Transcript Highlights:

• income fund.
• need discretionary funding structures for our institutions to pursue strategic priorities.
• But we need better data. But we need better data.
• We need general surgery, we need neurology, we need other sorts of things.
• We need general surgery, we need neurology, we need other sorts of things.

Summary: The committee heard a lengthy presentation from the Office of the State Board of Education on its budget, including the FY 2026 supplemental reversion for the Empowering Parents program, the FY 2027 Canvas learning management system renewal, a transfer of risk manager positions back to the institutions, and a one-time federal grant for AI-related subgrants. Members asked about staffing growth, federal-fund spending trends, the Canvas contract, the school safety tip line CETL Now, and the rationale for moving risk management functions. Director Jennifer White said the Canvas contract had been extensively reviewed and remains the best statewide solution, and she explained that the risk managers are being moved back because they work more efficiently embedded at the institutions. She also discussed the board’s data modernization efforts and said the office is pursuing better data-sharing and a phased approach to any future changes. A major portion of the meeting focused on White’s presentation of an outcomes-based funding proposal for higher education. She said the proposal is only the beginning of the work and would shift Idaho from an enrollment-based model toward one that rewards progression, completion, and workforce-relevant outcomes. The proposal would place 10% of base funding at risk, with institutions earning back funds through momentum measures and Idaho First funds tied to resident enrollment, completions, and priority programs. White emphasized the need for better data, a phased rollout, caps to avoid volatility, and special consideration for community colleges and dual enrollment. Committee members generally supported the concept but raised concerns about accountability, community college impacts, and how unearned funds would be handled. The committee then reviewed family medicine residency funding. Dr. Campbell outlined the Family Medicine Residencies budget request for additional residents and a fellowship, and program leaders explained the mixed funding structure that combines state positions, federal support, and patient-care revenue. Members asked about the impact of the 3% holdback, clinical placement capacity, and whether federal rural health funds might help. Program officials said the holdback affects some programs more than others, but they do not expect current residency numbers to drop, and they stressed the importance of continued legislative support to grow Idaho’s physician workforce. The committee also heard from Eastern Idaho Medical Residencies and the psychiatry residency program. Dr. Hinkley said Idaho has a severe shortage of psychiatrists, especially child and adolescent psychiatrists, and that residency training is the main way to retain physicians in-state. He and Dr. Moe described the program’s growth, the role of local recruitment, and the three-legged funding model involving state support, patient revenue, and hospital sponsorship. Members asked about expanding training to other regions, private support, and the program’s 10-year strategic plan. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting provided, and the committee moved on to the next medical education budget item.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to save our schools.
• Some of those mandates were not funded or not fully funded, and it's hurting our schools.
• Things need to change. We need to save our schools.
• Things need to change. We need to 40%. Things need to change.
• Funding flexibility?

Transcript Highlights:

• In terms of this funding split, we have $49.5 billion in General Fund, $138.5 billion in federal funds
• General Fund in the current year, and $22.4 billion total funds and $48.8 billion General Fund in the
• So as a result, I respectfully urge restoration of this funding. Thank you. Mental health needs.
• Not because the staffing standard is wrong, and not because the funding is not needed, but because the
• funding.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a lengthy Department of Health Care Services presentation on the governor’s Medi-Cal budget, including a $229.1 billion total-funds proposal, projected Medi-Cal enrollment declines as redeterminations continue, and several major cost drivers such as managed care growth, Medicare-related costs, pharmacy spending, and changes tied to federal policy. Members focused heavily on the elimination of Prop. 56 dental supplemental payments beginning July 1, 2026, questioning the likely impact on provider participation and utilization. DHCS said it is completing the required rate reduction/access analysis for CMS, has been holding stakeholder meetings and issuing provider bulletins, but could not yet quantify the real-world effect. The committee also discussed a $50 million savings proposal tied to new hospice utilization management authority and asked about possible effects on emergency dental care and provider participation. The hearing then moved through the November 2025 family health estimate and several county and program administration issues, including CCS, GHPP, and Every Woman Counts. DHCS said family health costs are rising despite slight caseload declines because of higher utilization and medical costs, and members raised concerns about CCS website accessibility, county administrative funding, and the transition of youth aging out of CCS. The department said most CCS beneficiaries are also on Medi-Cal, that counties have long raised funding concerns, and that it had clarified use of maintenance-and-operations dollars to address some county workload issues. Members also asked about Every Woman Counts potentially seeing higher demand as Medi-Cal changes take effect; DHCS said that is possible and that the program has multiple funding sources including General Fund. A major portion of the hearing focused on provider taxes and federal changes under H.R. 1, especially the Medi-Cal managed care organization tax and the hospital quality assurance fee. DHCS explained that H.R. 1 restricts new or increased health care-related taxes, phases down allowable tax levels over time, and tightens “generally redistributive” rules, which could sharply reduce the state’s ability to use the MCO tax for Medi-Cal financing. Members asked whether the Legislature could amend Prop. 35 or whether voters would need to act; DHCS said a three-fourths legislative amendment may be possible if it aligns with the measure’s purpose, but the department is still evaluating options. The committee also discussed hospital financing, with DHCS describing recent increases in state-directed payments and the effect of H.R. 1 in capping those payments at Medicare levels, and the LAO noting the tradeoff between preserving provider taxes and maintaining Medi-Cal funding. The subcommittee also reviewed a series of DHCS budget change proposals and trailer bill items, including managed care final-rule implementation, managed care operations, a hospital value strategy, a one-year extension of skilled nursing facility financing, long-term care payment transparency, and interoperability/prior authorization requirements. Members repeatedly questioned the use of limited-term versus permanent positions, the overlap among proposals, and the timing of new financing reforms. DHCS said the SNF extension would preserve current workforce standards, sanctions, growth limits, and the SNF quality assurance fee while the department develops a broader 2027-28 redesign. No votes were taken; items were repeatedly held open for later action. Covered California then presented on the expiration of the federal enhanced premium tax credit and the resulting affordability crisis. The agency said Californians will lose about $2.5 billion in premium assistance for 2026, average premiums could nearly double for many enrollees, and as many as 400,000 people could eventually leave marketplace coverage. Open enrollment ended with 1.9 million sign-ups, down 3% from the prior year, with especially steep declines among middle-income consumers and increased movement into bronze plans. Covered California said the state’s $190 million affordability subsidy is helping lower-income enrollees retain coverage, but cannot fully replace the lost federal assistance. Members also asked about the Health Care Affordability Reserve Fund, repayment of loans from that fund, the status of federal review of California’s essential health benefits benchmark, and implementation of the new gender-affirming care benefit under AB 144.

Transcript Highlights:

• And ideally, that location could meet those needs, whatever those needs are.
• The largest fund is the Program Added Cost funds.
• state funding formula.
• Each support unit gets X amount of funds in discretionary funding.
• fund.

Summary: The committee met with Representative Redman participating remotely after his flight was canceled. Members approved the minutes, then voted to proceed with a Medicaid study and to release the follow-up report on state oversight of children’s residential care. OPE staff said the original report had identified major gaps in oversight, but that most recommendations had now been addressed through agency changes and House Bill 723, which codified several reforms including a Youth Bill of Rights, annual unannounced surveys, revised interview procedures, and restraint/seclusion reporting to licensing. Of 19 recommendations, 13 were complete, two were in progress, and four remained open, with one requiring legislative action. The follow-up discussion focused on the remaining gaps: whether licensing should have authority to oversee treatment quality, whether restraint and seclusion data should be reported publicly or to the legislature, and how to address abuse by facility staff, including a registry pathway and a single investigative process. OPE and committee members noted that these unresolved items would require policy decisions by the legislature. Department of Health and Welfare and licensing officials described improved oversight practices, including unannounced surveys, a new tracking system, and better monitoring of foster placements. The ombudsman reported increased complaints, more facility visits, and stronger collaboration with licensing, and said his office could potentially take on more oversight if given authority and staffing. The committee then voted to close the report, with several members saying they wanted to work on legislation next session. The committee also heard OPE’s report on career technical education funding and teacher recruitment. The report said Idaho had 1,103 approved secondary CTE programs and about 151,500 enrollments, with agriculture the largest program area. Members heard that larger and more urban districts, especially in southwest Idaho, offered more diverse CTE options, while smaller and more remote districts relied more heavily on agriculture and had fewer health, public safety, and engineering programs. OPE said 60% of surveyed LEAs reported funding constraints, especially equipment and facility costs, and many said dedicated CTE funds could not be used for base teacher salaries. The report also found that recruiting CTE teachers was difficult, with respondents citing a lack of qualified candidates and pay that often was not competitive with local industry, though the comparison varied widely by program area. OPE outlined policy options such as allowing more CTE funds to pay salaries, adjusting the funding formula for smaller class sizes, simplifying occupational specialist credential routes, and targeting salary incentives to high-need fields. The presentation was still underway when the transcript ended, with members asking questions about district settings, salary comparisons, and how the funding options might affect staffing and program access.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, Representative Jones, that every transportation district needs extra funding for projects, and
• So I think we need to supplement the funding for the Department of Transportation.
• the general fund in any way; 35% of the state road fund, much needed, I know; 15% of the transportation
• Fund.
• I appreciate that because I need to make sure my school districts start using that funding, too.

Summary: The committee heard a District 5 New Mexico Department of Transportation presentation from Rhonda Lopez, who reviewed the district’s FY26 budget, staffing vacancies, and the status of special appropriations from 2020 through 2025. She described numerous completed and ongoing projects across the district, including roadway overlays, bridge work, intersection improvements, ADA upgrades, and maintenance projects, and also summarized STIP, TPF, LGRF, and equipment needs. Members asked about a guardrail issue near U.S. 64 in Hogback, the 5% local match for TPF projects, and the status of the New Mexico 371/U.S. 36 intersection funding agreement with the Navajo Nation; DOT said the match is secured or waived where applicable and that the Navajo agreement is nearly finalized. The committee then heard House Bill 270, which would amend the Public Works Apprentice Training Act to require contributions to apprenticeship and training programs for certain public works contracts, including highway-related work, while creating an exception where no approved apprenticeship program exists for a trade classification. The sponsor said the bill was intended to strengthen workforce development and support apprenticeship training. Contractors and asphalt industry representatives opposed the bill, arguing it would raise road project costs and duplicate existing training contributions. A motion to table failed on a tie, and a later motion to pass also failed on a tie, leaving the bill in committee. Next, the committee heard House Bill 322, which would create a transportation trust fund and transportation program fund, dedicate additional revenue sources including a portion of electricity GRT and motor vehicle excise tax, and begin annual distributions for federal matching funds in 2029. The sponsor and supporters said the bill would help address a multi-billion-dollar road funding gap, improve maintenance, and provide a stable source for matching federal dollars. Some members raised concerns about the electricity tax component, its effect on utility bills, and overlap with recently enacted transportation financing measures; others supported the concept but questioned timing and funding priorities. A motion on the bill resulted in a tie and failed, leaving the bill in committee. The meeting concluded with a District 4 NMDOT legislative presentation. The district outlined its geography, budget, staffing vacancy rate, completed special appropriations, active construction and maintenance projects, wildfire-related recovery work, local government funding allocations, and equipment replacement needs. Members asked about school district uses of local funding and the impact of aging equipment and weather on maintenance costs. The presentation ended without any formal action on District 4 items, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We call that settle-up because the state will eventually need to settle up and fund that higher requirement
• Per-pupil funding has grown.
• Paying off the deferrals aligns the ongoing cost of school programs with the funding that's needed to
• against the other needs.
• They need consistent support.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held its first hearing of the year on Proposition 98, focusing on the Governor’s budget estimates for the three-year budget window, the Public School System Stabilization Account (PSSA), and repayment of education deferrals. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee would rise by about $21.7 billion over the 2025 Budget Act, with increases in each year, full repayment of the existing settle-up obligation in 2024-25, a new $5.6 billion settle-up obligation proposed for 2025-26, and a higher guarantee in 2026-27. Finance also noted revised downward estimates for transitional kindergarten attendance and Los Angeles County property tax reimbursements, and said community colleges would be funded above the split because of enrollment growth. The Legislative Analyst’s Office emphasized fiscal risk and volatility, warning that recent revenue gains are tied heavily to the stock market and tech sector and could reverse quickly. The LAO argued the Governor’s proposed $5.6 billion delay shifts risk into future years and recommended instead fully funding the current estimate, making a larger reserve deposit, considering advance payments or pension-related uses, and finding additional non-Prop 98 solutions to reduce the state’s structural deficit. On the reserve and deferral items, Finance described revised PSSA deposits and withdrawals that would leave about $4.1 billion in the reserve by 2026-27, and both Finance and the LAO supported paying off the remaining LCFF and SCFF deferrals as good fiscal practice. Committee members questioned the size of the settle-up amount, the degree of revenue volatility, the use of the reserve, and the ongoing K-12/community college split. Finance said the proposal is meant to avoid overappropriation if revenues fall, while the LAO said a buffer of roughly $3.5 billion would address typical forecasting risk. Public commenters, including school boards, county offices of education, teachers, and advocacy groups, largely opposed the $5.6 billion withholding or settle-up delay, calling it a manipulation of Prop. 98 and urging full funding and more stable revenue solutions. Several speakers also urged dedicated funding for students experiencing homelessness. The hearing ended with no vote, and the chair announced that broader program discussions would occur in later hearings.

Transcript Highlights:

• from the general fund and other funds, FTE counts, ongoing general fund appropriations, and what the
• and major federal funds.
• Programs, the ability to understand program needs, and set funding priorities that align with overall
• With limited scope and funding, there were over $11 million in unmet housing and slum-and-blight needs
• With limited scope and funding, received over 11 million in unmet housing and slum and blight needs from

Summary: The Budget Section’s Commerce and Legal Services Division met to review the Department of Commerce base budget for the 2027-29 biennium and to receive an update on Commerce programs. Legislative Council staff first walked the committee through the “blue sheet” base budget summary, explaining the major line items, the large share of federal grant authority in Commerce’s budget, and the continuing appropriations that support several Commerce funds. Members asked how grant funding is coordinated across agencies, and staff said collaboration varies by program but is strong in areas like UAS and LIHEAP. Commerce Commissioner Chris Schilken then presented on current activities, focusing heavily on grant administration, transparency, and economic development programs. Members questioned how grant applicants are selected, whether Commerce tracks applications and return on investment, and how long grant awards take to reach recipients. The commissioner said Commerce uses scoring criteria, outside reviewers, a minimum 30-day application window, and typically completes awards within two to three months. A lengthy exchange followed over whether Commerce should open some grants only to intended recipients versus running competitive application processes; Commerce said it follows best-practice grantmaking and that its attorney in the Attorney General’s office approved that approach. Commerce also highlighted the North Dakota Development Fund, citing long-term investment and job creation results, examples such as Red Trail Energy, Packet Digital, Valiance, Corvent Medical, child care loans, and the Automate ND program. Members asked about acceptable failures, lessons learned, regional economic development coordination, and the expansion of the fund into non-primary sectors. Workforce Director Katie Ralston Howell then outlined a statewide workforce ecosystem review, a new governor’s workforce sub-cabinet, and three task forces focused on simplifying entry, warm handoffs, and data integration. She discussed the in-demand occupations list, Workforce Pell, apprenticeships, and efforts to better connect students with employers and higher education. Commerce also briefly reviewed housing programs and a new housing sub-cabinet. No votes were taken; the committee simply received testimony, asked questions, and adjourned after setting up the next meeting to hear the Attorney General budget in June.

Transcript Highlights:

• I really think we need the civil breakdown, then we need the... non MSU then we need the MSU.
• I mean, all of us have had them in our office saying they need more. funding for their staff and so forth
• You know, funding and funding and funding and funding and more staff, and I get that.
• Again, as Jordan was saying, you know, we funded what y'all had asked, but now we really need to attack
• financial exploitation units that. that funding needed to be annualized, and then the CBC rollouts for

Bills: SB1 , SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• And depending on how it's done, there could be potential impacts to how we need to fund school districts
• We just may need to look at a different way of providing funding for public schools, if so.
• But we just may need to look at a different way of providing funding for public schools if something
• We need to know when, and we've been working with the scholarship funding organizations and with parent
• We want to make sure that districts can now take that funding and say, we don't need it here, we need

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several gallery introductions before taking up Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 168, the Tristan Murphy Act, on mental health. Senator Bradley explained that the bill is intended to divert clinically appropriate defendants with mental illness from jail to treatment, create pretrial mental health diversion programs, expand grant uses for mental health and substance abuse reinvestment, require evaluations and treatment follow-up in certain probation and prison settings, add Hillsborough County to a forensic hospital diversion pilot, and establish a Florida Behavioral Health Data Repository. Senators from both parties spoke in support, emphasizing treatment over incarceration, public safety, and the Murphy family’s role in the bill. The Senate passed the bill 37-0 and then recorded 37 co-sponsors. The chamber then moved into presentations on SB 2500, the 2025-26 General Appropriations Act. Chair Hooper said the Senate budget totals $117.4 billion, reduces overall spending from the prior year, maintains reserves, keeps employee health contributions level, and includes major investments in water quality, transportation, education infrastructure, and nearly $1 billion in education capital outlay. Committee chairs outlined their portions of the budget, including increased funding for K-12 schools and scholarships, higher education workforce programs, Medicaid and health services, corrections and courts, transportation and housing, and environmental restoration such as Everglades and water quality projects. Members then asked extensive questions, especially about education funding, school choice, AP/IB and accelerated programs, the Family Empowerment Scholarship, and the FEFP calculations. Senator Burgess repeatedly explained that scholarship funding is being moved “below the line” to improve tracking and that the Senate position is to preserve funding while giving districts more flexibility. Senators also questioned the APD wait list for disability services, opioid settlement spending, arts funding, the My Safe Florida Home condo pilot, and proposed IT and agency restructuring. Several chairs said some issues would be resolved in conference, and no final vote on the budget was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• needed.
• and security fund that is no longer needed.
• needed.
• Fund.
• was a need for additional funding, we would certainly do that.

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The committee heard FY27 budget presentations for the Department of Public Safety and Corrections, beginning with Public Safety Services. House Fiscal Division staff reviewed the department’s recommended budget of $645.9 million, including supplemental pay, State Police, Motor Vehicles, and the State Fire Marshal. Officials explained that the overall budget reflects a net decrease from FY26, driven largely by shifts in funding sources, removal of one-time statutory dedications, and adjustments tied to undercollections in fees and self-generated revenues. State Police was recommended at $459.7 million, OMV at $86.7 million, and the Fire Marshal at $41.1 million. Department leaders also described ongoing modernization efforts, staffing vacancies, and the use of efficiencies identified internally. Lieutenant Colonel Robert Burns and agency heads testified about State Police operations, including increased cadet graduations, improved Mardi Gras security, progress on APHIS and OMV modernization, and the new crime lab under construction. Members asked about undercollections, vacancies, the role of public tag agents, and whether the agency could expand counter-drone capabilities. Burns said the department has identified about $11 million in efficiencies, but warned that counter-drone work would require additional funding, citing a $4.5 million fiscal note for HB 940 and roughly $9 million more for a robust unit. OMV officials said staffing and retention remain difficult, but modernization should improve service and reduce lines; they also said the agency continues to rely on public tag agents and is working through reinstatement fee collection issues. The committee then reviewed the Department of Corrections FY27 budget, recommended at $902.3 million, with most funding from State General Fund and a large increase tied to higher incarceration costs, medical needs, overtime, and added capacity at Louisiana State Penitentiary. DOC officials said the department remains under pressure from vacancies, turnover, contraband, and medical costs, and that the budget includes funding to add 150 correctional officers at Angola and to house ICE detainees at Camp J. They also discussed criminal justice reinvestment savings, prison enterprises, and reentry programs funded through the Second Chance Act. Members asked about staffing, inmate deaths at Elaine Hunt, work-release pay, and whether the department is tracking the true long-term cost of incarceration. Officials said they are pursuing pay increases, recruitment, expanded training and reentry programs, and more data-driven workforce alignment, while acknowledging that many budget pressures remain unresolved.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as that funding has decreased and continues to decrease, we need to find Methodology is to get to
• But there is a limited amount of funds allocated to this subcommittee. And they need to meet...
• In domestic violence shelters, we are scrambling for funding. We need 82% for that.
• When you heard that the clerk's office needs funding for issuing 80,000 protection orders, we cannot.
• We need that for funding and advocacy.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's what the state of California has adopted, is something that we will need GGRF funds to help us
• End up funding the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.
• The lack of stable funding is a major concern as local governments need reliable support to implement
• The need for continuous appropriation for AB 617 funding, and also for the Clean Cars for All program
• They need to have a decent system. right and we have to make sure our first dollars go to fund a decent

Transcript Highlights:

• We as families of special needs children are living proof that these funds are essential to our daily
• We can't get to the stability that we need in the system without adequate funding.
• But what we need now is a clear commitment to begin this funding effort.
• We're going to do everything we can to try and get the funding that you need.
• And I want to be clear, I'm not saying not to fund them. All of our services are needed.

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we need a paradigm shift in education generally, but higher education, the way we fund it.
• We need to fund not institutions, not... ...generally, but higher education, the way we fund it.
• We need to fund not institutions, not systems, not the 19th- and 20th-century way of doing things, but
• And it is what's needed to fund the pension obligations for the state and our employees.
• But we are cutting the GR transfer to the Homes Fund, but we don't believe that funding is needed with

Committee: House Budget

Summary: The committee heard extended discussion of the chair’s House budget substitute, especially House Bill 2 for elementary and secondary education and House Bill 3 for higher education. The chair said the operating budget leaves roughly $300 million in reserve, explained several cuts and restorations, and described proposed changes to child care, including cutting enhancement payments and keeping attendance-based rather than enrollment-based subsidy payments. Representative Fogle objected to the child care cuts and the proposed language limiting the department’s move to prospective payment and enrollment-based reimbursement; State Budget Director Dan Hogg testified that the governor’s office still intended to move to payment on enrollment in May if the budget language did not block it, while prospective payment remained under review because of federal funding concerns. The chair also explained a restriction on Parents as Teachers services for children already in public pre-K, and members debated whether that would reduce duplication or improperly limit services. The chair further proposed a new competitive Title I innovation grant program funded by a reallocation of some Title I dollars, with questions raised about what services would be reduced to offset it. The bulk of the meeting focused on a major higher education funding overhaul in House Bill 3. The chair and vice chair proposed replacing the current base-plus model with an FTE-based formula that would distribute the same overall state funding according to student credit hours, with community colleges funded on a 12-hour FTE, four-year undergraduate students on a 15-hour FTE, and graduate enrollment discussed as a separate issue. They said the goal was to make funding follow students rather than institutions and to reduce long-standing disparities between schools. Several members supported the idea as overdue and more transparent, while others warned it was being done too quickly and could harm institutions with high-cost programs, research missions, or smaller enrollments. Concerns were raised about possible closures, accreditation problems, and unintended effects on workforce programs such as nursing, engineering, and technical training. The chair and vice chair said there was no intent to force consolidation, but acknowledged that some institutions would gain and others would lose under the new model. Members also questioned how the formula would treat research and doctoral funding, especially at the University of Missouri, and whether graduate programs were properly counted. The chair said some special-purpose lines were retained, but a large portion of MU’s research and doctoral funding was folded into the broader pool and redistributed through the FTE model. Several members asked for clarification on whether graduate hours were counted at nine credits, and the chair said he was not certain and would seek follow-up from staff or the department. Community college representatives were discussed as having unanimously opposed the recommendation, and the chair noted that the institutions were briefed only shortly before the hearing. No votes were taken during the exchange, and the committee appeared to be gathering testimony and concerns ahead of markup and future action on the budget bills.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need the state to provide more funding because local funding just isn't enough in a community like
• I hope that you will recognize the unique needs of our community and provide the funding needed for all
• This funding is certainly needed, and certainly the... For our out-of-placement students.
• This funding is certainly needed, and certainly the students need to get to their respective schools.
• Our town struggled to bridge the gap between state funding formulas and the educational needs of our

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Education

Summary: The hearing focused primarily on H. 517/S. 314, a bill to provide a sustainable future for rural schools, and H. 697, a bill to require full funding of regional school transportation. Witnesses from rural districts, school committees, superintendents, students, and local officials described chronic underfunding, declining enrollment, high fixed costs, special education and transportation burdens, and the loss of programs, staff, and extracurriculars. Several speakers argued that rural aid should be funded at $60 million annually and made non-discretionary, while others emphasized that transportation reimbursement for regional districts has repeatedly fallen short of the state’s promise and is driving budget crises and overrides. A number of students testified in support of rural aid, describing cuts to classes, counselors, and activities, and the impact on their schools and communities. Committee members also discussed whether transportation policy should be revisited to address underlying cost drivers, including bus bidding practices and whether regional districts should have more flexibility in transportation requirements. The committee also heard H. 515, concerning Hancock Elementary School and a school choice-related exemption from a state requirement that has created a large financial burden for the district. Hancock’s superintendent and Rep. John Barrett explained that a decades-old regulation, recently enforced by DESE, would require Hancock to pay tuition for choice-in students through high school graduation even though the district only serves pre-K through grade 6 and sends its own students elsewhere for middle and high school. They said the rule creates a significant per-student shortfall and has forced Hancock to opt out of school choice. Committee members asked for clarification about how the arrangement works and how the costs fall on Hancock. Additional testimony supported related transportation bills for non-regional districts, especially Plymouth/Carver and North Middlesex, describing high and rising bus costs, special education and McKinney-Vento transportation expenses, and the strain on local budgets. Speakers repeatedly said that state reimbursement has not matched actual costs and that communities are being forced to choose between transportation and classroom services. No votes or final actions were taken in the hearing; the committee simply received testimony and closed the hearing on the bills discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is—we need further funding for this in the future because I believe it’s a three-year grant that we
• And I’m just advocating that we need furthermore funding for this grant as we are already awarded it.
• I think there genuinely is discussion around this topic and funding that needs to happen, continue to
• I think there genuinely is discussion around this topic and funding that needs to happen, continue to
• As you just mentioned, there needs to be a continuation of funding, and we're talking about the grant

Summary: The hearing focused on the Missing and Murdered Indigenous People (MMIP) grant program under the Board of State and Community Corrections and related Department of Justice efforts. BSCC reported that it now administers 36 MMIP grants across three cohorts, with awards ranging from $436,000 to $1 million, plus five collaborative grants at $2 million each, totaling $35.4 million awarded to federally recognized tribes. Testimony from tribal leaders and grantees described how the funding supports prevention, family advocacy, domestic violence services, law enforcement coordination, youth programming, culturally grounded healing, and new tribal public safety positions such as investigators, social workers, and drone operators. Speakers repeatedly emphasized that the crisis is longstanding, tied to generational trauma, and that the grant has helped build trust and infrastructure in tribal communities. Several witnesses and committee members urged continued and preferably ongoing funding, noting that demand now exceeds available one-time money. BSCC and tribal representatives described outreach efforts that increased participation from four applicants in cohort one to 20 in cohort two and more applicants than funding in cohort three. Tribes also raised implementation concerns, especially the burden of quarterly narrative reporting, limited staff capacity, and the need for flexible administration. BSCC said it uses steering committees, separate small- and large-project categories, orientations, monitoring visits, and technical assistance to support grantees. Tribal leaders and advocates stressed that the program should remain accessible without requiring a waiver of tribal sovereignty. The second major topic was DOJ’s update on AB 3099, the Tribal Assistance Program, and the tribal police pilot under AB 134. DOJ officials said the Office of Native American Affairs and the Division of Law Enforcement have been conducting outreach, trainings, listening sessions, and coordination with tribal, local, state, and federal partners to address Public Law 280 jurisdictional issues, improve reporting and data, and support Feather Alert and MMIP-related resources. DOJ said the AB 3099 report is in internal review and that the tribal police pilot is moving forward with the Yurok Tribe as a participant, with a July 1, 2026 start date. DOJ and tribal witnesses said the pilot’s main barriers are cost and, for some tribes, the waiver of sovereign immunity. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with broad support for expanding and sustaining MMIP-related funding and infrastructure.

Transcript Highlights:

• That Growth could increase the need for scholarship funding to nearly $75.3 million for new applicants
• The funds actually still stay in the funds.
• Do we probably need to re-look at the funding mechanism? Yes. Because right now it's flat, right?
• So we feel like we need, and it was funded last year, but it was funded as a contract.
• funds.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• And, uh, again, just more needs than there are funds.
• And, uh, again, just more needs than there are funds.
• And, uh, again, just more needs than there are funds.
• And, uh, again, just more needs than there are funds.
• </c><01:42:42.960><c> funding</c><01:42:43.600><c> yet</c> desperately desperately need funding yet desperately

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• those funds could be spent in other places, I think we'd like to know whether that money really needs
• Allocation, which wasn't needed and used, and then also the Economic Development Advancement Fund, which
• that’s trying to utilize these funds, they need to have leveraged all those.
• They just need the ability to...” “And again, this is just one funding mechanism for them, right?
• funds.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• But I have given them my own funding from my grow fund.
• But I have given them my own funding from my grow fund.
• need them.
• And it doesn't give us all the funding to complete our permitting database that will need to implement
• I know what we need. I know what we need for snowmelt. I know what we need to repay compacts.

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance