Transcript Highlights:

• Therefore, it will not reduce the federal revenues generated by geothermal production.
• </c><00:29:27.760><c> generated</c><00:29:28.480><c> by</c> reduce the federal revenues generated by
• reduce the federal revenues generated by geothermal<00:29:29.520><c> production.
• </c><00:29:34.559><c> by</c><00:29:34.880><c> reducing</c><00:29:35.360><c> the</c> federal revenues
• by reducing the federal revenues by reducing the administrative<00:29:36.399><c> responsibilities</c>

Transcript Highlights:

• So, right, we're projecting increased expenditures over time while revenue stays flat.
• Right now what we're looking at is smaller differences between revenue and expenditures.
• So, again, revenue stays flat, expenditures increase.
• But you'd be doing the calculation on actuals as opposed to this rounding-up ratchet.
• Increases in our incomes are not calculated that way.

Summary: The subcommittee opened with remarks on the Senate’s budget plan for affordable housing and homelessness, including a proposed $2 billion housing investment and full funding for HHAP rounds 7 and 8. The first major item was the administration’s housing reorganization and trailer bill package, which would codify the new Housing Development and Finance Committee (HDFC), consolidate multifamily housing finance programs into a one-stop application and award process, and shift some authority over bonds, tax credits, and the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program. Administration officials said the goal was to reduce duplication, speed projects from award to construction, and improve accountability by aligning financing decisions. The LAO generally supported the streamlining concept but recommended changes to the proposed bond set-aside and earlier reallocation of unused bond authority, and suggested preserving flexibility for integrated applications and reporting back on the proposed 70/30 split for housing versus sustainable communities funding. Committee members, especially Senator Cabaldon, raised concerns that the new committee structure could add process and delay, and questioned whether the proposal was effectively repurposing the climate-oriented ASIC program into a housing finance tool without enough direct investment in core housing programs. Administration witnesses responded that the structure was meant to create transparency, public accountability, and simultaneous financing awards, and said the proposal was only a first step in a broader consolidation effort. Members also asked about specific programs such as the Joe Serna Farm Worker Housing Grant Program and the Sustainable Agricultural Lands Conservation Program, and staff said those would remain within the broader streamlined framework or the flexible sustainable communities allocation. The committee then heard from CDLAC and TCAC on federal tax credit changes and state housing finance. Staff explained that H.R. 1 increased the federal 9% LIHTC allocation and, more importantly, lowered the bond-financing threshold for 4% credits from 50% to 25%, allowing California to finance many more projects. They reported emergency regulations were adopted quickly to implement the change, resulting in 195 projects and more than 25,000 units in the 4% program, while the 9% program funded 58 projects and nearly 3,000 units. Members asked about the value of the state low-income housing tax credit program and rehabilitation projects; staff said state credits remain important for filling financing gaps and that a portion of bond and credit resources is now set aside for acquisition and rehabilitation. Finally, the Civil Rights Department reported on the effects of federal civil rights rollbacks and on three limited-term or expiring programs: California vs. Hate, the Community Conflict Resolution Unit, and Investigations and Conciliation Enhancement. Director Kevin Kish said federal closures and funding cuts have increased demand on the department, which now has more than 12,000 open matters, up from 8,700 a year earlier, and a six-month wait for intake interviews despite overtime triage and early case screening. Members urged continued funding for the programs, arguing they are essential as federal protections weaken; department staff said California vs. Hate connects callers quickly to support services, the conflict resolution unit fills a gap left by the shuttered federal counterpart, and the limited-term investigators have helped reduce wait times even as filings continue to rise.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> calculate this into their budget. calculate this into their budget.
• Affecting the revenues of the pass.
• calculate calculate eligibility.<02:06:31.920><c> So,</c><02:06:32.680><c> this</c><02:06:32.960><c>
• ><c> impacts</c><02:50:27.640><c> and</c> Section three has revenue impacts and Section three has revenue
• President. ...there was no de minimis impact on state revenue.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> determined by a statutory calculation. determined by a statutory calculation.
• And it goes on to lay out a calculation to figure that up to provide that invoice.
• So on the table that I've provided you, you can see a graphic representation of what that calculation
• You see a calculation of the percentage of those that are state.
• And it goes on to lay out<01:26:38.400><c> a</c><01:26:38.719><c> calculation</c><01:26:40.000><c> uh

Committee: Joint Select Federal Natural Resource Management Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 1593, Dixon, revenue report, held in committee.
• AB 1751, Cork-Silva, townhomes, do pass as amended to clarify the bill does not impact the calculation
• AB 1751, Cork-Silva, townhomes, do pass as amended to clarify the bill does not impact the calculation
• AB 1761, Rogers, electricity calculations, do pass. That's out on an A roll call.
• AB 1793, Ward, cash payment calculation, do pass. That's out with Republicans not voting.

Summary: The Assembly Appropriations Committee held a suspense-file hearing on May 14, 2026, reviewing hundreds of Assembly bills and a few committee bills. The chair opened by explaining the committee’s budget constraints and the factors used in suspense decisions, including fiscal impact, return on investment, effects on constituents, and protection of the state’s social safety net. The agenda was organized alphabetically by author, and the committee noted that results would be posted later that day online. The committee then acted on a very large number of measures, sending many bills to the Assembly floor on do pass or do pass as amended motions, while holding many others in committee. Topics covered a broad range of policy areas, including housing, health care, education, labor, public safety, wildfire mitigation, water, energy, transportation, cannabis, immigration, and state governance. Many bills were amended to narrow scope, make implementation contingent on appropriations or existing resources, remove provisions, or clarify agency responsibilities; several bills were held without further action. Among the notable actions, the committee advanced bills on items such as Medi-Cal services, child care, wildfire-related programs, housing financing, school and college issues, public safety and criminal justice, environmental and energy policy, and various consumer and business regulations. Some measures were sent out on A or B roll calls, with Republicans often not voting on amended bills. The hearing concluded after the committee reported that a large number of bills had been moved to the Assembly floor, either as do pass or do pass with amendments, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 464 by Senator Barrow, coverage for abuse treatment; provide for cost calculations, duties
• Senate Bill 464 by Senator Barrow, coverage for abuse treatment; provide for cost calculations, duties
• Senator 464 by Senator Barrow's coverage for abuse of the treatment, provide for cost calculations, duties
• of the Department of Insurance, legislative appropriate, treatment, provide for cost calculations, duties
• It's designed to leverage minimal state funds, existing funds, no new revenue, no expanded government

Bills: HR252 , HR253 , HR254 , HR255 , HR256 , HCR103 , HCR104 , HR244 , HR245 , HR246 , HR247 , HR248 , HR249 , HR250 , HR251 , HCR101 , HCR102 , SCR40 , SCR60 , SB112 , SB131 , SB145 , SB194 , SB268 , SB307 , SB312 , SB319 , SB333 , SB341 , SB346 , SB464 , SB466 , SB488 , SB495 , SB503 , SB507 , SB509 , HR9 , HR196 , HCR27 , HCR28 , HCR50 , HCR62 , HCR67 , HCR71 , HCR78 , HCR81 , SCR20 , HB123 , HB251 , HB625 , HB662 , HB709 , HB769 , HB775 , HB783 , HB895 , HB1011 , HB1057 , HB1155 , HB1186 , HB1224 , HB1245 , HB1247 , HB1253 , HB1254 , HB1255 , HB1256 , SB8 , SB10 , SB11 , SB12 , SB13 , SB14 , SB16 , SB17 , SB18 , SB20 , SB21 , SB22 , SB40 , SB48 , SB55 , SB69 , SB75 , SB77 , SB78 , SB85 , SB102 , SB115 , SB133 , SB140 , SB148 , SB151 , SB165 , SB169 , SB170 , SB185 , SB197 , SB200 , SB217 , SB235 , SB278 , SB280 , SB291 , SB300 , SB303 , SB315 , SB324 , SB330 , SB411 , SB416 , SB420 , SB436 , SB438 , SB449 , SB455 , SB456 , SB477 , SB489 , SB521 , SB97 , SB105 , HR171 , HCR49 , HCR65 , HCR72 , HR37 , HCR64 , HR170 , HR191 , HR206 , HR207 , HR208 , HR217 , HCR11 , HCR53 , HCR60 , HCR66 , HCR68 , SCR19 , SCR3 , SCR6 , SCR18 , SCR11 , SCR22 , SCR2 , HCR6 , HB64 , HB68 , HB92 , HB130 , HB258 , HB633 , HB801 , HB61 , HB98 , HB102 , HB139 , HB142 , HB170 , HB185 , HB194 , HB199 , HB231 , HB247 , HB294 , HB336 , HB474 , HB661 , HB842 , HB852 , HB66 , HB153 , HB165 , HB326 , HB387 , HB455 , HB513 , HB603 , HB660 , HB719 , HB762 , HB766 , HB802 , HB816 , HB833 , HB940 , HB950 , HB975 , HB1028 , HB1039 , HB1051 , HB1053 , HB1080 , HB1201 , HB1215 , HB1228 , HB1251 , HB1252 , SB1 , SB23 , SB32 , SB42 , SB43 , SB46 , SB51 , SB110 , SB113 , SB150 , SB154 , SB161 , SB218 , SB220 , SB221 , SB253 , SB289 , SB310 , SB351 , SB399 , SB404 , SB502 , SB26 , SB28 , SB29 , SB30 , SB41 , SB44 , SB64 , SB84 , SB87 , SB93 , SB98 , SB107 , SB118 , SB142 , SB192 , SB195 , SB199 , SB219 , SB222 , SB234 , SB241 , SB255 , SB275 , SB277 , SB292 , SB294 , SB306 , SB314 , SB482 , HCR32 , HB798 , HB998 , HB1084 , HB1223 , HB59 , HB955 , HB1191 , HB1234 , HB646 , HB824 , HB341 , SB397 , SB442 , HB901 , HB79 , HR20 , HR74 , HB284 , HB306 , HB366 , HB393 , HB458 , HB577 , HB582 , HB605 , HB614 , HB682 , HB733 , HB752 , HB773 , HB911 , HB926 , HB996 , HB1035 , HB1069 , HB1113 , HB1140 , HB1180 , HB1240 , SB47 , SB82 , SB89 , SB149 , SB382

Summary: The House met with a quorum, opened with prayer and the pledge, adopted the journal, and received a large number of Senate messages, committee reports, and bill referrals. Members also introduced several resolutions and recognized guests, including students from Allen Parish, federal appointees Brandon Beach and Paul Hollis, and other visitors. The chamber then moved through a lengthy agenda of House and Senate measures, with many bills and resolutions reported favorably, amended, or referred to committee. Among the notable floor actions, the House adopted H.R. 32 urging the Port of New Orleans to obtain backup motors for the St. Claude Avenue Bridge. It also passed bills on a wide range of topics, including local court and ordinance procedures for Alexandria, prohibiting reporting criminal fines and fees to credit bureaus, veterans’ lottery benefits, police chief residency in Tickfaw, fire marshal plan review authority, expanding the definition of first responder to include public works employees, NIL protections for student athletes, salary increases and additional positions for assistant district attorneys, limiting OMV debt referrals for unpaid reinstatement fees, watershed restoration and flood control funding, a sexual assault survivor task force, elderly consumer protection education, recreation of the Public Service Commission, Medicaid reimbursement for non-emergency medical transportation, local sales tax audit procedures, alcoholic beverage definitions for salons and similar businesses, transfer of removed monuments to state park property, hearing aid dealer regulation updates, a permit fee for small in-state distillers, expanded city court jurisdiction in Avoyelles Parish, and a narrowed version of the Alexandria administrative adjudication bill. Several measures were amended on the floor before passage, including the Alexandria ordinance bill, the sales tax audit bill, the alcohol/beverage bill, and the monument transfer bill. The House also temporarily returned some bills to the calendar for later consideration. Most measures passed overwhelmingly, though House Bill 153 on criminal court debt reporting passed with 67 yeas and 18 nays, House Bill 660 on assistant district attorney salaries passed 94-1, House Bill 719 on additional ADA positions passed 95-0, House Bill 883 on the sexual assault task force passed 86-2, House Bill 1028 on non-emergency medical transportation passed 81-15, and House Bill 1215 on monuments passed 78-14.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yes, those are all contemplated within the development of the per child per month calculation.
• to lower your the actual cost on a per child per month basis because you're per child per month calculation
• day, whether we have maintenance adoption subsidies, not formula or not, the formula is going to calculate
• So when they were doing the calculations for what they were going to reimburse of foster care, parents
• So a lot of the funding retained earnings, Israeli general revenue from the street.

Transcript Highlights:

• Nearly $1.2 billion in SNAP revenue is at stake for 1,700 New Mexico grocery stores, farmers markets,
• There are 1,800 retailers who are at risk of losing revenue.
• Under that, the Federal Office of Inspector General calculated that we owed about $119 million, I believe
• They are very busy, and so we've calculated in our budget request the amount of tasks they, as human
• So we've kind of calculated a need for additional FTE. So we are going to do that.

Committee: House Legislative Health & Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• I was just curious myself if the revenue impact from the revenue estimate is something like this likely
• Thank you. impact from the revenue estimate but is impact from the revenue estimate but is something<
• Revenue does explicitly say the estimate Revenue does explicitly say the estimate is<00:18:30.880><c>
• </c> and then uh the commissioner of Revenue and then uh the commissioner of Revenue uh<00:42:17.040>
• </c> um or Mr M would that change the revenue um or Mr M would that change the revenue estimate<00:47

Committee: Senate Taxes

Transcript Highlights:

• So they have since been able to calculate the BHP funding now based on our premiums.
• So they have since been able to calculate the BHP funding now based on our premiums.
• So they have since been able to calculate the BHP funding now based on our premiums.
• So they have since been able to calculate the BHP funding now based on our premiums.
• So they have since been able to calculate the BHP funding now based on our premiums.

Committee: House Commerce Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• to fund the operations, then we would see those other revenue sources here, and we may just want to
• He added that currently, because there is no revenue in that account, it will not show up here.
• and no expense without revenue.
• and to have an expense you need to have revenue.
• </c><00:08:47.560><c> and</c> show up because there's no revenue and show up because there's no revenue

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:

• sales tax revenue for the state.
• Banks also earn far more from card revenue than they spend on rewards.
• What makes this even more challenging is that we are not just paying fees on our revenue.
• We lose the revenue.
• What are their total revenues? Where do they put their money?

Summary: The commission met to hear testimony on the future of credit card payments and swipe fees, with a focus on impacts to small businesses, especially restaurants and retailers. Members and witnesses discussed interchange fees, processing fees, chargebacks, fraud risk, rewards programs, and the growing use of card-not-present and digital wallet transactions. Several witnesses urged the commission to support legislation that would prohibit fees on the tax and tip portions of transactions and allow businesses to pass credit card fees on to customers if they choose, while others warned that state regulation of interchange could reduce fraud protections and harm consumer rewards programs. Small business owners and trade groups described rising costs and thin margins, saying card fees are now among their largest expenses and are often charged on money that is merely passing through the business, such as sales tax and gratuities. Restaurant representatives said the current system shifts fraud and chargeback losses onto merchants, with little ability to negotiate rates or recover disputed funds, and argued that transparency and fee relief would help keep independent businesses open. Retailers gave similar testimony, citing rising swipe fees, complex statements, and the burden of online and phone transactions. A representative from the airline industry opposed interchange reform, arguing that airline credit card rewards are popular with consumers and support travel and jobs in Massachusetts. Credit union representatives cautioned that state-level interchange limits could weaken fraud prevention and force higher rates or reduced services, while the National Restaurant Association and a payments-policy attorney countered that banks and networks already operate under fee caps in other contexts and that interchange rates are fixed rather than competitive. Commission members asked questions about how chargebacks work, how fees are broken down, whether businesses can negotiate with processors or POS providers, and how consumer behavior has shifted toward cards, online ordering, and delivery since the pandemic. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• time, both to do what you just suggested, to count who's actually in which districts, and then to calculate
• there are units in our formula that are actually calculated based on that 40th day.
• And then to calculate there are units in our formula that are actually calculated based on that 40th
• Chair and Representative, one of the things that's calculated in the Environmental Product Declaration
• It is a revenue-neutral bill which establishes a competitive program to address critical vacancies in

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 253, a committee substitute dealing with virtual and distance learning programs and school funding. Sponsors and staff explained that the substitute removed several earlier restrictions on virtual education, including residency requirements, the 10% enrollment cap, the ban on K-5 distance programs, and the moratorium on new enrollments. It also changed the State Cyber Academy Act to the Distance Learning Act, added reporting and evaluation requirements for districts and charter schools, and allowed the Public Education Department to withhold funding if programs are out of compliance. Members discussed concerns about impacts on rural districts, charter schools, and programs like Mosquero and the New Mexico Communications Academy, as well as the temporary funding fix for Gallup Public Schools, which was amended to average prior-year and current-year enrollment rather than use current-year membership alone. Public testimony on HB 253 was largely supportive, with school leaders and education organizations backing the amendment and the broader substitute while noting that more work may be needed on oversight and funding formulas. Committee members then debated the bill’s temporary provisions, the study requirement, and whether the changes would adequately address the Gallup funding issue and broader virtual-learning accountability. The committee adopted the amendment and then gave the House Appropriations and Finance Committee substitute for HB 253 a do pass recommendation. The committee then heard House Bill 153, a voluntary industrial decarbonization package that combines an Environmental Product Declaration grant program, a rebate or incentive program for lower-carbon building materials, and production tax credits and capital grants for eligible industrial products. Members asked detailed questions about environmental product declarations, hydrogen, anti-donation concerns, funding sources, and whether the bill would support sawmills, engineered wood, biofuels, and forest-thinning-related industries. Supporters from the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce and Clean Air Task Force testified that the bill would encourage innovation, attract private investment, and reduce emissions without imposing mandates. The committee adopted the substitute and then voted do pass on the bill, with Representative Brown noted in opposition. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 255, which consolidates public safety workforce funding into a single competitive fund for recruitment, retention, and professional development in law enforcement, firefighting, corrections, and public attorney offices. Testimony from counties, the chamber, AFSCME, and State Police supported the measure as a targeted response to staffing shortages and public safety vacancies. The committee took no extended debate and approved HB 255 with a do pass recommendation. The meeting ended with notice that the committee would meet again the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• That's not how we calculated it.
• It's not individual salary calculations or anything like that.
• And so that's where the calculation is.
• I had my staff calculate how many positions that would be.
• </c> Um, and so that's where the calculation Um, and so that's where the calculation is.<01:28:49.640

Bills: HF4077 , HF3809 , HF3639 , HF4478 , HF3363 , HF3874

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Summary: The Judiciary Finance and Civil Law Committee approved the minutes from March 25 and March 26, then took up House File 4077, a bipartisan bill authored by Representatives Greenman and Roach. The bill would prohibit municipalities from entering into non-disclosure agreements with private entities that restrict disclosure about land development, economic development, or publicly funded projects, while preserving existing Chapter 13 data practices rules and trade secret protections. The authors argued the bill is needed to prevent secret agreements and backroom decision-making that undermine public transparency, and they moved that the bill be re-referred to the general register. Several local officials and residents testified in support, including a St. Louis County commissioner, the mayor of Lonsdale, and residents from Farmington and Hermantown. Supporters said NDAs had been used in connection with data center and other development projects to keep elected officials and the public in the dark, eroding trust and limiting community input. They described the bill as a common-sense transparency measure and said existing law already protects legitimate trade secrets. Opposition came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Business Partnership, which argued that NDAs are often necessary in early-stage economic development discussions to protect sensitive business information and remain competitive with other states. They warned the bill could discourage investment, jobs, and tax growth, and said it would impose a one-size-fits-all state mandate that limits local discretion. Committee members then debated whether the bill was too broad and whether it should be narrowed to data centers; supporters responded that the issue extends beyond data centers to other forms of economic development. A roll call vote was requested on the motion to re-refer the bill to the general register, but the final vote result was not stated in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So about $50 million a year out of general fund revenues of over $30 billion a year.
• </c> costs of a route less the fair revenue costs of a route less the fair revenue for<00:34:23.200><
• In the bottom left corner, you can see the actual formula that calculates this.
• Uh there uh that that calculates this.
• </c><00:58:29.119><c> for</c> areas in orange uh we calculated for areas in orange uh we calculated for

Committee: House Transportation Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• It is unclear how agencies are expected to calculate the infrastructure and water levels needed to maintain
• It is unclear how agencies are expected to calculate the infrastructure and water levels needed to maintain
• them local reconstruction agencies, to really empower local governments to use a portion of our tax revenues
• events present a unique opportunity to boost our economy, generate millions in state and local tax revenue
• events present a unique opportunity to boost our economy, generate millions in state and local tax revenue

Committee: House Emergency Management

Transcript Highlights:

• The Faulkner County District did not issue pre-numbered receipts or retain documentation for revenue
• did not agree with the treasurer's summary of fund activity, resulting in $204,000 in unrecorded revenues
• Calculations of excess treasurer commission were not prepared or distributed in a timely manner.
• Calculations of excess treasurer commission were not prepared or distributed in a timely manner.
• It was the Forrest Davis grant, and those expenditures and revenues were posted to the sum of account

Committee: All LEGISLATIVE JOINT AUDITING-COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES

Summary: The committee approved the February 12 minutes and received updates on delinquent municipal water and sewer reports for 2022 and 2023, noting continued progress toward compliance and reinstatement of turnback funds for several cities. It also deferred several matters to the June 4 meeting, including Fargo’s municipal accounting noncompliance report, Jericho’s street-fund misuse issue, Biggers and Holly Grove deferred reports, and a group of private water and sewer reports lacking proper responses. Members then heard and filed a detailed report on the City of Strong, which involved repeat findings on undeposited receipts, improper use of solid waste funds, unsupported spending, late payroll tax payments, accounting control problems, and fund balance issues. Mayor Darrell Howell described corrective steps, including new internal controls, outside CPA assistance, repayment of misapplied funds, budget amendments, and efforts to address the findings; the committee commended the city’s efforts and filed the report. The committee also filed reports on Thornton Waterworks, Calhoun County, Salem, Briarcliffe, Compton Water Association, Montgomery County Regional Public Water Authority, Camden, Johnson County, and Sparkman, while deferring several private water reports and other unresolved items. A major portion of the meeting focused on the Pulaski County Regional Solid Waste Management District and other regional solid waste districts. The audit found issues in Pulaski County involving unapproved payroll items, missing credit card documentation, unapproved contracts, vehicle and cell phone documentation problems, lack of competitive bidding, and weak internal controls; members questioned the district’s practices and deferred the report to June while requesting district representatives appear. The committee also reviewed a statewide report on six regional solid waste management districts, with findings in Pulaski, Faulkner, and Benton counties and no findings in three others; that report was likewise deferred for Pulaski County questions. The meeting ended after a lengthy discussion with Cross County Rural Water System about overdue audit posting, water quality problems, grant-funded improvements, board notice practices, and the broader challenges facing rural water systems, after which the committee filed the report and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I wonder if you had any knowledge or quick calculation.
• To make matters worse, if I add all the revenue that EDD is going to collect over this 10-year duration
• into EDD Next, are those solely from the General Fund, or are we using a portion from collected revenues
• But for unemployment and for PFL, those are revenues that are wholly returned to the beneficiaries.
• But for unemployment and for PFL, those are revenues that are wholly returned to the beneficiaries.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on State Administration held an informational hearing on whether the Employment Development Department is ready for the next recession, with a focus on EDD Next, the department’s long-running technology modernization effort. The Legislative Analyst’s Office reviewed EDD’s major benefit programs, the history of prior modernization attempts, the current Integrated Claims Management System work, and the department’s remaining risks, including continued reliance on a COBOL-era mainframe and the challenge of adapting quickly to future federal or state policy changes during a downturn. The LAO also explained that most pandemic-era fraud was tied to temporary federal unemployment programs rather than California’s core UI system, and that the state’s UI loan repayment is not largely attributable to fraud. Members raised concerns about the cost of repeated modernization efforts, paper versus online claims, appeal overturn rates, WARN notices, and legislative oversight of the project. EDD’s panel said the department has made substantial customer-service and processing improvements, including online self-service tools, improved call center features, identity verification, fraud controls, language access upgrades, and a new document management system. Officials reported that as of early 2026, about 83% to 85% of claims across programs were being processed timely within two weeks, and said paid family leave delays in 2024 were tied to the transition into the disability insurance online platform and seasonal workload patterns. They also said EDD is working with the Department of Technology on EDD Next and that the project will proceed in phases, with paid family leave and disability insurance first and unemployment insurance later. Members pressed EDD on persistent paid family leave backlogs, the share of paper applications, response times for constituents, and whether the department tracks long-running cases and WARN notice trends. EDD said its service standard is generally immediate response through phone, chat, or callback tools, while more complex cases can take longer because the department may be waiting on claimants or medical providers. The department also said it tracks call outcomes and outstanding cases, and that it can provide additional data on WARN notices. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with plans to continue discussing EDD Next and paid family leave at a later March 10 budget hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• taking out that language that's underlined, and we're adding investor-owned electric utilities may calculate
• For investor-owned electric utilities that elect to calculate the benefit of... ...efficiency resources
• for investor-owned electric utilities that elect to calculate the benefit of avoided utility greenhouse
• That change will allow us to support the bill, and it's really just a common-sense change to calculate
• the utilities do a calculation.

Committee: House House Government, Elections & Indian Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• It tends to be around that 12 and a half percent range, but it's calculated on a long list of various
• factors, and so the effort that goes into the supporting documentation, the calculation of all those
• The calculation of all those soft costs and what they have to report in order to get reimbursed for that
• So our recommendation is to consider some of these other factors in that calculation, as well as consider
• So our recommendation is to consider some of these other factors in that calculation, as well as consider

Summary: The Capital Budget Committee heard presentations from the Department of Commerce, the Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO), and a consultant on the School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) study. Commerce officials described their agency’s role in housing, energy, local government, broadband, and other capital programs, and reported on a $5 million pilot under Senate Bill 5200 that used trusted community messengers and technical assistance to help historically excluded organizations prepare for capital funding. They said 18 organizations received direct support and 79 smaller projects were also funded, but emphasized that statutory match rules, reimbursement-based payments, site-control requirements, insurance and audit costs, and extensive contracting rules remain major barriers. Commerce outlined efforts to expand outreach, digital modernization, internal contracting improvements, tribal MOUs, and innovation centers, and members asked about small business support, housing program placement, and outreach to Eastern Washington and communities of color. RCO described its grant programs for recreation, conservation, education, and salmon/orca recovery, and reviewed equity work done before and after a 2021-23 proviso. The agency had already created a small-communities carve-out in youth athletic facilities, piloted stipends for advisory committee members, and reduced match requirements where allowed. Under the proviso, RCO completed an equity review and a planning program that funded 54 projects across 34 counties, with many applicants being new or long-absent grantees. Staff said the review led to changes in scoring criteria, clearer application guidance, more objective data measures, expanded technical assistance, and targeted community engagement. Members asked about application burden, project sizes, outreach, and how the agency is broadening participation and representation on advisory committees. The final presentation summarized a planning study on SCAP, which examined rising construction costs, fragmented grant programs, local funding barriers, and uneven district capacity. The report recommended nine major changes, including stronger planning support, a new minor-modernization category, a mechanism to use unused funds more quickly, an education-specification prototype, a SCAP enhancement program for low-capacity districts, acceptance of non-SCAP funds, phased modernization, streamlined D-form and reimbursement processes, and revisions to the SCAP formula to better account for grade-band differences, enrollment projections, and regional cost factors. Additional recommendations included ongoing monitoring and evaluation, facilities-impact reviews, matching SCAP increases to construction-cost inflation, earlier locking of funding estimates, flexible program spaces, and updated statewide building-condition assessments. No votes were taken during the meeting.