Transcript Highlights:

• even though we don't share the same faith, we do share a deep commitment to religious freedom and the free
• We do share a deep commitment to religious freedom and the free exercise of religion.

Bills: HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1002 , HB1065 , HB1155 , HB1916 , HB2264 , HB1078 , HB1687 , HB1701 , HB1717 , HB1795 , HB1859 , HB2088 , HB2091 , HB2107 , HB2109 , HB2110 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2151 , HB2152 , HB2155 , HB2165 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2228 , HB2229 , HB2230 , HB2235 , HB2238 , HB2242 , HB2245 , HB2249 , HB2253 , HB2254 , HB2269 , HB2272 , HB2283 , HB2304 , HB2317 , HB2340 , HB2343 , HB2385 , HB2406 , HB2417 , HB2426 , HB2445 , HB2452 , HB2472 , HB2492 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB2606 , HB2664 , HB1160 , HB1289 , HB1339 , HB1798 , HB1065 , HB1717 , HB1795 , HB1859 , HB2107 , HB2113 , HB2124 , HB2125 , HB2133 , HB2134 , HB2140 , HB2151 , HB2155 , HB2165 , HB2185 , HB2191 , HB2205 , HB2211 , HB2219 , HB2242 , HB2245 , HB2253 , HB2283 , HB2317 , HB2343 , HB2385 , HB2406 , HB2417 , HB2426 , HB2501 , HB2531 , HB2574 , HB2606 , HB1170 , HB1544 , HB1834 , HB2111 , HB2156 , HB2188 , HB2199 , HB2206 , HB2296 , HB2360 , HB2436 , HB2471 , HB2478 , HB2510 , HB2525 , HB2532 , HB2543 , HB2605 , HB2624 , HJM4012 , HB1759

Keywords: design review, local government, land use, zoning, project permits, housing density, middle housing, affordable housing, parking minimums, single-family zoning, infill development, growth management, comprehensive plan, permit streamlining, objective development regulations, architectural review, administrative review, transit-oriented development, accessory dwelling units, ADU

Transcript Highlights:

• :57.520><c> as</c> free meals would um remain at free as as free meals would um remain at free as as
• , and below 130% for free meals.
• </c><00:26:09.720><c> meals</c><00:26:10.640><c> um</c> meals and Below 130% for free meals um meals
• This bill is the work the time. much to qualify for free meals it does much to qualify for free meals
• free School meals because eligible for free School meals because of<00:58:57.200><c> this</c><00:58:

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 707 on the College Savings Program. Members discussed a suggested amendment from the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities to include the Hawaii ABLE Savings Program. The chair said the Department of the Attorney General advised there was no title problem, so the bill could be broadened to cover both the College Savings Program and the ABLE program. The committee also noted technical, non-substantive changes and a defective date of July 1, 3000 for further discussion. HB 707 HD1 was then voted on and the recommendation to pass with amendments was adopted unanimously by the members present, with two members excused. The committee then heard House Bill 424, which would provide free breakfast and lunch beginning the next school year to students who currently qualify for free and reduced-price meals. The Department of Education supported the measure, and testimony in favor came from teachers, public health and food security advocates, and several organizations. Supporters described students being denied meals because of unpaid balances, said school meals should not depend on family debt, and argued that the bill would reduce stigma and help hungry students learn. Committee questions focused on meal pricing, the impact of raising prices on families who pay full price, and whether portion sizes could be increased; DOE said breakfast costs less than lunch, full-price students would bear any increase, and portion sizes must follow USDA rules. Hawaiʻi Public Health Institute and Hawaiʻi Children’s Action Network said many families above the free/reduced thresholds still cannot afford meals, citing estimates that the DOE collects about $20 million a year in meal payments and that federal reimbursement totals are much larger. The committee then heard House Bill 757, the universal free school breakfast and lunch bill. DOE and the Department of Health supported it, and testimony was overwhelmingly in favor from county officials, teachers, students, food banks, advocacy groups, and community organizations. Witnesses argued that universal meals would eliminate stigma, reduce paperwork and debt collection, and ensure students do not fall through the cracks because of income cutoffs, language barriers, or administrative hurdles. Several students from Castle High School described classmates asking for food and families struggling to keep meal accounts funded, while teachers said they regularly see negative meal balance notices and hungry students. Advocates also said the bill is the better equity vehicle because it avoids means testing and reaches students who are not currently receiving meals despite needing them. The hearing on HB 757 was still ongoing at the end of the transcript, and no final vote on that bill was shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• meals or reduced meals from the federal government anymore due to the fact that it's free anyway, so
• for free or reduced meals.
• for free or reduced meals.
• The first factor is the percentage of students that are eligible for free and reduced meals.
• with special diets that want to receive free meals, and you have to accommodate that within the meal

Committee: Joint Legislative Management

Summary: The Legislative Management Committee met to fill a vacancy created by Representative Jared Hagert’s resignation, and the House majority recommended Representative Berg to replace him on the committee. The motion to appoint Berg was approved unanimously. The committee then took up its assigned task of estimating the fiscal impact of Initiated Constitutional Measure No. 3, the school meals measure, which would require public schools, and optionally nonpublic and tribal schools, to provide breakfast and lunch at no cost to students and reimburse schools through state funds after federal reimbursements are maximized. Legislative Council’s Liz Fordall summarized the measure’s requirements and answered questions about implementation, including the 2027-28 start date, the measure’s interaction with the Legacy Earnings Fund, and the fact that the Legislature would still control the funding source. DPI’s Linnell Johnson then testified at length on current school meal programs, direct certification, CEP and Provision 2 participation, and likely behavioral changes if the measure passed. She estimated the biennial fiscal impact at $124 million to $134 million, with an additional roughly $300,000 in administrative costs, and explained that the estimate assumed higher participation and some schools shifting to CEP/Provision 2 to preserve federal reimbursements. She also noted that if no new applications were filed in non-CEP schools, the cost could be substantially higher. After discussion, Senator Sorvaag moved to report a fiscal impact range of $124,300,000 to $134,300,000 per biennium to the Secretary of State, and the motion carried. The committee also received an informational update from Legislative Council attorney Dustin Richard on the ongoing redistricting litigation, explaining that the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Eighth Circuit’s prior ruling and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Louisiana v. Callais, leaving the court-imposed map in effect for now. No action was required on that item, and the meeting adjourned after a brief note that the prior minutes would be brought back at a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And many of those students may have also been connected to free and reduced-price school meals.
• And so HR1 is going to change what free school meals looks like in Virginia, and it already is.
• And so HR1 is going to change what free school meals looks like in Virginia. And it already is.
• We actually put forward money in the budget to transform reduced-price meals into free meals.
• "Means automatic enrollment in free and reduced meals.

Transcript Highlights:

• for the free and reduced meals meals meals program<01:01:11.359><c> this</c><01:01:11.520><c> school
• </c> free and reduced price meal free and reduced price meal program<03:07:41.479><c> welcome</c><03:
• Anyone who needs the understanding of free and reduced meal applications related to their school meal
• > applications</c> with free and reduceed meal applications with free and reduceed meal applications
• </c> model free and reduced price School Meal model free and reduced price School Meal web<03:48:35.840

Summary: The committee took up HB 651, a school-funding bill that would raise the base cost of an adequate education and increase differentiated aid for students in poverty, English language learners, and special education. The chair opened with housekeeping notices about parking and eating in committee spaces, and noted a revised fiscal note would be distributed. Representative David Luneau presented the bill as part of a broader package of public school funding measures, explaining that HB 651 builds on HB 550 and is intended to respond to court rulings and the ongoing school-funding litigation by adjusting both the base adequacy amount and equity-based funding factors. Luneau said the bill would raise the state’s adequacy grant from about $4,100 to $7,351 per student and increase differentiated aid, while also updating statutory language so future recalculations include the court-identified resource elements. He argued the measure is about fairness and shifting more of the burden from local property taxpayers to the state, not about increasing overall education spending. He reviewed fiscal-note figures indicating the bill would add roughly $576 million to the state share of school funding, bringing the total state share to about $1.65 billion, and said the note also mentions possible effects on charter schools and vouchers. Committee members asked about the evidence supporting higher costs for low-income and English learner students, how long ESL funding should continue, why free-and-reduced-lunch aid remains higher than special education aid, whether the formula is based on enrollment or average daily membership, and whether the bill is truly equitable across districts of different sizes and needs. Luneau and later witness Zach Shen of the New Hampshire School Funding Fairness Project said the bill is supported by research and court findings, that the current formula relies heavily on local property taxes, and that shifting more funding to the state would reduce property-tax pressure and help address disparities among districts. Shen also cited broad public support for the related HB 550 testimony and said HB 651 is intended as a step toward a more equitable funding system. No vote or final action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The law now mandates free, high-quality meals for all public schools.
• Second, although the state has started serving free meals in 2023, improvements in meal quality are unclear
• After the passage of the law, New Mexico started providing free meals to all students, starting in fall
• The state started delivering free meals to all kids immediately.
• rate and the free meal rate.

Transcript Highlights:

• meals or reduced meals from the federal government anymore due to the fact that it's free anyway, so
• to take applications for free or reduced meals.
• with special diets that want to receive free meals, and you have to accommodate that within the meal
• So you only get, of all the meals you serve, you only get to claim 42% of them at the free rate.
• We don't want to apply for reduced meals, free and reduced meals. Parents don't want to.

Summary: The Legislative Management Committee met to address the fiscal impact of Initiated Constitutional Measure No. 3, which would require public schools, public school districts, and public charter schools to provide breakfast and lunch at no cost to students and allow reimbursement from the state, with implementation beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The committee first filled a vacancy created by Representative Jared Hagert’s resignation by appointing Representative Berg to the committee. Legislative Council and DPI staff explained the measure’s requirements, including federal reimbursement participation, possible use of the legacy earnings fund if other funding is unavailable, and the authority of the Legislature and superintendent of public instruction to clarify implementation details. Linnell Johnson of DPI testified that the estimated fiscal impact for the 2027-2029 biennium is between $124 million and $134 million, based on participation assumptions, federal reimbursement rates, and the extent to which schools continue to collect applications or use community eligibility/provision 2 options. She also noted a likely additional administrative cost of about $300,000 for DPI to operate the program. Members asked about school participation, Title I implications, special diets, staffing, and whether the measure could reduce federal reimbursements if families stop applying. Johnson said the estimate is uncertain and could be higher if applications decline, but that schools would still have incentives to participate in federal programs because of reimbursement and other funding ties. After discussion, the committee adopted a motion to report a fiscal impact range of $124,300,000 to $134,300,000 per biennium to the Secretary of State. The committee then received an informational update from Legislative Council attorney Dustin Richard on the ongoing redistricting litigation. He explained that the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the Eighth Circuit’s ruling and sent the case back for reconsideration in light of Louisiana v. Callais, while the district court-imposed map remains in effect for now. No action was taken on that update, and the meeting adjourned after members noted minutes from the prior meeting were not yet available for approval.

Transcript Highlights:

• meals or reduced meals from the federal government anymore due to the fact that it's free anyway, so
• to take applications for free or reduced meals.
• It also... ...universal free meals, so have been able to receive some information from them.
• with special diets that want to receive free meals, and you have to accommodate that within the meal
• We don't want to apply for reduced meals, free and reduced meals. Parents don't want to.

Committee: Joint Legislative Management

Transcript Highlights:

• School meals for all uh this is the free School meals for all uh this is the pathway<00:56:12.760><c
• So again, free school meals for all.
• all</c> so again free School meals for all so again free School meals for all however<00:56:47.720><
• </c><00:57:24.520><c> School</c><00:57:24.720><c> meals</c> before a pathway to free School meals before
• We support free school meals for all children.

Summary: The committee heard several education-related bills, with testimony largely in support. SB 1388 and SB 1393, both concerning the School Facilities Authority and Department of Education representation and land conveyances, received support from DOE and the School Facilities Authority, with no questions or action taken. SB 423, which would add Head Start representation to the Early Learning Board, was supported by the Early Learning Board and the Executive Office on Early Learning, which explained the bill would realign the board with federal Head Start Act requirements after the board was restructured in Act 170; EEL also requested an effective-date amendment. SB 422, allowing DOE to award diplomas to students whose education was disrupted by war, drew support from DOE, the Chamber of Commerce, the Military Council, and the Special Education Advisory Council, but also significant opposition from the Hawaii Patriot Republicans and many individuals; members asked questions about the bill, and DOE explained the measure’s purpose, but no vote was taken. The committee also took testimony on SB 532, which would expand who may administer certain medications in schools. DOE, the Department of Health, and the University of Hawaii supported the bill. Members asked detailed questions about oral, nasal, and topical medications and the process for prescription review and administration; DOE explained that parents request the medication, a school form is completed, a nurse reviews it, and either a trained school health assistant or a contracted nurse administers the medication. DOE said the measure could improve attendance and learning, especially for students with ADHD, asthma, and other chronic conditions. The committee then heard SB 659 on locally sourced food products and school meals, where DOE’s procurement office opposed the higher small-purchase threshold and DOE exemption from procurement rules, while Ulupono Initiative, Hawaii Farm Bureau, Hawaii Public Health Institute, and others supported the bill as a way to advance farm-to-school goals and the 30% local food target by 2030. Testimony and questioning focused on the proposed threshold increase, transparency, and whether an online bidding system would be preferable. Finally, the committee heard SB 1300 on subsidies for ALICE families’ school meals. DOE supported the bill but requested amendments: defining eligibility at 250% of the federal poverty level, delaying implementation until the 2026-2027 school year, and covering reduced-price lunch students in full for 2025-2026. HSTA, Hawaii Appleseed, Catholic Charities Hawaii, Pride at Work Hawaii, Hawaii Youth Services Network, and others supported the measure, emphasizing food insecurity, the burden of meal paperwork, and the educational importance of free meals. Hawaii Appleseed suggested replacing ALICE with a federal poverty level standard and removing a rulemaking requirement that could delay implementation. No votes or final committee actions were reported in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• The law now mandates free, high-quality meals for all public school students, regardless of income.
• Second, although the state has started serving free meals in 2023, improvements in meal quality are unclear
• After the passage of the law, New Mexico started providing free meals to all students, starting in fall
• We also see that participation has increased among students who qualify for free meals, which is a majority
• The state started delivering free meals to all kids immediately, and we find the program is still working

Transcript Highlights:

• Free meals are a good investment in our future.
• In 2023, the legislature and Governor Walz passed free school meals, which provided a free breakfast
• Providing free school meals for all also ensures access to nutritious meals for all students as a key
• Oftentimes, people would say, "School meals, you guys passed free school meals, and we love that."
• Oftentimes, it's the dads who would say, "We love the free school meals."

Bills: HF51 , HF1161 , HF2201 , HF2786 , HF1053

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• The law now mandates free, high-quality meals for all public school students, regardless of income.
• Second, although the state has started serving free meals in 2023, improvements in meal quality are still
• Following the passage of the law, New Mexico started providing free meals to all students starting in
• We also see that participation also increased amongst students who do qualify for free meals, which is
• The state started delivering free meals to all kids... ...immediately, and we find that the program is

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• So many districts actually come out ahead when they quote sell a free and reduced-price lunch meal rather
• and reduced price they quote sell a free and reduced price lunch<00:34:47.800><c> meal</c><00:34:48.599
• </c><01:01:06.119><c> program</c><01:01:06.559><c> this</c> free and reduced price meal program this
• This is a bill relative to eligibility for the free school meals program, and I look to Representative
• </c><01:05:33.960><c> School</c><01:05:34.200><c> meals</c> eligibility for the free School meals eligibility

Summary: The committee first took up HB 112, which would require students in the University and Community College systems to pass the U.S. citizenship civics naturalization test. A motion was made to retain the bill, and the committee voted unanimously to retain it, resulting in no report. HB 510, dealing with due process rights for students, student organizations, and faculty in higher education disciplinary proceedings, was passed over for a later meeting so the University and Community College systems could meet with the committee. The committee then discussed HB 659, creating a college graduate retention incentive program, but retained it without further debate after noting the prime sponsor was unavailable. HB 770, concerning tuition credits for community service, was also held for later in the day because an amendment was expected. The most extensive discussion centered on HB 583, which would have the state participate in Medicaid direct certification for free and reduced-price school meals. Supporters argued it would identify more eligible students, reduce paperwork, improve accuracy in school funding formulas, and bring in additional federal child care scholarship money; opponents argued it would significantly affect school funding calculations and should be delayed. The committee rejected the amendment by a 10-8 vote and then voted 10-8 to retain the bill, with a majority report and minority report to follow. HB 646, requiring school districts to establish an online application for free and reduced-price meal participation, was also debated. One member said many districts already do this voluntarily and that the bill was unnecessary; another proposed an amendment to convert the mandate into a grant program to offset startup costs, but the committee proceeded on the underlying motion and voted 10-8 to retain the bill, with a majority report and a minority OTP report. HB 665, concerning eligibility for the free school meals program, was then retained by an 11-3 vote. Finally, the committee began work on HB 703, which would prohibit school districts from denying meals to students with unpaid balances and appropriate funds for that purpose. An amendment was explained that would remove state payment of district meal debt and instead require district policies against shaming or bullying students and allow voluntary donations to reduce debt. After discussion, a motion was made to ITL the bill, with the sponsor saying constituents opposed subsidizing the program and wanted districts to retain collection tools; further debate was underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• Speaker, is we would start the free meal program, the universal meal program, a year early.
• I said there's an initiated measure out there to get free school lunch meals.
• If you had a free meal, would you come here or would you stay at school and eat?
• We have increased the availability of free school meals for those We have increased the availability
• of free school meals for those at the lower end of the economic scale.

Bills: HB1621 , HB1624 , HB1623 , HB1622 , HB1625 , HB1626 , HB1627 , HCR3038

Summary: The House convened in special session, opened with prayer and the Pledge, confirmed a quorum, and recognized visiting students from Shiloh High School. Members also observed a moment of silence for former Representative Cindy Shriver Beck, and the House adopted the Employment Committee report approving special-session staff appointments. The chamber then considered House Bill 1621, which would require the presidential physical fitness test in K-12 physical education courses with exemptions for students with disabilities and an effective date of August 1, 2027. Supporters framed it as a return to a historic fitness standard and a response to federal direction; the bill passed 90-0. The House next took up House Bill 1624, a universal school meals bill that would place the program in statute rather than the Constitution, start it a year earlier than the initiated measure, and appropriate $65 million for the first year. Debate centered on whether universal meals were needed, whether the bill would preserve legislative flexibility and property-tax relief, and whether it would help families or subsidize those who could pay. The bill passed 55-38. Finally, the House began debate on House Bill 1623, the rural health transformation package tied to federal grant funds and a Bank of North Dakota loan program to support rural health projects, EMS, behavioral health, and related infrastructure. The sponsor and supporters emphasized North Dakota’s strong grant award, the need to move quickly, and the bill’s role in filling rural health gaps statewide. Some members raised concerns about federal spending, inflation, and telehealth, while others stressed the need to address EMS and workforce shortages. The transcript ends during debate on HB 1623, before any final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• Free meals are a good investment in our future.
• </c><00:43:08.040><c> a</c><00:43:08.160><c> free</c> free School meals which provided a free free School
• all</c><00:43:41.680><c> also</c> providing free School meals for all also providing free School meals
• </c><00:47:43.359><c> in</c> us how free meals make a difference in us how free meals make a difference
• And oftentimes people would say school meals—you guys passed free school meals—and we love that.

Bills: HF51 , HF1161 , HF2201 , HF2786 , HF1053

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:32:43.679><c> meals</c> are one of the ones to get free meals are one of the ones to get free
• </c><00:37:08.720><c> by</c> to make meals free for all students by to make meals free for all students
• Public school is free; kids need to eat to learn, so the meal should be free too.
• free School meals because Anu I support free School meals because some<00:49:00.079><c> of</c><00:49
• free School meals for Lost revenue for free School meals for all<01:14:29.239><c> thank</c><01:14:29.440

Committee: House Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• meals.
• to the actual meal counts from 2023–24 for the Universal Meals Program.
• Freshly prepared on-site meals.
• wanting to eat those meals.
• wanting to eat those meals.

Summary: The committee heard a series of budget proposals focused on education finance, with repeated questions about whether the state’s investments are coordinated, targeted to the highest-need students, and likely to produce measurable results. On the first item, the administration proposed $1 million for a study of California’s curriculum framework, standards, and instructional materials process, plus $250,000 for supplemental ELA/ELD guidance. CDE and Finance said the study would examine how other states organize standards, frameworks, and adoptions, while the chair and members questioned why California has gone so long without updating some standards, what the study would actually accomplish, and whether the proposal was too vague to justify the cost. The issue was held open. The committee then took up a proposed $25 million statewide literacy network within the system of support. CCEE and CDE said the network would coordinate multiple existing literacy leads, create a clearinghouse of evidence-based resources, and improve coherence across the state’s many literacy initiatives. Members pressed on how a one-time, five-year allocation could support a long-term system, how the work would reach distressed and rural districts, and whether the proposal would translate into classroom change rather than just another layer of coordination. The issue was also held open. Next, the committee reviewed a $500 million proposal to expand literacy coaches and reading specialists and to create a math coaches program. CDE described the existing literacy coach cohorts as producing positive reports from participating LEAs, while the LAO recommended modifications, especially for the math coach portion, including limiting eligibility to elementary schools, setting minimum grant amounts, directing funds to eligible school sites, and making eligibility automatic rather than application-based. Members focused on whether coaches were actually being placed at the schools with the greatest need and whether the state has a coherent long-term strategy for literacy and math investments. The committee also heard a $40 million proposal for training and implementation of K-2 reading difficulty screeners, which the LAO said was reasonable but could be reduced because $25 million had already been provided for training; CDE said the new funds were needed for full implementation, procurement, and sustainability. Finally, the committee heard a $10 million proposal for a developmentally appropriate TK multilingual learner screener, with CDE explaining why the preschool language-identification process is different from K-12 EL assessment and the chair asking staff to explore whether a single, more consistent approach could be developed. The meeting concluded with a presentation on universal school meals and kitchen infrastructure, including a $31.5 million backfill, an $84.1 million increase for projected meal growth, a COLA adjustment, and $150 million for kitchen upgrades and training to support freshly prepared meals.

Transcript Highlights:

• meals or should be participating in C in order to participate in free school meals.
• meals or should be participating in C in order to participate in free school meals.
• meals or should be participating in C in order to participate in free school meals.
• meals or should be participating in C in order to participate in free school meals.
• school meals or should be participating in C in order to participate in free school meals.

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman and Representative Issa, do you mean already qualify for free meals or operating the National
• What is the current percentage of students that actually receive free meals?
• Current percentage of students that actually receive free meals in North Dakota. Mr.
• Seventy-nine percent wanted free school meals. Senator Beckettal. Thank you, Mr.
• This satiates the thing I have supported, which is free school meals.

Bills: HB1623

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 1624, the “Universal Lunch Bill,” from Rep. Mike Nathie. He argued the proposal should be placed in Century Code rather than the Constitution so future legislatures can adjust it if state finances tighten, and said the bill would start the program a year earlier with a $65 million appropriation for one school year. DPI testified that the estimate did not include nonpublic schools that do not participate, and members questioned the impact on Title I, free-and-reduced applications, private-school accountability, breakfast mandates for schools that do not currently serve breakfast, and whether the funding could come from the DPI budget or other sources. Supporters, including North Dakota United, the North Dakota Catholic Conference, a pediatrician, and the American Heart Association, said universal meals improve student health and learning, reduce family costs, and are better handled in statute than by constitutional amendment. No opposition testimony was offered, and the chair closed the hearing for later work-session action. The committee then took up House Bill 1627, introduced by Rep. Tye Dressler, which would raise the income threshold for the state-funded school lunch program from 225% to 300% of poverty, with an estimated cost of about $7 million for 2026-27. Dressler said the bill is intended as a targeted, budget-friendly alternative to the ballot measure and emphasized that the state should maximize federal meal dollars while improving participation in the current program. Members questioned whether raising the threshold would actually increase utilization, whether a dollar amount would be clearer than a percentage, and how the change would affect federal reimbursements and application rates. DPI said it could quickly calculate additional percentage levels, and the chair closed the hearing, directing DPI to prepare more numbers for the work session. Finally, the committee opened Senate Bill 2403, presented by Sen. Schiable, to create a short-term bridge-loan program for financially distressed hospitals, centered on Jacobson Memorial Hospital in Elgin. The bill would authorize up to $5 million per loan, with a $10 million appropriation available on a first-come, first-served basis, and would run only through June 30, 2027. Schiable said the hospital’s debt and operating problems threaten local health care, ambulance service, and the community’s economy, and that the proposal was designed narrowly with Bank of North Dakota review to avoid creating a broad precedent. Committee members asked whether the appropriation could be reduced and whether the bank would still apply commercial feasibility and repayment standards; Schiable said yes, the bank would still evaluate the loan and could reject it if it was not sound.

Transcript Highlights:

• That are forcing schools to stop their free lunch or free breakfast programs.
• In any way directed to cut free lunch or free breakfast from our schools? Absolutely not.
• If there is no compliance, there will be no meal for that child who is getting guaranteed that one meal
• most meals.
• we have the meal.

Bills: SB 25 , SB25 , SB314

Committee: Senate Health & Human Services