Transcript Highlights:

• budget proposals. budget proposals.
• governor's um supplemental budget. governor's um supplemental budget.
• . process. process.
• Um, Liam and Kyle are going to take us through the DE budget and the DE budget spreadsheet for the budget
• spreadsheet for the budget. spreadsheet for the budget.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's going to be fun to help you guys and learn with you guys through this budget process this year
• with you guys through this budget with you guys through this budget process<00:04:57.600> this
• So moving from fiscal notes into the operating budget process, I wasn't sure Mike Kane was going to go
• So moving from fiscal notes into the operating budget process, I wasn't sure Mike Kane was going to go
• So moving from fiscal notes into the operating budget process, I wasn't sure Mike Kane was going to go

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting was an introductory Division One budget briefing led by Legislative Budget Assistant staff Melissa Rollins and Jack Mullen. They explained staff roles and agency assignments within Division One, noting that Jack is taking over the General Government category while Melissa handles Categories 2 and 3, and that members can contact either staffer with questions. They also reviewed the upcoming budget calendar, including the governor’s budget presentation expected in mid-February, agency hearings beginning around February 17–20, a Division One deadline around March 26, and House Finance reporting deadlines in early April. A major portion of the discussion focused on how to read fiscal notes and the difference between expenditures and appropriations. Staff used sample language to explain that a bill may show an expenditure estimate without actually authorizing funding or new positions, and that a zero appropriation means the agency is not authorized to spend the estimated amount unless the bill is amended. Members asked questions about why a bill could show costs but still not authorize spending or hiring, and staff clarified that new positions require specific legislative authorization and classification detail. They also noted that many bills will have expenditure lines without appropriations, and that amendments may be needed if the committee wants to fund or authorize the program. The rest of the meeting walked members through the HB 1 and HB 2 tracking documents used by the division. Staff explained that HB 1 tracking sheets record additional agency requests not included in the governor’s budget, including requests that may be zero-net transfers, corrections, or new spending items, and that grayed-out items indicate actions already taken. They said HB 2 will be handled through a similar tracking process, with amendments routed through LBA staff and the Office of Legislative Services. Members were told that the division will review agency budgets, class lines, and proposed changes over roughly six weeks, with the goal of preparing a detailed change report for full House Finance.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will also hear a few January budget items related to Prop. 98, the guarantee, and the K-12 budget,
• the 2025-26 budget. ...for the 2024-25 budget and the 2025-26 budget.
• for the 2425 budget and the 2526 budget for the 2425 budget and the 2526 budget while deferrals may
• Budget.
• Budget.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance met for its annual Proposition 98 overview, with Chair Alvarez outlining the committee’s focus on K-12 funding, student outcomes, and use of one-time funds. Superintendent Tony Thurmond gave an update on education issues, including wildfire recovery support for affected school communities, ongoing concerns about federal threats to education funding and immigration enforcement, progress on literacy and math, dual-language immersion, educator housing, and support for dual enrollment. Members broadly expressed support for these priorities, while also raising concerns about implementation, funding stability, and the need for schools to remain safe places for students. The committee then reviewed the Governor’s Proposition 98 proposal. The Department of Finance said the 2025-26 Proposition 98 guarantee is projected at $118.9 billion, with higher revenues and TK-related rebenching driving the increase. The LAO said the budget adds about $7.5 billion over two years and discussed the volatility of the guarantee, especially in 2024-25, when changes in revenue could have an outsized effect on school funding. Members questioned the proposed $1.6 billion delayed settle-up payment, the legal basis for delaying it, and the impact of possible federal funding freezes. The LAO presented alternatives such as a reserve deposit or delayed disbursement, while Finance said the proposal is intended to manage uncertainty. Members also raised concerns that ethnic studies implementation was not funded in the January budget, and Finance said the administration was not proposing funding for it. The committee next heard on the Proposition 98 rainy day fund and education deferrals. Finance said the reserve would receive a mandatory deposit of about $1.2 billion in 2024-25 and a discretionary deposit of $376 million in 2025-26, leaving a balance of about $1.5 billion. The LAO supported rebuilding the reserve as a way to manage volatility. On deferrals, Finance described the Governor’s plan to eliminate remaining deferrals by 2025-26, and the LAO said paying them off improves cash flow and budget resilience. Members generally supported eliminating deferrals and rebuilding reserves, though some asked about acting earlier if revenues allow. The committee also reviewed the proposed $1.8 billion student support and professional development block grant; Finance said it would fund professional development, recruitment and retention, and dual enrollment, while the LAO recommended clearer language on local discretion and use for one-time costs. Members were divided, with some supporting flexibility and others warning that one-time block grants can create instability and confusion for districts.

Transcript Highlights:

• In fiscal year 2026, we have a state budget of about $9.6 billion.
• committee on how to balance the budget committee on how to balance the budget along<00:06:24.160
• But there's also the budget horizon that sort of limits our scope of looking.
• But there's also the budget horizon that sort of limits our scope of looking.
• But there's also the budget horizon that sort of limits our scope of looking.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• It's called Budget Overview Brief.
• One is budget activity, FTE, all funds, base budget, and statutory references.
• It's called Budget Overview Brief.
• One is budget activity, FTE, all funds, base budget, and statutory references.
• three key elements one is budget three key elements one is budget activity<00:04:57.560> FTE<

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:

• Today I will start with a quick overview of where we are in the federal budget process, followed by a
• Uh, we have the federal budget reconciliation process, funding freezes by executive orders, tax reform
• <00:15:51.600> you<00:15:51.759> know<00:15:51.920> process normal state budget
• you know process normal state budget you know process timelines.<00:15:53.920> Uh<00:15:54.320
• ramifications for our budget. ramifications for our budget.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• or annual review process.
• for us to get that waiver request through the process.
• We have the Right structure, we have the right processes, etc.
• Same thing, these a lot of these processes are very manual.
• our budgeted headcount has not changed.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• STEP UP DID NOT TIMELY PROCESS FPS EO EDUCATIONAL TUITION PAYMENTS FOR STEP UP DID NOT TIMELY PROCESS
• AS I WILL DESCRIBE NEXT THE PAYMENT PROCESS FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS DIFFERED SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THE PROCESS
• SECOND ISSUE REGARDING EXTENDED BUDGET PROCESS.
• DO PLANS TO PHASE IN BETTER PROCESSES?
• IS THAT THE PROCESS GOING FORWARD?

Transcript Highlights:

• with a $10 million budget.
• I think 72% of our projects come in under budget, only 28% over budget.”
• “Twenty-two percent of our projects come in under budget, only 28% over budget.
• under budget, and to Mr.
• So there is a process for that.

Keywords: 965, house, all

Summary: The Ways and Means Committee held an informational hearing on the state capital outlay process, with Roger Husser and Matt Baker of the Division of Administration’s Office of Facilities Planning and Control (FPNC) presenting a detailed review of House Bill 2 and proposed improvements. They said FPNC administers about 54% of the bill, while other agencies administer the rest, and emphasized that the capital outlay program has improved significantly over the last few years, with project expenditures more than doubling due to better cash-flow management, staffing changes, and more efficient project administration. They also explained how the bill is structured by priorities, how the priority-one cash line of credit is capped and adjusted for construction inflation, and how the bill has grown into a much larger, longer-range plan than a true five-year program, especially on the non-state side. A major theme was that the bill contains too many dormant, legacy, and low-priority projects, which creates false expectations and ties up funding. Committee members pressed the presenters on culture change, third-party project management, staffing shortages, and the use of technology and statutory interpretation to speed projects without sacrificing compliance. Husser and Baker said they had reduced internal bureaucracy, used staff augmentation because of hiring difficulties, delegated smaller projects to agencies when appropriate, and improved cash-flow analysis so projects can move forward with less money up front. They also discussed overappropriations, dormant projects, and the need to reappropriate unused funds to projects that can actually spend them. The presenters offered several recommendations and considerations: limit the number and size of new projects, reduce scope creep, require more regular endorsement of long-running projects, consider caps on priority-five funding, impose time limits and reporting requirements on non-state grant projects, and possibly require non-state entities to escrow or otherwise demonstrate their match earlier. They also suggested bundling related projects together, expanding that approach beyond the current pilot, and improving transparency by showing full project funding history and the first year each project appeared in the bill. No votes were taken, and the meeting remained informational, with members generally supportive of the efficiency reforms while also raising concerns about false hope, dormant projects, and the need for clearer expectations and accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's the process that was taken place.
• Yes, they have the authority to do that within budget.
• bulk of what the budget is used for.
• So this is how we're doing it in the CTE budget, so it's zeroing it out of the CTE budget.
• in the IT budget.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer, pledge, and roll call, establishing a quorum. It then took up a series of appropriations and policy bills, with the most extensive debate centered on Senate Bill 2025, the Department of Veterans Affairs budget. The House approved amendments that shifted governance of the department and veterans’ home from ACOVA to the governor, citing concerns about ACOVA’s salary-setting actions and broader appropriation oversight. Members opposed to the change argued ACOVA had studied compensation and acted within its role. The amended bill passed 57-34, and the final bill passed 69-22 with the emergency clause carrying. The House also passed Senate Bill 2001, the legislative branch budget, which funds the 2027 session, legislative staff, chamber upgrades, IT improvements, and salary adjustments for legislative leaders; the bill passed 62-29, but the emergency clause failed. Senate Bill 2019, the Career and Technical Education budget, passed 82-10 with emergency clause. Senate Bill 2021, the Information Technology Department budget, passed 75-17 after discussion of data center migration, service automation, mainframe transition, ERP study, and DPI’s move from PowerSchool to Infinite Campus. Other measures passed included Senate Bill 2228 for rural grocery store sustainability grants, Senate Bill 2390 creating a rural catalyst community grant program, Senate Bill 2188 adjusting the Clean Sustainable Energy Authority, and Senate Bill 2265 authorizing a veterans national cemetery grant and line of credit with added reporting safeguards. Several House bills returned from the Senate were concurred in and then passed, including House Bill 1361 on mandatory minimum sentences for human trafficking offenders, House Bill 1017 for the Game and Fish Department, House Bill 1588 on firearms and dangerous weapons provisions, House Bill 1429 on harassment and stalking involving robots, House Bill 1591 on county fair resiliency grants, House Bill 1537 on service agreement protection for water projects, House Bill 1203 on edible medical marijuana products, and House Bill 1027 transferring administration of the State Fire and Tornado Fund from the Insurance Commissioner to OMB. The House also rejected a motion to reconsider Senate Bill 2307, which dealt with library materials and obscenity-related restrictions, by a vote of 48-51. In addition, the chamber appointed conference committees on several House and Senate measures where concurrence had failed, and laid over Senate Bill 2340 for two legislative days.

Transcript Highlights:

• Quorum being present, I want to welcome everyone to the Budget Committee.
• claims process with regard to screenings or the claims process in general.
• And we are more than happy to discuss the claims bill process.
• budget increases, the spending increases, and most importantly, the budget request increases of this
• can consider this as this bill continues to move through the process.

Summary: The Budget Committee met with a quorum and took up several bills. HB 677, relating to state-covered fertility preservation for employees undergoing cancer treatment, was introduced as coverage for egg and sperm preservation for up to three years, with an estimated fiscal impact of about $813,000. After brief questions and no public testimony or amendments, the bill passed unanimously and was reported favorably. The committee then considered CS/HB 59, which would reform Florida’s wrongful incarceration compensation process by extending the filing deadline from 90 days to two years, removing the clean-hands requirement, and allowing exonerees to choose between the state compensation process and a civil lawsuit; it was supported by the City of Flagler Beach and passed unanimously. CS/HB 1313, which recreates the Resilient Florida Trust Fund in the Department of Environmental Protection before its scheduled termination in 2025, also passed unanimously after supportive testimony from advocacy groups. The committee received a lengthy presentation from the Department of Management Services on the State Group Insurance Program and the recent Revenue Estimating Conference. The presentation covered enrollment, revenues and expenditures, rising medical and pharmacy costs, emergency room utilization, GLP-1 drug spending, and options for tighter formulary and utilization management. Members asked about ER cost growth, GLP-1 coverage and copays, PBM oversight and potential conflicts, avoidable ER visits, cancer screening claims, dental and vision costs, specialty drug biosimilars, and possible savings from more restrictive pharmacy models. DMS said it would follow up on several questions and noted ongoing work on cancer coordination, preventive screening, biomarker testing, and a proposed member-facing benefits platform. The committee also heard extensive testimony on HB 301, which would raise sovereign immunity caps from $200,000 per person and $300,000 per incident to $1 million and $3 million, align limitations periods with private claims, and allow government entities to settle above the caps without a claims bill. Local governments, school-related entities, and county and city associations opposed the bill, warning of major fiscal impacts, higher insurance costs, and pressure on services; several speakers urged smaller increases or a tiered approach. Proponents, including families affected by catastrophic injury or death, argued the current caps are too low and the claims bill process is inefficient and unfair. After debate, the bill passed on a recorded vote, with some members voting no, and was reported favorably.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, that being said, the process really is that when departments come in and they do their budget
• You know, that being said, the process really is that when departments come in and they do their budget
• You know, that being said, the process really is that when departments come in and they do their budget
• That being said, the process really is that when departments come in and they do their budget allotments
• That being said, the process really is that when departments come in and they do their budget allotments

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee met on February 4, 2025, for decision making on previously heard measures, then later held hearings on additional bills. Early action focused on several measures that were amended and advanced, including SB 161 on state project exemptions from county permitting, which was heavily revised to allow programmatic or project-specific agreements with counties, require public reporting of exempted projects, and create a working group to study broader permitting and construction coordination issues. The committee also advanced SB 635 on energy efficiency with changes shifting survey leadership to the Hawaii State Energy Office, SB 700 on resilience hubs after narrowing it to focus on emergency-service-capable hubs and removing distributed energy language, SB 869 on community outreach boards with a technical amendment, SB 1081 on a legislative budget office by converting it to a feasibility study, SB 711 on gubernatorial appointments with a salary threshold change, SB 405 on neighborhood board agendas with a committee-report note about OIP concerns, SB 381 with privacy issues deferred to Judiciary, SB 2 as a two-year pilot for fruit tree planting in selected districts, SB 239 on disaster preparedness with sheltering revisions, and SB 998 as introduced with a cost estimate for site selection work. Several measures were deferred or not advanced, including SB 615, which was deferred indefinitely, SB 1132, which the chair said would be set aside in favor of another childcare bill, and SB 111, which was not taken up further because of confusion during an earlier hearing. During the later hearing portion, SB 1175 on procurement drew testimony from the State Procurement Office, which supported the bill but corrected its estimated database revision cost from $7,500 to $30,000; the Department of Transportation also appeared, while the General Contractors Association submitted opposition. Committee members questioned whether the past-performance database should include more detailed quality information and whether a one-year post-completion review would be useful, but no amendment was adopted at that time. SB 1587 on retainage received written support from the Subcontractors Association of Hawaii and no opposition in the room. SB 1543 on government accountability, which would require justification for outside consultants and cap consultant spending, drew opposition from the American Council of Engineering Companies of Hawaii, which argued it could slow procurement, reduce flexibility, and worsen delays given existing vacancies and limited in-house expertise. The Public First Law Center supported the related transparency bill discussed in the hearing, arguing it would close a loophole by making contractor-created records used in government functions subject to disclosure under UIPA, while the Attorney General’s office opposed it. The transcript ends with that testimony still underway, and no final vote is shown for the later hearing bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• These just move money around from one budget activity to the DHS budget after the various changes that
• Section 15 is from the governor's budget bill.
• Section 3 is from the Governor's Budget Bill.
• Sanderman for the thorough process.
• budget bill includes responsible reforms to address the projected budget shortfall and investments to

Bills: HF2434

Keywords: healthcare, personal care assistance, worker retention, disability services, state funding

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'll go through that process.
• bill uh so we'll go through that process bill uh so we'll go through that process so<00:04:48.000
• project the Minnesota Minnesota budget project the Minnesota budget<00:09:24.519> project<00:
• Motion prevails. out and we grew our budget by 40% with out and we grew our budget by 40% with the<00
• <00:14:48.600> um motans to have their budgets um motans to have their budgets um individually

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 4, first adopting the H004A1 amendment without objection. The author described the bill as a constitutional amendment intended to create a tax relief account funded from projected budget surpluses, defined as revenues exceeding 105% of projected expenditures based on the November forecast. Supporters framed the proposal as a way to return excess taxpayer money to families, homeowners, and seniors rather than allowing the state to retain or redirect it. Testimony in support came from Ranna Lee of Americans for Prosperity, who praised the bill’s clarity and argued that taxpayers are overburdened and should receive surplus funds back; she also suggested broader tax and budget reforms, including rate reductions and tighter spending limits. Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project testified in opposition, saying the legislature already has authority to use surpluses for rebates or tax cuts and warning that constitutionalizing tax policy would reduce flexibility, weaken accountability, and make it harder to respond to changing conditions, emergencies, or recessions. Members then briefly commented, with Republicans expressing support for returning money to taxpayers and citing cost-of-living pressures and fixed incomes. The committee did not hear a formal department position. At the end of the hearing, Representative Johnson renewed the motion that House File 4, as amended, be recommended to pass and sent to the Ways and Means Committee; the motion prevailed on a voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• > confirmed Kentucky state budget director confirmed Kentucky state budget director confirmed
• ,<00:18:22.320> or project is on schedule, on budget, or project is on schedule, on budget
• We have also um revised process.
• process. Every it's not cookie cutter. process. Every it's not cookie cutter.
• budget director about this project? budget director about this project?

Keywords: Call to Order and Roll Call- 00:00:01 Staff Report on Statewide Emergency Responder Voice System- 00:01:09 Kentucky State Police and Finance and Administration Cabinet Response to Staff Report- 00:48:37 Adjournment-01:34:512, 958, all

Summary: The committee heard a staff report on Kentucky’s statewide emergency responder voice system (SERVS), a multi-phase project intended to improve interoperable radio communications for first responders. Staff said Kentucky State Police did not appear to have violated statutes or regulations, but the project lacked an overall master plan, clear milestones, and consistent documentation, which contributed to delays, spending issues, and deployment problems. The report recommended updating the Kentucky Field Operations Guide to reflect SERVS and noted that the project has been funded in phases since 2018, with appropriations totaling roughly $216 million across 2018, 2020, 2022, and 2024, while about $109 million had been spent by the end of fiscal year 2025. The report raised concerns about project sequencing and oversight. Staff said most spending was concentrated in special mobile equipment, with Motorola accounting for about two-thirds of all SERVS expenditures and the top four vendors making up 81 percent of spending. They also said a sample of Motorola payments suggested possible late payments, though they could not confirm whether interest was paid. Staff criticized the use of master agreements for a project of this size, the lack of a centralized ledger, and the absence of a documented timeline or risk mitigation plan. They recommended stronger procurement and planning requirements, including possible legislative changes requiring approved master plans for large capital projects and additional funding conditions tied to SERVS master agreements. Land acquisition and deployment progress were identified as major bottlenecks, especially in Eastern Kentucky. Staff said the project began in western Kentucky using existing tower sites, but the remaining work is concentrated in harder-to-acquire areas, with more than 95 percent of new towers still incomplete. They said the Division of Real Properties did not begin formal contract work on acquisition until October 2024, despite earlier coordination, and recommended earlier consultation on future projects. Staff also noted that the Kentucky Wireless Interoperability Executive Committee had not been active in oversight, and survey results showed limited awareness and involvement among first responders. Committee members agreed that the lack of an initial implementation plan and the continuing need for funding reflected broader planning problems, and they discussed the need for a clearer end-to-end game plan rather than continuing to fund the project without a defined completion path.

Transcript Highlights:

• And remind the body that when Texas went through a zero-based budgeting process a number of years ago
• And through the process of the orbitals, what we ended up doing is, through this entire budget week,
• into our budget. into our budget.
• . budget. budget.
• No budget in a year budget isn't either.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, and approved the journal from April 10, 2026. After a brief opening that included the Pledge of Allegiance and roll call, the chamber moved into third reading. The first item was House Bill 1348, concerning use of money from the broadband infrastructure cash fund, which passed on final passage. The House then took up a series of bills dealing largely with education funding and program changes, including House Bills 1349 through 1358, covering prevention services in early childhood, school food programs, Healthy School Meals for All funding, Colorado reading and social studies assessment changes, repeal or phase-out of several teacher and school-related programs, and the Colorado Academic Accelerator Grant Program. Most of these measures were adopted, with some receiving notable no votes but still passing. The chamber also considered House Bill 1359, which would credit money from removal of natural resources on public school lands to the state public school fund, and House Bill 1360, concerning the affordable housing financing fund. HB 1360 drew extended debate. Supporters argued it was consistent with Prop. 123 and TABOR-related funding rules, while opponents said it would divert money from the general fund, exceed what voters authorized, and create a precedent for using reserve-like funds to cover budget shortfalls. Despite the opposition, HB 1360 passed after a member changed a vote from yes to no. The House then adopted House Bills 1361 and 1362, repealing the pay for success contracts program and the Decarbonization Tax Credits Administration Cash Fund, respectively. The final major item was House Bill 1363, which temporarily reduces the general fund reserve. This bill prompted the strongest opposition, with members arguing that the state was using a rainy day fund to cover self-inflicted budget problems, relying on future money, and failing to address underlying spending growth. Supporters of the bill said the reserve reduction was necessary to balance the budget and reflected difficult choices by the Joint Budget Committee. The bill nonetheless passed, and the House completed action on the listed third-reading calendar items.

Transcript Highlights:

• For the legislative and judicial branch budgets, I'm going to speak relative to the House budget.
• to the House budget.
• which is the judicial branch budget. which is the judicial branch budget.
• Um we the House budget for a moment.
• entirety of the Commonwealth budget entirety of the Commonwealth budget there,<00:29:06.880>

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Roll Call 00:00:23 HB 503 Discussion 00:01:00 HB 503 Vote 00:02:17 HB 504 Discussion 00:02:53 HB 504 Vote 00:04:48 HB 500 Discussion 00:05:19 HB 500 Vote 00:29:18 HB 900 Discussion 00:32:02 HB 900 Vote 00:33:00, 958, all

Summary: The Kentucky Senate Appropriations and Revenue Committee met with a quorum and first took up House Bill 503, the legislative branch budget, adopting a committee substitute and reporting it favorably. The chair said the Senate version fully funds defined calculations, provides 2% raises in each fiscal year for legislative employees, removes a paragraph on operating expense reductions, and includes $1 million in the first year for a judicial branch salary study. House Bill 504, the judicial branch budget, was then amended and reported favorably; changes included 2% annual raises for judicial employees, revised operating expense language, $1 million each year for county current services, retention of Boyle County fit-up language, reporting requirements for smaller capital projects, full funding for nine judges added in 2022, and removal of furlough prohibitions and certain budget implementation language. Both bills passed the committee unanimously with favorable expressions to the floor. The committee then considered House Bill 500, the executive branch budget, adopting a committee substitute before hearing a lengthy summary of major spending and policy changes. The chair described statewide 2% annual employee raises, agency base reductions with many exemptions, increased school safety and 911 funding, veterans and military funding, local government and severance-related changes, attorney general and auditor funding, pension and retirement system support, education funding changes including SEEK, postsecondary and scholarship provisions, public safety and corrections funding, and multiple capital projects. The chair also highlighted Medicaid-related provisions, including added waiver slots, increased state-directed payments, a 2.5% reduction in managed care vendor payments for plan years 2027 and 2028 with savings redirected to fee-for-service rates, and additional funding for behavioral health and public health programs. The bill was reported favorably after members explained their votes, with several noting they had only recently received the full 228-page bill and wanted more time for detailed review. Finally, the committee adopted a committee substitute for House Bill 900, an appropriation measure for government agencies, and reported it favorably. The chair said the bill remains a work in progress and that one-time funding requests from across the Commonwealth and across party lines would continue to be addressed as the process moves forward. All measures considered during the meeting passed the committee with unanimous or near-unanimous favorable votes, and the meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• tight budget year. tight budget year.
• filed and no due process. filed and no due process.
• Speaker, the proposed budget that we just voted on is a flawed budget.
• Speaker, the proposed budget that we just voted on is a flawed budget.
• Speaker, the proposed budget that we just voted on is a flawed budget.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• steps to complete that process, making sure that our budget process is transparent.
• This was an important first step to shore up our budget process and ensure that we, as elected leaders
• process.
• process.
• In wrapping, I wanted to say how proud I am of this process that we've done... Process.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Appropriations met with a quorum present, adopted the April 23, 2026 minutes, and then held a discussion focused on eligible legislatively directed spending items (LDSIs) for the FY 2027 budget. The chair explained that the committee was part of a new transparency process requiring legislators to publicly disclose LDSI requests, including the recipient, amount, and purpose, and noted that the forms must be posted publicly for at least 45 days before inclusion in the budget. He said Senate members submitted more than 500 eligible LDSI forms and House members submitted 750, for over 1,250 total proposals made available online. The chair emphasized that the process is intended to increase accountability and public awareness of how tax dollars are spent, and encouraged the public to review the posted forms on the Senate and House websites. During the meeting, four cards of support were read into the record: Wendy Fallow supported the Literacy Center of West Michigan project; Graham Filler supported the H.H.W. request on behalf of Kalamazoo County; and Mayor David LaGrand and Rob Verhulen both supported the aquarium request. No committee questions were raised, no substantive votes were taken on the LDSI items, and the committee moved through routine procedural actions. The meeting ended with a motion to adjourn, supported and adopted without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• PROCESS FULL CIRCLE I WANT TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET CONFERENCE.
• AS YOU KNOW BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE PASSED THE RESPECTIVE BUDGET BILLS LAST WEEK AND THE BUDGET CONFERENCE
• ONCE THE SPEAKER AND SENATE PRESIDENT ANNOUNCE ALLOCATIONS AND BUDGET CONFEREES THE CONFERENCE PROCESS
• THE OTHER DOCUMENT IN THE PACKET IS THE BUDGET.
• MEMBERS, I HOPE YOU FIND THIS INFORMATION HELPFUL AS WE BEGIN THE BUDGET CONFERENCE PROCESS.