• Over the years IT division has faced increasing personal and operational costs due to several factors
• Third, IT also had to absorb rising operational costs due to the pandemic-induced inflation.
• and $520,000 towards the operating expenses.

Transcript Highlights:

• which then lowers their credit rates, which gives them a better interest rate and better borrowing costs
• There's no exchange of funds between states and no Arizona appropriation to offset the costs.
• Finally, I want to talk a little bit about our cost savings programs, because that doesn't get quite
• With regard to emergency operation plans, the Auditor General staff did an emergency operation plan audit
• The auditor general or the auditor mentioned operation plans.

Committee: Senate Senate Education Committee of Reference

Transcript Highlights:

• Addressing energy costs is the necessary next step in lowering the cost of living and doing business
• Costs will go down for daily operations, making new investments, expanding, and attracting new workers
• I hear a lot of this cost-effective. Can you actually define what is the cost-effectiveness?
• However, the levelized cost of energy or levelized cost of comfort Starts to get past that.
• It reduces costs.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy

Summary: The committee heard testimony on H. 4144, the Governor’s Energy Affordability, Independence, and Innovation Act, with the administration arguing the bill would lower bills in the short and long term while expanding clean energy supply and innovation. The Governor and Secretary said the bill would reduce or restructure charges on customer bills, reform Mass Save, expand securitization as a financing tool, speed interconnection, create energy-ready zones, strengthen consumer protections in competitive supply, and allow broader state procurement of energy resources. They said the package could save consumers billions over time and would help address high energy costs, especially during extreme heat and winter spikes. Committee members pressed the administration on several provisions, especially securitization, asking whether the bill requires an apples-to-apples comparison of total costs over time, including interest and lost tax revenue, versus paying through rates. Administration witnesses said DPU review and public comment would be required and said they would work to clarify the language if needed. Members also questioned the bill’s solar and procurement provisions, including reduced net metering compensation for some large facilities, the scope of all-resource procurements, and whether hydro, solar, and nuclear would be included; the administration said those resources were contemplated and that procurement would still be reviewed by DPU. Other questions focused on the short-term relief from bill changes, the treatment of low- and moderate-income discounts, and whether the bill’s heat pump and Mass Save reforms would help customers who cannot afford upfront costs. Several witnesses and committee members discussed Mass Save reforms, including securitization of program costs, on-bill financing, pre-approval of rebates, and shifting program administration away from gas utilities. Administration witnesses said the changes were intended to reduce volatility, lower administrative costs, and better align costs with long-term savings. Questions also touched on geothermal permitting, municipal participation in offshore wind procurement, and the proposed repeal of the ballot requirement for nuclear power, which the administration defended as preserving future options under heavy review. No votes were taken during the hearing portion described. Supportive testimony came from labor, environmental, business, planning, and development groups. The AFL-CIO, NECA, and the Environmental League of Massachusetts backed the bill, emphasizing lower bills, job creation, labor standards, just transition protections, and cleaner energy. NAIOP, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable, and MAPC supported provisions on energy-ready zones, interconnection reform, microgrids, extreme-heat shutoff protections, and Mass Save improvements. A HEET representative praised the bill’s use of securitization, geothermal, and utility financing tools but urged guardrails and workforce protections. Overall, testimony was broadly favorable, with most witnesses calling for refinements rather than opposing the bill outright.

Transcript Highlights:

• Cost is only compared to the expected cost of a particular MCO.
• I operate just in Texas.
• What's going to cost you...
• It won't cost the state more money; it'll cost probably the state...
• , that cost comes through as part of our cost base and that goes on to the state.

Bills: HB149 , HB252 , HB643 , HB1442 , HB1500 , HB1672 , HB1851 , HB1893 , HB2028 , HB2768 , HB2818 , HB149 , HB252

Committee: House Delivery of Government Efficiency

Keywords: artificial intelligence, regulation, biometric data, ethical AI, consumer protection, AI governance, employment compensation, state agencies, salary payments, general appropriations, government efficiency, public works, contractors, payment bonds, government contracts, construction law, transparency, open meetings, government accountability, public access

Transcript Highlights:

• The cost of these reactors is the most daunting issue facing the industry today.
• It is a commercial operating construction and operating permit. Um, 55 years, three years.
• We do not operate with federal dollars.
• The levelized cost of electricity, which takes into account your capital cost, your deployment cost,
• That's a 5.4 billion projected cost for a three hundred megawatt facility.

Bills: SB1468 , SB1612 , SB1789 , SB2530 , SB2571 , SB2717 , SB2967

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Transcript Highlights:

• “Obviously right now, what has happened on fertilizer and fuel costs in particular—fuel costs were most
• Sometimes there are costs that we do not adjust annually for, like rent, utilities, fuel costs, things
• What are the ongoing cost pressures that would be created?
• What are the ongoing cost pressures?
• What are the ongoing cost pressures that would be created?

Summary: The meeting began with a lengthy opening discussion with Secretary Karen Ross of the Department of Food and Agriculture, who reviewed the department’s proposed budget, emphasized California agriculture’s record output, and highlighted major priorities including climate-smart agriculture, groundwater management, local food systems, farm-to-school, food hubs, invasive pest prevention, bird flu response, and food safety. She also warned about federal budget cuts, especially at USDA and FDA, and discussed market access challenges abroad, rising input costs, labor shortages, and the need for automation and workforce training. Members raised questions about the future of Farm to School, the California Nutrition Incentive Program/Market Match, local food procurement, and how to better connect farmers to schools, food banks, and food hubs; Ross said the department had strong evidence the program benefits small farms and Title I schools and noted continued interest in building out local food infrastructure. The committee then took up item one on eliminating vacant positions at the Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Parks and Recreation, and Food and Agriculture. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that the Governor proposed eliminating 6,000 vacant positions statewide, with the Joint Legislative Budget Committee previously rejecting 650 of them, including 174 in these three departments. LAO and Finance said the vacancies represented a source of budget flexibility, but warned that eliminating them could create program impacts; LAO recommended retaining the special-funded positions at Fish and Wildlife and Food and Agriculture, while weighing the General Fund positions against other priorities. Finance argued the reductions were part of a broader budget-resiliency exercise and that departments could reclassify or shift vacancies to higher priorities. Members focused heavily on the practical impacts of the cuts. Assemblymember Petrie-Norris argued that Fish and Wildlife staffing shortages were already slowing permits needed for housing, clean energy, water, and transportation projects, and questioned the value of saving relatively small amounts of money. Fish and Wildlife officials said the department had prioritized mission-critical work and could still meet permitting obligations, but acknowledged limited-term staffing constraints. State Parks said the proposed ranger and maintenance cuts would not have immediate effects but could slow maintenance and eventually worsen deferred maintenance. Food and Agriculture said some of the eliminated positions supported early pest detection and eradication, but that the department believed it could still meet its mandate and reclassify positions if needed. The chair and several members signaled concern about the Fish and Wildlife and Parks cuts, while also noting the broader need for budget reductions. The committee then moved to item six, hearing an overview from the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation. Staff described the office’s role in CEQA implementation and said the budget requests were baseline funding to maintain existing functions, including IT services and administrative/legislative support, rather than new programs. The chair asked the presenters to move quickly through background material so the committee could get to questions, and the item began with no votes taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Head Start is a federally funded no-cost preschool program.
• , and school-day programs to operate a minimum of five and a half hours per class day.
• costs for the state without benefit.
• The Department of Social and Health Services operates four residential habilitation centers.
• Child care providers operate on a very thin margin; ...that child in ECEAP.

Bills: HB2099 , HB2317 , HB2318 , HB2350

Committee: House Early Learning & Human Services

Keywords: military families, early childhood education, access, assistance program, education equity, HB2317, early learning, child care licensing, day care, preschool, Head Start, DCYF, Department of Children, Youth, and Families, Washington State, RCW 43.216, child care center, family home provider, family child care, outdoor nature-based child care, school-age child care

Transcript Highlights:

• and reasonable costs for investigating the violation.
• They're operating under the licensed operators per contractual agreement, so they're just as licensed
• in the space and reducing those costs.
• in the space and reducing those costs.
• The other men that by creating more legal operators in the space and reducing those costs.

Bills: SB1206 , SB1254 , SB1290 , SB1421 , SB1432 , SB1515 , SB1563 , SB1641 , SB1649 , SB1670 , SB1671 , SB1747

Committees: House Commerce , House House Commerce Committee of Reference

Keywords: storm damage, catastrophic storm, hail damage, wind damage, roof repair, roof replacement, post-storm repairs, insurance claim, property and casualty insurance, adjuster, public adjuster, contractor licensing, homeowner protections, deductible waiver, insurance fraud prevention, storm chaser, residential construction contract, workers' compensation, joint check, claim solicitation

Transcript Highlights:

• health care sharing ministries are appealing options to Floridians trying to cut costs.
• or not going to cost.
• They handle insurance operations among insurance carriers.
• They handle insurance operations among insurance carriers.
• As we know, the cost of living is increasing throughout our state.

Bills: S0266 , S0394 , S0540 , S0632 , S0642 , S0832 , S0834 , S1028

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Summary: The Committee on Banking and Insurance met with a quorum and took up several bills, beginning with SB 834 on insurance requirements for nonprofit religious organizations and health care sharing ministries. The bill repeals a recent restriction on licensed insurance agents marketing or selling faith-based health care sharing programs. Supporters argued the change restores free speech and consumer education while preserving existing fraud and disclosure protections; opponents said allowing agents and brokers could create consumer confusion and has been associated with bad actors. A title amendment was adopted, and after debate the committee reported the bill favorably. The committee also heard and passed SB 642, which extends reporting and duty requirements to foreign and alien bail bond insurers, and SB 394, a technical bill updating reinsurance intermediary manager law to match current DFS practice. SB 266, which lets vulnerable adults rescind public adjuster contracts without penalty, was reported favorably after testimony from supporters in the insurance and elder law communities and a public adjuster who said the intent was good but the bill may need refinement. SB 832, a residential property insurance transparency bill requiring rate breakdown reports and a consumer resource center, also passed after discussion about consumer clarity and whether the required cost categories can be compiled as written. Later, the committee approved SB 540, which creates cybersecurity requirements for mortgage and money service businesses, closes a regulatory gap for certain investment advisers, adjusts OFR examination-payment deadlines, changes de novo charter requirements, allows virtual credit union meetings, and makes other financial regulation updates. Several amendments were adopted, including a substitute amendment removing fintech sandbox provisions. Finally, SB 1028 on Citizens Property Insurance Corporation was reported favorably after debate over a commercial lines clearinghouse intended to reduce Citizens’ exposure and shift more business to the private market; members discussed taxpayer risk, market competition, and consumer protections. The meeting ended with adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• c> anticipate,</c><00:03:01.560><c> you</c> regular operations, we anticipate, you regular operations
• </c> going to make these programs operate going to make these programs operate more<00:04:58.400><c>
• Each strengthen frontline operations.
• </c> more financially sustainable operating more financially sustainable operating model.<00:07:37.280
• Additionally, the CFCRB operations will Additionally, the CFCRB operations will be<00:11:58.960><c> consolidated

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary received an update from the Administrative Office of the Courts on implementation of House Bill 504, the judicial branch budget, and court facility projects. AOC leaders said they do not anticipate problems balancing the outgoing biennium or fiscal year 2026, and explained that the budget changes were driven by the need to reduce costs while preserving required constitutional, court-rule, and statutory services. They also said the new filing fee increases authorized by HB 504 took effect that day and are expected to generate up to $5 million, while the reorganization is projected to save about $3 million in general fund dollars. The bulk of the presentation focused on a major reorganization of the Office of Statewide Programs, which includes specialty courts, family and juvenile services, and pretrial services. AOC said the plan eliminates 170 positions and creates 109 new ones, mainly by reducing middle-management layers, expanding regional service delivery, and cross-training staff. Officials said 110 employees had already been offered or accepted placements, 24 had chosen voluntary separation, and the final number of employees leaving remains fluid until the process concludes around August 1. They emphasized that specialty court programs were not eliminated, but state-funded treatment court contracts and behavioral health liaison positions were removed, with treatment costs shifted to Medicaid or participants where appropriate. Members asked about the process, staffing impacts, specialty court participation, juvenile services, and how AOC will monitor the changes. AOC said the reorganization was developed by leadership, HR, and legal staff under direction of the Chief Justice and approved by the Supreme Court, and that it is intended to improve efficiency and frontline support rather than reduce services. They said specialty court participant levels are being watched closely, that CDW services will continue to use outside providers for programming, and that the agency will keep judges and stakeholders informed as the new structure goes into effect. No votes were taken, and the committee did not approve minutes because a quorum was not present.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's often a cost, and we try to recoup those costs, but that's after the fact.
• </c> we expect it to not cost more than that. we expect it to not cost more than that.
• </c> those beds, then then it's a new cost. those beds, then then it's a new cost.
• </c> is design, build, operate, maintain. is design, build, operate, maintain.
• That maybe costs a fraction of what it would cost in year five.

Transcript Highlights:

• The cost and complexity of permanent construction has pushed too many operators out before they open.
• To implement video inspections, there are really three low-cost or no-cost requirements: a scheduling
• costs, and really resulted in the same safety results.
• With the rising cost of child care, parents are struggling, and many times child care costs are even
• With the rising cost of child care, parents are struggling, and many times child care costs are even

Committee: Senate Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• Haw Davis, our Director of Operations and uh, Taylor Henderson, which is our Assistant Director of Operations
• They operate on a shoestring budget.
• But that total cost was $167,000.
• increases in ballot printing as paper costs and printing costs have gone up.
• And I think it would be rather small because I think it would be more cost shifting than cost savings

Transcript Highlights:

• The governor's budget proposes this cost shift, or change in the cost-sharing policy.
• It's a cost shift. Great. Not great, but sure. It's a cost shift to the counties.
• In addition, administrative costs far exceed the actual costs of services.
• And so the administrative costs may seem higher than the services cost because the services cost is only
• And so the administrative costs may seem higher than the services cost because the services cost is only

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the governor’s IHSS budget proposals and extensive testimony from the Department of Social Services, Department of Finance, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, county representatives, labor, consumer advocates, and advocates for older adults and people with disabilities. The administration described IHSS as a large and growing program serving more than 900,000 recipients, and outlined three proposals: shifting the cost of growth in authorized hours per case to counties, eliminating the backup provider system, and aligning IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations. The LAO said the overall budget estimates appeared reasonable but raised concerns about the hours-per-case proposal, including the lack of a comprehensive root-cause analysis, the limited control counties have over statewide cost growth, and uncertainty about how the baseline and savings would work. CWDA, SEIU, and consumer advocates strongly opposed the hours cost shift, arguing that counties use state-designed tools, that demographic changes and rising need explain much of the growth, and that the proposal would pressure counties to cut services and destabilize care. The chair and members repeatedly questioned the administration about the proposed baseline, the claimed savings, and whether the measure effectively circumvents the county maintenance-of-effort agreement. On the backup provider system, the administration said the statewide program is underutilized and administratively expensive, and proposed eliminating it to save about $3.5 million. The LAO suggested the Legislature consider whether administrative costs could be reduced while preserving some version of the program. County and consumer advocates opposed the cut, saying the system is a critical safety net when regular providers are unavailable, especially in rural areas and for people with complex needs. They argued that low utilization reflects the difficulty of finding emergency backup care, not lack of need, and that many counties already rely on local backup systems or other models. Committee members also pressed for better data on requests, fulfillment, and administrative costs, and discussed whether the state could support local alternatives instead of eliminating the program. The final topic was the proposal to align IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations by automating the process when recipients fail to complete Medi-Cal redeterminations. The administration said this would reduce General Fund costs by about $86 million by preventing payment of IHSS in the residual program when recipients are no longer eligible for Medi-Cal, while also automating reinstatement when Medi-Cal is restored. The LAO noted the proposal has been rejected in prior years and suggested improved notice and communication to recipients as an alternative. CWDA and advocates warned that the change could create gaps in care, especially for people who lose Medi-Cal for procedural reasons, and urged additional safeguards such as better notices, faster reprocessing, and automatic reinstatement. Members questioned how many people would be affected, how the residual program currently works, and whether providers could go unpaid during the gap; the department said the automation is already built and would be activated if the proposal is approved. No votes were taken during the discussion, and the committee moved through public comment and questioning without final action on the proposals in the excerpt provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't have any big cost overruns.
• It depends on the total cost of the project, Madam Chair.
• The overall cost for EDD Next, which is around $1.2 billion in total, that cost...
• The overall cost for EDD Next, which is around $1.2 billion in total, that cost has remained unchanged
• We also have the deputy director of operations and policy. See?

Transcript Highlights:

• the welcome center operational cost off the welcome center operational cost off the<01:26:20.320><c>
• </c><01:28:25.360><c> the</c> operational costs, but then there's the operational costs, but then there's
• </c><01:29:28.159><c> cost,</c> an asset versus the operation cost, an asset versus the operation cost
• </c><01:29:33.040><c> costs</c> budget that removed the operation costs budget that removed the operation
• c><01:29:51.280><c> DOT</c><01:29:51.840><c> to</c> operation costs and we allow DOT to operation costs

Summary: The committee worked through several HB 2 budget amendments, focusing first on energy-related transfers and then on judicial funding. For the energy item, members discussed moving remaining money from the renewable energy fund into the general fund for the biennium, with later-year amounts going to the general fund rather than ratepayers. They noted the proposal was based on prior House Bill 111 language, that the exact amount was still being worked out with the Department of Energy, and that some language about “incentive payments” was being removed or clarified. Amendment 1211H was moved and adopted on a 5-4 vote. The committee then considered amendment 1040 on the governor’s scholarship fund, which would eliminate the program and sweep uncommitted funds. Members supporting the program argued it helps New Hampshire students afford in-state college and should be reworked rather than repealed; opponents said the remaining balance was limited and the program should be ended. Amendment 1040 was defeated 4-5. The committee then turned to a judicial council request tied to a Franklin Pierce criminal justice clinic that had previously used ARPA funds. Supporters said the clinic cleared 323 cases in nine months, provided training for future attorneys, and could reduce more expensive assigned-counsel costs by helping the public defender system handle cases more efficiently. The amendment would add $100,000 to the judicial council line for that purpose. There was some confusion over the line item and whether the request should be attributed to the judicial branch or judicial council, which was corrected during discussion. Members also discussed a larger issue: the judicial council’s budget request appeared lower than intended because of a possible clerical error in how prior-year funding was calculated, especially after the last budget combined HB 1 and HB 2 funding. The committee compared the public defender line and assigned counsel line, noting that if public defender funding is cut, more cases would shift to assigned counsel, which is more expensive. No final vote on the judicial council amendment is shown in the excerpt.