Transcript Highlights:

• In fiscal year 2022-23, the legislature allocated five...
• And part of the reason for that is funding.
• And those are allocated funds that you have, and so you're pressing the easy button by having to be your
• You're absolutely correct about DP funds and leveraging our purchasing together.
• We were appropriated funding for the modernization efforts in 2019-2020.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard a panel on state cloud modernization efforts after canceling an LBR on the Department of Corrections’ OBIS project because the presentation materials were not submitted on time. Florida Digital Service, the Northwest Regional Data Center, and several agencies described how the state is assessing and migrating applications to cloud environments under the cloud-first policy. Northwest explained its 2023 cloud readiness assessment of 890 applications from 24 agencies, the criteria used to rate readiness and risk, and its recommendation to tackle lower-risk applications first. Agency updates covered the Department of Corrections’ modernization of 98 legacy applications tied to OBIS and cloud-native infrastructure, the Department of Elder Affairs’ Microsoft Power Platform modernization, the Department of Health’s health management and child protection systems, and FDOT’s large cloud program for transportation systems. Members repeatedly asked about costs, data ownership, disaster recovery, single sign-on, security tools, and whether cloud migration actually saves money; presenters generally said the focus is more on modernization, resilience, and efficiency than immediate savings, and that cost analyses are often application-specific rather than enterprise-wide. The discussion also covered governance and architecture questions. Florida Digital Service said agencies remain responsible for their own databases and cloud tenants, while FLDS provides advice and an enterprise architecture framework; it does not have statutory oversight over most projects, except for OBIS project oversight due to its size. Northwest said it is acting as a cloud broker for some agencies and is consolidating Azure and AWS payer tenants to seek better pricing, but agencies still make system-by-system decisions based on business needs, risk, latency, and total cost of ownership. Members raised concerns about fragmented data structures, the lack of a complete statewide application inventory, and the need for better interoperability and enterprise standards. Several agencies said disaster recovery is built into their cloud plans, and FDOT and Corrections described ongoing efforts to keep systems current through core platforms, training, and ongoing support. In the second half of the meeting, the Department of State presented two new technology requests. Secretary Byrd described the SunBiz corporate registry system as a 34-year-old platform supporting more than 3.5 million business entities and generating over $575 million in annual general revenue. He said the department had already virtualized the legacy hardware after earlier modernization efforts failed and is now seeking $800,000 recurring for password protection and $5 million nonrecurring to continue procurement for a replacement system. The department also presented the Florida Voter Registration System modernization request, noting that the current system is outdated and requires manual workarounds for some statutory changes. The department requested $2.4948 million nonrecurring and $44,000 recurring to procure a modernized FVRS solution, and staff said the feasibility study recommended a hybrid approach. Members asked about the study’s findings and about creating a database for voter eligibility information for returning citizens; the department said that would require data sharing with all 67 clerks of court and other entities such as DOC.

Transcript Highlights:

• > fund.
• and funded. and funded.
• Current statute provides a clear, neutral, and grounded framework for allocating surplus funds.
• Current statute provides a clear, neutral, and grounded framework for allocating surplus funds.
• <01:18:45.360> No for allocating surplus funds. No for allocating surplus funds.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The next slide shows an update on how the department has allocated the asset preservation funding it
• And so, if we were to allocate money into that program, would the funding go to those 20 eligible, or
• And so, if we were to allocate money into that program, would the funding go to those 20 eligible, or
• And so, if we were to allocate money into that program, would the funding go to those 20 eligible, or
• And so, if we were to allocate money into that program, would the funding go to those 20 eligible, or

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee first approved the March 5 minutes, then heard a presentation from Balig Engineering on cost drivers for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure in small Minnesota communities. The testifier said most Minnesota communities are small, and that limited local staff, complex funding requirements, and the need to combine multiple funding sources make projects expensive and labor-intensive. He cited examples of aging infrastructure, including a Tracy street collapse and failing water mains, and said federal funding can help but often requires extensive reports that can cost tens of thousands of dollars and hundreds of staff hours. He also pointed to inflation, supply-chain disruptions, colder climate requirements, higher material and labor costs, limited competition among contractors and suppliers, and newer treatment requirements such as PFAS removal and cybersecurity controls as major cost drivers. Members asked whether reduced bonding or less frequent state funding would lower prices, whether annual bonding bills provide market certainty, how regionalization could be encouraged, and whether tightening specifications adds costs. The testifier said stopping work would likely drive contractors out of the market and reduce competition, which could raise prices later, and that consistent funding helps keep contractors in Minnesota. He said regional water systems such as Red Rock Rural Water and Lincoln Pipestone Rural Water are already helping lower costs and that legislators could encourage more regionalization through incentives. He also said some specifications and federal requirements, especially around treatment plant controls and cybersecurity, increase costs, though some standards like deeper water-main burial are necessary. The committee then moved on to the Minnesota Department of Veterans Affairs, where John Kelly began presenting the governor’s 2026 capital budget recommendations and described the department’s mission, statewide network of veterans homes and cemeteries, and service to nearly 300,000 veterans and dependents.

Transcript Highlights:

• Similar to our per-student chart, we have our green bar of total ALE funding allocated from the state
• year is from fund balances of previous allocations.
• It's either a fund balance from a categorical previous allocation or another categorical fund. Yes.
• fund.
• fund.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We want to make sure that whatever performance funding an agency actually receives gets allocated to
• That whatever performance funding an agency actually receives gets allocated to the RSA for next year
• Category A funding will represent about 93% on average of an agency's RSA allocation for FY27.
• The recommendation that $5.9 million is a percentage increase over the current funding allocation, that
• , but additional funding is not being allocated above the $5.8.

Summary: The committee first considered revisions to the JBC rules, which staff said were all prompted by acts passed in the 2025 legislative session. The rules were adopted without objection. Members then received a balanced budget presentation from DFA Secretary Jim Hudson on the governor’s FY27 proposal, which he said was built around three priorities: limiting state government growth, continuing investments in education, and advancing income tax cuts. He highlighted major additions for education funding, EFA growth, pay plan costs, higher education productivity funding, drug task forces, corrections medical costs, the governor’s 1033 initiative, SNAP error-rate reduction, and Medicaid sustainability, while also explaining a new A/B funding category structure intended to prioritize recurring costs and preserve room for tax cuts. Members questioned Hudson about the cost of income tax reductions, the constitutional balanced-budget requirement, education funding, the Educational Adequacy Fund, Medicaid trust fund balances, and the impact of federal changes on Medicaid and SNAP. Hudson said each tenth of a percent income tax cut would cost about $58 million, the budget remained balanced, public education would still receive historic increases, and the Medicaid trust fund would be monitored closely with additional set-asides proposed. He also said the FY27 SNAP administrative cost increase would be about $18 million. The committee then heard from the Division of Higher Education, which reported institutions were 2.61% more productive overall and that the budget recommendation followed the statutory productivity formula. Questions focused on why some institutions were receiving decreases or large increases, how the formula works, and how the new return-on-investment metric and committee composition would affect future funding. The committee approved several higher education-related actions, including personnel changes for nine institutions and special language for North Arkansas College’s move into the University of Arkansas system. Staff then walked members through the higher education appropriation summary, explaining large percentage increases at several institutions were tied to federal funds or corrected carry-forward issues, including the U of A School of Mathematical, Sciences and the Arts, South Arkansas College, SAU Tech, ASU Mountain Home, and ASU Newport. Members also discussed UAPB’s 1890 extension program and the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture’s land-grant matching funds; officials said UAPB’s recommendation was being aligned with actual spending and that the Division of Agriculture’s Smith-Lever and Hatch matches were included within its overall appropriation. The committee ultimately adopted the Higher Education Coordinating Board’s recommendations for all institutions and then moved on to the Department of Corrections section, with the chair outlining how the committee would proceed through those appropriations by section.

Transcript Highlights:

• Sections 8 and 9 are fund transfers to the Quick Action Closing Fund.
• Sections 8 and 9 are fund transfers to the Quick Action Closing Fund.
• The clarification is: are we increasing state general government fund by $73.8 million and other funds
• So we’re—and then the next item is other funds.
• But back on page 1, in the general fund, in the public school fund, it’s zero. It’s the same.

Summary: The committee first reviewed a long list of House and Senate bills that were ready to be passed out, then heard a special language subcommittee report. The report recommended do pass on six bills, including SB 63, SB 67, SB 73, HB 1089, HB 1090, and HB 1093, and amendments on 11 others. A motion to pull HB 107 out for separate consideration failed, and the special language report was adopted. The committee then took up the Revenue Stabilization Law and schedule. Staff explained the schedule’s differences from the governor’s balanced budget proposal and described several fund transfers, including $100 million for Medicaid sustainability, $70 million for the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom account, $43.7 million for the general discretionary majority vote set-aside, $5 million for the motor vehicle set-aside, and two $150 million transfers related to the Quick Action Closing Fund and public highway improvements. Members asked for clarification on allocations, and the committee adopted the amendment and passed both House Bill 1100 and Senate Bill 75 as amended. Representative McClendon then presented a bill to support expansion of the Bella Vista Veterans Wall of Honor, but withdrew it, saying he would seek other funding sources. The committee then moved through the remaining captioned bills, including House Bills 105, 107, 1008, 1022, 1035, 1036, 1037, 1051, 1052, 1064, 1066, 1068, 1089, 1090, and 1093, and Senate Bills 3, 4, 7, 8, 15, 20, 21, 30, 31, 36, 41, 43, 58, 63, 67, and 77, generally passing them with little or no discussion, some as amended. The chair announced that all prior holds had been released and said the next Joint Budget Committee meeting would be Tuesday for peer issues only, then adjourned the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We obtained a court order directing the federal government to resume provision of funding. of funding
• To some extent, to the purpose of the funds.
• I'm also going to add that there was another layer where these funds were already allocated.
• In some of these funding cases, we had those types of allocations that nevertheless the agency said,
• What if the funding gets cut off again?

Transcript Highlights:

• allocated to the counties.
• So does the division currently retain any of this grant funding? Allocated to the counties.
• So with all, with these funds... Funding retained by the division to be used within the state.
• So with all these funds they retain, will these funds be used for hazard mitigation on state infrastructure
• , or can the division allocate, for example, up to 25% retained from one county allocation and grant

Summary: The Natural Resources and Disaster Subcommittee heard and acted on several bills related to wetlands, emergency management, fishing licenses, disaster recovery, the Florida Keys, brownfields, wastewater treatment, and spring protection. HB 1175 on mitigation banking drew the most discussion, with supporters saying it would create more predictable release of mitigation credits and help address shortages, while opponents warned it could weaken watershed-based wetland protection and allow credits to be used farther from the impact site. The committee adopted a strike-all amendment making the changes prospective after July 1, 2025, and then reported the bill favorably with committee substitute by a 12-3 vote. The committee also considered HB 1535, a broad emergency management strike-all that would expand local storm-preparedness information, debris removal coordination, shelter planning, permitting procedures after storms, limits on post-storm fee increases and moratoria, and changes to election procedures after disasters. Members raised questions about FEMA coordination, shelter standards, impact fees, and the 100-mile post-storm land-use restrictions. After adopting the strike-all, the bill was reported favorably with committee substitute on a 17-0 vote. HB 673, which would extend the same fishing-license convenience to freshwater guides that saltwater captains already have, and HB 705, which extends a public-records exemption for disaster recovery assistance applicants, were both reported favorably without amendment. Later, the committee approved HB 995 for the Florida Keys, which combines affordable-housing incentives, a Habitat for Humanity bond exemption, an extension of the Florida Keys Stewardship Act, and a modest increase in hurricane evacuation time to allow additional residential permits; it was reported favorably on a unanimous vote. HB 733 on brownfields received a technical strike-all and was also reported favorably. HB 645 creating a general permit for distributed wastewater treatment systems passed unanimously, and HB 691 on a reclaimed-water project tied to Outstanding Florida Springs passed 16-1 after concerns were raised about cost, water quality, and whether the bill could broaden the intent of existing spring-protection law. The meeting adjourned after all agenda items were completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• And in addition to that, you have the funding within the department to fund that.
• funding remaining, and... ...was allocated for specific identified positions, but there was still leftover
• funding remaining.
• across HAP rounds by allowing HCD to reduce future allocations, beginning with these FY 2026-27 funds
• Resolution funding.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• we need to modify in Prop. 4, in GGRF funding, and General Fund.
• Funding. So that is typical.
• Funding.
• We've funded things from, it's been, we've been funding demos and pilots at ARB for for.
• Does the administration have any plans to allocate additional funding to ensure that this important program

Summary: The committee hearing focused heavily on CARB’s broad trailer bill request for regulatory fee authority. Finance and CARB argued the proposal would let CARB develop fees to recover reasonable costs for implementing and enforcing regulations, while the LAO recommended rejection because the authority was too broad, could apply to an entire division of code, and would delegate core legislative taxing/fee-setting power without enough guardrails. Members from both parties raised concerns about the breadth of the authority, accountability, affordability impacts, and whether the Legislature would be put in an up-or-down position after CARB had already developed regulations. CARB responded that fees would still go through a budget change proposal and legislative approval before collection, and cited existing examples such as transport refrigeration units and commercial harborcraft fees. The committee then reviewed CARB’s request for permanent resources to implement SB 905 on carbon capture, utilization, storage, and carbon dioxide removal. CARB said the Legislature had previously authorized limited-term positions and funding, but it had struggled to recruit and retain staff with specialized regulatory and technical expertise, and that the work had included pre-rulemaking contracts, technology review, and permit-related preparation. Members questioned the pace of work, the use of limited-term positions, and whether additional permitting authority would be needed. CARB said it hoped to begin rulemaking later in the year if permanent resources were approved. Members also discussed the cap-and-trade spending plan, noting lower-than-expected auction revenues but higher interest earnings, and the need to monitor the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and possible May Revision changes. The committee then heard overviews of the zero-emission vehicle package, the Community Air Protection Program, demand-side grid support, and e-bike incentives. CARB described ongoing investments in community-based transportation equity, drayage trucks, harbor craft, and other clean technology demonstrations, while members pressed on affordability, program duplication, and whether enough funding was being directed to incentive programs. No formal votes were taken during the portion provided, and the chair repeatedly indicated that the hearing was intended to surface concerns for later budget negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Starting on page one, recommendations fund the agency at $5.07 billion in all funds, with $67.5 million
• being GR related funds.
• Section 2, the summary of funding changes and recommendations shows the following funding changes.
• Supply Chain Fund.
• So the Texas Energy Fund.

Transcript Highlights:

• And while it is common practice in New Mexico for institutions to request construction fund funding when
• There are two different funds that fund projects. The primary fund is the Water Project Fund.
• We have $184,000 left in that fund.
• sources, and one of those funding sources is local funding.
• So tell me how the local funding is, how you raise that local funding. Got it. Thank you, Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• About the cost allocation sample, so the way this funding— which document are you looking at?
• <01:54:59.280> called<01:54:59.480> the funds would go into this fund called the funds
• <01:56:29.679> and fund um the money goes into the fund and fund um the money goes into the
• $10 million from the Gopher allocated $10 million from the Gopher stimulus<01:56:50.119> funding<
• <01:56:59.000> to trust fund funds to be distributed to trust fund funds to be distributed

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee Division II met with the New Hampshire Department of Education to review school nutrition programs and related funding. Department staff Melissa White and Kelly Rambo walked through a packet covering the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility (CEP), After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, and Summer Food Service Program, explaining that these are federally funded USDA programs, with some state supplemental funding in certain areas. They also reviewed reimbursement rates for lunch, breakfast, child/adult care, and summer meals, noting that summer rates follow calendar-year timing while most others follow the state fiscal year. Members asked several questions about how the funding works, especially the difference between federal reimbursements and the state match. Staff explained that the state lunch line in the budget is a fixed match amount tied to federal participation, while breakfast funding is broken out by meal type and reimbursement category. They also discussed why FY 2022 federal spending was much higher during COVID, when USDA covered meals at the free rate for all students, and why FY 2023 and FY 2024 dropped as normal income-eligibility rules returned. A committee member also asked about the “severe need lunch” two-cent rate, and staff said they did not know USDA’s formula. A substantial portion of the meeting focused on summer meals and the distinction between the Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT. Staff explained that SFSP provides meals at approved sites, which can be open or closed sites, while Summer EBT is a separate DHHS-operated benefit program that provides funds to families. They said some schools or sites may not qualify under USDA rules, but eligible children can often use another nearby open site, and the department posts an interactive map and phone line to help families find locations. The committee also discussed the Community Eligibility Provision. Staff said New Hampshire currently has three CEP schools, that the eligibility threshold had recently been lowered from 40% to 25% identified students, and that the program allows participating schools to offer free meals to all students while the local district covers the non-federal share. Members asked whether any districts in the 25% to 40% range had joined; staff said no. The department offered to provide the eligibility report in Excel and noted that the CEP intent is to reduce application burden, though the lower threshold can make the local cost share harder for some districts to absorb.

Transcript Highlights:

• of PR funds.
• of PR funds."
• <00:49:32.520> Um,<00:49:33.520> if full allocation of PR funds.
• Um, if full allocation of PR funds.
• <01:01:36.559> I it's in the same fund. Good question. I it's in the same fund.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Given the General Fund structural deficit and the constraints of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, it
• Fund.
• funding source.”
• If we want to continue to fund it, we have a funding source. It’s called GGRF.
• of the funding and it's a big allocation.

Summary: The committee first heard Issue 1 on trailer bill language to redirect funding for emergency demand-response programs. The Department of Finance proposed using about $26.9 million in General Fund originally set aside for the Distributed Energy Backup Assets program to bolster the Demand-Side Grid Support Program for summer 2026, and using about $70 million in CalCHAP interest to support ratepayer-funded demand response in summers 2027 and 2028. The CEC and CPUC said they are working on a transition from DSGS to ELRP or a successor program, while the LAO noted the General Fund money would otherwise revert to savings. Members pressed the administration on whether demand response remains important, whether DSGS has been successful, and whether the state should keep funding it through the CEC rather than shifting to a ratepayer-funded CPUC program. The CEC and CPUC said the programs are not directly comparable, emphasized different cost structures and enrollment metrics, and said a CPUC rulemaking is underway with a proposed decision expected in Q3 2026. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then took up Issue 2, a budget proposal tied to SB 254 and the new transmission accelerator. GoBiz and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank described a five-year, roughly $26 million request to staff and administer the accelerator and manage Proposition 4 and AB 1207 funds for transmission financing. Members asked about state liability, ownership of financed lines, FERC revenue requirements, and whether the program would help underserved regions and offshore wind development. Staff explained that the accelerator would only consider projects already identified through CAISO’s competitive transmission planning process, and that state financing would be a small portion of large projects intended to lower overall costs to ratepayers. The LAO said it had no specific concerns but urged the Legislature to ensure the final language matches its intent. The committee also heard Issue 3 on petroleum market oversight. The CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requested additional positions and funding to implement ABX2-1 and continue work on supply stabilization, refinery monitoring, and transportation fuels analysis. Members questioned why the work was funded through the Energy Resources Programs Account, whether existing staff from the paused price-gouging work could be reassigned, and whether the program had produced evidence of price gouging or improved supply conditions. CEC and Finance said the new positions are needed because the workload has expanded, while some existing staff remain on related analysis and reporting duties. The discussion ended without a vote in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund savings.
• But at their core, what they do is they allocate a certain amount of, a portion of the funds for programmatic
• And if those were to come into play, that could really make determining how to allocate funds within
• Determining how to allocate funds within that might not have much of an impact if the size of the MCO
• And so those total fund dollars are about $938 million total fund, of that about half is General Fund

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held the first of several hearings on the Governor’s May Revision for health care, with opening remarks focused on the state’s projected $12 billion deficit, looming federal Medicaid changes, and the potential impact on Medi-Cal, public health, reproductive health, and safety-net providers. Several members criticized the proposal as balancing the budget on vulnerable Californians, while others defended the need for cost containment and questioned the administration’s assumptions. The chair set ground rules for respectful, focused questioning and outlined three topics: the Medi-Cal proposals, Proposition 35, and Proposition 56. DHCS Director Michelle Baas presented the May Revision’s Medi-Cal package, saying the department’s budget totals $200.6 billion overall, including $45.2 billion General Fund, and that the proposals are intended to address rising caseloads, pharmacy costs, and managed care spending. She described proposed changes for adults with unsatisfactory immigration status, including a freeze on new full-scope enrollment for those 19 and older, $100 monthly premiums beginning in 2027, elimination of adult dental and long-term care coverage, removal of PPS/RAP payments to FQHCs and rural health clinics for that population, and a pharmacy rebate aggregator. Other proposals included eliminating certain OTC drug classes, removing GLP-1 coverage for weight loss, prior authorization and step therapy changes, reinstating the Medi-Cal asset test, eliminating acupuncture as an optional benefit, allowing utilization management for hospice, raising the managed care minimum medical loss ratio to 90%, reducing PACE capitation rates toward the midpoint of the actuarial range, eliminating the skilled nursing facility workforce and quality incentive program, and suspending the SNF backup power requirement. The LAO said the revised Medi-Cal spending estimate is about $2.5 billion higher than the Governor’s Budget in the budget year, and that the increase appears driven more by higher per-enrollee costs than by caseload alone. The LAO said the budget solutions are concentrated in a few areas, are largely ongoing, and should be considered in light of federal uncertainty, but suggested the Legislature could explore alternatives such as more targeted income thresholds for the undocumented expansion and simpler asset-test rules. Department of Finance officials said the proposals are difficult but necessary to address a third consecutive deficit and rising Medi-Cal costs. Members then pressed the administration on the methodology and impacts of the proposals, especially the enrollment freeze, premiums, asset test, hospice controls, PACE reductions, and the elimination of benefits and provider payments. No votes or formal actions were taken at this hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• funding.
• with the subtraction of declining enrollment funding, which is currently in state law.
• funding because of the detaching school districts, and only the last quarter of the isolated funding
• Before you, under Exhibit D, is the committee fund allocations for every year for per diem, mileage,
• allocations as this last year.

Summary: The Executive Subcommittee met and first approved an emergency rule change from the Department of Education to update consolidation and annexation rules to reflect Acts 919 of 2025 and 157 of the 2026 fiscal session. The rule implements the creation of new isolated school districts after local detachment votes, and officials explained the funding structure for parent districts: they retain foundation funding, declining enrollment funding, and local tax revenue, while 90% of the foundation funding generated by detaching students is forwarded to the new districts. Members discussed the financial impact in detail, and the emergency rule was approved without objection, effective upon adjournment of the Legislative Council meeting on June 19, 2026. The Department of Human Services then presented an emergency rule allowing hospitals to open separate adolescent substance use disorder units and receive payment for residential services provided to adolescents. The rule was approved without objection, and Senator Irvin requested that the topic be placed on a future public health agenda for an update. The committee also approved Whitehall’s waiver request to exceed $1 million through cooperative purchasing for construction services related to a project using a vendor with prior experience and a longer-warranty system. In addition, members voted to keep committee per diem, mileage, and expense allocations unchanged for the new fiscal year. Finally, the committee approved a motion to cancel the July 2026 Legislative Council meeting, allow only subcommittee meetings with imminent matters through July 31, and treat July subcommittee actions as final for reporting at the August 21, 2026 meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• funded state funded locally funded our private resources at FSU.
• So the current funding process allows lawmakers to allocate resources based on the evolving needs of
• with things like performance and some of the other incentive funds that you all have recently allocated
• And with more funding allocated to the strategic opportunities, we can provide an even greater impact
• based funding.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• fund General operational funds general fund General operational funds to<00:05:37.000> attract
• You can't take some of the grant funding to fund this?
• You can't take some of the grant funding to fund this?
• You can't take some of the grant funding to fund this?
• You can't take some of the grant funding to fund this?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• funding.
• has had for many years and has not been utilized, so there is no new funding being asked for.
• I think the only other finding is the isolated funding they will have received.
• Before you, under Exhibit D, is the committee fund allocations for every year for per diem, mileage,
• allocations this last year.

Keywords: 1204, all