Transcript Highlights:

• This ensures that this process remains transparent, accountable, and that the process is shaped with
• So what processes are in place?
• Is this going to be budget neutral?
• Is this going to be budget neutral?
• We'll be voting on the budget, and as chair of the education budget subcommittee in the Senate, one of

Summary: The committee heard several higher education bills. It first approved the consent calendar, which included SB 67 and SB 619. The main discussion centered on SB 437, which would direct the CSU system to develop a fair, evidence-based process for verifying whether someone is a descendant of a person enslaved in the United States, as part of the state’s reparations work. Supporters said the bill fills a gap left by the Reparations Task Force and would create a transparent, credible lineage-verification process; opponents argued genealogy methods already exist, the bill would waste money and delay action, and some raised constitutional concerns. The committee took a vote on SB 437, but the roll was left open after the initial tally showed three ayes and three noes. The committee then heard SB 790, which would allow California to join the interstate reciprocity agreement for online postsecondary education. The author and supporters said the bill would improve consumer protections for California students taking out-of-state online courses and help California institutions compete more effectively by reducing the burden of seeking separate state approvals. Opponents, including University of Phoenix and other groups, argued the bill conflicted with the existing reciprocity framework, could exclude some institutions, and might not actually secure California’s entry into the agreement. The committee voted 3-1 to pass SB 790 as amended to the Business and Professions Committee, with the roll left open. The committee also heard SB 391, which would authorize the Community College Chancellor’s Office to charge fees for research partners seeking access to data. Supporters said the office is absorbing significant unfunded workload from data requests and that fees would help recover costs; opponents, including the California Teachers Association community college association, warned the fees could create barriers for faculty and smaller researchers. Members discussed possible exemptions and implementation details. The committee voted 5-1 to pass SB 391 as amended to the Appropriations Committee, with the roll left open. Finally, the committee heard SB 685, a pilot program to provide cost-of-attendance assistance at four CSU campuses for students who experienced homelessness in high school. Supporters said it would help students cover housing, food, and transportation costs and reduce dropout risk; members asked about eligibility and implementation, and the author explained the bill would use McKinney-Vento homelessness designations and target students at risk of “summer melt” and college homelessness.

Transcript Highlights:

• How are we working at having the process... ...are we working at having the processing time get better
• process.
• So if we change models, has the department started the budgeting process in regards to a fiscal note
• So if we change models, has the department started the budgeting process in regards to a fiscal note
• What would cause this to be off budget? Anything? ...cause this to be off budget.

Summary: The committee first approved the February 11, 2026 minutes and then received an update from the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency on the interagency council on homelessness and continuum of care funding. Testimony described rising homelessness tied to tight housing markets, low incomes, aging homelessness, barriers to rental assistance and public benefits, and limited shelter and case-management capacity. Members discussed the need for more affordable housing, continued one-time funding for the North Dakota Homeless Grant and Housing Incentive Fund, better coordination with Health and Human Services on economic assistance and human service zones, landlord engagement, recovery housing, and reentry housing. The committee also heard that federal continuum of care funding remains uncertain, with possible shifts away from permanent supportive housing and housing-first models; members asked for a future update on the impact if federal rules reduce the share available for permanent housing. The committee then took testimony on accessibility of government services for people who are blind or visually impaired. Paul Olson of North Dakota Vision Services School for the Blind described current screening and service delivery, including infant referrals, regional staff, short-term programs, and collaboration with vocational rehabilitation. He said the targeted screening system is working, recommended maintaining the current model, and noted ongoing challenges with staffing, public awareness, and accessible state websites and documents. Public testimony from a visually impaired resident and a deaf resident emphasized barriers such as CAPTCHAs, inaccessible PDFs, employment forms that screen out applicants based on driver’s license status, shortages of interpreters, and the need for video remote interpreting and video relay services, along with training for users and agencies. Finally, the committee heard a final report on the study of child care provider licensing from HHS Early Childhood Director Kay Larson. The report summarized provider input and committee discussion on simplifying North Dakota’s child care licensing structure, reducing administrative burden, and balancing that with health and safety standards. Key topics included licensing categories, child care assistance eligibility, food program sponsorship, staff qualifications, training requirements, ratios and group size, age bands, and preschool exemptions. The committee’s recommendations included streamlining to three provider types plus a preschool designation, revising ratio and age-band rules, and carrying forward certain preschool outdoor-space exemptions. Larson noted that any changes would require statutory changes, rulemaking, and a transition period before new licensing rules could take effect.

Transcript Highlights:

• So there's more policy than we would like in these budget bills, but they are mostly budget bills and
• So there's more policy than we would like in these budget bills, but they are mostly budget bills and
• It is a frustrating process.
• They you know frustrating process.
• complete budget agreement passed. complete budget agreement passed.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Your partnership is critical to our budget process.
• CDCR is over budgeted by a few million dollars in the budget year.
• these ongoing reductions to CDCR's operating budget.
• While proportionally, it may be a smaller bit of the budget, I mean, the budget has, it has grown significantly
• I'm just going to say for the record that I echoed what we get to the full budget process and have to

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:03:44.200> on budget on budget on 1054<00:03:46.159> I<00:03:46.400> I<00:03
• <00:13:51.600> of opportunities we are in the process of opportunities we are in the process
• concern and will'll add to budget concern and will'll add to budget uncertainty<01:10:36.320>
• <01:10:57.800> will progress the legislative process will progress the legislative process
• relatively beginning phase of a process relatively beginning phase of a process so<01:11:14.719>

Keywords: 928, house, all

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.

Transcript Highlights:

• When funding sources require separate processes, When funding sources require separate processes with
• because of the budget we're in.
• Tomorrow, we will get a budget draw.
• What if we saved a year on that process?
• But, um, you know, I now know the processes. I go to these things and I also learn a process.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Governor’s 2025 reorganization plan to split the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into two new agencies: a Business and Consumer Services Agency and a California Housing and Homelessness Agency. Administration officials said the change would give each side more focused leadership, improve consumer protection and regulatory oversight, and better align housing and homelessness policy with the state’s broader housing goals. Leaders from the Department of Consumer Affairs, Cannabis Control, Alcoholic Beverage Control, and Financial Protection and Innovation all voiced support for the business-side reorganization, while housing officials emphasized that the new housing agency would help streamline funding, compliance, and coordination across programs. Members raised concerns about timing, budget impacts, office space, and whether the split would actually reduce bureaucracy. The administration said the plan would be included in the May Revision, was intended to be cost-neutral, and would not require fee increases for licensees or additional office space. On the housing side, officials said the new Housing Development and Finance Committee would work toward a single application and more coordinated award process for affordable housing funding, while preserving CalHFA’s statutory and financial independence. They also said the reorganization would improve compliance monitoring, data collection, and coordination with local governments, including Los Angeles homelessness programs. Public testimony was largely supportive. Industry groups representing beverage distributors, craft brewers, wine, mortgage lenders, and housing organizations backed the business-side split, and housing advocates such as Housing California, the California Housing Partnership, and the California Housing Consortium supported the housing agency concept and the proposed one-stop-shop approach. Several witnesses urged that tax credits, bonds, and other funding sources be better coordinated, and some said the plan should be paired with additional state investment and implementation resources. No formal vote was taken; the hearing was informational.

Transcript Highlights:

• Next is our budget operational budget summary, which is on Table...
• Next is our budget operational budget summary, which is on Table...
• operational budget of 322 20, budget operational budget of 322 20, 5867<00:14:47.199> it<00:14
• <01:53:37.520> that<01:53:37.639> was was budgeted that was was budgeted that was budgeted
• <01:53:41.159> gave budgeted budgeted yeah we already gave budgeted budgeted yeah we already

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• ideologies in the budget process.
• <00:01:47.360> This ideologies in the budget process.
• This ideologies in the budget process.
• budget targets.
• These are the uh budget budget targets.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House Democratic leaders and House Republican leaders announced a compromise set of budget targets reached Friday night, describing it as a numbers-only deal that leaves policy issues aside. They said the targets are the first step in the budget process: House committee chairs will write bills to fit the targets, those bills will go to Ways and Means, and later leaders will negotiate global targets with the governor and Senate. Leaders emphasized that the agreement reflects compromise rather than either party’s ideal budget, and that they will continue talks with Governor Walz and the Senate over the next several weeks. The speakers highlighted what was not included in the deal, saying it does not target paid family and medical leave, earned sick and safe time, reproductive rights, or universal school meals. They said the House priorities that did make it in include housing, education, pensions, public safety, and transportation. On education, they said the compromise provides $40 million in new money in the first biennium for the READ Act and no cuts in either biennium, contrasting that with larger cuts in the governor’s and Senate proposals. They also said schools could still choose to fund unemployment insurance for school workers from existing resources, though it was not earmarked in the targets. Leaders said the agreement leaves room for committee chairs to make choices within the targets, including in health and human services, where they described the target as a reduction in projected growth rather than a cut to existing appropriations. They said the budget plan sets aside discretionary inflation adjustments in the first biennium while preserving inflation indexing for items like the K-12 formula. They also said the deal improves the state’s long-term balance, with a projected $1.6 billion balance in the first biennium and a $1.3 billion deficit in the second, and that the House’s numbers do not include the same revenue assumptions as the governor’s and Senate’s plans. In questions, leaders said conference committees will require majority support from both House and Senate conferees, and that the House will send equal numbers of Democratic and Republican conferees. They said the bonding bill size is still under discussion, but the adopted numbers would allow for roughly a $700 million general obligation bill. They also said large state spending for professional sports facilities is likely over, and explained that the press conference was held without Republican leaders for logistical reasons after the deal was reached late Friday.

Transcript Highlights:

• , inspection process, decontamination process.
• the state budget process that we're dealing with today.
• the state, you know, budget process that we're dealing with today.
• Is that correct in this year's budget? In this year's budget for the GGRF component, yes.
• We've streamlined processes.

Summary: The subcommittee began by announcing a change in the agenda order, moving item 6 ahead of item 1 and then item 7, and noting there would be no votes taken on any items that day. Item 6 covered a proposed operational efficiencies control section for the Natural Resources Agency that would let multiple departments jointly fund landscape-scale or multi-jurisdictional projects and allow Finance to transfer climate bond funds to a lead state entity. The LAO said the proposal was reasonable but suggested the Legislature consider requiring summary notification on how it is used; Finance said it would consider that request. Item 7 focused on the 2026-27 biodiversity and nature-based solutions spending plan. Finance and the Wildlife Conservation Board described the climate bond funding for habitat restoration, wildlife crossings, public access, tribal nature-based solutions, and related work, including $111 million proposed for WCB and $30 million for Salton Sea habitat and public access projects. The LAO supported the overall approach but flagged the San Andreas Corridor Program as an area where the Legislature may want to specify geographic priorities. Members discussed the pace of Salton Sea work and whether the proposed projects would count toward disadvantaged community goals. Item 8 addressed Cal Fire’s aviation contract and staffing needs for wildfire response. Cal Fire said year-round fire activity, a larger and more complex aircraft fleet, and labor market pressures justified the proposed contract increase, including more mechanics, pilots, and maintenance support. The LAO recommended approval, saying the proposal addressed health and safety concerns. Members asked about contractor staffing, competition in the bidding process, and future technology for early fire detection and suppression. The committee then took up item 1 on golden mussel containment. Fish and Wildlife described the invasive species’ spread in the Delta, the task force and response framework, and a request for eight new positions funded by Prop. 4 to support control plans, outreach, monitoring, research, and coordination with partners and law enforcement. Members pressed the department on whether the state should fund more direct decontamination infrastructure and grants to local water managers, and on the realistic goal of containing the mussel. The chair and several members emphasized the urgency of the threat and requested an itemized breakdown of the $20 million request. The hearing then moved to a broader LAO overview of wildfire prevention and response funding, where the LAO summarized the state’s funding mix and warned that ongoing wildfire resilience funding will likely decline as one-time bond and GGRF funds are exhausted, prompting discussion of long-term funding options and the balance between prevention, suppression, and community hardening.

Transcript Highlights:

• Second year was a budget cycle.
• was a budget cycle. was a budget cycle.
• for the 2024-2026 budget was based on. for the 2024-2026 budget was based on.
• request and requested the budget budget request and requested the budget to<00:34:34.080> replace
• For the RFP process?

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The meeting opened with the pledge and prayer, a roll call established quorum, and members announced a Veterans Caucus meeting to follow the session. The committee also recognized distinguished veteran Joe Mash Masterson of Bardstown, who was praised for his Army service, long-time advocacy for veterans, and leadership in the American Legion and local veteran organizations. Masterson thanked his family, the American Legion Post 121, and the VA staff, and several members offered remarks honoring his service and the committee’s practice of recognizing veterans. The committee then briefly addressed a referred administrative regulation, 017 KAR 001 030, which leadership described as technical updates to existing policy; no vote was taken. After that, members heard testimony from KDVA and Finance and Administration officials on the ongoing HVAC replacement project at the Radcliffe Veteran Center. Officials said the system had been problematic for years, that design work began early to accelerate the project, and that the work was complicated by the need to replace the system in an operating nursing facility. They explained that the project was bid in March, awarded to Less Mechanical, and that protective measures, shop drawings, and equipment orders were underway. Committee members pressed officials on why the problem had taken so long to resolve, why the original system had been installed, whether the issue had been communicated regularly, and whether the state should be paying for a replacement in a relatively new facility. Officials said the original system’s components and warranties had failed, that they had tried to replace parts before moving to a full replacement, and that the system’s manufacturer and quality differed from a similar facility in Glasgow that had not had the same issues. They said the current phase one contract was about $6 million, with the remaining funds held for phase two to restore full occupancy; phase two design was nearly complete and could be bid later if funding is approved. Officials estimated phase one completion around January 2026 and full completion around March 2027, depending on funding and scheduling.

Transcript Highlights:

• for the determination of processes for the determination of budget<00:28:05.280> requests<00:
• But the way that we did this, the way that we came together, the way that the budget committee process
• on a regular basis during the budget on a regular basis during the budget process<01:30:55.040><
• the budget.
• that shape this budget. that shape this budget.

Keywords: 981, all

Summary: The Senate convened with a quorum, approved the prior day’s journal, and then took up a large third-reading consent calendar containing many House bills, most of them dealing with appropriations, fund transfers, repeals of programs or cash funds, and related budget adjustments. The calendar included measures affecting broadband infrastructure, early childhood prevention services, school food programs, reading and assessment programs, higher education funding, human services funding models, disaster and transportation funds, public safety communications, and several other state cash funds and reserve requirements. Most of the bills passed with broad support, though several drew recorded no votes from individual senators on specific measures. Before the consent calendar vote, Senator Catlin recognized a Montrose leadership class visiting the chamber. The Senate then adopted the consent calendar, with the clerk recording numerous individual no votes on particular bills. Among the more notable measures passed were bills related to the Healthy School Meals for All program, the state education fund, the Affordable Housing Financing Fund, kinship care, judicial discipline, public defender/prosecutor behavioral health support, public safety personnel health benefits, multimodal transportation funding, unclaimed property transfers, tobacco education funds, and preschool funding. Several bills were approved unanimously or near-unanimously, while others had more divided votes. The chamber then debated Senate Bill 90, which exempts critical infrastructure from the Consumer Repair Bill of Rights Act. Senator Snyder explained that the bill had been revised after stakeholder discussions with opponents, the governor’s office, and the attorney general’s office; the amendment L006 was described as narrowing and defining the exemption, giving the Attorney General rulemaking authority, and preserving district court review. Senator Carson supported the amendment and said it clarified that the bill focused on business-to-business and business-to-government equipment rather than retail consumer products. The amendment was adopted 35-0, and the bill then passed 22-13. The Senate also passed House Bill 1351 on the Healthy School Meals for All program, with Senator Kirkmeyer saying it repays money previously transferred from the state education fund and does not reduce program funding or transparency. House Bill 1353 on state-administered social studies assessments passed 25-10, and House Bill 1359 on school land mineral revenues passed 28-7. The final portion of the transcript shows additional House bills being read and passed, including measures on housing financing, reserve reductions, cash fund transfers, child welfare subsidies, kinship care, judicial discipline, public safety benefits, multimodal transportation, unclaimed property transfers, tobacco education funds, and preschool funding, with several senators recording no votes and Senator Kirkmeyer noting concerns about transparency in cash fund balances during the debate on House Bill 1405.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:15:52.120> and every other program in the budget and every other program in the budget
• Well, but they're in the budget.
• house bill one entirely so their budget house bill one entirely so their budget is<01:21:20.159>
• one that’s in process currently.
• ’s budget, as far as I understand.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Division 2 Finance Committee work session focused primarily on House Bill 115 and a proposed amendment, 114H, which would carry over language from HB 2 into HB 115 and place limits on Education Freedom Accounts (EFAs). Representative Murray described the amendment as a way to keep the 350% federal poverty eligibility cap, require students to have attended a charter public school in grades K-12 for the preceding year before entering the voucher system, and add guardrails against universal eligibility. She argued the state was facing a severe budget crisis, that expanding EFAs would divert money from other programs, and that public testimony and local votes showed widespread opposition to expansion. She also cited a letter from former Finance chair Neil Kirk opposing expansion. Other members responded that the committee should not revisit policy already decided by the House, though some said the amendment was fair to discuss because of its fiscal implications and supported it on that basis. The discussion then broadened into a debate over the fiscal impact of universal vouchers and the reliability of enrollment and cost estimates. Representative Luno argued that prior EFA projections had relied on assumptions that could badly underestimate state exposure, pointing to Arizona as a cautionary example and saying New Hampshire should not expand the program without better analysis. Representative Papovich similarly warned that universal eligibility could create a large, unexpected cost, estimating a potential exposure of about $285 million based on school-age children not currently in public, charter, or EFA programs. In contrast, Representative Weyler said EFAs can save money because public school spending is already high and parents using EFAs still pay taxes and take on more responsibility for their children’s education. After discussion, Representative Murray moved to accept the amendment, and Representative Bean seconded it. There was some procedural clarification about voting on the original bill and the amendment. The transcript ends before a final recorded vote on the amendment or on HB 115 itself, though the committee had also been told it would likely reconsider several retained bills later in the week, including HB 129, HB 133, HB 671, and HB 781.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have seen local budgets, local government budgets soar.
• We have seen local budgets, local government budgets soar.
• Our voters are facing higher Seeing local budgets, local government budgets, soar.
• We're not telling them how this whole process, the phased-in process, is going to work.
• We're not telling them how this whole process, the phased-in process, is going to work.

Summary: The Senate took up Committee Substitute for Senate Joint Resolution 2F, a proposed constitutional amendment to expand homestead property tax relief, lower the assessment cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, and limit county and municipal ad valorem tax revenues to specified uses. Senator Avila presented the measure as a major property tax reform intended to provide relief to homeowners and restrain local government spending, while opponents argued it would shift costs to fees, services, and state appropriations and could harm local budgets, public safety, schools, and other services. Several senators also raised concerns about the ballot language and the lack of a completed fiscal analysis. The chamber considered and rejected multiple amendments. Senator Sharif’s income-based “circuit breaker” amendment failed, as did Senator Smith’s sunset clause amendment and Senator Berman’s amendment to rewrite the ballot statement for greater accuracy. During questioning, Avila said the revised language was meant to preserve flexibility for local governments and that future legislatures could set implementing procedures and, if necessary, prohibit certain local expenditures by general law. He also confirmed that the proposal would not affect refinancing or portability, and said the measure would not prevent local governments from continuing to fund many services such as libraries, parks, animal control, code enforcement, mosquito control, public housing, county health departments, and elections. Debate on final passage was extensive. Supporters described the proposal as overdue relief for homeowners and a way to force local governments to prioritize spending, while critics called it a risky tax shift that could reduce local revenue by billions and force cuts or higher fees. Some senators emphasized concerns about public safety funding, mental health and social services, and the accuracy of the ballot summary; others argued the measure would give voters a chance to decide on property tax reform. After debate, the resolution was rolled over for third reading and the Senate continued discussion, but the transcript provided does not include a final vote on the joint resolution.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, I I would agree budget proposals.
• It is a not just a budget decision.
• The process that we're remarks.
• <01:05:01.920> I through that process a little bit? I through that process a little bit?
• Budget cycle.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The conference committee met late on Friday evening to discuss the Public Safety and Judiciary budget agreement, beginning with a brief exchange among members about concerns that the executive branch had been delaying the committee’s work by waiting to approve legislative decisions. Members emphasized that the legislature should retain its independence while still allowing normal collaboration with the governor’s office. The committee then moved through several outstanding policy items and adopted them without opposition, including the A38 amendment addressing data-sharing concerns involving disability-related information, a study of firefighting services by the state fire marshal, and an A46 amendment governing access to unredacted portable recording system data in collision investigations, with guardrails on disclosure and use. The committee next reviewed the spreadsheet and budget targets. Fiscal staff explained the judiciary side of the agreement, including funding for court operating costs, a one-time Justice Partner Access Program appropriation, forensic exam rate increases, guardian ad litem funding, public defense, human rights, the competency attainment board, the cannabis expungement board, and fee increases for civil filings and motions. On the public safety side, staff described the target as well as the discretionary items funded, including nonprofit security grants, BCA staffing changes, fire marshal initiatives, a 10-year arson statute of limitations, prosecutor training grants, legal representation for children, E911 funding for critical infrastructure, Philando Castile Training Fund support, corrections-related savings from the Stillwater phased closure and sentence-to-serve elimination, a mandatory minimums task force, a victims of crime account transfer, a decommissioning study, in-service use-of-force training, and extensions of several expiring appropriations. The committee also noted a correction to a spreadsheet label related to the Stillwater closure item. After the spreadsheet walkthrough, the committee took testimony from Chief Justice Natalie Hudson and State Court Administrator Jeff Shorban on behalf of the Minnesota Judicial Branch. Hudson thanked the committee for its work and said the agreement covers some unavoidable costs, including insurance, lease expenses, forensic examiner pay, and the new access system, but argued it does not adequately address the judiciary’s most urgent problem: staffing and judicial compensation. She said court employees are leaving for better-paying jobs, judicial salaries are frozen for two years, and applicant pools for judgeships have declined, especially in greater Minnesota. She also said the judicial branch was not meaningfully consulted on the budget target and urged lawmakers to recognize the courts as a constitutional obligation rather than a discretionary program.

Transcript Highlights:

• 43.680> consistent<00:10:44.240> processing whole the lack of consistent processing whole
• comply with application processing comply with application processing timelines<00:11:58.200>
• So right now applications are still being processed in the, uh, they're still being processed in the,
• So right now applications are still being processed in the, uh, they're still being processed in the,
• So right now applications are still being processed in the, uh, they're still being processed in the,

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We knew during the budget negotiations.
• There is funding in the budget agreement There is funding in the budget agreement uh<00:09:24.400>
• more uh should we have uh budget more uh should we have uh budget surpluses<00:14:14.200> uh<
• So, budget reality shaped the it.
• reserve fund from the budget reserves. reserve fund from the budget reserves.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: House leaders and members discussed a budget agreement centered on preserving Hennepin County Medical Center, with speakers saying the deal provides $705 million total for HCMC and related hospital support. They said $205 million would go directly and exclusively to HCMC, with a $500 million reserve fund available next summer for hospitals meeting narrow eligibility criteria tied to medical assistance and uncompensated care, plus a $30 million uncompensated care fund and increased Medicaid rates for critical access hospitals. They also said the agreement includes a task force to develop a long-term solution for HCMC and new governance provisions, including a professional hospital board, mediation requirements, and continued reporting on public dollars. The leaders also highlighted other parts of the budget deal, including $1.2 billion in bonding for infrastructure, $125 million for a homestead tax refund that would increase the homestead credit by 12% for qualifying homeowners, and $75 million for county IT modernization with additional ongoing funding and a possible future surplus allocation. They said the agreement preserves three-month Medicaid retroactive coverage for one year despite federal changes, provides $10 million for food banks and food shelves, and includes $12.5 million for school-linked mental health grants, $3.8 million for mobile crisis grants, and $5 million for anonymous threat reporting systems in public and private schools. Members also said the deal does not change existing law on the ballpark tax, which remains tied to Target Field bonds and other statutory obligations, and that NLX and Blue Line transit funding would only redirect to reserve accounts if those projects do not move forward. They said the agreement also includes memorial provisions for former Speaker Melissa Hortman, including a $200,000 appropriation to Helping Paws, renaming Highway 610 as the Hortman Memorial Highway, a memorial garden, and a work group on a Capitol complex state park proposal. In response to questions, leaders said they were frustrated that comprehensive gun violence prevention and some other issues were not included, and they said the session would end with an orderly finish after several long days of final work.

Transcript Highlights:

• If it's within the budget, then I would urge us to try to use the budget for the Department of Corrections
• We're an increase in their budget.
• I am against the process. Does that make sense? He does. These issues. I am against the process.
• I know that there's two budgets.
• There's this budget here, and then there is the local county budget.

Summary: The committee first received a report on the executive protection detail, which was filed without questions. Members were then given a long advance list of House and Senate bills ready for consideration, followed by several amendment requests from agencies. The committee adopted amendments for the Auditor of State to increase special deputy expense allowance, the Administrative Office of the Courts for court interpreters and substitute court reporters, and several other items including local sales tax refunds, county property tax redistribution, and local law enforcement funding. It also held one amendment on House Bill 1034 and moved a Northwest Arkansas Community College cash fund increase tied to tornado-related campus repairs. The committee then considered a series of member amendments and appropriation items, including increases for the Public Defender Commission and deputy prosecuting attorneys to cover higher bar license fees, and a $12 million federal appropriation-only item. A lengthy discussion followed on a proposal from Senator Wallace and Representative Tosh to fund a pilot program for prison cell-phone detection/jamming technology at two correctional facilities. Sponsors and Department of Corrections officials said the system would target illegal contraband phones, would be procured through an RFP, and would be a two-year pilot; members raised questions about legality, cost, scope, data, and whether the department should use existing budget authority. The committee ultimately advanced the item by motion. The committee also took up an amendment from Senator Caldwell for the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture, seeking a $4 million appropriation increase. Testimony emphasized that the division’s extension offices and research functions are underfunded, that salaries are not competitive, and that the request would help with staffing and flexibility; other members questioned why the division needed more appropriation authority when it already had room under current limits and noted that the request exceeded the higher education board’s recommendation. The amendment was adopted after extended debate. Finally, the committee began acting on governor’s letters, adopting amendments for a $150 million increase to the homestead property tax credit, a $23,000 reallocation for the Insurance Department’s conference costs, $100,000 for property appraisal review work, $1.5 million for career and technical education professional development, $300,000 for DFA regulatory federal spending, $5 million for Inspector General fraud investigations, a consolidation of appraiser/abstractor/home inspector appropriations, deletion of a completed Fort Chaffee readiness center appropriation, and a revised reappropriation for corrections capital projects that would add special language restricting use of the $73.7 million prison-expansion reappropriation. The committee also heard a summary of a supplemental appropriations package involving fund transfers for pregnancy resource centers, senior centers, assistance grants, used tires, and UAMS pregnancy/stroke programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• That is not a household budget.
• And it's not a political process.
• And it's not a political process.
• Thank you. seeing local budgets, local government budgets soar.
• We're not telling them how this whole process, the phased-in process, is going to work.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• budget resolution labeled BUD S02. budget resolution labeled BUD S02.
• budget resolution. budget resolution.
• aside from the uh finance budget bills. aside from the uh finance budget bills.
• Bud Res 2, the House budget resolution. Bud Res 2, the House budget resolution.
• The budget resolution is Thank you. The budget resolution is passed. passed. passed.

Bills: HF601

Keywords: agriculture, depredation compensation, livestock, crop damage, elk, wolves, wildlife management, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Well, thank you to our budget chair.
• We did not look at the, again, CARB doesn't play a role in the budget process and dedicating budget funds
• We did not look at the, again, the CARB doesn't play a role in the budget process and dedicating budget
• The revenue is invested through the annual budget process, and the utility bill rebates are sent back
• You are not in charge of the budget.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Environmental Quality Committee and Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 held a joint hearing on CARB’s proposed amendments to the cap-and-invest regulations. Opening remarks from senators emphasized the 2025 reauthorization of the program through AB 1207 and SB 840, and focused on whether CARB’s April revisions faithfully implement legislative intent while balancing climate ambition, affordability, leakage prevention, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). Several senators raised concerns that the proposal could reduce GGRF revenues, weaken funding for transit, affordable housing, wildfire prevention, drinking water, and other community programs, and shift too much support toward industry. Others stressed the need to protect businesses and consumers from higher costs and to avoid leakage and refinery closures. Senator Cortese’s statement, read into the record, warned that the proposal could jeopardize transportation funding commitments. CARB Chair Lauren Sanchez said the amendments respond to legislative direction and public comment, and described four main changes: increased electric bill credits, a larger manufacturing decarbonization incentive (MDI), additional compliance support for industry, and removal of post-2030 allowance allocations from the current rulemaking. She said the proposal keeps the cap aligned with 2030 and 2045 targets, maintains affordability protections, and is intended to reduce emissions while minimizing leakage and supporting in-state jobs. CARB staff also said the MDI would have guardrails, require applications and reporting, and be tied to emissions-reducing facility upgrades. The Department of Finance explained that GGRF revenue estimates are highly uncertain and are updated periodically based on auction data. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the amendments are significant and could materially affect environmental ambition, industry support, utility credits, and GGRF revenues. LAO highlighted that the MDI could add allowances above the cap, potentially reducing certainty that 2030 targets will be met, and noted that the proposal appears to shift more allowances to industry and fewer to GGRF than current regulations. LAO also said the proposed GGRF estimate of about $8 billion through the decade could be insufficient to fully fund lower-priority tiers of programs. In questioning, senators pressed CARB on whether the proposal would raise consumer costs, whether free allowances or MDI funds would actually lower prices at the pump, how leakage is measured, and whether the Legislature’s budget assumptions would need to be revised before final action. No votes were taken during the hearing; the discussion was informational and focused on questioning CARB and fiscal staff ahead of the board’s planned May 28 consideration of the amendments.