Transcript Highlights:

• The funding for performance fund is $45 million right now? Forty-five? Correct.
• It's not for the funding.
• that fund.
• and funds, and then these two accounts, we will be finishing the year. fund and funds and then these
• funds to do the one D.E.”

Committee: All ALC-PEER

Summary: The committee considered a series of appropriation, transfer, and review items, approving most requests in Sections B through J. These included temporary appropriations for state technology upgrades, personnel management, court reporters and interpreters, crime victim claims, juvenile sex offender assessments, radiation lab testing, higher education workforce grants, an ARPA grant for the UAFS LPN program, an IIJA grant for geological/critical minerals work, a restricted reserve transfer for 102 State Police vehicles, a transfer to the Arkansas Heroes Program, several cash fund requests for the Real Estate Commission HVAC and AV needs, and overtime appropriations for Emergency Management and Military. One budget classification transfer request from the Commissioner of State Lands for $250,000 to cover operating expenses tied to a new building was discussed at length but failed on the vote after questions about the lease and operating costs. A major portion of the meeting focused on a $25.7 million pay plan appropriation request for 15 agencies. Members questioned why the Department of Human Services had not requested additional pay-plan dollars for human development centers, where DHS acknowledged staffing shortages, high turnover, and heavy overtime but said the issue was not lack of pay-plan funding. DHS was asked to provide a written plan to address staffing problems. The Department of Corrections testified that the pay plan had improved retention and hiring, and committee members asked for follow-up data on vacancies and staffing outcomes. Members also clarified that the pay-plan request was appropriation only, not new funding, and approved it. The committee then reviewed fund reports, including the restricted reserve, Budget Stabilization Trust Fund, Tobacco Settlement, State Central Services, Education Adequacy, Medicaid Trust Fund, IIJA, and Revenue Services transfer reports. DHS and DFA were questioned closely about the Medicaid Trust Fund, with members noting a $90 million February draw and asking about projected year-end balances; DFA and DHS said February was a high-expense, low-revenue month and projected the fund would remain solvent through the fiscal year, ending between $150 million and $200 million, while a second $100 million set-aside is planned for FY27. The committee also discussed a state hospital damage report, where DHS explained that insurance proceeds would not fully cover the repair costs because of depreciation and the age of the buildings; members expressed concern that the state would recover far less than originally expected, and DHS said any additional insurance recovery would be limited and returned to restricted reserve.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fund to $10 million.
• One-time special funds, which are coming from special funds, is $328,922.
• General Fund cash of $289,733,915. And then Transportation Trust Funds of $273,383,222.
• Fund funds.
• issue special fund.

Committee: Joint Capital Improvement

Summary: The committee met to finalize the FY27 bond bill, beginning with a roll call and a detailed review of updated appropriation amounts. The Comptroller General walked through major changes across agencies, including additions for OMB, the Department of State, DNREC, Agriculture, Education, and Transportation, and explained the funding sources that would cover the total $1.256 billion package. Members then debated several large items, especially the $110 million appropriation for the Diamond State Port Corporation, the $35 million Legislative Hall addition, the $20 million Community Reinvestment Fund, and the $30 million land and building acquisition line. Questions focused on the port project’s costs, expected jobs, return on investment, and whether the state would face future commitments; Secretary of State Charney Patitofunded Chances and other officials testified that the port expansion would create construction and permanent jobs and support long-term economic growth, while some members remained skeptical and objected to the process and spending priorities. The committee also discussed school construction funding, with officials explaining that additional money would forward-fund projects already in the pipeline and help districts that had been turned down for certificates of necessity. Other items reviewed included funding for park improvements, marina acquisition, the Plummer Center demolition and transfer, the Pyle Center sewer project, the Site Readiness Fund, affordable housing, the Arts Endowment Fund, an unclaimed property task force, and various transportation and community transportation projects. Several members raised concerns about county distribution, minority-party involvement in negotiations, and the scale of certain appropriations, but the majority defended the package as statewide investment and economic development. The committee then voted on the Section 1 addendum and a series of new and replacement epilogue sections, including provisions for the port project, Legislative Hall minor capital improvements, land acquisition, affordable housing, the Community Reinvestment Fund, downtown development districts, the Rite Aid demolition, the Site Readiness Fund, school construction formula review, and enhanced school capital funding. Most motions carried, with a few recorded no votes or abstentions on the main addendum. The meeting concluded with a motion authorizing technical corrections by the Comptroller General’s office, followed by closing remarks thanking staff and members for their work and noting that this was likely the final bond committee meeting for some participants before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• FAIR funds will fund improvements to municipally owned bridges across the Commonwealth.
• So the Commonwealth Transportation Fund, the legislature, in its wisdom, set up that fund to collect
• So the Commonwealth Transportation Fund, the legislature, in its wisdom, set up that fund to collect
• funding for FY27 of $400,000.
• For that reason, both the overall funding and Funding is vital to small communities like ours.

Bills: H4987 , S2905

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Transportation

Transcript Highlights:

• We added the $5 million in general fund to that, and $40 million from the other funds.
• So that's general fund? I'm sorry, with that general fund? So, Mr.
• it in general fund just to make it clear what the funding source was.
• It was in the HHS budget with the funding and left the House with the funding in it.
• It was in the HHS budget with the funding and left the House with the funding in it.

Bills: SB2003

Committee: House Appropriations - Education and Environment Division

Summary: The committee met to work through the higher education budget, beginning with a conflict-of-interest request from Representative Martinson, who was excused from voting because of a partnership that leases office space to Bismarck State College. Members then reviewed the higher education institution budget sheets, covering ongoing and one-time funding items for campuses and system projects such as BSC housing, Lake Region roof repairs, UND’s STEM and National Security Crossroads projects, the UND allied health facility, NDSU projects including New Horizons, DSU deferred maintenance and campus security, Mayville’s Old Main, Minot projects, and the regional health institutes. Members also discussed student financial assistance, the professional student exchange program, IT security funding, and workforce/education innovation grants. Several amendments and policy questions were debated. The committee adopted an amendment to make workforce education innovation grants competitive rather than automatically distributed, and then voted to remove language prohibiting those funds from being used to duplicate academic programs. Members also removed similar anti-duplication language from the New Horizons section. They agreed to extend the UND hyperbaric chamber transfer authority to 2027 and clarified language around UND land-sale proceeds. A proposed amendment to add $5.6 million for the Wahpeton State School of Science building purchase failed for lack of a second, and a proposal to restore fetal alcohol spectrum disorder funding to UND was left for conference. The committee also discussed, but did not add, a tuition cap change, a study on the Praxis exam, and several governance-related provisions. The committee spent significant time on broader higher education policy items, including a $3 million enterprise resource planning request for the university system, a $2 million grant program for students who are pregnant, recently gave birth, or are caring for young children, and a $1.1 million request for library age-verification software tied to the Odin system. Members also discussed dual-credit authority for UND and NDSU, a goal for the UND medical school to increase North Dakota resident enrollment, and intent language regarding the commissioner/chancellor model and presidential search authority. At the end of the meeting, the committee approved the amendments and then gave the higher education budget a do-pass recommendation as amended, with Representative Sanford designated as the carrier. The Forest Service budget was also approved, including two additional FTEs, and the committee adjourned after noting it would continue with other budgets the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• Infrastructure Fund.
• of the Broadband Infrastructure Fund.
• Actual grant funding...
• And that the federal funds in there and we have state funds. Yes, sir.
• Those are federal funds, but they are matched with some of the state funds.

Bills: SB 1 , SB1

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• c> funds</c> because the funds because the funds ended<01:05:19.480><c> one</c><01:05:19.880><c> one<
• ><01:53:38.560><c> was</c> infrastructure fund was a fund that was infrastructure fund was a fund that
• </c><01:56:29.679><c> and</c> fund um the money goes into the fund and fund um the money goes into the
• </c><01:56:59.000><c> to</c> trust fund funds to be distributed to trust fund funds to be distributed
• available um and award funds in funds available um and award funds in the<01:57:53.679><c> order</c>

Summary: The Department of Education’s Bureau of Wellness and Nutrition presented an overview of the school meal and child nutrition programs it administers, including the National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), After School Snack Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, Summer Food Service Program, and Special Milk Program. Staff explained which programs are federally funded through USDA, which have state matching funds, and how reimbursement rates are set for different programs and fiscal years. They also walked the committee through a packet showing reimbursement tables, state and federal funding totals, and eligibility data. Members focused much of their questioning on how state and federal reimbursements work for lunch and breakfast, why lunch is shown as a state match while breakfast has meal-based breakdowns, and how the department allocates funds in the budget. The department explained that lunch uses a set state match tied to federal requirements, while breakfast reimbursement is based on meals served. They also reviewed FY 22-24 funding trends, noting higher federal spending during COVID-era waivers and lower amounts as those waivers ended. A committee member asked for the data in Excel and the department agreed to provide it. The discussion also covered summer meal programs and the distinction between the Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT. Staff explained that SFSP provides meals at approved open or closed sites, while Summer EBT is a separate DHHS-run benefit program that provides funds to families; the two programs coordinate through data sharing but are not the same. Members also discussed CEP, with staff explaining that New Hampshire currently has three schools participating, that the qualifying threshold was reduced from 40% to 25% identified students, and that districts must cover the non-federal share with non-federal funds. No votes or formal actions were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to look at funding the Permanent University Fund and the Texas University Fund.
• : the Permanent University Fund, the Higher Education Fund, and the Texas University Fund.
• a fund distribution.
• National Research University Fund, National Research Development Fund, and the TRIP fund also was eliminated
• Fund.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Higher Education met to review interim charges on the Permanent University Fund (PUF), the Available University Fund (AUF), the Higher Education Fund (HEAF), and the Texas University Fund (TUF). Legislative Budget Board staff outlined how each fund works, including PUF’s constitutional role for UT and Texas A&M, HEAF’s capital support for institutions outside those systems, and TUF’s research funding for eligible universities. They also described TUF’s growing corpus and distribution changes, and noted which institutions are nearing eligibility. Committee members asked about distribution formulas, comparisons to other states, and how funds are allocated among system institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• This funding includes roughly $2.2 billion Proposition 98 General Fund for TK expansion.
• One thing about this grant, though, is that it is flat funded and has been flat funded since 2014.
• Those funds are going away.
• The SIP federal funding—is that program at risk, that funding at risk?
• Department of Finance, do you anticipate a decrease in SIP funds? Chris. Decrease in SIP funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• One would be to simply make funding available, incentive funding, that is available to any community
• And all of that funding comes into the affordable housing fund.
• And all of that funding comes into the affordable housing fund.
• By utilizing CERNA funds.
• billion in funding has been awarded in its first three funding rounds.

Summary: The committee held an outcomes review hearing on AB 457 and related farmworker and rural housing policy, with members and witnesses discussing whether recent streamlining laws are actually increasing production. Chair Haney, Assembly Members Soria and Pellerin, and others described the purpose of AB 457 and its predecessor bills AB 1783 and AB 3035: to make farmworker housing easier to build through ministerial approval and other reforms. Witnesses emphasized that farmworkers face severe overcrowding, high rents, long commutes, and limited access to housing in both rural and coastal agricultural regions. The first panel focused on practical barriers and local models. Napa County described its county-owned farmworker centers, which provide nightly lodging, meals, and services, funded by lodger fees, a grower assessment, and state support. Testimony stressed that these centers function as navigation hubs rather than permanent housing, and that stable, inflation-adjusted operating funding, language access, transportation, and local set-asides are critical. United Farm Workers urged that local farmworkers be prioritized over H-2A workers and warned against displacing long-term resident workers. Several witnesses said the biggest barriers remain infrastructure, land costs, local opposition, and insufficient subsidy rather than approval streamlining alone. The second and third panels addressed AB 457’s implementation and broader state funding issues. Santa Clara County said the bill could help on a county-owned Gilroy site, but financing remains the main obstacle. Self-Help Enterprises said AB 457’s expanded geography and project-size rules may help future sites, but rural projects still struggle with water, sewer, and environmental review costs, and with the state’s Super NOFA process, which tends to favor deeper-income projects that do not match farmworker household incomes. HCD reported that CERNA and other programs have increased farmworker housing production in recent years, but witnesses argued that rural regions still receive too little funding, that infrastructure dollars are too fragmented, and that more rural-specific set-asides, local funding incentives, and predictable allocations are needed. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• c><00:54:14.480><c> moving</c> funding and the funding is moving funding and the funding is moving forward
• So the lead prevention fund, um, the 7964, this is federal funds and general funds.
• </c><01:09:58.960><c> the</c> CDC funds we have funds from the CDC funds we have funds from the Environmental
• The second funding source, again, it's other funds, not General Funds.
• c> have</c> larger funding funded programs we have larger funding funded programs we have something<04

Summary: The Finance Division III work session focused on the Department of Health and Human Services’ Division of Public Health Services budget. Department staff said Public Health has a relatively small budget compared with other DHHS divisions, is supported mostly by federal and other non-General funds, and contains nearly 100 accounting units and more than 50 federal grants. They emphasized that the governor’s budget did not include significant cuts, but that federal funding uncertainty and the winding down of pandemic-era resources were major factors affecting the division. The division also explained that some apparent budget growth reflects reorganizations, including moving the Bureau of Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Recovery and some programs from other DHHS divisions into Public Health. The presentation described Public Health’s mission as serving the entire state through food and water safety, disease surveillance, emergency response, maternal and child health, chronic disease prevention, WIC, community health center support, and public health data collection. Members asked about bird flu, and staff explained that human-health response would involve Public Health’s lab, infectious disease, and emergency preparedness units, while animal-health issues are handled with the Department of Agriculture; they also noted ongoing milk testing requested by FDA and USDA. The division said its organizational structure includes bureaus for Family Health and Nutrition, Infectious Disease Control, Public Health Protection, Emergency Preparedness, Prevention and Wellness, Statistics and Informatics, and Public Health Laboratories, with about a 15% vacancy rate. Committee members questioned whether the division’s budget and staffing had really grown since pre-COVID, and staff responded that full-time authorized staffing is about the same as in 2018, with the increase largely due to federal pandemic funding that has since receded and to program transfers between divisions. They said Public Health’s General Fund share is about $24 million out of roughly $1.1 billion in DHHS General Fund spending, or about 2.2% of the department total. Members also asked about the 3,000-position cap and unfunded positions; staff explained that the cap remains in chapter law through June 30, 2025, that 394 positions were unfunded in the governor’s budget, and that the division expects flexibility to move money from personnel lines and fill unfunded positions to manage changing needs. No votes or formal actions were taken in this portion of the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition to the increase in FEFP funding, the proposed budget provides funds for other key Pre-K-12
• Fiscal year 2026-27 opioid settlement trust fund funding represents the fourth year of investments since
• the trust fund was established to direct settlement funds from opioid manufacturers and distributors
• funding in the budget.
• And so we have funded... Senator Brodeur: We've made historic funding in our state parks.

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, then moved to the conference report on House Bill 501E, the General Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2026-27. Budget chairs presented the major spending areas, describing a $114.5 billion overall budget that they said was fiscally responsible and below the prior year’s spending. Highlights included pay increases and retirement adjustments for public safety employees, education funding for K-12, higher education, health and human services, criminal justice, transportation, environmental programs, and agriculture/regulatory agencies. Members then questioned chairs on several items. In education, senators discussed K-12 declining enrollment funding, teacher salary set-asides, private school scholarship spending, mental health funding, preeminence funding for universities, the Hamilton Center at UF, and charter school PICO funding. In health and human services, questions focused on the iBudget waiver waitlist, provider rates, ADAP/HIV funding and the return of Biktarvy to the formulary, KidCare, rural health funding, SNAP-related IT and error reduction efforts, and the IDD managed care program. In criminal justice, senators asked about correctional officer pay, prison staffing and infrastructure, air conditioning in prisons, juvenile justice facilities, law enforcement recruitment, and court system funding. Environmental and transportation questions covered Florida Forever, water quality, state parks, water projects, housing, elections funding, and emergency management. Several specific actions and explanations were given during debate: the budget includes $8.8 million for state attorney competitive area differentials but no funding for public defender CAD requests; assistant state attorneys will start at $70,000 and assistant public defenders at $65,000; the battery disposal issue was described as a temporary study/preemption approach; and the Senate said the budget does not fund Medicaid expansion, preeminence funding, or the SunBucks Summer EBT state share. Senators also noted that some proposals discussed in committee did not make it into the final budget. The transcript ends with debate statements from members praising the budget process and Chair Hooper, while also expressing concerns about public schools, health care access, affordability, and the lack of funding for certain priorities.

Transcript Highlights:

• our roads, fund our police services, fund our rec center, fund our park, fund whatever we feel like
• our roads, fund our police services, fund our rec center, fund our park, fund whatever we feel like
• our roads, fund our police services, fund our rec center, fund our park, fund whatever we feel like
• our roads, fund our police services, fund our rec center, fund our park, fund whatever we feel like
• our roads, fund our police services, fund our rec center, fund our park, fund whatever we feel like

Transcript Highlights:

• It can only be used for this fund, and this fund can only be used to reimburse the investigation and
• fund.
• fund.
• projects fund, or debt service fund to balance its budget.
• to another school fund.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee held a public hearing on several bills. Senate Bill 5109 would raise the mortgage lending fraud prosecution surcharge on recorded deeds of trust from $1 to $5 and remove the 2027 sunset on the surcharge and account. Committee staff said the change would generate additional revenue for county auditors and the Department of Financial Institutions to contract with prosecutors; King County and the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys testified in strong support, saying the current funding has eroded and the bill would better sustain mortgage fraud prosecutions. A question was raised about whether other budget funding could serve a similar purpose, but supporters said the dedicated surcharge/account structure was the best fit. No vote was taken. The committee also heard Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 5500, which would require DCYF’s biennial child care report to include a current cost-of-quality study in addition to the market rate survey. Testifiers from Child Care Aware of Washington, child care providers, and the early education design team supported the bill, saying the market rate survey alone does not capture the true cost of providing quality care. Staff said the bill would have a small fiscal impact for DCYF. The committee then heard Substitute Senate Bill 5834 and Senate Bill 5835, both Department of Retirement Systems request bills: one would broaden use of pension fund interest earnings for fund-protection expenses beyond the 2025-27 biennium, and the other would raise the threshold for lump-sum payment of small monthly benefits from $50 to $250. Neither bill drew public testimony, and staff said the fiscal impacts were minimal. Later, the committee heard Engrossed Senate Bill 5872, which would create the Pre-K Promise Account for ECAP funding and allow gifts, grants, and donations to be used solely to expand the program. Supporters including rural health coalitions, the Balmer Group, and Snohomish County said the account would help expand access to early learning, especially in child care deserts; DCYF estimated staffing costs to administer the account. Substitute Senate Bill 6007 would direct WSIPP to study DCYF’s child welfare screening tools and their effects on outcomes, with a reported cost of about $234,000; there was no public testimony. Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6019 would clarify home care agency rate-setting and require that no more than 20% of Medicaid home care rates go to administrative costs, with DSHS saying there would be no fiscal impact. Labor and caregiver witnesses supported it as a parity and accountability measure. Finally, Senate Bill 6065 would allow school districts in binding conditions or enhanced financial oversight to use transportation vehicle funds more flexibly, including temporary loans or permanent transfers with approval; a rural education representative supported the bill, and staff said OSPI would incur only modest administrative costs. The committee took no final action and adjourned after the hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• The supplemental benefit liability was largely not pre-funded, with no funding at all at most institutions
• The original intent of these rates was to partially pre-fund SRP benefits and that some ongoing funding
• Now, that is a funding policy choice, and you as the PFC could revisit those funding policy choices in
• To illustrate that point, in terms of the funded ratio change, most plans funded...
• Let's move on to the last topic: funded ratio. Last topic: funded ratio.

Committee: Joint Pension Funding Council

Transcript Highlights:

• cats, and various revenue and funding sources for the special fund.
• It also appropriates funds.
• </c> to finding creative ways to per to fund to finding creative ways to per to fund arts<00:19:36.840
• :11.080><c> and</c><00:20:11.280><c> also</c> CIP Bond funding as well um and also CIP Bond funding as
• fund the special<00:25:39.320><c> fund</c><00:25:39.640><c> shall</c><00:25:39.880><c> be</c><00:25:

Committee: House Culture & Arts

Summary: The Committee on Culture and the Arts heard testimony on HB 547 HD1, which would create a spay-neuter special fund to reduce pet overpopulation and support spay/neuter services, funded in part through a tax return check-off and other sources. The Department of Taxation said it could implement the check-off; the Attorney General and Budget and Finance raised drafting and placement concerns about which department should house the fund; and the Hawaii Humane Society strongly supported the bill, emphasizing statewide need and the importance of distributing funds to areas of greatest need, including neighbor islands. The Tax Foundation opposed the measure on special-fund grounds, arguing there was no sufficient nexus between the bill’s purpose and the proposed revenue source. The committee later recommended HB 547 HD1 with technical amendments and sent it to Finance, with members voting aye and no objections noted. The committee also heard HB 925 HD1, relating to arts funding, which would impose a 1% fee on ticket sales from concerts at state venues and direct the proceeds to a dedicated arts fund. The State Foundation on Culture and the Arts supported the measure, while the Attorney General suggested defining “concerts” for clarity and Budget and Finance was available with comments. In discussion, the committee chair asked about how other states fund arts programs, and Director Ewald said many states use dedicated funding sources such as concert fees, bond funding, cultural trusts, and hotel lodging taxes. The committee recommended HB 925 HD1 with amendments, including a preamble, a new Performing Arts special fund, a definition of “concerts,” and a defective date, and the recommendation was adopted. Finally, the committee considered HB 1378, also related to the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts. Based on the Attorney General’s testimony, the committee proposed deleting a section of the bill, creating a Performing Arts special fund, specifying revenue sources such as legislative appropriations, foundation charges, grants, gifts, and interest, and using the fund for coordination, planning, promotion, marketing, and execution of performing arts events. The amendments also added a definition of Performing Arts, granting standards, and a defective date, while blanking out the appropriation amount for the committee report. The committee voted to adopt the recommendation on HB 1378 with amendments, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Trust Fund, I would entertain any comments.
• So the Idaho Children's Trust Fund...
• The Children's Trust Fund is... are there any comments there or thoughts about the trust fund?
• of, And I think that a lot of the funding in the past came from the victims of violent acts funding,
• I'm just wondering if we can fund this, but maybe at a lower level, to be more in alignment with Fund

Summary: The committee first approved the January 29, 2006 minutes, then spent most of the meeting reviewing Idaho Children’s Trust Fund and related prevention-focused grant requests. Members repeatedly discussed whether proposals fit the committee’s mission of youth substance-abuse prevention, the need for measurable outcomes and oversight, and whether some requests were more like child care or general social services than prevention. Several members also noted that future legislation and a clearer planning framework may be needed so the committee is not simply reacting to applicants’ own goals. The committee then considered individual funding requests. It approved one-time funding for the Idaho Children’s Trust Fund ($692,240), the Idaho Safety Assessment Center Coalition ($1 million through the Department of Juvenile Corrections), the Idaho Network of Children’s Advocacy Centers ($3 million through ICDVVA), a recovery center request ($150,000 ongoing through Health and Welfare), a statewide drug awareness media campaign ($5 million through the Office of Drug Policy), and the governor’s recommended $25 million one-time transfer to the Department of Health and Welfare/Division of Medicaid to help address the Medicaid forecast and general fund impact. The Children’s Bridge request for $3.5 million did not receive a second and died. Throughout the meeting, members emphasized that any approved funding should include intent language for distribution, oversight, reporting, and in some cases procurement or performance measures. There was also discussion that some programs should have a designated state agency “home” for long-term sustainability, and that the committee should better track whether funded programs are actually reducing youth substance use and related harms. The meeting ended after the committee adopted the motions and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• prohibits the funds from being used as a substitute for traditional sources of funding.
• /c> they manage the funding um the fund has they manage the funding um the fund has grown<00:07:17.479
• been</c><00:09:01.920><c> used</c> heritage fund the funding has been used heritage fund the funding
• for how to use these funds.
• </c><00:15:54.959><c> receives</c><00:15:55.160><c> 14</c> fund uh this particular fund receives 14 fund

Committee: House Legacy Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• with taxpayer funds.
• State-funded, federal-funded degrees.
• might fund less.
• , with excess funds transferred to the class The school district bond fund, with excess funds transferred
• fund.

Committee: House Higher Education and Workforce Development

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> cancel to the general fund. cancel to the general fund.
• </c> funding is received. funding is received.
• service fund.
• I'm not asking for more funding. I'm asking for fair funding.
• I'm not asking for more funding. I'm asking for fair funding.

Committee: Senate Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Because that funding would otherwise come straight from the state road fund.
• But it takes funding.
• You'll see that the Fire Protection Fund, the Local Government Road Fund, and the DWI Grant Fund are
• Major and non-major funds, just like the general funds, have both increased.
• Major funds have increased by 140%, and non-major funds have increased by 110%.