Transcript Highlights:

• </c> impact on the housing market. impact on the housing market.
• > uh</c> affordable housing providers and uh affordable housing providers and uh single<00:30:21.760>
• Without intervention, we risk further eroding affordability and access to housing in our state.
• afford affordability and access eroding afford affordability and access to<00:37:42.480><c> housing</
• </c> affordable and safe for the long term. affordable and safe for the long term.

Transcript Highlights:

• We simply can't afford that anymore.
• This was affordable and we were doing fine.
• This amount is one-third of what I owe for my house.
• Affordable health care.
• We support that being affordable coverage.

Committee: House Health

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:06:13.120><c> Bill</c> the capital um budget for House Bill the capital um budget for House Bill
• </c> office prepares um and then the house office prepares um and then the house bill<00:06:20.520><c
• So this committee will go through the process, recommend a capital budget to the full House, the House
• It will also be on our website. blank that has the house decisions each blank that has the house decisions
• They put language in House Bill 2 that was contingency that basically said if this House Bill 25 gets

Summary: The Public Works and Highways committee held a capital budget orientation led by Legislative Budget Assistant Office staff, who walked members through the budget materials, the capital budget process, and the committee’s compare sheet. The presentation explained that agencies begin developing capital requests nearly a year in advance, submit them by May 1, and that the governor’s recommended capital budget is a reduced version of the much larger agency wish list. Members were told the agencies initially requested about $1.1 billion in projects, the catalog was trimmed to just over $400 million in general fund projects, and the governor’s recommendation in the pink book totals about $143 million in general fund capital appropriations. The committee also reviewed the prior capital budget and related statutes and committee procedures. Several specific projects drew discussion. The Department of Education’s CTE projects were explained as having been shifted into the operating budget in the prior cycle and now returning to the capital budget recommendation; members asked whether there was a backup CTE project and whether local approval had been secured for the named project. The Cannon Mountain tramway request was highlighted as a $20 million recommendation, with the presenter explaining that an earlier $18 million appropriation would be lapsed back to the general fund to help balance the budget. The Department of Corrections’ new prison project was also discussed; members were told the state has already appropriated $50 million for planning and site evaluation, but the governor’s current capital budget does not include a new prison construction appropriation because the project is not yet ready for that phase and may need to be funded differently, possibly through a separate, staggered appropriation. State Treasurer Monica Mezzapelli then presented on debt affordability and the state’s borrowing capacity. She said the state’s credit position has improved, with the debt-to-revenue ratio falling from 8.2% in 2015 to 3.8% in 2024, and explained that RSA 6-C limits debt authorization to 10% of unrestricted prior-year revenue. She noted that the Treasury’s planning assumes $60 million in annual bond issuance, with the prison-related $40 million now expected to be issued in 2026 rather than 2025 because the project is not ready to spend the funds. She said the state can still borrow more, but additional debt service must be paid from operating funds, and recommended keeping capital bonding in the $120 million to $130 million range to preserve affordability and the state’s credit rating. Members asked for clarification on the CTE funding shift, the prison schedule, and the meaning of the large agency request totals. The chair and treasurer discussed the governor’s $143 million recommendation versus the committee’s usual target range, and the treasurer said $130 million would be more comfortable than $140 million, with $135 million described as a possible compromise. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion provided; the meeting was informational and ended with the presenters offering to answer follow-up questions as agencies come before the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1222, House Bill 1289, House Bill 1223, House Bill 1221, House Bill 1065, House Bill 1004,
• , House Bill 1328, Senate Bill 142, House Bill 1423, House Bill 1014, House Bill 1059, and House Bill
• House Bill 1222, House Bill 1289, House Bill<02:01:28.639><c> 1223,</c> Bill 1223, Bill 1223, House<
• </c><02:01:32.800><c> 1065,</c><02:01:34.239><c> House</c> House Bill 1221, House Bill 1065, House House
• 1014, House Bill 1059, and House Bill 1014, House Bill 1059, and House<02:02:01.520><c> Bill</c><02:

Transcript Highlights:

• We are very proud of the work that we've done with affordable housing.
• The proposed redevelopment includes high-density, affordable, and market-rate housing, senior housing
• </c> extend excess TIF into affordable extend excess TIF into affordable housing<00:31:15.600><c> trust
• support housing production, including much-needed<00:35:30.920><c> affordable</c><00:35:31.440><c> housing
• ,</c> much-needed affordable housing, much-needed affordable housing, ensure<00:35:33.080><c> that</c

Committee: House Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• I move that House Bill 2096 be voted due pass. Any discussion?
• We will hear House Bill 1733 sponsored by Representative Welland Camp.
• That's always afforded to everybody. Yeah.
• We'll take the next person in opposition to House Bill 1733. Mr.
• Is there anyone else here in opposition to House Bill 1733?

Committee: House Local Government, Elections and Pensions

Summary: The Committee on Local Government first met in executive session and voted House Bill 2096 do pass by a roll call vote of 14 ayes and 0 noes. The committee then opened a public hearing on House Bill 1733, the Missouri Firefighter Bill of Rights, sponsored by Representative Wellencamp. The sponsor said the bill was intended to create statewide due-process protections for firefighters, paramedics, EMTs, and dispatchers employed by public agencies, including rules for investigations, interrogations, locker searches, discipline, and political activity. He said the bill was meant to address inconsistent procedures across departments and to protect workers from unfair treatment, while not limiting legitimate management investigations. Committee members questioned several parts of the bill, especially the scope of the immunity language, whether volunteer firefighters and fire districts were covered, and whether the bill would interfere with existing collective bargaining agreements or management’s ability to investigate misconduct. Supporters, including representatives from firefighter organizations, argued that the bill would provide needed statewide standards, clarify Garrity rights, protect political participation, and ensure fair disciplinary procedures. They said many departments lack consistent protections and that some firefighters have faced unfair investigations or terminations. Opponents, including representatives of fire protection districts, ambulance associations, and municipal risk-management groups, argued the bill was too broad, redundant, and likely to create litigation. They said many of the protections already exist through contracts, policies, or other laws, and raised concerns about the criminal immunity language, locker-search restrictions, and possible interference with EMS “hot wash” reviews and patient-care improvements. Several opponents also objected that the bill would impose a one-size-fits-all statewide mandate and could affect local control. The hearing closed without further action on House Bill 1733, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we will now move to House Bill 3496, sponsored by Representative Reedy.
• I'm presenting House Bill 3496 for the record. I'm Rodger Reedy.
• They do whatever they can according to what their county can afford.
• Next person in favor of House Bill 3496. Thank you. Next person in favor of House Bill 3496?
• Is there anyone here for informational purposes only on House Bill 3496?

Summary: The Committee on Local Government first took up Senate Substitute for Senate Bill 975, which concerns community paramedic/mobile integrated health services and related jurisdictional issues. Supporters, including ambulance and EMS leaders from Caldwell County and Cox Health, said the bill would help expand community paramedicine in rural and regional areas, improve patient care, reduce unnecessary emergency room use, and lower Medicaid costs. One witness described a successful program that cut Medicaid charges dramatically, while another said the bill would help ambulance districts merge and operate more efficiently. An opponent representing the Missouri State Council of Firefighters said the group supported the underlying bill but was concerned about the Senate-added jurisdictional language affecting community paramedic services and wanted those issues resolved. The committee heard testimony but took no vote before closing testimony on the bill. The committee then heard House Bill 3496, sponsored by Rep. Rodger Reedy, which would update county official salary schedules and assessed valuation ranges that have not been revised in decades. Reedy and the Missouri Association of Counties said the bill is intended to modernize minimum salary schedules while preserving local control through county salary commissions, with a growth factor designed to account for changing assessed valuations over time. Committee members asked about how the bill interacts with other salary legislation and whether counties could use alternative training or salary arrangements approved by their associations. Supporters said the proposal was developed through a multi-year task force process involving county officials and related associations. The Missouri Association of Counties and Warren County officials testified in favor, saying the bill reflects a broad consensus and better matches current county finances. No one testified in opposition to House Bill 3496, and the chair closed the public hearing and adjourned the meeting after testimony concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• they can't afford it, they can't afford it.
• they can't afford it, they can't afford it.
• </c><00:20:55.080><c> it</c><00:20:56.000><c> um</c> can't afford it they can't afford it um can't afford
• She cannot get to work from the subsidized housing that she has to rent because she can’t afford anywhere
• She cannot get to work from the subsidized housing that she has to rent because she can’t afford anywhere

Committee: Senate Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• and then other areas where we didn't allow for denser housing.
• I have a mom who's elderly that rents an apartment in Eagle because she can't afford to buy a house.
• Across Idaho, we are hearing the same message: We need more housing choices.
• housing.
• housing that typically does not require government affordable-housing subsidies like you see with large

Committee: House Business

Transcript Highlights:

• And this alumni house is named after Earl and Muriel Smith Camp.
• Again, thank you to Fresno State and the Alumni House for hosting us.
• And this alumni house is named after Earl and Muriel Smith Camp.
• Again, thank you to Fresno State and the Alumni House for hosting us.
• Turning to the Other expenditures for families to afford food.

Summary: The joint informational hearing at Fresno State focused on cost pressures in California’s food system and how those pressures affect households, farmers, and small businesses. Opening remarks emphasized Fresno State’s role in the Central Valley economy and the region’s importance to the state and nation’s food supply. Members said the hearing was part of a broader “pocketbook tour” to gather local input on affordability, food costs, labor, water, regulation, and market conditions, and they noted the added strain from the federal shutdown’s impact on CalFresh benefits and food insecurity. The first panel featured an agricultural economist, a PPIC researcher, and a Small Business Development Center leader. The economist described agriculture’s outsized role in the Central Valley’s GDP, employment, exports, and food manufacturing, while identifying water scarcity, SGMA-related land fallowing, labor shortages and rising labor costs, market uncertainty, invasive pests, and rising production costs as major barriers. The PPIC witness said food prices remain much higher than before the pandemic, household budgets are under pressure, and California’s nutrition safety net—especially CalFresh, WIC, and school meals—reduces poverty significantly, though federal changes and the shutdown could weaken that support. The SBDC representative highlighted technical assistance, capital access, and training for farm-adjacent businesses, but warned that reduced funding and ownership-transition challenges are making it harder for small businesses and farms to adapt. The second panel brought testimony from a small produce grower, a food entrepreneur, and the Fresno County Farm Bureau CEO. The grower said input costs such as fertilizer, fuel, irrigation supplies, land leases, labor, and compliance have risen sharply while wholesale prices have not, leaving small farmers with thin or negative margins and delayed disaster assistance. The food entrepreneur described scaling barriers for small food processors, including the lack of local small-batch processing facilities, higher distribution costs, and the need for better education on labeling and regulatory compliance. The Farm Bureau leader argued that farmers are price takers, not price setters, and said consumer food prices are driven largely by transportation, processing, packaging, and retail costs rather than farm-gate prices; he also stressed the importance of exports, water infrastructure, land preservation, ag burn rules, and continued investment in technology and labor solutions. Members asked about ways to help small farmers, land access, farm-to-school participation, ag burn restrictions, and water reliability. Witnesses suggested grants or programs to help small farmers buy land, more local processing capacity, continued investment in water conveyance and recharge, and stronger support for technical assistance and innovation. No formal votes were taken; the hearing concluded with members thanking the panelists and inviting continued input as they prepare future legislation.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, Amesbury would be a minimum-aid district under House 2, the House 2 proposal.
• Funding our district cannot afford to lose.
• With quality, accessibility, and affordability, With quality, accessibility, and affordability at the
• With quality, accessibility, and affordability, With quality, accessibility, and affordability at the
• It passed the House last July.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Ways and Means

Summary: The Joint Committee on Ways and Means held a public hearing in Lawrence focused on the governor’s proposed FY27 budget for education and local aid. Opening remarks from Senator Pavel Payano, Representative Pat Duffy, and local leaders emphasized the importance of education funding for Lawrence and other Gateway Cities, with Acting Mayor Giovanni Rodriguez and Superintendent Ralph Carrero highlighting the city’s high-need student population, Chapter 70 and Student Opportunity Act funding, early college and career pathways, and the need for sustained support to close achievement gaps. The Education Secretariat testified in support of the budget, with Acting Secretary Amy Kershaw outlining investments in early literacy, universal pre-K, student mental health, school meals, high school redesign, higher education affordability, and early childhood systems. Commissioner Noi Ortega described higher education proposals including expanded free community college, continued free tuition at public four-year institutions, student success funding, early college and dual enrollment investments, and the Bright Act and Drive Act. Commissioner Pedro Martinez detailed K-12 proposals such as full Student Opportunity Act funding, increased Chapter 70 aid, special education circuit breaker funding, transportation aid, literacy initiatives, and a new Accelerating Achievement Initiative aimed at schools with the greatest needs. Commissioner Kershaw also described early education proposals including funding for C3, child care financial assistance, CPPI, workforce supports, and administrative funding restoration. Committee members questioned the administration about the pending local contribution formula study, the final year of Student Opportunity Act implementation, and the need to address health care and other cost drivers in school funding. Officials said the local contribution report is expected by the end of June and that a draft will be shared for public comment after data analysis is complete. Members also raised concerns about Chapter 70 disparities between districts and urged a broader review of the formula. In response, the commissioners said the Student Opportunity Act narrowed funding gaps but further work is needed, and they pointed to the new achievement initiative, literacy efforts, and early college expansion as ways to improve outcomes. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• And Sacramento has got to get real on focusing on affordability.
• So, affordability, 100%.
• And, you know, first I just wanted to mention, as has been discussed today, affordability—A for affordability
• We all know that we are having an affordability crisis in every way that you can imagine: housing, groceries
• California's experienced an affordability crisis.

Committee: House Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to strengthen public education, expand access to housing and support services, ensure robust
• We need to strengthen public education, expand access to housing and support services, ensure robust
• Today, we're here to ask you to consider whether we can afford a $180 million tax cut with a backlog
• Families feel more strained as housing, transportation, and food become less affordable.
• These amounts will not help families struggling to afford groceries or gas.

Committee: All REVENUE & TAX - SENATE

Summary: The Senate Revenue and Tax Committee met to consider Senate Bill 1, sponsored by Senator Jonathan Dismang, which continues the state’s long-running effort to reduce Arkansas income tax rates. Dismang said the bill would lower the personal income tax rate retroactive to January 1, 2026 and delay the corporate income tax change until the following January, bringing the rate down from 7% to 3.7%. He also said the bill would use existing surplus funds and estimated that a person making $65,000 would see their effective tax burden reduced by about 45% compared with earlier rates. The committee heard several witnesses in opposition, including a United Methodist pastor/social worker, a parent describing her son’s disability and need for supported living services, representatives from Arkansas Appleseed and Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, and a Marshallese community advocate. They argued that Arkansas should preserve revenue for public schools, health care, food assistance, housing, rural hospitals, early childhood education, and disability services, and said the tax cuts would disproportionately benefit higher-income taxpayers while providing little relief to working families. Several speakers cited low state spending relative to national averages and warned that further cuts would worsen existing service gaps. In closing, Dismang and other supporters said the state can be both compassionate and competitive, that no essential services would be cut by the bill, and that Arkansas has continued to grow revenue despite prior tax reductions. Members emphasized balancing service funding with economic competitiveness and noted the legislature’s focus on lower-income tax brackets in earlier reforms. The committee then voted to do pass SB1, and the bill was approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:26:22.279><c> position</c><00:26:23.039><c> the</c><00:26:23.200><c> house</c> the original House
• position the house the original House position the house ultimately<00:26:24.080><c> voted</c><00:26
• </c><00:30:40.039><c> their</c> result they can no longer afford their result they can no longer afford
• They can't afford to pay that.
• They can't afford to pay that.

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 115-FN, which would remove the income cap from New Hampshire’s Education Freedom Account eligibility rules. Representative Valerie McDonnell, the bill’s sponsor, said the measure is intended to fund students rather than systems and to expand educational choice regardless of income or zip code. She described the change as a small statutory edit but argued it would have significant benefits, including helping families afford alternative education settings and testing costs such as AP exams. She also cited testimony from families who said EFAs helped children with special needs or difficult circumstances, and she argued the program is popular and cost-effective. Committee members questioned McDonnell about the bill’s fiscal impact and administration. One member asked whether removing the income cap would extend vouchers to families above the statewide median income and whether the change could cost more than $100 million annually; McDonnell said she did not agree with that estimate and pointed to Arizona as a comparison. Representative Wendy Thomas asked whether the bill should require stronger data-sharing from the Children’s Scholarship Fund, which administers the program, so the Department of Education and taxpayers could better track spending; McDonnell said the program already uses ClassWallet and regulated expenditures, and that the question was better directed to the administrator. Several members testified in opposition. Representative Wendy Thomas said the bill would increase costs for public schools, raise local property taxes, and worsen oversight problems. Representative Heath Howard argued the proposal would function as a subsidy for wealthy families already paying private tuition and said public education and special education should be funded first. Representative Megan Murray also opposed the bill, emphasizing the lack of a legal reporting requirement for EFA spending and the need for transparency, accountability, and attention to special education needs. Representative Sam Farrington supported expansion, sharing a constituent story about a student who left public school after harassment and benefited from private school placement. No vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, before we start this house rules, we just having a public.
• My colleagues in the House, there were 98 yes votes for this bill out of 103 current House members.
• Thank you for the opportunity to share some comments on House Bill 477.
• In the House public hearing a couple of weeks ago, House public hearing a couple of weeks ago, and even
• We can't afford the increased cost and inputs as other industries can.

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• In this case, it would be an affordable housing provider, and for CHC, we are concerned that right now
• the contractor does something wrong even though the affordable housing provider does nothing wrong,
• the contractor does something wrong even though the affordable housing provider does nothing wrong,
• You know, and like you, some of them, I consider affordable housing developers to be the best actors,
• And so, from our perspective, if an affordable housing provider is waiting for that payment, and again

Summary: The Assembly Labor and Employment Committee met on March 19, 2025, adopted its rules, and approved the consent calendar before hearing several bills. AB 538, by Assemblymember Berman, would require awarding bodies on public works projects to make a timely attempt to obtain certified payroll records from contractors when the public requests them, rather than simply saying they do not have the records. Supporters said it would clarify existing prevailing wage enforcement; county, city, special district, and housing groups opposed it over workload, privacy, and potential funding risks. The bill passed the committee on a do-pass recommendation to Appropriations. The committee then heard AB 485, authored by Chair Ortega, which would direct state agencies to deny or renew business licenses for employers with outstanding wage theft judgments unless the judgments are satisfied or bonded. Supporters, including labor groups and a caregiver who described delayed recovery of unpaid wages, said the bill would give workers meaningful leverage to collect judgments. The California Hospital Association opposed it, warning that license action could threaten patient access to care. The bill passed on a do-pass recommendation to Appropriations. AB 596, by Assemblymember McKinnor, would codify workers’ right to wear a face covering or respirator at work unless it creates a direct safety hazard. Supporters said the measure would protect workers from illness, wildfire smoke, and employer restrictions after prior Cal/OSHA protections expired; the Chamber of Commerce opposed it narrowly, asking for an exception where masks are infeasible for certain tasks. The committee supported the bill and sent it to Appropriations. The hearing concluded with the roll kept open for absent members and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Historically funded through the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities account, SALC also is
• Natalie Spivak with Housing California, commenting on item 5, the Affordable Housing and Sustainable
• Additionally, while AHSC's track record of producing integrated affordable housing and transportation
• This integration has led to lengthy delays and additional costs as affordable housing developers meet
• And second, on the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, we are very supportive of

Transcript Highlights:

• housed.
• Family housing, including affordable housing, is proven to be a very complicated issue, and so we're
• Between our challenge and workforce housing program, we will be able to build more than 400 new affordable
• Accessible, affordable, sustainable, and equitable housing.
• of both supportive housing and very low-income housing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, these are providers that offer housing with affordable rents and pairs the housing with important
• Uh, these are providers that offer housing with affordable rents and pairs the housing with important
• :58.720><c> the</c><00:47:59.040><c> housing</c> affordable rents and pairs the housing affordable rents
• He said there is certainly more work we need to do to make housing more affordable, starting with passing
• housing more affordable uh to do to make housing more affordable uh starting<00:58:23.680><c> with</c

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm against House Bill 2521.
• I'm against House Bill 2521.
• Washington more affordable instead of less affordable?
• Affordability is key.
• Affordability is key.

Bills: HB1607 , HB2159 , HB2441 , HB2521 , HB2531 , HB2543

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: recycling, waste reduction, environmental policy, sustainability, municipal regulations, preK, education funding, childcare, youth development, state budget, HB 2441, line of duty death, survivor benefits, medical insurance premium reimbursement, surviving spouse, domestic partner, dependent children, public employee death benefits, retirement system, Washington State