Transcript Highlights:

• The next set of lines, so that has an adjusted cost estimate.
• Again, this is not an all-in cost for this initiative. This is just year one.
• The all-in cost is going to be significantly more.
• It comes at a cost of other constituents that we also care deeply about.
• of what's in their operating budget.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• For dialysis patients, Medicare pays only 80% of the costs.
• at or below the cost of delivering care.
• This time has a cost.
• are operating under reimbursement rates that no longer reflect the cost of delivering high-quality ABA
• Since 2015, Maryland, both lower-cost-of-living states.

Bills: H4353 , H4425 , H4453 , H4623 , H4770 , S2587 , S2737

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Health Care Financing

Keywords: behavioral health, Medicaid, reimbursement rates, healthcare providers, service delivery, accreditation, Medicare, end-stage renal disease, healthcare access, patient coverage, renal failure, MassHealth, asset limit, personal vehicle exemption, vehicle value, healthcare, autism, ABA services, assistive technology, children

Transcript Highlights:

• We've got about $20 million less in our normal operating costs. That's about a 12% reduction.
• We've got about $20 million less in our normal operating costs. That's about a 12% reduction.
• reduced, which is a pretty big expense in some of the operating and administrative costs that some local
• and perhaps one or two one-stop operators instead of 10.
• We need to get below 6 in order for Arkansas not to have to contribute to cost share of the cost of the

Committee: All ALC-HOSPITAL, MEDICAID, & DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES STUDY SUBCOMMITTEE

Transcript Highlights:

• So any delays efficient operation.
• </c> regulatory oversightes with operational regulatory oversightes with operational realities<00:45:
• </c> this going to add um more cost? this going to add um more cost?
• with the low operating cost of a vessel to move people and cargo between coastal communities.
• We do have operators telling us that, you know, they want to operate in that space.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 1588, which would establish a Department of Transportation noise detection program using cameras to enforce noise control laws. DOT supported the measure and said it is already piloting the technology at eight locations, with about 10 sites costing roughly $2 million to $2.5 million to install and operate. The Department of Health said it was willing to work with DOT but noted its current regulations are not designed for vehicular noise sources and that the bill may need clearer standards to be enforceable. Members raised concerns about the lack of a specific decibel threshold and whether the system could accurately identify the source of noise; DOT said the pilot can pinpoint vehicles and that the program would align with existing health standards, but no final number was identified during the hearing. The committee then heard HB 1696, which lowers the minimum age for a commercial driver’s license from 19 to 18 and removes a restriction tied to vehicle category, while requiring DOT rule changes. DOT, the City and County of Honolulu, the Hawaii Transportation Association, Teamsters Local 996, and other stakeholders testified in support. The Hawaii Transportation Association suggested adding a training requirement for drivers ages 18 to 20, proposing at least 320 hours of employer training and recordkeeping. Members sought clarification that the bill would apply to intrastate, not interstate, licensing. For HB 233, the committee considered a measure authorizing DOT to designate airport special district zones statewide to prevent unauthorized access and improve security. DOT and the City and County of Honolulu supported the bill, explaining that defined boundaries would help law enforcement address trespassing, disruptions, fires, theft, harassment, and other incidents around airports and terminals; DOT said commercial airports are ready to implement the proposal, while some general aviation sites would need further work. Members asked about the scope of the boundaries, existing enforcement, and whether the measure would cover state-owned or non-state parcels near airports. The committee also heard HB 2332, which renames the Harbors Division as the Commercial Ports Division and distinguishes “harbor” from “port” in statute. DOT, the Maritime Group, and harbor users supported the bill, saying the change would reduce confusion between commercial cargo/cruise facilities and recreational small boat harbors, and could help with clarity and possibly federal grant competitiveness. Members asked about impacts on small boat harbors and cruise activity, and DOT explained that the bill is aimed at purpose-built commercial ports, not recreational facilities. The committee also took testimony on HB 2283, which clarifies DOT’s consultative role with the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs in setting port pilotage standards and requirements. DOT, DCCA, Matson, the Hawaii Pilots Association, and others supported the measure, saying it would improve coordination and ensure pilot licensing standards reflect operational realities in the harbors. Finally, after a recess, the committee heard HB 2217, which would allow driver’s permits, licenses, and ID cards to include a notation for a non-apparent disability. The Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities opposed the bill as drafted, saying voluntary alternatives such as Smart 911 may be better and that the category is too broad. The Attorney General’s office supported the intent but recommended limiting the notation to medically recognized, specifically defined conditions so agencies can train personnel and avoid confusion or escalation.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think I was talking about the cost vary. I think I was talking about the costs vary.
• a benefit-cost ratio below one.
• For a breakdown, here's the pumping cost, the outlet operating cost per biennium, just for additional
• That operating cost per biennium is just for additional information.
• It's cost. And so it benefits.

Committee: Joint Agriculture and Water Management Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• these marinas, operate these reservoirs, operate these watercraft inspection stations or watercraft
• Another source is base funding for Cal Fire operations.
• There are a number of other state operations money.
• Forest Service about consolidating their operations.
• costs for restoring this program.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those costs are going out.
• Some of those costs related to special ed. Hold up.
• Here are some costs that we can put aside.
• Chair and Representative, all of them support the operations.
• , and lastly, 33% relates to operating expenditures.

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy presentation on the K-12 public school support budget, including how support units, career ladder funding, health insurance, discretionary funding, transportation, facilities, and the Public Education Stabilization Fund (PSIF) work. Legislative Services explained that FY 2026 support units were revised downward, creating a $22.3 million ongoing general fund reduction, and walked through the FY 2027 agency request and governor’s recommendation. The governor recommended no increase for population forecast adjustments, but did recommend some statutory and policy changes, including shifting certain interest earnings to the general fund and reducing funding for some virtual school and IDLA-related items. The agency request also included one-time proposals for a high-needs special education fund and a regional service model for related services. Members asked extensive questions about how career ladder dollars are distributed, how health insurance and discretionary funds interact, why the health insurance increase in the budget differed from current plan estimates, and how facilities money under House Bill 292 is used. There were also questions about the size and use of the Idaho Career Ready Students fund, the maintenance-of-effort implications of special education funding, and whether some special education costs are being used for student housing or other noninstructional expenses. The superintendent and budget staff emphasized that many of the budget lines are formula-driven or statutorily required, that local districts determine actual staffing and spending within those formulas, and that special education costs continue to outpace available funding. Superintendent Debbie Critchfield then framed the budget request around enrollment trends, shifting demographics, and the need for more flexibility in how districts use existing dollars. She highlighted proposed categorical flexibility for some funds, changes to digital content and curriculum distribution, continued literacy gains, growth in career technical education programs funded through Idaho Career Ready Students, and the importance of endowment and Millennium Fund support. She also described the special education proposals as a temporary bridge while the state considers larger formula changes and noted a near $100 million gap between special education spending and funding. She further outlined planned federal waiver requests on assessments and flexibility, and said the department is seeking more state control over testing and reporting requirements. The committee did not take final action on the budget during this portion of the meeting. Members raised concerns about interest transfers from dedicated funds, the complexity of the funding formula, special education accountability, and whether the state should revisit the overall school funding model. Several follow-up data requests were made, including information on health insurance participation, regional special education service needs, and school contingency fund balances.

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, transitions from free or low-cost platforms to a more... ...are paying them.
• without direct input from the affected agencies, resulting in unanticipated costs.
• It ensures agencies can match costs... ...transparency, and good governance.
• It ensures agencies can match costs with value and that taxpayers can trust how funds are managed.
• So by doing this, we're really going to significantly increase the costs if we go down this road.

Bills: HB1662 , HB1683

Committee: House Education

Keywords: education agencies, administrative independence, superintendent, education reform, agency authority, education, school boards, district adjustments, administrative boundaries, educational governance

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, if I could, not the percentage, but the amount that it's costing us.
• You mentioned medical costs and the high-cost inmates; the privates are also experiencing increased medical
• costs because of medical care for inmates.
• Delaying design increases construction costs. Delaying design increases construction costs.
• This bill creates more red tape, more cost for ADOA.

Bills: SB1001 , SB1035 , SB1056 , SB1065 , SB1138 , SB1161 , SB1204 , SB1207 , SB1248 , SB1274 , SB1284 , SCM1002 , SCM1006 , SCR1020

Committee: Senate Appropriations, Transportation and Technology

Keywords: appropriation, economic security, blind individuals, older adults, state funding, Arizona Department of Corrections, ADC, corrections, prison, jail, correctional officers, prison guards, staffing, retention, salary increase, pay raise, wage increase, general fund, state budget, private prisons

Transcript Highlights:

• to identify areas where we can cut costs.
• Currently, the commissary is operated by a private vendor, but we believe we can manage it more cost-effectively
• Having said that, can you just remind me what the cost of private versus state-operated prisons is?
• than privately operated ones.
• , legal fees, and operational needs.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• About the same cost, if not actually less costly.
• We have large animal feeding operations.
• Within this total are the construction costs, which are being provided by Mortensen, NDIT costs, which
• This includes costs such as the site costs, professional fees for the architect, owner's rep, special
• And our design to date, our scope cost estimate Our design to date, our scope cost estimations are running

Summary: The committee first approved the December 10 minutes and then received a DEQ base budget summary and agency overview. DEQ staff explained that the agency is largely federally and special funded, with major ongoing costs in salaries, operating expenses, grants, and continuing appropriations. Director Dave Glatt and accounting director Beth Jacobson highlighted core programs, the move to a new chemistry laboratory, the new state fuel inspection program, wastewater-related funding from HB 1577, and implementation of SB 2267 for on-site wastewater rules. They also noted the agency’s spending patterns, possible federal EPA cuts, and the likelihood of some fee adjustments or program changes if federal support declines. Members asked about DEQ’s travel, field offices, future staffing, and how the agency would respond to reduced federal regulation. DEQ said most staff are based in Bismarck, with field offices in Fargo, Sawyer, and Gwinner, and that travel is driven by inspections and spill response. Glatt said the agency would continue to rely on science and law, and that any future federal retrenchment could mean more state responsibility but likely not a wholesale increase in FTEs. The committee also discussed a feedlot enforcement case in the Minot area, with DEQ explaining its role in ensuring compliance, permitting, and animal-waste management standards. The Department of Health and Human Services then presented on FTE block grant reporting, TANF balances, child care transfers, and the Rural Health Transformation Program. Donna Ockland explained that no line-item transfers had occurred yet for the new rural health work, but about 33 positions were planned and some current staff time could be reimbursed through approved cost allocation. HHS also reviewed TANF’s frozen eligibility and block grant structure, the transfer of up to 30% of TANF funds to child care, and recent program changes that increased benefits and raised the income limit. Staff said the department is using TANF more strategically to support child care and other allowable uses, while still carrying over unused funds as many states do. Finally, Pat and HHS staff gave an update on the Rural Health Transformation Program, saying the first funding opportunity was being posted and that the state is on track to obligate the federal funds within the required timeline. They described priorities such as workforce retention, preceptor development, technical assistance for critical access hospitals, community wellness projects, and ambulance upgrades. Members asked about rural versus urban eligibility, immigrant recruitment, evaluation of year-two funding, and how the program would address varied local workforce needs. The meeting then shifted to an Office of Management and Budget update on the new State Hospital project, where Lindsay Ashley reported continued construction progress, updated cost information, and selected alternates, with photos and details showing work underway in multiple building sections.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:08.480><c> and</c> This bill empowers transit operators and This bill empowers transit operators
• Um and we've how we want it to operate.
• of the money and up to $29 subsidies and what it's costing us.
• </c> entity that might incur some costs entity that might incur some costs associated<00:13:45.600><c
• Um, I haven't heard from transit operators that this is something that's needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• operating under 420R Entities operating under 420R are<00:07:19.560><c> exempt</c><00:07:19.919><c>
• </c> before beginning operations. before beginning operations.
• Would it lead to more costs?
• the average statewide cost.
• </c> special ed costs at the state expense. special ed costs at the state expense.

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• We are able to operate as a subcommittee, so we won't move on minutes yet.
• So, with that, we can operate as a... Subcommittee, correct?
• Costs, right? Labor costs are high. Everything's high. Interest rates are high.
• They don't have a cost-benefit analysis.
• What they don't have at this point is a cost-benefit analysis.

Committee: House Revenue Stabilization & Tax Policy Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• Transportation is the second-highest cost behind housing.
• Transportation is the second-largest household cost outside of housing in our state.
• These bikes do not have fully operable pedals.
• WSDOT says there are nonzero but indeterminate costs to implement this, and the costs associated with
• collecting tolls, like credit card fees and pay-by-mail costs, would be reduced.

Summary: The Transportation Committee held public hearings on three bills. HB 2307 would update the commute trip reduction program by removing the current 6 a.m. to 9 a.m. arrival-time requirement from key definitions, so more employers and shift workers could qualify for CTR benefits. The bill sponsor and several supporters, including Microsoft, transit and transportation nonprofits, local transportation management groups, and city representatives, said the change would modernize the program, improve equity, reduce congestion, and help workers with transportation costs. No one testified in opposition. HB 2374 would distinguish electric-assisted bicycles from higher-powered electric motorcycles, clarify labeling and equipment rules, and direct DOL to convene a work group on enforcement and consumer protection. The sponsor and many supporters, including cities, trail and park organizations, Washington Bikes, and several students, said the bill would address unsafe high-powered vehicles being marketed as e-bikes, especially those used by younger riders, while preserving access to true e-bikes. Some testifiers asked for additional work group members and suggested civil enforcement options for underage riders. HB 2379 would require WSDOT to suspend tolling on facilities that serve as evacuation routes during emergencies such as wildfires or levee breaches. The sponsor said the bill was prompted by constituents facing evacuation while tolls were still being charged; staff noted the fiscal impact would be indeterminate and could reduce toll revenue during suspensions. After the hearings, the committee took executive action on two bills. It adopted proposed substitute H-2771 for HB 1823, which cleans up Transportation Improvement Board provisions and removes obsolete language while retaining remaining bond authority. It also passed HB 2111, which directs interest earned from toll revenues for the Interstate Bridge project to be credited to that project. Both actions were approved by voice vote, 27-0, with two members excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• There is a reasonableness that's expected, both time and cost.
• Costs that would go through what it actually cost the district.
• There would not be any cost to distribute at that point.
• There's no longer that entity to be able to take on that cost.
• I'm just talking about flat rate cost in general.

Committee: House Utilities

Summary: The Utilities Committee met with a quorum and first took up House Bill 2807, with a substitute ending in .03C. Representative Herbert explained that the substitute was intended to match the Senate version, add battery energy storage to the renewable standard, clarify that the nuclear provision applies to new, not existing, nuclear generation, and create nuclear energy credits to help track generation for the PSC. Members asked about how the credits would work, whether they could involve out-of-state generation, and how the bill would affect Missouri jobs and in-state generation. The committee adopted the substitute and then voted the House Committee Substitute for HB 2807 do pass by a roll call vote of 18 ayes and 1 no. The committee then heard House Bills 3351 and 3371, sponsored by Representatives Koslow and Taylor, which would expand a prior, narrower water-district detachment proposal statewide. The bill would create a “specific demand customer” category for large water users whose quantity or quality needs may exceed a district’s capabilities, require a water district to respond within 60 days, and allow the customer to seek service elsewhere and pursue detachment if the district cannot or will not serve them. It also would prevent districts from taking on new encumbering federal debt to block detachment and would require gifts offered specifically to pay off such debt to be accepted and applied to that purpose. Sponsors said the measure was meant to stop “debt hoarding” and remove barriers to economic development while still allowing courts to review reasonableness and protect both districts and customers. Members questioned the scope of the bill, including the use of “may exceed” in the definition, whether the restriction on new loans could create problems in emergency or repair situations, how reasonableness would be judged, and whether the proposal could affect existing ratepayers or apply to municipal systems. The sponsors said the intent was to address net-new customers and to leave ordinary financing available except for loans used to prevent detachment. In informational testimony, Missouri American Water described a separate but related problem involving USDA red tape delaying a partial sale of the city of DeKalb’s water system, saying the delay was preventing lower rates and needed capital investment for a small community. No votes were taken on HB 3351 or HB 3371 before the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:11:46.959><c> the</c> meaning the state owns and operates the meaning the state owns and operates
• 00:11:57.120><c> we're</c> owns and operate the prisons so we're owns and operate the prisons so we're
• kitchen operations.
• 19:37.280><c> 13,300</c><00:19:38.280><c> meals</c> operations we serve about 13,300 meals operations
• </c> project will cost project will cost cost<01:03:27.400><c> okay</c><01:03:28.240><c> and</c><01:03

Transcript Highlights:

• Plant and operations. And so, basically, really quickly, why we use phased. Plant and operations.
• So the scope was and cost were expanded.
• Concerned about the cost Elementary.
• So I know you touched on this, but on the cost per square foot So these numbers on the cost per square
• So where's this cost per square foot coming from?

Committee: House Public School Capital Outlay Oversight Task Force

Transcript Highlights:

• The proposed substitute exempts property owned, operated, or controlled by a public corporation operating
• Lowering the cost equals more homes created, period.
• This will lower the cost and result in more homes being developed.
• That's not only the opportunity cost of searching for homes, but, of course, the actual cost of the land
• with acquisition, lower holding costs, and the opportunity costs from the time lost searching for land

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee held public hearings on three bills. SB 6237 would require landlords to disclose flooding history and flood risk to new tenants, along with notices that renters’ insurance and flood insurance may be needed and that county or local government sources have hazard information. The sponsor said the bill was a simple disclosure modeled on other states’ laws after recent flooding in Washington. Testimony was generally supportive, with an environmental nonprofit urging a broader jurisdiction-based disclosure instead of only county government, and housing industry groups saying they were neutral or concerned about added lease disclosures and asking for clearer language about what flooding information must be disclosed. No vote was taken on the bill. The committee then heard SB 6214, which would authorize public corporations, housing authorities, and certain nonprofits to operate as land bank authorities for affordable housing, with requirements for affordability covenants, annual reports, priority access to tax-foreclosed properties, and tax exemptions for qualifying land bank property and transfers. Supporters from Spokane, counties, housing authorities, affordable housing groups, and developers said land banking would help lower land costs, speed development, and expand affordable housing production. One member of the public opposed the bill, arguing it could remove land from the market and affect rural land supply. Department of Revenue staff flagged a technical issue, saying the bill needs a clearer definition of a qualifying land bank authority so the exemption can be administered, and confirmed the proposal would shift property off the tax rolls. The committee also asked whether the bill would allow non-housing uses such as parks or green space; staff said the bill requires affordable housing use, though the other half of land bank activity is not specified. The committee also heard SB 6139, which would require landlords to keep accepting previously used payment methods and continue to accept partial rent payments during an unlawful detainer process, while making clear that partial payments do not reinstate a lease or stop an eviction unless the parties agree in writing. The sponsor said the bill was intended to address cases where tenants can make partial payments but landlords shut off payment portals and refuse them, forcing judges to issue case-by-case standstill orders. Tenant advocates opposed the bill, arguing it would encourage evictions, remove judicial discretion, and could trap tenants by inviting partial payments that do not protect their housing. Landlord and property management groups were concerned about requiring continued access to payment portals and about ambiguity over whether accepting partial payments would waive eviction rights, though they said the bill was a good starting point and suggested clearer receipts and statutory protections. The public hearing was closed without action on SB 6139. In executive session, the committee adopted a proposed substitute for SB 6091, which limits broker marketing restrictions without requiring open access to homes and removes a Washington Law Against Discrimination provision, then voted the bill do pass to Rules. The committee also voted to recommend confirmation of gubernatorial appointments 9278, Pedro Espinoza, and 9279, Diana H. Perez, to the Housing Finance Commission.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:05:34.759><c> that</c> used directly by uh the operations that used directly by uh the operations
• </c><00:11:25.360><c> opportunities</c> and identifies cost-saving opportunities and identifies cost-saving
• </c> are identifying areas of cost-saving are identifying areas of cost-saving opportunities<00:13:50.639
• Yeah, so Medicare operates similarly to how we operate at the state level with commercial plans.
• Medicare operates similarly to how we operate at the state level with commercial plans.

Summary: The working session focused on the New Hampshire Prescription Drug Affordability Board’s budget request and its recent work. Early discussion centered on a technical question about a statutory dedicated fund for donations: members asked why the budget did not show a line item for accepting donations, and DHHS CFO Nathan White explained that the statute already authorizes the fund, but because no revenue has been received yet, it does not appear in the budget. He said any future donations would go through the normal process under RSA 14:30-a, with fiscal committee and Governor and Council approval and a memo to the Department of Revenue Administration. The chair clarified that the account was not a prerequisite to soliciting donations, and White said the fund would supplement, not replace, General Fund support. Kirk Williamson, the board’s executive director, then presented the board’s mission and budget. He said the governor’s budget provides about $256,500 in the first year and slightly more in the second, all General Funds, and that the board had distributed a technical amendment to continue the executive director position. He described the board’s role as analyzing prescription drug costs, identifying savings opportunities, monitoring market trends, promoting transparency, and making recommendations to the legislature and public payers. He also emphasized that the board operates publicly, with live-streamed meetings and a stakeholder advisory council that includes unions, state agencies, Medicaid, corrections, higher education, and other stakeholders. A major topic was the board’s estimate of $6 million in potential savings, based on Medicare’s newly negotiated prices for 10 drugs. Williamson explained that the board used those federal negotiated prices as a benchmark to estimate what New Hampshire public payers might be missing by not having similar leverage, and said the board is trying to build evidence for future recommendations rather than directly setting prices. Members asked how those potential savings could become actual savings, and Williamson said the board is sharing findings through its advisory council and feedback loops, though it has not yet sent a formal recommendation letter to specific purchasers. He also discussed the difference between pharmacy-benefit spending, which relies heavily on PBM-negotiated rebates, and medical-benefit spending, which is administered differently and is being added to the board’s next report. Williamson highlighted other work, including a model on Humira and a pending legislative effort to improve biosimilar competition, plus a proposed state-backed pharmacy savings card that would be no cost to the state and could save users about $240 per prescription based on Connecticut’s experience. No votes were taken during the session.