Transcript Highlights:

• the Arkansas independent assessment, and replace it with a more functional assessment tool.
• ARIA manual, our independent assessment manual.
• I don't know that there's necessarily issues with the assessment or... ...that assessment?
• So we’re going from three assessments down to two assessments with a PCP being the gatekeeper.
• “So, just to clarify, we’re not asking the PCP to do an assessment, an independent assessment in the

Summary: The committee approved the December 8 minutes and referred items C1 and C2 to the labor and environment subcommittees, adopting the chair’s recommendations. The main substantive item was a DHS rule package revising the State Plan Personal Care Manual and the Arkansas Independent Assessment (ARIA) Manual. DHS said the revisions would repeal and replace the current manuals with streamlined versions, remove overlapping language, implement Act 853 by shifting licensure/certification for personal care agencies to the Department of Health, lengthen personal care prior authorizations from six months to one year, and keep the 64-hour monthly cap. For ARIA, DHS said it would remove references to state plan personal care, clarify telehealth and in-person assessments, and add/update sections for PASS, AR Choices, Living Choices, and PACE. DHS argued the current independent assessment process is costly and not controlling utilization, citing a 95% approval rate, annual spending of more than $212 million on personal care for about 17,000 people, and an estimated $6.173 million in savings from eliminating the Optum assessment and reducing prior-authorization frequency. Agency witnesses said the new process would reinsert primary care practitioner involvement, use standardized evaluation and prescription forms, and rely on personal care provider nurses for the assessment step, with training already available through an AFMC contract. Several members questioned whether PCPs should be used as gatekeepers, whether the change would delay services, and whether the savings estimate accounted for training or provider burden. Some members also raised concerns about conflicts of interest, the workload on physicians, and whether the agency had adequately worked with the existing vendor to improve the current system. The discussion became contentious, with Senator Irvin and others strongly opposing the proposal as inconsistent with the earlier independent-assessment approach and urging DHS to slow down and work with legislators. Other members asked for clarification on how the new process would work for new applicants and whether it would affect waiver or PASS participants; DHS said the rule would not apply to PASS and should not delay services. At the end of the hearing, the chair offered DHS the option to pull the rule down and work off-record with legislators on a revised proposal, and DHS agreed. The meeting then adjourned without further business or a final vote on the rule.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then, regarding assessment, the state has to have an assessment, and it must contain at least three
• So with that, ATLAS assessments for grades three through 10 assess in three main subjects: English language
• So this is not tied to a specific assessment.
• So this is not a tie to a specific assessment.
• This is accomplished with the Atlas assessments that include summative assessments for students in grades

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The committee received a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on Arkansas academic standards, accountability, and achievement as part of the adequacy study. Staff reviewed how state curriculum and standards have evolved from the 1997 Public Education Act, the 2003 Quality Education Act, and the 2017 Educational Support and Accountability Act, including required course offerings, graduation requirements, career and technical education pathways, and recent additions such as success-ready pathways, Arkansas history, firearm safety, and fetal growth and development instruction. Members asked for a comparative chart showing how the laws and requirements changed over time, and staff agreed to provide one. The presentation then turned to the federal ESSA plan and Arkansas’s state accountability system. Staff explained the state’s long-term goals for 2030, including 80% proficiency in ELA and math, 52% of English learners on track to English proficiency, and 94%/97% four- and five-year graduation rates. They reviewed 2025 assessment results showing proficiency rates generally in the 30s, with English learners and students with disabilities performing lowest and white students highest. They also discussed school support and improvement categories, equitable access to educators, and report card/public reporting requirements, noting that some ESSA-related measures such as the school index, equity labs, and certain 2024 report card data were not currently available or not being calculated. Members questioned whether those ESSA commitments were being met and asked staff to follow up with DESE, including whether the legislature can revise the ESSA plan. The committee also reviewed the Arkansas Accountability Act and related assessment data. Staff described the Atlas assessment system, alternate assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities, ELPA 21 for English learners, ACT results, and NAEP comparisons. They reported that no student group met the 80% proficiency goal in 2025, Arkansas’s ACT composite score declined slightly over time, and Arkansas generally trailed national and SREB averages on NAEP. Members asked for additional data, including historical highs and lows, the number of assessments students take by grade, dropout data, and comparisons with other states. The meeting ended with agreement to invite the Department of Education to a future meeting to answer questions about missing data, equity labs, report cards, and ESSA compliance.

Transcript Highlights:

• If somebody doesn't pay<00:02:19.840> their<00:02:20.000> assessments, pay their assessments
• property tax and not pay the assessment. property tax and not pay the assessment.
• Of that, 115,000 are assessed a fee.
• These assessments are subordinate to ad valorem. property to enforce this assessment.
• :32:27.440> advorum Assessments are subordinate to ad valorem assessments, but superior to other

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• How many students in the EFA program are being assessed using the statewide assessment, and what's the
• delivering the assessment.
• , things like NWEA, i-Ready, those types of assessments that i-Ready, those types of assessments that
• That would help. >> The state assessment, I think because we >> The state assessment, I think because
• So now when students take the state assessment, usually take the state assessment, usually within about

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Education Freedom Account Oversight Committee met on March 27 and approved the agenda, adding a request for clarification on how the Children’s Scholarship Fund separates applications for the EFA program and the education tax credit program. The committee also approved minutes from December 30, 2025, and March 27, 2026, with a request that the March minutes include a link to the live stream. Members discussed the status of pending Legislative Budget Assistant audit reports on EFA and special education, noting the reports were still not released and would likely come later in the summer after review by the Department of Education and the Children’s Scholarship Fund. A major topic was the EFA program’s administrative fee, which statute allows up to 10% of deposits. Children’s Scholarship Fund representatives said current administrative costs were under 8%, that staffing had been reduced through the ScholarVia platform, and that any unused amount is reconciled and returned to students at year’s end. Members asked for historical administrative-cost data and a written explanation of how the withholding and reconciliation process works. The committee also reviewed the distinction between the EFA and education tax credit funding streams and was told the two programs use separate applications and separate funds, though both use the same platform. The committee spent substantial time on assessment and accountability. Department of Education staff explained that EFA students may satisfy annual assessment requirements through a portfolio, a norm-referenced test, or the statewide assessment; only about 10 EFA students took the statewide assessment, while most used portfolios or standardized tests such as the California Achievement Test and NWEA. Staff described how statewide assessment data are kept separate by student identifier and can be aggregated for EFA reporting, and members asked for breakdowns by grade, test type, and school district. The department also discussed linking assessments through Lexiles and Quantiles and said it could provide a list of commonly used formative assessments in New Hampshire districts. The committee additionally discussed a possible PSAT addition to the state contract and the costs of the statewide assessment program. Another major issue was special education eligibility and services within the EFA program. Members questioned the rule allowing a medical certification of disability from a licensed professional anywhere in the United States as an alternative to an IEP-based determination. Department staff said the current system allows either pathway, that about 1,000 EFA students are identified as special education students, and that the program does not track growth or service alignment on an individual basis. Members expressed concern that the medical-certification route may be too broad and asked for data on the disability categories used. The committee also discussed career and technical education access for EFA students, noting that Senate Bill 491 would provide guidance and that House Bill 1817 would address access and funding issues, but that current law still allows EFA funds to be used to pay CTE costs. The meeting ended with a request for future agenda items and a decision to leave the next meeting date open until fall, pending further information from the LBA audit process.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then regarding assessment, the state has to have an assessment, and it must contain at least three
• So with that, ATLAS assessments for grades 3 through 10 assess in three main subjects: English language
• So with that, Atlas Assessments for grades 3 through 10 assess in three main subjects, English language
• The ATLAS assessments include summative assessments for students in grades 3 through 10, as well as end-of-course
• The ELPA 21, or English Language Proficiency Assessment for the 21st Century, is the assessment used

Summary: The committee received a lengthy Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on Arkansas academic standards, accountability systems, and adequacy requirements. Staff reviewed how state curriculum and standards have evolved from the 1997 Public Education Act through the 2003 Quality Education Act and the 2017 Educational Support and Accountability Act, including required coursework, standards for accreditation, career and technical education, graduation requirements, and recent additions such as computer science, personal finance, firearm safety, and fetal growth and development instruction. Members asked for a chart comparing the major laws and repeals over time, and staff agreed to provide one. The presentation then turned to federal ESSA requirements and Arkansas’s state accountability system. Staff explained Arkansas’s long-term goals for proficiency, English learner progress, and graduation rates, and reported 2025 ATLAS proficiency results, which remained below the 80% goal across student groups. They also reviewed English learner progress, graduation rates, school support and improvement, and equitable access to educators. Data showed gaps by subgroup and by school poverty/minority concentration, with Title I and high-poverty schools more likely to have emergency/provisional teachers and less experienced staff. Members questioned the lack of recent data for some ESSA measures, including equity labs and school index calculations, and asked staff to follow up with the Department of Education. The committee also discussed NAEP results, ACT scores, and teacher quality measures under the state accountability act. Arkansas’s NAEP performance remained below national averages in fourth- and eighth-grade reading and math, and ACT composite scores and benchmark attainment were also reviewed. Members asked for additional information on historical highs and lows, the number of assessments students take by grade, dropout data, and comparisons with other states. No formal votes were taken; the main action was agreement to request additional information from DESE and to schedule department follow-up at a future meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• are the sale prices with the assessments are the sale prices with the assessment. assessment. assessment
• the assessment.
• . assessments. assessments.
• the assessment. the assessment.
• <02:38:12.000> value<02:38:13.040> um assess the change in assessed value um assess

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• THE ASSESSMENT HAS CHANGED A FEW TIMES OVER THE 20 YEARS.
• ORDERING THAT ONE ASSESSMENT PERIOD.
• NAMELY WE HAVE FIVE AND OF COURSE ASSESSMENTS.
• STUDENTS MUST PASS THE ALGEBRA ONE AND OF COURSE ASSESSMENT AND GRADE 10 ELA ASSESSMENT.
• USING OTHER ASSESSMENTS.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:05:29.160> MCA Minnesota comprehensive assessments MCA Minnesota comprehensive assessments
• <00:21:19.600> the and nationally accepted assessment the and nationally accepted assessment
• also offers a more efficient assessment also offers a more efficient assessment experience<00:21
• shortcomings of our current assessment shortcomings of our current assessment system<00:25:09.520
• am 100% with you we should be assessing am 100% with you we should be assessing all<01:26:11.119

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It prevents assessment structure.
• assessments limits.
• interim assessments assessment on interim assessments limits. limits. limits.
• >> It's still an assessment. >> It's still an assessment.
• Cost assessment.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So with a higher assessed value, if the personal property would go up, with a higher assessed value,
• If my county is at 48% of the assessed value currently, If my county is at 48% of the assessed value
• Assessment that was not appealed.
• But we're talking about individual assessments, though, too, where an individual property owner's assessment
• And they only assessed new... ...to do anything on commercial assessments.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• an assessment was required. an assessment was required.
• . assessment. assessment.
• assessment.
• have an assessment? have an assessment?
• there would be an assessment? there would be an assessment?

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• First, courts assess fines on offenders.
• First, courts assess fines on offenders.
• some fines were not assessed.
• some fines were not assessed.
• However, in cases with no fines assessed, they could have assessed an additional $57,000 to $170,000,

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee I-900 Subcommittee heard JLARC’s annual update on the status of legislative implementation of State Auditor recommendations, followed by two State Auditor performance audits. JLARC staff reported that for the 2024 review period there were three new legislative recommendations and three unresolved older recommendations. They said the legislature did not convene a work group on civil asset forfeiture, and no formal action was taken on two water-use-efficiency recommendations. Two recommendations related to concurrent Medicaid enrollments were addressed in a bill introduced this session, but that bill was not adopted. The first audit examined how Washington can ensure climate-resilient electricity infrastructure. The State Auditor found the state has opportunities to better adapt new energy infrastructure by using more site-specific climate information, broader collaboration, and vulnerability assessments. The report recommended expanding climate analyses through the University of Washington Climate Impacts Group if funding is available, using forecasted information in DNR wildfire maps, designating a non-regulatory office to coordinate siting and conflict resolution, and expanding vulnerability assessments in Ecology and Commerce processes. Agency witnesses generally agreed resilience is important but emphasized existing efforts, the need to avoid duplicative requirements, the importance of affordability and efficiency, and the role of current forums such as the Clean Energy Siting Council and SEPA processes. The second audit reviewed fines for human trafficking and related sexual exploitation crimes. Auditors found courts assessed fines inconsistently, collection rates varied, some revenues were sent to the wrong local government, and some jurisdictions did not use the money as required for enforcement, prevention, or survivor services. The audit recommended courts work with prosecutors to improve awareness of mandatory fines, and that King and Pierce County improve coding, templates, and tracking so revenues are routed and used correctly. King County testified that it appreciated the audit and described its existing prevention and survivor-support work. The committee took no votes or formal actions and adjourned after the presentations and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• and why we assessed and how the assessment process works.
• The board unanimously agreed we needed to assess.
• They had some of, some of the assessment was split, was assessed at one rate and some at another, depending
• And we ended up assessing twice, because the first one, we ran out of money, and so we had to assess
• I think your assessment in 2021, 2021.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Fair Plan, focused on the plan’s rapid growth, its financial stability after the January Southern California wildfires, and its role as the insurer of last resort. Fair Plan officials explained that the plan was created in 1968, is a not-for-profit involuntary association of licensed property insurers, and is intended to be a temporary safety net until policyholders can return to the admitted market. They emphasized that the plan is not a state agency or taxpayer-funded, but is regulated by the Department of Insurance and supported by member-company assessments if claims exceed available funds. Victoria Roach and Armand Feliciano said the Fair Plan has grown sharply since 2018 and especially after market pullbacks by major insurers, reaching about 575,000 policies and roughly $600 billion in exposure by spring 2025. They noted that growth is increasingly occurring in lower wildfire-risk areas, where the plan can sometimes be cheaper than the voluntary market, and said this undermines depopulation back into the private market. They also discussed recent policy expansions, including coverage for farms, higher residential and commercial limits, and pending or proposed changes such as AB 290, SB 525, and AB 226, which would add tools like a line of credit and bond access. A major portion of the hearing addressed the January wildfire losses and the plan’s financial response. Fair Plan officials said they assessed member insurers for $1 billion after determining claims and cash flow would exceed available resources, and that the process was approved quickly and paid smoothly, with more than 80% of the assessment collected within 10 days. They also described the reinsurance tower, the plan’s limited surplus, and the need for actuarially sound rates to reduce future reliance on assessments. On claims handling, they said the plan has received over 5,500 claims from the fires, has paid more than $2.9 billion so far, expects total payments near $4 billion, and has focused on advancing payments quickly for total losses and other urgent needs. Members questioned the plan’s solvency, the growth in non-wildfire areas, claim denials, smoke-loss coverage, and how depopulation works. Roach said most closed claims without payment were duplicates rather than denials, and that smoke claims require direct physical loss under the policy, with coverage determined case by case. Public commenters from the California Building Industry Association and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California said the Fair Plan’s growth reflects a weak voluntary market, inadequate rates, and insurer fear of future assessments, and urged support for rate increases and AB 226. The hearing concluded with no vote, but with a commitment from Fair Plan officials to follow up on unanswered questions and continue providing more transparency through public data and website disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was on the lethality assessment that you mentioned.
• It was on the lethality assessment that you mentioned.
• department, if they go out, they do a lethality assessment.
• You mentioned the evidence-based lethality assessment program.
• So we assess and start working with them.

Summary: The committee held a panel discussion on Florida’s domestic violence system, focusing on the roles of the state, the federally designated coalition, direct-service providers, and law enforcement. Members reviewed the history of the system after the dissolution of the former coalition in 2020, the creation of the Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence, DCF’s Office of Domestic Violence, and the current contract structure involving Women in Distress and its subcontractors for hotline and legal services. Panelists also discussed the 2024 lethality assessment law, the workgroup’s conclusion that the evidence-based Maryland tool could not be used because of copyright and cost issues, and the state’s current use of statutory questions instead. DCF and FDLE described the statewide certification and funding framework, including more than $60 million in domestic violence funding for fiscal year 2025-26 and the requirement that law enforcement complete lethality-assessment training by October 1, 2026. Testimony highlighted both collaboration and conflict. Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence and Women in Distress described overlapping training and technical-assistance roles, but disagreed sharply about the quality of their relationship with DCF and whether the current structure is duplicative. DCF said it maintains communication with both the coalition and the centers and emphasized that the coalition is federally required, while the coalition argued that the department has obstructed its work. Women in Distress and Hope Villages stressed direct services, prevention, and the need for more housing, staffing, and funding, especially in rural areas. They also described programs in schools, hospitals, and child welfare settings, and noted that children exposed to domestic violence often need specialized services. Members asked about funding flows, certification, rural coverage, the number of centers, and the lethality assessment rollout. DCF said the 41 certified centers serve all 67 counties and that no new applications have been received in about 15 years. FDLE reported that 46 of roughly 400 law enforcement agencies had completed the lethality-assessment training and attestation, with the statutory deadline still ahead. Panelists said domestic violence appears to be increasing, citing higher hotline demand, shelter occupancy, and local case numbers, while also noting that statewide crime data remains outdated. The discussion ended with calls for better coordination, clearer implementation of statutes, more funding, and possible legislative fixes to improve data collection, training, and service delivery.

Transcript Highlights:

• That comes often in the assessment structure.
• value goes up, that assessment limitation limits how much your assessment goes up, based on whichever
• Here, there is a 10% assessment limitation.
• Centrally assessed property primarily includes railroads that are assessed at a statewide level, and
• You have assessment limitations that limit how your assessed value is able to grow.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Finance and Tax met to hear a staff presentation on Florida property taxes. Staff Director Azar Khan gave an overview of the property tax system, including constitutional limits, January 1 assessment rules, homestead and non-homestead residential property, commercial and agricultural classifications, tangible personal property, and centrally assessed property. The presentation highlighted major exemptions and assessment caps, such as the homestead exemptions, Save Our Homes, the 10% cap for non-homestead property, and favorable treatment for agricultural/classified use land. It also reviewed long-term growth in just value and taxable value statewide, along with declining millage rates over time as taxable values have risen. Members then discussed the possibility of eliminating property taxes and the fiscal consequences of doing so. Senator Jones asked about the impact on local governments and referenced estimates that replacing property tax revenue could require roughly $43 billion; staff responded that current levied amounts are in the ballpark of more than $30 billion for non-school levies and more than $20 billion for school levies, but that the exact impact would depend on county and district budgets and collections. Senators Bernard, Passidomo, Gates, and others emphasized the need for more data on alternative revenue sources, such as sales tax increases or other combinations, and for input from counties and cities before considering broad tax changes. Chair Avila explained the presentation was intended to give members a foundation before property tax proposals are heard in committee, noting that several bills had already been filed involving homestead and tangible personal property. No bills were voted on, and no formal action was taken beyond the informational presentation. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• assessments that needed to be collected. assessments that needed to be collected.
• yet would be to avoid assessments yet would be to avoid assessments altogether<01:09:04.640>
• non-assessible risk pool, we have non-assessible risk pool, we have something<01:34:25.120> called
• Uh but that return of assessment.
• expecting that assessment that year. expecting that assessment that year.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We had a $1.4 billion emergency assessment.
• The amount of the assessment was scheduled to be 1.4% over 10 years.
• We don't want to have to levy assessments, but we try and avoid that.
• We don't want to have to levy assessments, but we try and avoid that.
• from an assessment for these 2024 storms.

Summary: The Insurance and Banking Subcommittee received a lengthy presentation from Citizens Property Insurance Corporation CEO Tim Serio, with Insurance Commissioner Michael Yaworski also answering questions. Serio reviewed Citizens’ role as Florida’s insurer of last resort, its statutory funding structure, eligibility rules, depopulation program, reinsurance obligations, and the surcharge/emergency assessment mechanisms that can be used if Citizens runs a deficit. He emphasized that recent legislative reforms, combined with lower litigation and improved market conditions, have helped the private market recover and reduced Citizens’ policy count from a peak of about 1.41 million in 2023 to 936,182 at the end of 2024, with a projected drop to about 771,000 by the end of 2025. He also said the reforms reduced Citizens’ rate need and helped avoid an emergency assessment after the 2024 storms. Members asked about Citizens’ rate increases, why Citizens still seeks higher rates despite lower litigation, how the 20% eligibility threshold works, whether Citizens should be wind-only, and whether the state or federal government could help with deficits. Serio explained that Citizens is still charging below actuarially sound rates in most areas, that rate filings reflect reduced litigation and lower reinsurance exposure, and that assessments on all Florida property policyholders are the reason Citizens tries to build surplus and depopulate. He said the depopulation program is working better than in the past, with less than 2% of takeout policies returning to Citizens, and that the Office of Insurance Regulation has been vetting takeout companies more carefully. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on claims handling after Debby, Helene, and Milton, including flood-versus-wind disputes and Citizens’ use of the Division of Administrative Hearings for some claim disputes. Serio said Citizens had received 76,625 claims from the three storms and had paid nearly $823 million in indemnity and expenses as of January 7, 2025. He said many closed-without-payment claims were either below deductible, withdrawn, duplicate, or flood-only, and that Citizens had asked its internal audit function to independently review the claims data and denials. He also described Citizens’ storm outreach, catastrophe response centers, managed-repair program, and claim review process, and said the corporation remains focused on paying valid claims while minimizing the risk of assessments on the broader Florida market.

Transcript Highlights:

• It was on the lethality assessment that you mentioned.
• "So there's, you mean, when do we do a lethality assessment?" "Yes."
• department, if they go out, they do a lethality assessment.
• You mentioned the evidence-based lethality assessment program.
• So we assess and start working with them.

Summary: The committee held a panel discussion on Florida’s domestic violence system, focusing on how state and federally funded services are coordinated, the role of the Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence (FPEDV), the Florida Domestic Violence Collaborative, DCF, and certified domestic violence centers. Members reviewed the post-2020 restructuring after the dissolution of FCADV, the current hotline, legal services, training, and technical assistance contracts, and the Legislature’s recent work on lethality assessments under SB 1224. Panelists also described prevention, shelter, counseling, child advocacy, and legal support services, along with the statewide network of 41 certified centers serving all 67 counties. Testimony highlighted both collaboration and tension. FPEDV and Women in Distress described overlapping training and technical assistance roles, but FPEDV said its relationship with DCF has been difficult and at times obstructive, while DCF said communication and coordination are ongoing. Women in Distress and other providers emphasized the importance of direct services, the statewide hotline, injunction assistance, child welfare co-located advocates, and prevention programs. Several members asked about funding flows, certification, and whether the current structure is sufficient for rural counties; witnesses said federal FVPSA funds are formula-based, DCF contracts directly with centers, and rural programs face staffing and fundraising challenges that limit beds and services. A major portion of the discussion centered on the lethality assessment work group and implementation of the new statewide tool. FDLE explained that the work group concluded the Maryland model was copyrighted and costly to replicate exactly, so Florida adopted a statutory assessment that is not evidence-based in the same way, with training available online and 46 of about 400 law enforcement agencies having completed it so far. Senators raised concerns about multiple assessments, redacted police reports, and whether the tool will be useful without better coordination and data collection. Witnesses also discussed rising domestic violence, teen dating violence, and strangulation cases, with providers reporting increased demand, full shelters, and greater use of hotels and mobile crisis responses. No formal votes or actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• assessed valuation. assessed valuation.
• . assessments. assessments.
• So they had two assessments. Correct. So they had two assessments.
• prepare for that assessment. prepare for that assessment.
• assessment?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• assessing at full fair market value.
• the dirt is assessed.
• the property assessments of a property that doesn't sell, the U.S.
• Let's say you got 50% of your assessment up to 100,000, then you got 20% of the assessment between 100
• to contest assessments.

Summary: The Committee on Finance and Tax met with a quorum present and heard a presentation from the Property Appraisers Association of Florida on ad valorem valuation, exemptions, and the property tax process. Lauren Levy reviewed the legal and historical framework of Florida property taxation, including Save Our Homes, the 10% cap on non-homestead assessments, portability, tangible personal property exemptions, TRIM notices, and the distinction between taxable value and millage rates. He emphasized that property appraisers are independent constitutional officers who assess just value, administer exemptions, and are overseen by the Department of Revenue, with values and exemptions generally determined as of January 1 and subject to challenge through the Value Adjustment Board or circuit court. Mike Twitty described the mass appraisal process in Pinellas County, explaining how property appraisers value large numbers of parcels using the same core approaches as fee appraisals but with statistical testing, field reviews, aerial imagery, and technology. He discussed the importance of budget, staffing, and the January 1 valuation date, and noted that recent hurricanes caused significant damage, increased petitions, and required new procedures to help property owners with value reductions and FEMA-related issues. Paul Polk focused on Department of Revenue oversight, explaining sales ratio studies, uniformity measures such as COD and PRD, time adjustments, sales qualification reviews, and in-depth studies that can lead to corrective action if assessment standards are not met. He also noted that the Department reviews property appraiser budgets to preserve independence from county pressure. Senators asked about the supersized homestead concept, DOR review and rejection standards, value trends, and the impact of storms and new construction on taxable value. Twitty and Polk said value growth has been driven by a mix of new construction, market appreciation, cap resets, and storm-related adjustments, while noting that some counties saw market value decline even as taxable value rose. They also said some property tax relief proposals would be easier to implement than others depending on how local tax bills are structured, especially where law enforcement millage is separately identified. No votes were taken on legislation, and the committee adjourned after the presentation.