Transcript Highlights:

• one-time every three years assessment one-time every three years assessment where<00:05:22.160><
• come together and build the assessment come together and build the assessment tool<00:09:48.000>
• <00:10:04.800> when to uh get a complete assessment when to uh get a complete assessment when
• So, we have to make sure that those are properly assessed.
• But if you are are properly assessed.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Families and Children met and heard presentation of Senate Bill 191, a pilot proposal to create the Kentucky Kindergarten Readiness Performance-based Child Care Incentive Program. Senator Danny Carroll explained that the three-year pilot, to be developed with the University of Kentucky College of Education, would reward child care providers or families with a $2,000 payment when a child is found kindergarten-ready, with the award tied to the prior two years of care. He said the program would include child care centers, child care homes, and eligible low-income families, with added supports such as home-visiting resources and curriculum assistance, and would also automatically fund providers caring for children with special needs who cannot be assessed in the same way. Members asked about logistics, eligibility, diversity, and cost. Senator Meredith asked how parents would participate and how many children might be included; Carroll said UK would help define the details and that the pilot would likely use about $2 million in available funds, with a broad enough sample to produce meaningful data. Senator Thomas raised concerns about direct payments to parents and the fiscal implications of scaling the idea; Carroll responded that the pilot would only test the concept, that public pre-K and Head Start would not be included, and that the program would target families eligible for child care assistance. He estimated the broader annual cost, if expanded statewide, could eventually be much higher, but argued the educational and workforce benefits would outweigh the expense. Senator Thomas also asked whether the bill’s reference to diverse providers meant geographic, racial, language, and socioeconomic diversity, and Carroll said that was the intent, with UK given latitude to structure the sample and assessment tool. Another senator supported the bill as a step toward universal pre-K and emphasized that learning begins at birth. The discussion ended with a motion and second on the bill, followed by a roll call vote, but the transcript cuts off before the vote result is stated.

Transcript Highlights:

• They would, what would their ability be to assess fees?
• They don't have an ability to assess fees.
• They don't have a constituency to assess fees.
• The Children's Services Council can't assess fees. Who are you going to assess your fee on?
• The Children's Services Council can't assess fees. Who are you going to assess your fee on?

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations took up SJR 2-F, the proposed constitutional amendment on property tax relief, which would reduce assessment growth on non-homestead property, expand homestead exemptions, create a new exemption for new homesteaders, and direct counties, cities, and school districts to use property tax revenues for specified core services. Senator Avila presented the measure as the governor’s plan to provide historic relief and argued that local governments should tighten budgets and prioritize core functions. Senators raised concerns about the lack of fiscal scoring, the breadth and ambiguity of the permitted uses, the effect on special districts and local services, and whether the proposal would shift costs to fees or other taxes. The committee adopted several amendments, including Avila’s amendment clarifying that ad valorem revenues could be used for county and municipal operations and administration and other expenditures not prohibited by law, and Trumbull’s amendment removing school board ad valorem taxes from the proposal. Other amendments failed, including proposals to allow user fees and non-ad valorem assessments, add a sunset, redirect tourism development taxes, narrow the small-business provision, and change the ballot title to reference local service reductions. Grall’s amendment removing the constitutional trust fund requirement was adopted, while the committee also rejected Berman’s title-change amendment and Smith’s sunset and tourism-tax amendments. The committee then returned to the bill as amended for questions, including extended debate over whether the proposal would affect noncitizen residents, the impact on local government finances, and whether local governments would respond with higher fees or special assessments. The meeting ended with the bill still under discussion after the final round of questions, with Avila saying he would continue working with the governor’s office on the language before the next vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• and find the right dollar amount to be the right threshold to be at, especially as it concerns assessment
• struck-out 3... ...that sub 3 would replace the struck-out 3 and it makes it just really tight to assessment
• and the study is done, they can... ...the end of the day and after the assessments and the study is
• This is what we're going to do: we're going to assess for the next two years, and it's a full assessment
• Why do we need another two years to assess? If you could just fill in the blank for me there.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The conference committee on House Bill 1218 met to reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, which concerns environmental assessment requirements and cost-share analysis for drainage projects. Members discussed revised language that would keep the existing $1 million threshold in place for assessment drain projects, maintain the moratorium on environmental assessments for those projects, and add study language to examine thresholds for when environmental assessments should be required. The House side explained that the goal was to prevent the threshold from being lowered again, while also allowing the interim study to gather more data on agricultural benefit valuation and cost-benefit analysis. Senator Engett asked why additional study time was needed if more than 50 environmental assessments had already been completed. In response, members explained that the current tool has gaps in how agricultural land benefits are valued, which can affect cost-share calculations, and that the study period would help improve the analysis. They also noted that the bill would not affect municipal water supply or flood control projects, with the main issue being assessment drains in agricultural land. No votes were taken. The committee agreed the revised language should be put into proper legislative form, and the chair indicated the committee could reconvene later that morning, possibly at 11:00 a.m., before adjourning the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• , academic assessments of students.
• Is there a place for assessments, standardized assessments?
• And I think that's what assessment should be.
• I think assessment is a positive thing.
• And at some point, if assessment tests are reinstated, At some point, if assessment tests are reinstated

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So just to be very clear, the registrants, when they pay their annual assessments to our department,
• Well, the deadlines for issuing invoices and having the assessments paid are going to be set forth in
• Everyone pays a minimum assessment of $250. All licensees pay that.
• Last year, the last fiscal year, the assessments and fees were $2,800.
• Last year's enabling legislation that increased these fees and assessments were remarkable.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on State Administration heard a series of budget change proposals and trailer bill items, beginning with Housing and Community Development (HCD) requests. HCD sought permanent authority for seven existing temporary positions to support the HCD Connect IT system, and a separate proposal to fund implementation of eight 2025 housing-related laws with $4.2 million General Fund and 16 positions, plus $470,000 one-time General Fund. Members asked about how HCD Connect would interact with programs moving to the new Housing Development Finance Committee, and HCD also explained that the estimated cost to implement AB 1053 had been revised downward from about $6 million to $1.9 million because of shared implementation with CalHFA and the new committee structure. The committee also heard a Cal ICH proposal for $339,000 one-time General Fund to implement AB 678 on LGBTQ+ inclusive and culturally competent homelessness services, with testimony emphasizing data gaps and the need for a contract-based approach because HMIS cannot be changed unilaterally. The Department of Financial Protection and Innovation presented three continuation proposals: $15.34 million and 53 positions for the California Consumer Financial Protection Law program, $13.5 million and 51 positions for the Debt Collector Licensing Act program, and $49,000 ongoing for two positions in the broker-dealer/investment adviser education program. Members and the public raised concerns about the size and fairness of debt collector assessments and licensing fees, while DFPI explained the pro rata fee structure, the current license count, and how larger assessments fall on larger firms. Public testimony also supported retaining funding for the Student Loan Empowerment Network and requested funding for a franchise broker registration program. The committee also considered a mandate item involving suspension of a disclosure requirement related to property taxation, and trailer bill language from the Government Operations Agency to amend AB 91 on MENA demographic data collection, with the administration emphasizing data nondisclosure, protection of federal funding, and delayed implementation. The Secretary of State’s office then presented Help America Vote Act funding requests: $10.3 million for VoteCal maintenance and operations and $4.492 million for HAVA spending plans supporting voter education, training, accessibility, auditing, and county assistance. The office also requested $660,000 General Fund to implement AB 1392, which would make voter registration information for elected officials and candidates confidential, and explained the need to modify VoteCal and county election systems. The committee also heard requests to continue the Cal-Access Replacement System with $11.8 million General Fund and to continue the Notary Automation Program Replacement Project with $9.75 million from the Business Fees Fund. Members asked about total project costs, testing, data migration, and the expected November 2026 go-live date for Cal-Access replacement. Votes were taken on the vote-only items once quorum was established, and the committee approved the items considered. The final informational item was an overview from the California Arts Council, which highlighted the agency’s 50th anniversary, its statewide grantmaking, and the economic impact of arts funding. Council staff described Creative Corps, cultural districts, and the role of arts funding in local economies, while members and public witnesses urged increased support, including a request to raise local assistance grant funding to $50 million and to provide additional funding for cultural districts. Testimony emphasized the arts as economic infrastructure, community infrastructure, and a source of civic and cultural vitality across California.

Transcript Highlights:

• We start with assessment.
• mental health services, and there are also functional assessments, level-of-care assessments, and crisis
• Um, this is—I have a question about the assessments. I have a question about the assessments.
• just talks about assessments.
• Um, assessments for mental health services—the requirements for who can administer an assessment are

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met for an introductory overview of its jurisdiction and staff roles. Nonpartisan House Research and House Fiscal staff explained that they draft bills and amendments, prepare bill summaries and background research, answer legal and fiscal questions, and help track revenue and budget effects. They also distributed a Budget Overview Brief intended to condense the larger budget materials into a more usable format for members. Staff then walked through the Human Services budget and the committee’s areas of responsibility. They described the department structure, noting that DHS oversees administration, compliance, rulemaking, and county support, and that the overall Human Services budget is large, with medical assistance as the dominant program. They also explained recent and upcoming reorganizations: many children and family-related functions are moving to the new Department of Children, Youth, and Families, Direct Care and Treatment is becoming its own agency, and some homelessness-related functions remain at DHS. Staff reviewed how the budget is organized by program and budget activity, the difference between direct appropriations and standing appropriations, and how forecasted programs and “tails” work in the budget process. The presentation also covered Medicaid financing and long-term care. Staff explained the federal-state FMAP match, including Minnesota’s current 51.16% federal match for most Medicaid spending, the CHIP match, and the 90% federal share for the expansion population. For long-term care, they outlined Medical Assistance services for elderly and disabled people, state-funded long-term care supports, and Board on Aging programs. They highlighted the personal care assistance program’s phaseout and replacement by Community First Services and Supports, and reviewed the five home- and community-based waivers. Members asked one question about refugee resettlement funding, specifically whether it covers flights; staff said they would need to follow up on the exact use of the federal funds. No bills were heard, and no formal votes or other committee actions were taken during this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So this bill narrows the number of projects that would trigger assessments and mitigation.
• We appreciate that the proposal before you removes vehicle miles traveled from being assessed.
• You heard earlier about the different assessment tools.
• That GHG Impact Assessment director potentially Chris Burns, Mr. Behrens.
• And our understanding is this assessment must be used for every project going forward.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 748, a bill revising Minnesota’s transportation greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) impact assessment requirements for trunk highway projects. The chair first moved and adopted the A2 author’s amendment and then the A3 amendment, which was described as adding implementation time and project exemptions when federal dollars are available. The bill author explained that the measure responds to concerns from stakeholders that the current law can force costly mitigation, delay or stop safety and capacity projects, and create uncertainty because key implementation details are still being developed by a technical advisory committee. Testimony was split. County and city engineers, county commissioners, the Minnesota Transportation Alliance, and the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities generally supported the bill, arguing that the current requirements can add 20% to 40% or more to project costs, are difficult to administer, and could jeopardize critical safety improvements, congestion relief, and federal funding. They cited examples such as Scott County and Trunk Highway 65, and said VMT mitigation is especially hard to quantify and fund. Opponents, including Move Minnesota and Sierra Club, argued that safety and climate goals are not in conflict, that reducing driving can save lives and reduce pollution, and that the bill would weaken an important tool for cutting transportation emissions. Members also asked about how GHG and VMT are measured, whether the required assessment was ready, and who would be responsible for mitigation assets and costs. After discussion, the committee held a roll call vote. The bill, as amended, passed 8-7 and was moved to the General Register.

Transcript Highlights:

• We conducted this assessment over the period of time.
• As of recently, we handed in the final assessment results.
• The assessment consisted of several components.
• However, to do an assessment like this...
• That's all called out in the assessment.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a lengthy presentation on the Agency for Persons with Disabilities’ I-Connect system, based on an ILAB assessment of the platform’s performance and requirements. ILAB said the system provides useful centralized records, reporting, compliance support, and audit trails, but users described it as cumbersome, outdated, and inefficient, with excessive manual entry, weak navigation, limited notifications, no mobile app, poor printing/export options, and performance issues. ILAB also said the original 2013-era requirements were too high-level and that only a portion of the requirements could be verified, with some features de-scoped or never implemented. Their recommendations included better integration with electronic health record systems, improved performance monitoring, electronic signatures, OCR, and more modern export and verification tools. Public testimony from providers and advocates echoed those concerns. A support coordination provider said the system is nicknamed “I Disconnect,” described problems with EVV/GPS sign-ins, lengthy support plans, lack of a phone app, and possible HIPAA concerns. Another advocate said the system should have preserved family access to records and criticized the need for providers to use workarounds and additional software. APD staff said the agency has spent about $19.7 million through FY 2023-24, has regular build updates under the current contract with WellSky, and uses an internal help desk and vendor ticketing process to triage bugs versus enhancement requests. They said some issues are handled case-by-case, critical tickets have SLAs, and the agency is working on interoperability and other requested improvements. Members questioned whether the system should be fixed or replaced, whether the original contract and SaaS arrangement were sufficient, and whether the state received value for the money spent. APD said the system went live in phases and that all functionality was in place by June 2024, while ILAB and members noted significant technical debt and unresolved gaps. The committee also discussed record retention, provider access to records after a consumer changes providers, and whether federal funding or compliance could be affected. The meeting ended with broader budget remarks emphasizing completion over expansion, stronger upfront planning for technology projects, and more accountability before funding new systems or major enhancements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Indirect cost assessment CRS 2 G.
• Indirect cost assessment.
• Indirect cost assessment.
• Indirect cost assessment: $56,675.
• indirect cost assessment indirect cost assessment 572,135,31172135 311<05:27:54.638> A67.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened with a quorum, approved the prior journal, and heard several brief recognitions before moving to business. Members welcomed foster care advocates for Child Abuse Prevention Month, Girl Scouts visiting the Capitol, and participants in Black Maternal Health Week, with remarks emphasizing foster youth voice, leadership development, and the need for culturally competent maternal health care and doula/midwife support. The chamber then took up House Joint Resolution 1026, honoring former Governor Roy Romer and designating a portion of I-25 as the Governor Roy Romer Memorial Highway. Supporters highlighted Romer’s long public service, his work on education and infrastructure, and his role in major state projects. A proposed amendment to strike the word “memorial” was withdrawn, the House suspended the rules to allow Romer to speak from the well, and Romer offered remarks about legislative collegiality and the importance of democracy and listening to opposing views. House Joint Resolution 1026 was adopted on a 60-0 vote, with four excused and one absent. After a brief recess, the House returned to special orders and resumed reading House Bill 1410 at length, continuing through extensive appropriations language for the Department of Human Services, including child welfare, youth services, Medicaid-related transfers, SNAP and benefits administration, and other funding line items. No final action on House Bill 1410 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• assessment.
• Now we are 12 years later, and the assessments went down back in 2016, but we still are being assessed
• Um, if the assessment had been based on 10% of gross utility revenues, the assessment would have been
• collected as part of the assessment collected as part of the assessment invoices<02:50:52.200>
• accounted for in the utility assessment accounted for in the utility assessment uh<05:18:52.840>

Keywords: 1189, house, all

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:

• they're assessed is pretty high. they're assessed is pretty high.
• uh establishing special assessment uh establishing special assessment districts<04:36:15.199>
• that dealt with special assessment that dealt with special assessment districts<04:36:31.439>
• this special assessment district idea. this special assessment district idea.
• So, if you have that district<04:58:05.360> assessment, district assessment, district assessment

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• on top of a previous assessment.
• on top of a previous assessment.
• on top of a previous assessment.
• on top of a previous assessment.
• on top of a previous assessment.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all