Transcript Highlights:

• There was we kind of had a co-mingling of assessed and market.
• it from assessed value to market<00:03:00.560> value.
• <00:03:05.360> value changed the language from assessed value changed the language from assessed
• And co-mingling of assessed and market.
• whether you use fair market or assess. whether you use fair market or assess.

Keywords: 916, all

Summary: The joint conference committee on House Bill 45 met to reconcile changes to the long-term homeowner property tax exemption. Members reviewed the original bill, which removed the exemption’s sunset, adjusted the signup/reporting date and procedures, clarified treatment for homeowners who sold one house and bought another, changed valuation language from assessed value to fair market value, and added a $3 million cap. The committee also discussed Senate amendments and a proposed cleanup amendment intended to prevent stacking the long-term homeowner exemption with a separate voter-approved homeowners’ property tax initiative if that initiative becomes law. Members asked about the difference between using “shall not qualify” versus a repealer, and were told the repealer was removed to avoid creating a trigger-bill issue if the initiative does not pass. Questions also focused on whether the catch title’s “limitation” language referred to the $3 million cap, and it was explained that the language could apply both to the cap and to the restriction on using both exemptions. One senator asked what Senate language was being deleted, and the response was that the committee was removing language that had gone too far, including a 25% exemption provision that was outside the scope of this bill and would be handled later in the interim. After discussion, the committee moved to concurrence. A roll call vote was taken, and all six members present voted aye. The committee announced concurrence and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Joint Resolution 213 changes the assessment increases from assessment increases from every year
• We thought slowing the assessment down to every third year was a better solution.
• If they are able to assess every year, they're going to tack the three percent on a non-homestead.
• value, their assessed value increased so their tax that they had to pay went up and increased.
• Spreading out these assessment increases over a three-year period Charles Chapman: puts a lot of faith

Transcript Highlights:

• We shouldn't be assessing the property in order to tax the property until it can come under use.
• One is, what is the assessment process like currently in those kind of situations?
• What kind of impact on the assessment process likely going forward?
• obviously you have limited resources, limited people that are doing that assessment.
• value, whichever is less. ...or actual assessed value, whichever is less.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And then we use assessment fees, which is what's on your screen.
• Does every hospital pay an assessment fee?
• And then the state share of that total payment is what the assessment fee is.
• And so they get very irritated that they have to pay an assessment without getting a benefit of the assessment
• Like that's why we're willing to put that assessment up to get the dollars back.

Summary: The subcommittee met to review Arkansas DHS hospital spending and reimbursement methods, with Secretary Janet Mann and Deputy Secretary Misty Eubanks explaining Medicaid hospital payments. They described fee-for-service per diem payments, cost settlements, and the upper payment limit (UPL) program, noting that SFY 2025 hospital payments included $688 million in inpatient/outpatient claims, $473 million in UPL payments, $248 million in cost settlements, and about $47 million in other payments such as graduate medical education and disproportionate share hospital funds. Members asked about why per diem rates vary, how cost settlements work, why UPL applies mainly to private hospitals, and how assessment fees are structured and funded. DHS said the hospital assessment fee is broad-based and uniform, used as the state share to draw federal funds, and that supplemental hospital payments after federal match totaled $548 million with no general revenue used. The Arkansas Hospital Association’s Jody Ann Tritt then gave a broader overview of the hospital landscape, explaining the different hospital types in the state, including critical access hospitals, rural emergency hospitals, PPS hospitals, and specialty hospitals. She said Arkansas hospitals face financial strain, citing a negative 5.18% patient service margin statewide and lower reimbursement than surrounding states. She argued that Arkansas hospitals are paid less than hospitals in neighboring states for similar services, that commercial payer rates and administrative burdens are a major problem, and that Medicaid and Medicare rates remain below cost even with UPL support. She also said hospitals are the backbone of community care, provide emergency and public health functions, and are looking for ways to invest in technology and telehealth but often lack the revenue to do so. Members pressed for clearer data on hospital finances, reimbursement adequacy, and the impact of commercial insurers. Tritt said the association had just authorized a statewide survey to gather updated financial information from hospitals, which she said would take about a year to complete. She also explained that Medicaid pays weekly, Medicare and commercial plans can involve delays and denials, and that hospitals often spend significant resources on revenue cycle work. The discussion ended with a brief update on assisted living reimbursement: DHS said one facility, The Pillars of the Community in Crossett, had announced closure, nine Living Choices waiver clients were being transitioned, and the updated rate study would be available after cost reports are collected, likely before the end of the fiscal year. The meeting then adjourned.

Bills: SB903, SB2101, SB2550, SB2983, HB2433, SCR8, SCR20, SCR28, SCR32, SCR40, SCR48, SCR55, SCR57, SCR69, SCR74, SCR83, SCR87, SCR94, SCR99, SCR114, SCR139, SCR160, SCR165, SCR177, SCR178, SCR179, SCR41, SCR78, SCR90, SCR130, SCR159, SCR162, SCR173, SB2024, SB2075, SB2730, HB2581, SB2050, SB2471, SB2466, HB1163, HB1514, SB3082, SB2135, SB2727, SB3097, HB1696, HB2021, SR20, SCR110

Keywords: public land trust, Hawaiian affairs, OHA, ceded lands, financial reporting, income settlement, trust responsibility, organic waste, solid waste, waste diversion, composting, bioconversion, recycling, food waste, green waste, food-soiled paper, wood waste, landfill diversion, waste reduction, waste management

Bills: SB903, SB2101, SB2550, SB2983, HB2433, SCR8, SCR20, SCR28, SCR32, SCR40, SCR48, SCR55, SCR57, SCR69, SCR74, SCR83, SCR87, SCR94, SCR99, SCR114, SCR139, SCR160, SCR165, SCR177, SCR178, SCR179, SCR41, SCR78, SCR90, SCR130, SCR159, SCR162, SCR173, SB2024, SB2075, SB2730, HB2581, SB2050, SB2471, SB2466, HB1163, HB1514, SB3082, SB2135, SB2727, SB3097, HB1696, HB2021, SR20, SCR110

Keywords: public land trust, Hawaiian affairs, OHA, ceded lands, financial reporting, income settlement, trust responsibility, organic waste, solid waste, waste diversion, composting, bioconversion, recycling, food waste, green waste, food-soiled paper, wood waste, landfill diversion, waste reduction, waste management

Bills: SB903, SB2101, SB2550, SB2983, HB2433, SCR8, SCR20, SCR28, SCR32, SCR40, SCR48, SCR55, SCR57, SCR69, SCR74, SCR83, SCR87, SCR94, SCR99, SCR114, SCR139, SCR160, SCR165, SCR177, SCR178, SCR179, SCR41, SCR78, SCR90, SCR130, SCR159, SCR162, SCR173, SB2024, SB2075, SB2730, HB2581, SB2050, SB2471, SB2466, HB1163, HB1514, SB3082, SB2135, SB2727, SB3097, HB1696, HB2021, SR20, SCR110

Keywords: public land trust, Hawaiian affairs, OHA, ceded lands, financial reporting, income settlement, trust responsibility, organic waste, solid waste, waste diversion, composting, bioconversion, recycling, food waste, green waste, food-soiled paper, wood waste, landfill diversion, waste reduction, waste management

Bills: SB903, SB2101, SB2550, SB2983, HB2433, SCR8, SCR20, SCR28, SCR32, SCR40, SCR48, SCR55, SCR57, SCR69, SCR74, SCR83, SCR87, SCR94, SCR99, SCR114, SCR139, SCR160, SCR165, SCR177, SCR178, SCR179, SCR41, SCR78, SCR90, SCR130, SCR159, SCR162, SCR173, SB2024, SB2075, SB2730, HB2581, SB2050, SB2471, SB2466, HB1163, HB1514, SB3082, SB2135, SB2727, SB3097, HB1696, HB2021, SR20, SCR110

Keywords: public land trust, Hawaiian affairs, OHA, ceded lands, financial reporting, income settlement, trust responsibility, organic waste, solid waste, waste diversion, composting, bioconversion, recycling, food waste, green waste, food-soiled paper, wood waste, landfill diversion, waste reduction, waste management

Bills: SB903, SB2101, SB2550, SB2983, HB2433, SCR8, SCR20, SCR28, SCR32, SCR40, SCR48, SCR55, SCR57, SCR69, SCR74, SCR83, SCR87, SCR94, SCR99, SCR114, SCR139, SCR160, SCR165, SCR177, SCR178, SCR179, SCR41, SCR78, SCR90, SCR130, SCR159, SCR162, SCR173, SB2024, SB2075, SB2730, HB2581, SB2050, SB2471, SB2466, HB1163, HB1514, SB3082, SB2135, SB2727, SB3097, HB1696, HB2021, SR20, SCR110

Keywords: public land trust, Hawaiian affairs, OHA, ceded lands, financial reporting, income settlement, trust responsibility, organic waste, solid waste, waste diversion, composting, bioconversion, recycling, food waste, green waste, food-soiled paper, wood waste, landfill diversion, waste reduction, waste management

Bills: SB903, SB2101, SB2550, SB2983, HB2433, SCR8, SCR20, SCR28, SCR32, SCR40, SCR48, SCR55, SCR57, SCR69, SCR74, SCR83, SCR87, SCR94, SCR99, SCR114, SCR139, SCR160, SCR165, SCR177, SCR178, SCR179, SCR41, SCR78, SCR90, SCR130, SCR159, SCR162, SCR173, SB2024, SB2075, SB2730, HB2581, SB2050, SB2471, SB2466, HB1163, HB1514, SB3082, SB2135, SB2727, SB3097, HB1696, HB2021, SR20, SCR110

Keywords: public land trust, Hawaiian affairs, OHA, ceded lands, financial reporting, income settlement, trust responsibility, organic waste, solid waste, waste diversion, composting, bioconversion, recycling, food waste, green waste, food-soiled paper, wood waste, landfill diversion, waste reduction, waste management

Bills: SB903, SB2101, SB2550, SB2983, HB2433, SCR8, SCR20, SCR28, SCR32, SCR40, SCR48, SCR55, SCR57, SCR69, SCR74, SCR83, SCR87, SCR94, SCR99, SCR114, SCR139, SCR160, SCR165, SCR177, SCR178, SCR179, SCR41, SCR78, SCR90, SCR130, SCR159, SCR162, SCR173, SB2024, SB2075, SB2730, HB2581, SB2050, SB2471, SB2466, HB1163, HB1514, SB3082, SB2135, SB2727, SB3097, HB1696, HB2021, SR20, SCR110

Keywords: public land trust, Hawaiian affairs, OHA, ceded lands, financial reporting, income settlement, trust responsibility, organic waste, solid waste, waste diversion, composting, bioconversion, recycling, food waste, green waste, food-soiled paper, wood waste, landfill diversion, waste reduction, waste management

Transcript Highlights:

• eliminates the account for the regulation and supervision of captive insurers and redirects the fees and assessments
• Additionally, the bill requires the trailer to be assessed for the governmental services taxes for the
• metrics in collaboration with the Department of Education that school districts and schools can use to assess
• Districts and schools can use to assess and perform, assess the performance of pupils and schools, as

Bills: SB6, SB62, SB74, SB90, SB104, SB119, SB132, SB133, SB135, SB182, SB185, SB193, SB207, SB217, SB229, SB233, SB260, SB262, SB280, SB281, SB300, SB306, SB378, SB382, SB393, SB403, SB422, SB427, SB431, SB434, SB442, SB452, SB456, SB468, SB472, SB487, SB503, SB6

Keywords: cloud seeding, Nevada, water conservation, agriculture, Desert Research Institute, victim compensation, hate crimes, property remediation, criminal justice, vulnerable persons, elections, voter registration, mail ballots, candidate eligibility, cybersecurity, education funding, teacher grants, classroom supplies, instructional support, specialized personnel

Transcript Highlights:

• , NAPE assessments.
• profession uh via lensure assessments. profession uh via lensure assessments.
• assessments.
• skill before taking that assessment. skill before taking that assessment.
• their assessment. their assessment.

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call - 00:13 Approval of Minutes - 4:07 Kentucky Academic Standards for Reading and Writing - 5:18 Math Improvement Committee Report - 21:02 ETS Praxis Exam - 41:47 KDE Performance Review Data - 1:15:04 Adjournment - 1:57:54, 958, all

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from KDE on the revised Kentucky academic standards for reading and writing. KDE explained the statutory six-year review process, the public comment periods, and the main revisions, including updates tied to the science of reading, decodable text, encoding/decoding, and an updated vision statement. KDE said 308 responses were received on the initial public comment, most respondents favored keeping standards as-is, and about 12% of standards were revised. The department also said the document was streamlined by removing repeated graphics and reducing its size by about 24%, and that a later comment period drew more than 400 responses. No new standards were flagged for review. Members asked about alignment between standards, curriculum, assessments, and NAEP, and KDE said instructional resources should be aligned to standards, KSA assessments are aligned to the standards, and screeners/diagnostics help identify student needs. Representative Truett raised the idea of a textbook-to-standards crosswalk, and KDE said publishers and a future repository partner should provide such crosswalks for local districts. Representative Bojanowski asked why foundational reading skills are not directly assessed on the third-grade KSA; KDE responded that the assessment is designed to measure end-of-grade expectations, while screening and diagnostics are used earlier to identify decoding needs. Representative Gel asked about early childhood supports, and KDE said it is working with early learning and special education offices and promoting LETRS professional learning for both teachers and preschool educators. The committee then received the mathematics improvement committee report. KDE said the mathematics committee unanimously approved a new strategic plan for improving math achievement from pre-K through grade 20 and adult education. The plan centers on six priorities: student empowerment, effective mathematics teaching and learning, continuous educator development and growth, a continuum of learning, community and family partnerships, and teacher recruitment and retention. KDE said the plan is intended as a living document with goals, recommended actions, and evidence bases, and that it aligns with the Kentucky Numeracy Counts Act by supporting high-quality instructional resources, professional learning, and family resources. In response to Senator Thomas, KDE explained that the professional learning recommendation means districts should tailor teacher training to classroom needs and instructional materials so math teachers are better equipped to implement standards and support students.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now we'll talk about the assessments that are used in JR.
• An assessment is a tool that's used to determine the risk and needs of a young person.
• State law requires assessments that are used to determine risk to be validated.
• I mean, one has to do with the training of staff and then the assessment.
• In terms of assessments, we determined they were not validated.

Summary: The committee met on July 15, 2026, but initially lacked a quorum, so it could not adopt prior minutes. Chair Jerry Pollett welcomed new member Senator Victoria Hunt and new JLARC staff, and noted national recognition for recent JLARC reports. The meeting then moved into a series of preliminary audit presentations and an agency strategic management update, with committee members asking questions after each item. JLARC presented a preliminary audit of DCYF’s Juvenile Rehabilitation programs. Staff concluded that crowding, staffing shortages, weak risk assessments, and inconsistent programming combine to create unsafe conditions. The report found that most youth are housed in two large secure facilities operating near or above capacity, incidents rise as population rises, 47% of frontline staff leave within a year, current assessment tools are not valid for the population, and program access depends more on facility than individual need. JLARC made one recommendation to the legislature to address crowding and seven to DCYF, including improving retention, training, incident response procedures, validated assessments, program alignment, and data quality. DCYF Secretary Ross Hunter said the agency agreed overcrowding is a serious problem, described ongoing efforts to improve staffing and safety, and said a detailed response would be provided later. Committee members raised concerns about education access, retaliation against staff or youth who participated in the audit, and whether JR-25 has helped or worsened conditions. JLARC then presented a preliminary audit of Labor and Industries’ enforcement of farm worker labor laws. The audit found that L&I generally meets inspection timelines for health and safety complaints, but not for wage and hour or retaliation complaints, where delays are driven largely by time before assignment to an investigator. Staff said complaint volume exceeds capacity, though the agency has added staff, created screening processes, and reorganized workloads, and 2026 legislation now allows prioritization of complaints and broader investigations. JLARC recommended that L&I report back in December 2026 and December 2027 on backlog reduction and implementation of the new law. An L&I representative said the agency is hiring additional staff and will provide a formal response later. The committee also received a JLARC overview and Department of Health strategic management plan update on hospital data reporting, inspections, complaints, and adverse event reporting. DOH reported measurable progress on inspection compliance, new staffing and licensing systems, translated complaint forms, and plans for future work on language access, adverse event reporting, and financial data dashboards. After lunch, JLARC began its 2026 tax preference performance reviews. The first review covered the Main Street tax credit, which JLARC said has helped increase the number of Main Street communities and businesses, with positive growth near designated districts; JLARC recommended continuing the preference and improving business-count data. The second review covered the equitable access to credit program, which JLARC said appears to support underserved communities by funding loans through CDFIs; JLARC recommended continuing the preference beyond its 2027 expiration. The committee began questions on the program mechanics and the role of the Community Reinvestment Act, and the presentation was still underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• /c><00:15:49.680> a<00:15:50.000> leading screening assessment is a leading screening assessment
• <00:23:01.840> with grade level, will they be assessed with grade level, will they be assessed
• for the good assessment tool. for the good assessment tool.
• After conducting an initial assessment, my students teach, observe, and assess their students during
• doing just general assessments doing just general assessments um<01:10:32.320> showed<01:

Bills: HF3421

Keywords: early literacy, reading instruction, teacher preparation, teacher candidates, teacher licensure, educator licensing, Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, PELSB, field experience, supervised practicum, evidence-based reading, science of reading, literacy methods, teacher training, preservice teachers, school-based experience, reading intervention, Minnesota education policy, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• assessments as often as every week.
• But if someone was... there assessing them, that would be different.
• I have a question where it comes to assessment... in this memorial.
• Chair, and Representative, yes, it would because it is related to assessment.
• But also for math, because we're wanting to do math assessments and look. at another assessment for math

Bills: SB194, SB200, SB203, SB204, SJR3

Keywords: appropriation, higher education, sports facilities, community college, Luna Community College, KANW, educational radio, rural news, public education, funding, education, documentary, historical figure, Padre Antonio Jose Martinez, cultural heritage, research funding, federal funding, New Mexico, University of New Mexico, New Mexico State University

Transcript Highlights:

• These are properties that are assessed by the state.
• And I know there's a cost in assessing all the time.
• And it's like, why don't we assess more frequently? Mr.
• And I know there's a cost in assessing all the time.
• With assessed valuations.

Summary: The subcommittee of the Tax Reform and Relief Committee met to begin its study of the feasibility and desirability of revising the content of the real estate tax statement to improve property tax transparency. Legislative Council staff reviewed the study directive under House Bill 1176 and the statutory requirements for tax statements, including required line items such as true and full value, mill levy, legislative tax relief, primary residence credit, and the Legacy Fund portion of that credit. The Tax Department then explained how the current uniform statement is prescribed and approved, and noted that changes are typically driven by statute and implemented collaboratively with counties and vendors. County officials from the North Dakota Association of Counties described the full annual tax cycle, from county budgeting and valuation notices to budget hearing notices, levy certification, cap calculations, and final tax statement mailing. They emphasized that counties and auditors do extensive coordination with taxing districts and neighboring counties, and that the process is labor-intensive and often manual. Members discussed the limited public response to budget notices and tax statements, the difficulty of explaining the legislative tax relief line, the 3% cap and valuation issues, and whether more frequent assessments or different timing would improve understanding. Several members and witnesses noted that many taxpayers only engage when they receive their final bill, and that clarity may be more important than adding more detail. NDACO also presented a rough cost survey from eight counties, estimating an average tax statement cost of about 74 cents and a statewide total near $600,000 for printing and mailing tax statements alone, with outsourcing generally cheaper than in-house printing. Witnesses noted that House Bill 1176 added other mailings and notices, increasing county workload and cost beyond the statement itself. The committee then heard from software vendors, who explained how their systems handle tax billing, budget notices, valuation notices, primary residence credit processing, and tax levy calculations, and they identified the 1600/1685 primary residence credit and discount interaction as a current programming challenge. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and focused on gathering testimony and identifying issues for possible future recommendations or bill drafts.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think that there's been a rise in probably. delinquent assessments, and that was with COVID.
• So that is probably the reason why there is probably uptake on lawsuits involving assessments.
• to pay an assessment or a fee? That number is pretty low.
• And then also to answer to your neighbors, too, who are paying their bills and paying assessments and
• Like the assessed value on the home is $500,000.

Bills: HB406

Keywords: local economic development, notification, workforce development, municipal agreements, county contracts, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Regarding county assessments, our county social workers use state-designed and state-mandated assessment
• So we assess that monthly.” “Okay.
• We must acknowledge that most IHSS consumers are already under-assessed, not over-assessed.
• The assessments, yes.
• The assessment service? Yes.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the governor’s IHSS budget proposals and then took public testimony from the administration, LAO, county representatives, labor, consumer advocates, and an aging/disability advocacy group. The administration described IHSS as a large Medi-Cal long-term services program serving more than 900,000 recipients and proposed three changes: shifting some growth costs tied to authorized hours per case to counties, eliminating the statewide backup provider system, and aligning IHSS terminations with Medi-Cal terminations. The administration also discussed the earlier CFCO reassessment penalty change for counties and said overdue reassessments had dropped significantly. LAO said the governor’s overall IHSS cost estimates appeared reasonable, but raised concerns about the hours-per-case cost shift, including unclear root causes for growth, limited county control over statewide averages, and uncertainty about the eventual savings. County Welfare Directors Association, SEIU, and consumer/advocacy witnesses opposed the hours cost shift, arguing counties use state tools, the proposal would pressure counties to cut services, and it could harm older adults and people with disabilities by increasing institutionalization and shifting costs elsewhere. The chair and members repeatedly questioned the rationale for the proposal, the lack of a defined baseline, and whether the current assessment tools or MOE structure should instead be revisited. On the backup provider system, the administration said the program is underused and costly to administer relative to service spending, while LAO suggested the Legislature consider whether administrative costs could be reduced instead of eliminating it. County, labor, and consumer witnesses opposed the cut, saying the system is a critical emergency safety net even if utilization is low, especially for rural areas and people with complex needs. Members also asked about data quality, county backup systems, and whether consumers know the program exists. On the Medi-Cal/IHSS alignment proposal, the administration said automation would stop General Fund-only spending when recipients lose Medi-Cal and restore IHSS automatically when Medi-Cal is regained; LAO and others noted the proposal had been rejected before and urged better notices and safeguards. Witnesses warned that automatic termination could create gaps in care and unpaid work for providers, while the department said counties already manually terminate in some cases and that automation is ready if approved. No votes were taken in the excerpt, and the chair indicated the committee would continue with public comment and later items before a hard adjournment time.

Transcript Highlights:

• Simply put, this report or this assessment connects data to action.
• statewide needs assessment.
• We assess their independent living skills. We assess their independent living skills.
• Most assessments are conducted on-site and in person.
• We conduct an independent assessment.

Keywords: 977, all

Summary: The committee met to receive a detailed financial operations presentation from the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agency, with staff walking members through funding sources, budgeting, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and grants management. Sabrina Walker explained VR’s blended funding structure, including federal grants, state appropriations, program income, and interagency contracts, and emphasized that state funds are essential to meeting the federal match and maintenance-of-effort requirements. Members asked repeatedly about transparency, audit controls, and the risk that state cuts could reduce federal drawdowns; staff responded that all reports reconcile back to the SCEIS accounting system, are subject to state audits and internal reviews, and that even modest state reductions could significantly reduce total available funding. The committee also discussed pre-employment transition services for students with disabilities, with staff confirming services are offered through school districts, charters, and private schools, and that contracts are monitored for performance and compliance. The presentation then shifted to budgeting and internal controls. Walker described a zero-based departmental budgeting process, monthly monitoring reports, contingency reserves for unexpected expenses, and a formal annual cycle that culminates in board approval. Members asked about facilities tracking, culture, and how the agency maintains accountability; staff said facilities staff inspect buildings and equipment, supervisors justify line-item requests, and the process has become smoother over time as departments learned the system. Cynthia Johnson followed with an accounts receivable overview, describing invoicing, receipting, aging, customer verification, year-end reporting, and the use of cross-training, shared email inboxes, and spreadsheets as checks and balances. She also explained work training center billing, interdepartmental transfers, and the revolving fund used to issue consumer checks more quickly than standard vendor payments. Olivia Perez presented accounts payable operations, including invoice processing through SCEIS and OnBase, the three-way match, travel reimbursements, revolving fund checks, State Treasury Office interactions, and handling of reversals, rejections, and levy notices. She reported that AP processed 67,723 SCEIS payments, 13,670 case management system invoices, 3,379 travel reimbursements, and 15,693 revolving fund checks in fiscal year 2025, with only 70 payment rejections. The final portion of the meeting covered Grants and Funds Management, where Walker explained federal reporting, drawdowns, payroll allocation, asset tracking, lease and IT contract reviews, cost allocation, and closing packages. She noted upcoming system changes such as S/4HANA, Workiva, and SC Pro, but said the agency is receiving training and feedback opportunities. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the presentation portion beyond approval of the prior minutes and a brief recess.