Transcript Highlights:

• . contracts. contracts.
• contract. No. contract. No.
• for this contract. for this contract.
• Now, contract uh contract 22.
• Uh are there any other questions on contract<01:02:23.080> 26? contract 26? contract 26?

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved a motion and then deferred a large batch of 246 contracts totaling about $187.8 million until the April 2026 meeting. It then moved through the agenda and reviewed several pulled items, beginning with four Attorney General contingent-fee contracts. Committee members questioned why the contracts were new, what the $20 million maximums meant, and how the fees would work; the AG’s office explained they were new awards from a September RFP, that the $20 million was an outside estimate tied to a full recovery, and that one contract would require a $380 million recovery to pay out the maximum. The committee voted to consider those contracts reviewed without objection. The Department of Highways then explained an “alternative delivery support” contract, describing it as a procurement method different from the usual design-bid-build model and noting it can help with innovation, speed, timeliness, or cost reduction. After that explanation, the committee again voted to consider the contract reviewed without objection. The Kentucky Horse Park/Kentucky Horse Racing and Gaming Corporation presented eight legal services contracts; members focused on differing hourly rates and retroactive approval. The corporation said it had selected four firms through an RFP to maintain flexibility and avoid conflicts, would use in-house counsel first, and did not expect to use the maximum rates. Senator Thomas argued the committee’s statutory hourly rate cap is outdated and should be revisited. The committee then approved the contracts. One Transportation Office of the Secretary contract was deferred to the April meeting, consistent with the agency’s prior request. The committee then reviewed Cabinet for Health and Family Services items from the Department of Community Based Services: three contract amendments and one memorandum of agreement. Members asked about funding sources, service outcomes, and whether the programs reduce future need; the agency said one amendment was a $55,000 increase offset by reductions elsewhere, that the total contract amount with the agency did not change, and that follow-up data show over 90% of children remain in the home after services. The committee approved those items. Finally, the committee reviewed a LIHEAP contract amendment from the Division of Family Support, which the agency said used federal funds, not state general funds, to add newly appropriated federal money for low-income home energy assistance and crisis heating support. Members asked about future funding and were told that continuation depends on Congress. The committee approved that item. It then began reviewing Behavioral Health, Developmental and Intellectual Disabilities memoranda of agreement tied to Kentucky Correctional Psychiatric Center staffing; members asked for a count of personnel, and the agency said it would provide that information, after which the discussion continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have two contracts today. First contract is with WPI.
• We have one contract today. This is a have one contract today.
• Contract value, $350,104.
• We have two contracts. They're with the same law firm. These are two new contracts.
• These are two new contracts.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There are eight contracts.
• There are eight contracts.
• This is the last contract.
• Chair, that is all of M4 out-of-state contracts. It's all of M4 out-of-state contracts.
• It looks like it's a contracted amount that's fairly standard, but when does this actual contract end

Summary: The PEER Review Subcommittee met to consider a large agenda of budget, appropriation, transfer, and contract items. Members approved temporary appropriation requests for several agencies, including the Auditor of State, Department of Education, and Labor and Licensing; ARPA return requests from Workforce Services; Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act requests for State Police and Agriculture; restricted reserve transfers for teacher scholarships, school facilities, and economic stimulus; a Commerce reallocation of positions and spending authority; cash fund, budget classification, overtime, and pay plan requests; and 17 methods of finance items for universities and other agencies. Most items were approved without objection after brief explanations from staff and agencies. Several items drew questions and were held or discussed further. A Department of Human Services discretionary grant package for the RSVP program was held over after Senator Irvin raised concerns about whether the grants were an effective use of state general revenue and asked for more information on administration costs and program operations. In the contracts section, Representative Richardson questioned a DHS sole-source contract with EMS Link for document management software and a DHS contract with Presidio; the EMS Link item was held for additional answers, while the Presidio item was clarified as not sole-source and was allowed to proceed. Members also asked for more information on a Department of Education mental health referral contract with Care Solace, which officials said is a statewide concierge/referral service connecting students to Arkansas providers and telehealth options. The committee also reviewed monthly reports, including the Medicaid Trust Fund. DHS and DFA officials said the fund was currently sufficient to finish the fiscal year, though it was being drawn down and would likely require a $100 million transfer from restricted reserves in FY27, with another $100 million set aside in the governor’s budget as a backstop. Members discussed the need to define a minimum reserve level and to better account for ongoing Medicaid costs in the budget. The meeting ended with no further business and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So instead of contracting with a private... security contractor, they could effectively contract with
• If an entity wishes to contract for police services, the contract has to be approved or may be denied
• Right now, who actually writes the contract? The county attorney. Ernie writes the contract.
• What I like about the bill is it doesn't say you shall contract, it says you may contract.
• has a contract with Haltom City.

Bills: HB336, HB554, HB849, HB 1033, HB1338, HB 1246

Keywords: law enforcement, sheriff, constable, contracts, county governance, HB 554, fireworks, Juneteenth, Juneteenth holiday, retail fireworks permit, Texas Occupations Code, Local Government Code, county commissioners court, drought conditions, Texas A&M Forest Service, fire safety, holiday sales, seasonal fireworks sales, Fourth of July, Independence Day

Transcript Highlights:

• We're in contracts review. K-1.
• Service contract.
• The service contract.
• , not an intergovernmental contract.
• These are in-state contracts. There are 22 contracts.

Summary: The committee heard a series of appropriation requests and contract reviews across multiple sections. In Section B, members approved temporary appropriations for the Court of Appeals, Commerce/Aeronautics, and Insurance-related payments and refunds. Section C ARPA requests from DHS were approved to return unused federal funds. Section D infrastructure-related appropriations, including wildfire preparedness, broadband BEAD funding, forestry support, recycling, and oil and gas sample preservation, were approved after questions about broadband audit controls and performance safeguards. Section E DHS reallocations were approved, including large transfers within Medical Services from hospital medical to private and public nursing home lines, along with smaller transfers for children and family services, developmental disabilities, and youth services; members asked about the source and purpose of the medical services transfer. Sections F and G were reviewed, covering cash fund requests, federal grants, and miscellaneous grants, including community college storm repairs, corrections commissary and maintenance, 911 enhancements, maternal health, disability determinations, state police equipment, digital newspaper archiving, and CDL data improvements. In Section H, the committee reviewed pay plan appropriations and performance fund transfers tied to the new Class and Comp pay plan. Section I reviewed three methods of finance for UA Little Rock, UAMS, and the University of Arkansas system. In Section J, the committee reviewed discretionary grants, including a $1.4 million HIV services grant and nine tobacco prevention subgrants through UAPB. Members questioned the effectiveness, metrics, and addresses of some tobacco-cessation arts-based grantees, especially Arts Absolutely Inc.; after discussion, Representative Kavanaugh moved to expunge the vote on J2 and refer it back for review at a later ALC meeting, and that motion passed. J3, a Department of Energy and Environment grant for propane safety training and e-waste recycling services, was then reviewed. The committee also reviewed contracts in Section K. K-1 ratified emergency management nuclear planning work performed during a transition between agencies. K-2 construction contracts included architectural and engineering services for corrections, National Park College signage, a Razorback Road parking facility, and UAMS cyclotron installation. K-3 intergovernmental contracts covered health, education, autism waiver, stroke, newborn screening, Medicaid evidence review, and radiation testing services. K-4 out-of-state contracts included staffing, IT, tobacco prevention, audit, marketing, planetarium, recruitment, and janitorial services; Senator Irvin noted one contract appeared to belong in the out-of-state list rather than intergovernmental. K-5 in-state contracts covered staffing, cleaning, re-entry and treatment services, foster care and disability services, hearing officers, asbestos abatement, campus IT support, and janitorial work. The meeting ended after a brief personal update from Senator Irvin about tornado damage in Stone County and thanks to members for their concern, followed by adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• the contract. the contract.
• through contract review. through contract review.
• <00:18:49.240> review any contract review any contract review uh<00:18:51.280> contract
• c> comes uh contract, any contract that comes uh contract, any contract that comes through<00:18:
• sole-source contract. sole-source contract.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Teams contract, all of this is Teams contract. I understand that.
• >> Contracts are up to what they are offered individually as a contract.
• the end of their contract. the end of their contract.
• original team's contract? original team's contract?
• It would be their<00:47:26.720> contract. their contract. their contract.

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• There are eight contracts.
• This is the last contract.
• DHS with UAMS. amends an existing contract for the poison 13, this is the last contract, DHS with UAMS
• This is an original contract.
• It looks like it's a contracted amount that's fairly standard, but when does this actual contract end

Summary: The PEER Review Subcommittee met to consider a large agenda of appropriation, transfer, contract, and other review items. Members approved temporary appropriation requests in Sections B through F, including funding for prosecuting attorneys, education-related adjustments, school operating needs, labor licensing divisions, ARPA fund returns from Workforce Services, IIJA grants for state police CDL implementation and a forestry-related county grant, reserve fund transfers for teacher scholarships, school facilities, and economic development, and a Commerce reallocation tied to organizational realignment. Cash fund requests in Section G and budget classification transfers in Section H were also reviewed, along with pay plan requests in Section I, overtime requests in Section J, and multiple methods of finance in Section K. The committee also reviewed discretionary grants in Section L, including agriculture promotion board grants and DHS aging/adult behavioral health grants, plus RFQs, construction contracts, intergovernmental contracts, and out-of-state contracts in Sections M1 through M5. Several items drew questions from members. Workforce Services explained that $225,000 in TANF-related funds would be returned to the federal government because the two-year hold period for uncashed or moved checks had expired. Commerce officials described the $25 million site infrastructure grant program, saying it supports site development, due diligence, and infrastructure build-out at eligible sites of 30 acres or more, including rural communities, with grant agreements and matching requirements providing accountability. DHS and Education officials answered questions about the Care Solace mental health referral contract, saying it is a statewide concierge/referral service that helps schools connect students to Arkansas providers and follow up so students do not fall through the cracks; members asked for more information on provider selection, school-day scheduling, and Arkansas vendor participation. The committee held one item over: the DHS discretionary grant item for the RSVP retired senior volunteer program in L2, after concerns were raised about whether state general revenue was being used effectively and how much administrative overhead the providers retain. Members also questioned several contracts, including a DHS sole-source contract with EMSLink for document management software and a DHS bridge contract with Arkansas Foundation for Medical Care for Medicaid inspections of care reviews; in both cases, agency staff explained the need to avoid service disruption and said follow-up information would be provided. A Department of Corrections reentry center contract was discussed for its recidivism results, and ARDOT retirement-system investment contracts were briefly explained. The meeting ended after a lengthy discussion of the Medicaid Trust Fund balance, with DFA and DHS officials saying the state is expected to finish the fiscal year without exhausting the fund, that a restricted reserve of $100 million is available as a backstop, and that the larger question is what minimum balance should be maintained going forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• It will depend on the contract.
• Let's focus on the contracts.
• So the type A contracts are called life care contracts.
• But the contract is everything because the contract governs most of the disputes that come up.
• It depends on the contract.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission’s fifth meeting focused on consumer protections and resident rights in continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs), with a presentation by Yvonne Choyah of UC Law San Francisco. She described California’s CCRC framework, including entrance fee structures, monthly fee increases, contract types (A, B, and C), disclosure requirements, and regulatory oversight. A major theme was that residents often do not understand the contracts they sign, while providers retain broad discretion over fees, transfers, terminations, and changes to the physical plant. She also emphasized that California’s regulator is understaffed and not well suited to oversee the complex financial and insurance-like aspects of CCRCs, and that resident complaints and litigation can be slow and difficult. Choyah and commission members discussed several consumer-protection issues, including refundable versus repayable-on-resale entrance fees, rising monthly care fees, the decline of life care contracts, and the need for clearer disclosures and better comparative data for prospective residents. She noted that California requires annual disclosure statements, resident bill of rights materials, and some fee-related reporting, but that enforcement and accessibility remain weak. Members raised questions about resident board representation, accreditation, refund requirements, and whether state agencies or resident associations could help explain contracts to consumers before admission. Choyah suggested stronger oversight, more financial expertise in regulation, and better transparency about ownership and fee-setting. The meeting ended with discussion of the commission’s next steps toward its August report. Staff said a draft report would be prepared from the commission’s discussions and circulated for comment before final revisions. The chair also announced staff transitions: Jennifer would be leaving the State House role, and Juliana Fernandez and Vicky Halal would be the main contacts going forward. The commission adjourned after thanking Choyah for her presentation and answering member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• contract list, personal service contract contract list, personal service contract amendment<00:02
• been using contract? been using contract?
• . contract. contract.
• :37:36.960> contract<01:37:37.360> number contract for review is contract number contract
• the contract? the contract?

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the May 12 minutes, then deferred item 285 on the routine personal service contract green list for Western Kentucky University to the July 2026 meeting. It also noted that several deferred university contracts had been withdrawn by the institutions, and then approved the remaining agenda items without objection, including personal service contracts, amendments, memoranda of agreement, Kentucky Entertainment incentive agreements, deferred items, and corrections, except for items pulled for further review. The main pulled item was a Kentucky Administrative Office of the Courts contract supporting Fayette District Court’s juvenile treatment court through Fayette County Public Schools. Court officials explained that the program, created under Supreme Court rules in 2022, serves court-connected juveniles with mental health and related needs, operates at the courthouse, and uses a school-employed program manager funded through a pass-through arrangement with Fayette County Public Schools and the Urban County Government. They said the program has had over 100 referrals, accepted about half, and had at least 25 successful graduates, with 11 high school graduates among participants. Members asked about who pays for drug screens, family involvement, and what counts as successful completion; the officials said the Urban County Government’s Division of Youth Services pays for drug screens and services, and that parents must participate in classes and support services. The committee then approved the contract review, with some members explaining their votes in support and one member emphasizing the committee’s role in reviewing contracts in the public interest. The committee also reviewed two Auditor of Public Accounts contracts. The auditor’s representative said contract 11, with Vantage Point Solutions, will examine the Kentucky Communications Network Authority/Kentucky Wired network for $700,000, well below the $1.5 million appropriated, and that a report is expected before the 2027 regular session. Contract 12 funds a special examination of investment managers used by Kentucky’s retirement systems, prompted by a Legislative Oversight and Investigations request to assess whether investments tied to ESG factors are consistent with fiduciary duties; the representative said the retirement systems have been cooperative and that findings are expected on a similar timeline, with some flexibility built into the deadline. After questions about the Texas litigation referenced in the explanation, the committee approved both auditor contracts without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we had to do a<00:30:00.240> contract. a contract. a contract.
• contract, you know, compared to contract contract, you know, compared to contract last<01:02:38.400
• Um contracts.
• review the contract the contracts review the contract reviewed<01:16:01.120> without<01:16:01.360
• . contracts. contracts.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first established a quorum, approved the minutes from the November 10 meeting, and then approved a large agenda of contracts and related items, with the total agenda amount stated as $359,638,393.88. Most items were approved without objection, but two contracts were pulled for discussion: attorney general panel counsel contingency fee contracts and a Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission personal services contract. For the attorney general’s office, Chris Lewis explained that the contracts were panel counsel contingency fee agreements, with 14 qualified awards from 16 applicants. He said the contracts were contingency-based, so no money would be paid unless cases were successful, and that the fee structure worked out to roughly 5% under the statutory waterfall. Senators asked about the size of the contracts, whether the terms were uniform, why no Kentucky firms were among the awardees, and how the public should understand the large dollar figures. Lewis said one Kentucky firm applied but was disqualified for a late submission, other Kentucky firms had inquired but did not apply, and local firms could still work with national firms on cases. The committee then approved the contracts. The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission contract drew more extensive questioning. Commission representatives said they had previously had a contract disapproved because the proper process was not followed, so they used an RFI process posted on the state and commission websites for at least three weeks. They received one applicant, a Kentucky firm, and set the rate at $125 per hour. Members questioned whether the commission was acting beyond its ethics mission, whether staff were helping draft complaints against legislators, and whether the commission was taking on a prosecutorial or human-resources role. The commission said its role is limited to enforcing the legislative code of ethics, providing advisory guidance, and following the formal complaint process; it does not pursue matters outside that code. Members also raised concerns about the earlier procurement misstep and the commission’s credibility, and the commission apologized, said it had corrected the process, and pledged to comply going forward. The committee then approved the contract.

Transcript Highlights:

• They've got them contracted with the same people we could be direct contracting with, right?
• Exclusive use contracts.
• contracts.
• With, with contracting.
• If the purchase of a contract.

Transcript Highlights:

• Contract with the federal government on a call when needed contract and because the state of Washington
• The contract and everything that everything that we pushed for the contract and wasn't there and that
• contracts, not exclusive use contracts because they do start using, when the fires occur, they start
• We would ship to primarily state-owned exclusive use contract and backfill with the federal contract.
• We felt like it was probably a contract had been pulled out and was not for contracting.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're in contracts review. K-1.
• , not an intergovernmental contract.
• These are in-state contracts. There's 22 contracts.
• It's a new contract for temporary staffing.
• Contract number 11: DHS with ARVAC.

Summary: The committee considered and approved several temporary appropriation requests in Section B, including spending authority for the Court of Appeals to pay appointed counsel in criminal appeals, Commerce/Aeronautics airport and aviation grants, and Insurance Department items for workers’ compensation benefits and premium tax refunds. It also approved ARPA-related requests in Section C to return unused federal funds from DHS aging, mental health, substance abuse, and Older Americans Act grants. In Section D, the committee reviewed and approved Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act requests, including Agriculture grants for wildfire preparedness and forestry capacity, a large Commerce broadband BEAD request, environmental recycling-related reallocations, and Oil and Gas Commission grants for facility repairs and sample preservation. Members questioned the broadband program’s audit process and performance safeguards; the State Broadband Director said the funds are federal, subject to audits, and payments are released only after engineering certification of completed work. The committee also approved DHS reallocations in Section E, including major transfers within Medical Services from hospital medical appropriations to private and public nursing home lines, as well as transfers for children and family services, developmental disabilities, and youth services. The committee then reviewed cash fund requests, miscellaneous federal grants, pay plan and performance fund transfers, methods of finance, and a large set of contracts. A Northwest Arkansas Community College official explained storm-damage repairs and insurance settlement issues, and DHS explained its hospital medical transfer was moving excess appropriation rather than cash. Members also questioned several UAPB tobacco prevention subgrants, especially arts-based outreach, and asked for more data on effectiveness; the committee later voted to expunge and re-refer the J-2 item for further review at a later ALC meeting. Additional discussion covered a DEQ grant to Free Geek of Arkansas for e-waste recycling, a UAPB tobacco program, and various contracts for universities, DHS services, corrections, and public safety. The meeting ended with reports filed for information and a brief member comment thanking others for concern after a tornado in Stone County; no one was injured.

Transcript Highlights:

• in state contracts.
• under the Public Contract Code and prohibited that contract from going forward.
• of a contract.
• of a contract.
• of a contract.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• a motion to consider this contract a motion to consider this contract reviewed?
• . contract. contract.
• . contract. contract.
• these contracts. these contracts.
• Contract moves forward.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first approved the August 12 minutes and then handled a large agenda of 355 contracts totaling about $278.7 million. It agreed to defer three Office of Energy Policy items to the October 2025 meeting and reviewed a deferred Kentucky Educational Television contract without objection. The main substantive discussion centered on two University of Louisville legal services PSC amendments and a Seven Counties Services MOA item. For the University of Louisville items, members questioned a large increase in hourly rates and the scope of the legal services, especially complex litigation work and a Colorado estate matter. University officials said the contracts followed an RFP, involved specialized litigation, included local counsel where required, and were expected to be offset by savings in other PSCs and by a potential financial recovery in the Colorado matter. The committee also discussed whether the $125 hourly rate was a statutory requirement or committee policy; the chair later said staff would verify whether it was an executive-branch regulation or statutory rate. Both University of Louisville items were ultimately approved, though Senator Meredith voted no on one and Senator Douglas explained his support while urging future adjustments and more information sharing. The Seven Counties Services contract drew questions about how the $18.7 million would be used and whether federal changes could affect future funding. Cabinet officials described 988 crisis response, outpatient mental health and substance use treatment, prevention, recovery, and harm-reduction services, and said they were monitoring federal developments daily. Representative Petrie and Senator Thomas pressed the cabinet on the long-running Seven Counties bankruptcy and the need to push for resolution; officials said the matter was pending on a motion for reconsideration and that they would try to help move it along. The contract was approved. At the end of the meeting, the committee approved the remaining agenda items as reviewed without objection, but Senator Meredith voted no on the blanket approval motion because of numerous retroactive contract requests and what she said were insufficient explanations such as administrative error or staff being on conference. She said retroactive approvals should be rare and supported stronger internal controls.

Transcript Highlights:

• We just have one contract today.
• We have seven contracts today, one... We have contracts today, um, one legal.
• Uh, we have three contracts on your agenda today: two renewals and one new contract.
• We have one contract; this is a contract with the psychiatrist for evaluation services.
• All right, moving on to Legal contracts' office. Any questions on the contracts? One.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The WSP contract is also for up to $12 million, and it's a contingency contract for response equipment
• we contracted out before.
• It's a new contract posted to the database. The date of the contract is 5/19.
• So you contract out those clinics? ...year. So you contract out those clinics to outside providers?
• We have two contracts for... We have two contracts for review today.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And it and it's a statewide contract.<00:47:26.319> Correct. contract. Correct. contract.
• initial contract, and we're not even at 40% of that contract.
• So, so the contract is not the contract.
• These are design services contracts, not construction contracts.
• So the contract is not the contract.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Government Contracts Committee met with a quorum and approved the July 8 minutes. It then deferred several items from the July agenda, including a Kentucky Education Television contract because the vendor was not yet registered with the Secretary of State, and a University of Louisville contract at the university’s request. The committee also deferred a behavioral health memorandum of agreement and later a Department of Community Based Services contract after questions were raised about the scope of services and the need for additional information. The most extensive discussion involved the Seven Counties Services contract with the Department for Behavioral Health, Developmental, and Intellectual Disabilities. Committee members questioned why the state continues to contract with Seven Counties despite its bankruptcy and pension-related liabilities, how the funding split was determined, whether the services are statutorily required, and whether the state or another provider could deliver the services more efficiently. Agency representatives said Seven Counties is the sole provider of core community mental health services in its region, serves about 24,500 people, and that service needs and acuity remain high even as the number served has declined. A cabinet attorney said the bankruptcy dispute is ongoing and involves roughly $20 million in contested retirement contributions, though members suggested the amount may be higher. Members also raised broader concerns about whether local governments, especially Metro Louisville, should contribute more toward services tied to social determinants of health, and whether the contract includes services beyond what statute requires. The committee requested additional information on the contract scope and possible offsets or recovery of unfunded liabilities, and then voted to defer the Seven Counties contract to the next meeting. The committee also heard a separate DCBS presentation on the Youth Villages Intercept program, where staff explained it was selected because it is an approved evidence-based Family First prevention service, provides intensive in-home and foster care stabilization services, and is headquartered in Tennessee but operates across Kentucky; members asked for clarification on Medicaid billing and additional funding needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• > Contracting<01:13:15.920> there's familiar with Contracting there's familiar with Contracting
• Is it Medicaid contracts?
• Is it Medicaid contracts?
• contracts.
• <01:43:23.119> cont contract not be allowed to contract cont contract not be allowed to contract

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Finance Committee held a hearing on House Bill 619, which would appropriate $1 million to the Solid Waste Management Fund for matching grants to municipalities and businesses for waste diversion projects, with 50% of the money prioritized for food waste diversion. Representative Karen Ebel, the sponsor, said the fund would help New Hampshire meet its solid waste diversion goals, preserve landfill capacity, and support composting, recycling, and related local business activity. She cited New London’s composting program as an example, saying 172 families participated and 32 tons of food waste were diverted in 2024, reducing tipping and trucking costs. Committee members asked about possible alternative funding sources, including a surcharge on landfill tipping fees. Ebel said many other states use such surcharges to fund recycling and solid waste programs, while New Hampshire relies on general funds. She also said the current fund balance was about $900,000 because some money had been used for staffing, and that the grant program was still in rulemaking. Questions also focused on how household composting works and whether municipalities could generate revenue from compost; Ebel said participation is optional, most programs use buckets and transfer stations, and the main benefit is cost savings from reduced disposal rather than compost sales. Testimony in support came from the New Hampshire Municipal Association and the Northeast Resource Recovery Association. Both said municipalities are interested in food waste diversion and composting, that these programs can reduce long-term disposal costs and property tax pressure, and that there is growing demand for technical assistance and grant support. The Northeast Resource Recovery Association said food waste makes up about 24% of municipal and business waste, that fewer than two dozen communities and fewer than two dozen businesses currently offer such services, and that a City of Lebanon pilot program saw about 30% savings by composting on site. The Department of Environmental Services said it was not taking a position but is working on rulemaking for the grant program and expects strong interest from municipalities, private composters, farmers, and anaerobic digester operators. No vote or final action was taken at the hearing.