Transcript Highlights:

• Our individual income tax calculation starts with adjusted gross income.
• Uh, most rules for calculating business net income affect AGI or FTI.
• Uh most rules for<00:02:15.440> calculating<00:02:16.000> business<00:02:16.400> net
• <00:02:16.640> income for calculating business net income for calculating business net income
• take place after the calculation of AGI. take place after the calculation of AGI.

Bills: HR1, HF387

Keywords: January 6 insurrection, pardon, law enforcement, violent crimes, public safety, justice system, political accountability, Blaine, local sales tax, special tax, restaurant tax, lodging tax, admissions tax, amusement tax, hotel tax, redevelopment, capital improvements, municipal finance, bonding authority, tourism tax

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm just wondering how it's calculated kind of, and what aspect of fraud is looked at.
• I'm just wondering how it's<00:10:38.400> calculated<00:10:39.040> kind<00:10:39.240>
• kind of, and what Chair it's calculated kind of, and what Chair Nash.<00:10:40.680> aspect<00
• So, I'm trying to think about how we calculate this, and what we do.
• <00:21:00.520> I being able to calculate that out. I being able to calculate that out.

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee took up House File 3683, which would require the state budget forecast to estimate the budgetary impacts of fraud committed against state programs. Chair Nash argued that fraud has real fiscal effects on the state, that those costs should be quantified in the forecast much like inflation was previously incorporated, and that doing so would help lawmakers understand the true cost of money lost to fraud. He also said the bill was intended to give MMB direction to develop a way to forecast fraud’s impact and that the issue should be treated as part of the state’s fiscal outlook. Deputy Commissioner Anna Mingy of Minnesota Management and Budget testified in opposition to the bill’s approach, saying fraud is unacceptable and MMB is committed to combating it, but that the twice-a-year forecast is not the right tool for this analysis. She said forecasts are forward-looking budget tools based on projected revenues and spending, while fraud analysis is retrospective and involves legal definitions and processes. She also warned that requiring MMB to consult with legislative chairs on fraud estimates before public release could politicize the forecast and would be a departure from current practice. Members raised concerns about how fraud would be defined and quantified, whether the bill would cover known or potential fraud, and whether it would duplicate existing budget adjustments. Chair Nash responded that the bill was modeled on prior inflation-forecast language and said fraud’s fiscal impact should be estimated even if the exact number is debated. Other members questioned whether the proposal would add value or create subjective numbers, while supporters said audits and program integrity data provide a basis for estimating a range. Deputy Commissioner Mingy also answered questions about bond ratings, saying Minnesota maintained its AAA rating and that rating agencies focus on governance and long-term obligations, not specific fraud estimates. She later said the administration’s anti-fraud package includes permanent bans on state contracts and grants for individuals convicted of fraud. The discussion ended without a recorded vote or final action in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• Fannie Mae's index rate, known as the required net yield, is the benchmark index used to calculate these
• Absent this, we are again unable to calculate these numbers.
• to respond to this we are calculate to respond to this we are replacing<00:03:43.319> it<00:03
• <00:03:51.640> these<00:03:52.640> these again unable to calculate these these again
• Commissioners group Capital calculation Commissioners group Capital calculation and<00:04:26.080

Bills: HF2601, HF2607, HF2027, HF2608

Keywords: financial institutions, insurance regulation, insurance holding company, group capital calculation, liquidity stress test, NAIC, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, insurer solvency, affiliate transactions, groupwide supervision, internationally active insurance group, lead state commissioner, policyholder protection, hazardous financial condition, deposit or bond, contract for deed, conventional loan, cooperative apartment loan, mortgage interest rate cap, average prime offer rate

Transcript Highlights:

• had already put into the bill around how the 70 days of eligibility for emergency assistance is calculated
• had already put into the bill around how the 70 days of eligibility for emergency assistance is calculated
• <00:11:10.880> during<00:11:11.120> a<00:11:11.360> 12-month um is calculated
• during a 12-month um is calculated during a 12-month period.<00:11:12.880> Um,<00:11:13.279><
• from the date of the that is calculated from the date of the eligible<00:11:23.839> households

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House took up several Senate amendments and concurred in them after brief explanations from committee members. On House Bill 841, relating to miscellaneous animal welfare procedures, the House suspended rules, heard that the Senate had removed or revised several provisions — including a certified rabies vaccinator program, a fixed limit on breeding dogs, rescue-organization data reporting, and some advertising language — and then concurred 9-0-2 in committee and by voice vote. On House Bill 938, establishing the Vermont homelessness response continuum, members reviewed Senate changes clarifying funding eligibility, municipal grant applications, emergency assistance timing, fair-hearing procedures, rulemaking timelines, a unified housing voucher framework, and a shift of $500,000 from emergency hotel/motel spending to a Burlington day shelter; the House concurred after a question about the fiscal note was answered by noting the amount matched the governor’s budget and existing appropriations. The House also concurred in the Senate amendment to House Bill 941, which would have created a study committee on municipal regulation of agriculture, but the Senate struck that study-group language; the House committee supported concurrence 7-0-1, saying the underlying bill should move forward even without the study group. The House then considered House Bill 957, approving amendments to the Williston charter. The committee explained that the town had voted to eliminate the office of listers and replace it with contracted professionally qualified assessors, with transitional language ending lister terms after passage or upon hiring an assessor; the committee recommended passage 9-0-2, the House ordered third reading, suspended rules to place the bill in all remaining stages, passed it, and voted to message it to the Senate forthwith. At the end of the session, the House noted two additional committee reports: Senate Bill 64 on optometrists was referred to Ways and Means, and Senate Bill 313 on career technical education was referred to Appropriations. The House then adjourned until May 22, 2026, at 10 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this total award each year is calculated considering several factors.
• It also includes calculated projections in local property revenue growth to accurately fund state foundation
• And this total award each year is calculated considering several factors.
• And we'll discuss how that amount is calculated a little bit later in this presentation.
• But the matrix calculates a per-student funding rate based on the cost of personnel and other resources

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then took up an interim study proposal on adult education and the Excel Center model. Representatives from Goodwill Industries of Arkansas, the Excel Center network, and the University of Notre Dame’s Lab for Economic Opportunities testified that roughly 300,000 Arkansans over age 19 lack a high school diploma or GED, and argued that the Excel Center provides a supported diploma pathway for adults who struggle with GED testing. Witnesses highlighted wraparound services such as free child care, transportation assistance, tutoring, life coaching, and career services, and cited outcomes including high retention, growing enrollment, and research showing higher employment and earnings and lower criminal justice involvement for graduates. Committee members raised questions about the state’s role, existing adult education programs, and how the study would be structured; the motion to adopt the ISP passed, though there was some procedural disagreement about when questions should have been taken. The committee then heard a detailed adequacy funding overview from BLR staff Katie Walden and Adrian Beck on Arkansas K-12 education finance. They reviewed national funding principles and explained Arkansas’s system, including state and local revenue sources, the Public School Fund, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, and the Facilities Partnership Program. Staff said K-12 state and local revenues totaled $6.6 billion in 2025, with foundation funding making up the largest share of district and charter funding, followed by additional, categorical, and supplemental funds. They also explained the matrix-based foundation formula, the role of the uniform rate of tax, and how categorical and supplemental funds support areas such as alternative learning, English learners, special education high-cost cases, teacher salary equalization, declining enrollment, and student growth. Members asked several follow-up questions about how specific funding categories are defined and used, including student support staff, instructional aides, special education high-cost occurrences, ALE funding, teacher salary equalization, and the inclusion of Excel Center amounts in state-local funding totals. Staff said some of those details would be addressed in a later presentation and offered to provide additional records, including district lists and historical information. The meeting ended after the funding overview, with no additional votes or actions beyond the ISP adoption and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• And TRIP has calculated that in the Las Cruces area, the average driver there loses almost $2,000 each
• And in fact, in Albuquerque, our report calculates that the average driver loses 40...
• The report calculates that traffic crashes, particularly those that may have been preventable,...
• And that only calculates the economic cost of crashes.
• I've got my calculator, so I'm just curious. And then I'm going to go ahead, sir. Mr.

Keywords: 996, all

Summary: The committee first heard TRIP’s annual New Mexico transportation report from Carolyn Boniface Kelly, which described deteriorating roads and bridges, congestion, safety concerns, and a large transportation funding gap. The report said more than half of major roads statewide are in poor or mediocre condition, over 170 bridges are rated poor, congestion costs drivers significant time and money, and traffic crashes and road conditions impose billions in annual costs. Members broadly agreed the report underscored the need for more stable transportation funding, with several noting the state’s recurring underinvestment and the safety risks to motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. The committee then took up Senate Bill 2, a transportation bonding and revenue package. Senator Gonzales and Governor’s office and NMDOT representatives said the bill would authorize about $1.5 billion in additional bond debt for ready-to-go highway projects, while also increasing certain motor vehicle excise, registration, weight-distance, and EV-related fees to help support debt service and transportation funding. Supporters, including contractors, the Greater Albuquerque Chamber, the Department of Finance and Administration, and transportation officials, argued the bill would improve safety, economic development, project delivery, and funding stability, and help preserve federal dollars. Opponents, including the Rio Grande Foundation and some committee members, objected to the tax and fee increases, argued the state should use existing surpluses or other funds instead, and raised concerns about impacts on families, businesses, and local governments. Committee members questioned how projects would be selected, how the new fees were calculated, how EV surcharges would work, and whether local government distributions would be affected. NMDOT said the projects would be reported to the legislature annually, selected using crash data, asset management, and project readiness, but bond approval would remain with the State Transportation Commission. After debate, Representative Romero moved do pass on SB 2 as amended, Representative Hochman-Vigil seconded, and the committee approved the bill 7-2, with Representatives Brown and Dow voting no and several members expressing reservations despite supporting the need for transportation investment.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we calculate what the previous for the current year.
• So what is my explain a little bit about how the retention is calculated.
• The formula used to calculate retention is outlined directly in statute.
• The dollar amount calculated from that grows when that property value that home Grosso is very similar
• Of the looking at slide tend those last calculations are those last calculations based on internal calculations

Transcript Highlights:

• So I have to enter into this FSET support think window, or prospective income calculation.
• This is where I enter in that calculation for the purposes of getting the SNAP budget correct.
• So I have to enter into this FSET support think window, or prospective income calculation.
• This is where I enter in that calculation for the purposes of getting the SNAP budget correct.
• >> Anybody got a big enough calculator? You know, I don't know if Mr.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• How long would it take you to calculate that 0.174, or how long does it take you to calculate out if
• If somebody looks at changing, how long would it take you to calculate that 174?
• Or how long does it take you to calculate out if there was a change in the weighting factor?
• know if someone has a calculator on them, 120,000 times 0.001.
• Or even his calculator. Changing the threshold is also fairly is a math problem.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes and then received a lengthy DPI presentation from Stanley Schauer on statewide reading and math assessment data for students with and without disabilities. He explained the assessment systems used over time, the absence of 2019-20 data, and how North Dakota’s standards are set by educators. Members asked about alternate assessments, cohort trends, the apparent drop in proficiency in higher grades, and the new NDA+ assessment. Schauer emphasized that the biggest pattern in the data was the relative stability of students with disabilities, the post-pandemic drop and partial recovery, and the need to focus on reducing the novice category. He also said the state plans to revisit high school standard setting and that future data could be broken out by program, disability category, and schools using science-of-math or other initiatives. Public testimony from special education staff suggested that the flat performance of students with disabilities during COVID likely reflected continued services and intensive supports, and committee members discussed whether the current disparity goal is realistic and whether growth measures would be more useful than simple proficiency buckets. After the presentation, the committee took a short break and then moved into discussion of special education funding models. Chair Richter said members should contact Schauer directly with ideas for additional data views and noted that the committee would continue its work on funding and possible model changes. Brandon Bomback of Grand Forks Public Schools began a presentation arguing that the special education funding formula, especially the weighting factor, should be reconsidered if the committee wants a system that better reflects accountability and student needs. He said his comments were based on the perspective of a larger district and focused on the special education weighting factor rather than other parts of the formula. The remainder of his presentation was not included in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• value calculation. value calculation. Thanks,<00:08:54.400> Ms.
• How were those payments treated in terms of calculations towards benefits?
• Chair: Senator Rasmusson, you know, part of the calculation is to the question of high five.
• discussion to that um in the calculation discussion to that um in the calculation if<00:51:03.760
• <01:03:00.840> in retirement annuity must be calculated in retirement annuity must be calculated

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The commission first approved the minutes and then took up several pension omnibus items. Representative Rapinski’s item, related to an I-RAP issue, was moved ahead of the agenda and passed without further information after members noted the State Board of Investment and Minnesota State had not identified additional facts; the bill, as previously amended, was recommended for inclusion in the 2026 Pension Omnibus Bill. The committee also corrected a procedural issue on Senator Gustafson’s bill, SF 3897/HF 3703, after realizing an amendment referenced earlier belonged to a different bill; the motion was restated without the amendment reference and the bill was then recommended to pass and be incorporated into the omnibus bill. The main policy discussion centered on SF 3897/HF 3703, which would change how terminating firefighter relief association plans value benefits for firefighters under age 50. Senator Gustafson said the current statute can unfairly reduce benefits by requiring present-value discounting and that the bill would instead allow benefits to be based on accrued benefit under the plan formula, while still leaving relief associations flexibility to use present value if they choose. Staff confirmed the bill applies only to relief associations under chapter 424B, not PERA or the statewide plan. Senator Rasmussen raised concerns about consistency between SVF and non-SVF reliefs and about differing treatment on termination; the bill author acknowledged the difference. The committee ultimately voted to recommend the bill for inclusion in the omnibus pension bill. The final major item was House File 4162, as amended by an A1 amendment, which requires employers of reemployed annuitants in TRA to make employer contributions during reemployment, including Minnesota State Colleges and Universities employees covered under section 354.445. Representative O’Driscoll argued the bill would direct existing education-formula pension dollars to TRA, prevent districts from using those funds elsewhere when retirees are rehired, and keep the employee neutral because the annuitant’s benefit would not change. Supporters said the measure would help pension funding and address situations where districts rehire retired teachers, often in hard-to-fill specialties. Opponents, including Senator Rasmusson, questioned the added cost to school districts, citing an estimated $5.385 million in annual TRA revenue from the change and warning it could reduce districts’ ability to hire or retain staff. After discussion, the committee had not yet taken final action on this item in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• around that that does not impact any taxes or fees, which is important, that all the taxes are calculated
• on the I don't know. which is important that all the taxes are calculated on the total transaction cost
• Yet, the manufacturers, who the calculation of this piece of the puzzle would be, would have to hire
• components in that car, the seats, the type of formats you're going to use, it's going to change the calculations
• It's going to be an impossible thing to enforce or even calculate.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure held a public hearing on two bills: House Bill 5138, concerning consumer protections for cash transactions amid penny scarcity, and House Bill 5036, concerning consumer information related to tariffs. Chairs Tackey Chan and Senator Payano opened the hearing, noted the committee’s one-year anniversary, reviewed procedures, and explained that the Senate and House were both in session, with Senator Payano prepared to take over if needed. The committee heard from several industry and legislative witnesses, and the hearing was eventually closed by motion and voice vote. Supporters of H. 5138, including Senator Paul Feeney, the Massachusetts Package Stores Association, the Massachusetts Restaurant Association, and the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association, said the bill would create a clear statewide rounding standard for cash transactions if pennies become scarce. They argued it would improve operational efficiency, reduce confusion, provide legal clarity, and protect businesses and consumers by requiring notice and limiting the rule to cash payments. The Retailers Association of Massachusetts also supported the concept but suggested amendments, including changing mandatory rounding language to allow flexibility and clarifying that taxes and fees would not be affected. Witnesses were largely opposed to H. 5036. The Retailers Association, the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association, and the Massachusetts State Auto Dealers Association said tariff-related shelf or price disclosures would be difficult or impossible to implement because tariff costs change frequently and are hard to trace through complex supply chains. Auto dealers emphasized the challenge of calculating tariff impacts across thousands of vehicle parts and models, while retailers said the proposal would add burdens and could increase costs. No votes on the bills were taken during the hearing; the only formal action was adjournment of the hearing after testimony concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• , >> Um, as part of the adequacy calculation, >> Um, as part of the adequacy calculation
• the adequacy calculation come from? the adequacy calculation come from?
• the DOE does the adequacy calculation. the DOE does the adequacy calculation.
• calculate it based on that. calculate it based on that.
• from right from the state calculation. from right from the state calculation.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The commission met to review and amend the minutes from its previous meeting, correcting the date, several spelling and wording errors, and clarifying references to a scholarship fund and a member’s title. The minutes were then approved as amended, with some members abstaining because they were not present at the prior meeting. The chair then turned to the commission’s work plan under SB 57, emphasizing the need to prioritize the statutory topics and identify which issues require additional research, documentation, and possible spreadsheets. Members discussed a broad range of special education cost drivers and policy questions, including student referral rates, why students are classified as other health impaired, whether referrals increased after COVID school closures, intervention processes before referral, the cost of services required under IEPs and 504 plans, differences between federal law, state law, and DOE rules, reporting of special education costs, out-of-district and residential placements, district sharing of resources, dispute resolution, graduation rates, and adult learning outcomes. Several members raised concerns that school environments, mental health, bullying, and possible overidentification may be contributing to rising special education numbers and costs, while others cautioned that some reported district percentages may be inflated or unclear because of how the data are counted. A major portion of the meeting focused on HB 742, which would eliminate prorated special education aid when state appropriations are insufficient and require the governor to draw a warrant to cover shortfalls. Representative Ames explained that the bill had been recommended for interim study because the commission is already examining special education costing, and he highlighted the gap between FY24 special education costs of about $977.1 million and state aid of $33.9 million for catastrophic aid, $67.4 million for differentiated aid, and $50.8 million in federal IDEA funds, leaving local districts to cover about $825.1 million. He argued the commission should ultimately make clear that both the federal government and the state should contribute more. The Department of Education, through Melissa White, answered questions about data and oversight. She said special education counts come from IEPs entered into the state system using SASIDs, that DOE monitors districts through both desk audits and on-site visits, and that billing is checked against the services listed in each student’s IEP. She also said DOE’s special education work is largely federally funded, with roughly $56.7 million received through IDEA this year and about $49.1 million flowing through to LEAs, while the department retains a small amount for administration and statewide support activities. Members also discussed how adequacy calculations use special education counts from the state system and how those figures are reported.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our performance is calculated by two independent nationally recognized firms.
• Our performance is calculated by two independent nationally recognized firms.
• Our performance is calculated by two independent nationally recognized firms.
• to independently match the calculations to independently match the calculations and<00:41:56.960
• <01:41:00.840> under calculation under calculation under 352.00<01:41:03.400> subdivision

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It does not change how swipe fees are calculated or administered.
• We will calculate interchange fees.
• Starts with how Visa and MasterCard calculate the interchange fee and what banks do to adopt it.
• We're talking about the calculation of the fee at the point of sale.
• We're talking about the calculation of fees in the course of... A transaction using technology.

Bills: HB245, HB245, HB700, HB2783, HB3526, HB3900, HB4061, HB4124, HB4166, HB4395, HB4534, HB4609, HB4641, HB4736, HB4738, HB4739, HB4945, HB5015, HJR175

Keywords: property tax, delinquent taxes, ad valorem, penalties, interest cap, military service, retirement, law enforcement, custodial officer, Employees Retirement System, commercial financing, brokers, registration, disclosures, finance, consumer protection, fees, deferred compensation, automatic participation, county employees

Transcript Highlights:

• Under controlling federal law, the money in the irrevocable trust should have been calculated as should
• not have been calculated as Ms.
• as should not have been been calculated as should not have been calculated<00:05:23.920> as<00
• <00:05:24.240> Guyon's calculated as Ms. Guyon's calculated as Ms.
• Compensation is calculated as 4% times $114,260, which equals $4,570.40.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Joint House and Senate Subcommittee on Claims convened on April 30, first without quorum and then with quorum, at which point the committee corrected and approved the prior minutes. Members then reviewed several claims held over for informational purposes, including injury claims for Fraser, Larson, Schmidt, Stuart, and Washington, and property claims for Lidberg, Robecky, and Young, with no action taken on those items. The committee dismissed a claim by Ms. Prevally seeking reimbursement for funds liquidated from irrevocable trusts after hearing that the matter had already been litigated in court and that subcommittee rules bar claims for public assistance compensation. The panel then approved two exoneration claims: James Jovan Davis, whose murder conviction was vacated after postconviction proceedings and who settled for $250,000, and Clayton Douglas Groves, whose sexual-conduct convictions were vacated after evidence of prior false accusations was admitted and who settled for $350,000. Testimony from counsel for both claimants emphasized wrongful conviction, the length of incarceration, and negotiated settlement amounts, with members asking about the basis for the compensation and attorney-fee allocations. The final exoneration claim, Marvin Haynes, was also approved. The committee heard that Haynes was convicted as a teenager, later exonerated after new evidence showed false evidence and suggestive eyewitness identification, and that the state and claimant had reached a $4.5 million settlement. The committee then turned to Department of Corrections injury claims, denying Arnold Baker’s claim for lack of evidence of a compensable permanent injury, and approving Mark Carroll’s claim for a $4,570.40 award after he suffered a compensable ankle fracture while working. In property claims, the committee discussed Anthony Edwards’s claim for food, a JPay tablet, and shoes. After testimony from Department of Corrections counsel about property inventory procedures and the lack of a current replacement tablet program, members agreed to compensate Edwards $70 for the missing shoes, deny the food claim, and deny the tablet claim because the tablet had been returned and any malfunction was reported outside the department’s reporting window.

Transcript Highlights:

• Salaries are calculated annually using the average base salary of all public school teachers statewide
• Salaries are calculated annually using the average base salary of all public school teachers statewide
• Salaries are calculated annually using the average base salary of all public school teachers statewide
• Salaries are calculated annually using the average base salary of all public school teachers statewide
• , completes its review and calculations, completes its review and calculations, the<00:16:08.639>

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee heard an Office of Education Technology presentation on the Kentucky Education Technology System (KTS) and a request to increase its annual budget from $15.4 million to $30 million, including an additional $14.6 million. The witness described KTS as a statewide service model that provides districts with student information and financial systems, internet bandwidth, regional support, cybersecurity, online registration, learning management and email services, and collaborative instructional technology support. He argued the state’s centralized purchasing saves districts 40% to 60% compared with buying services individually, and said federal internet discounts and district matching funds create a strong return on investment. He also said KTS has faced long-term funding cuts, has not received a cost-of-living increase since 1992, and is now at a “breaking point” where some services may have to be shifted to districts at higher cost. The request was broken into six main items: restoring funding for the computer science and information technology academy; strengthening cybersecurity defenses in response to sharply rising attacks on K-12 systems; funding online registration through Infinite Campus; stabilizing ongoing support costs for Infinite Campus; providing cost-of-living increases for KTS services; and increasing the KTS financial assistance sent to districts, which requires local matching funds. Members asked about the current appropriation, and the witness said it is $15.4 million. One member praised the office’s work and support for districts, while another noted the district had been an early adopter of one-to-one technology. The committee then received an overview of the KRS 156 salary schedule and step-and-rank system for state-operated career and technical education staff at area technology centers. Officials explained that salaries are set under statute and regulation based on years of service and educational rank, with annual calculations tied to statewide teacher salary averages and retroactive adjustments to July 1. They said the current ABR request is $325,000 over the biennium to cover step and rank increases. The presentation noted that KRS 156 salaries are generally comparable to local districts but are less competitive with business and industry, making recruitment and retention difficult, especially for instructors coming from the trades. Members agreed that trade instructors are underpaid relative to the market and said the issue deserves further review, with department officials indicating they are considering possible statutory revisions and a delayed implementation in a future biennium.

Transcript Highlights:

• they are engaged solely in administrative billing services, billing administrators facilitate calculations
• Billing administrators facilitate calculations, allocations, and transmissions of billing services.
• Billing administrators facilitate calculations, allocations, and transmissions of utility charges as
• Our role is strictly limited to calculating utility charges, preparing invoices and statements, and providing
• Our role is strictly limited to calculating utility charges, preparing invoices and statements, and providing

Summary: The Assembly Banking and Finance Committee met with a quorum, took up its consent calendar, and passed SB 946 and SB 700 on a do-pass motion to the next committee. The committee then heard SB 546 by Senator Grayson, presented by Assembly Member Blanca Rubio, which would clarify that third-party billing administrators are not debt collectors when they are only performing administrative billing services. Supporters from Conservis Utility Billing Management and the California Apartment Association said the bill reflects the original intent of the Debt Collection Licensing Act, would reduce compliance uncertainty, and still preserves consumer protections by barring coercive collection practices. There was no opposition, and the bill passed on a unanimous roll call to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 505 by Senator Richardson, presented by Assembly Member Maggie Krell, which would require digital wallet providers and money transmitters operating in California to use two-factor or multi-factor authentication for logins. Support came from the National Consumer Law Center, while TechNet said it was currently opposed but working with the author on amendments. Members discussed balancing security with convenience for trusted devices and users. The bill passed unanimously on a do-pass motion to the Committee on Appropriations, and the committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• calculation benefited the taxpayer the most.
• calculation benefited the taxpayer the most.
• calculation benefited the taxpayer the most.
• calculation benefited the taxpayer the most.
• <01:05:26.599> of understanding is that the calculation of understanding is that the calculation

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• discussion regarding the updates to some of the adequacy standards as well as the square footage calculator
• before to now, it's been beneficial regarding the adequacy standards change and the square footage calculator
• It's better because ultimately we're giving square footage based on the calculator and design professionals
• So the gross square footage calculator increase was big for us, not only us but other school districts
• members, I would have to look to see what they got awarded. when they got awarded and if the new calculator

Transcript Highlights:

• She said PNNL uses modeling to calculate annual savings, and this analysis looks at those savings on
• She said PNNL uses modeling to calculate annual savings, and this analysis looks at those savings on
• She said PNNL uses modeling to calculate annual savings, and this analysis looks at those savings on
• She said PNNL uses modeling to calculate annual savings.
• ><00:30:07.039> annual uses modeling to calculate annual uses modeling to calculate annual savings

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: Representative Mecklin moved House File 3545 to the general register and offered a DE amendment that removed the commissioner’s authority to choose a more efficient standard and removed the requirement that the 2038 residential energy code achieve a 70% reduction in annual net energy consumption compared with the 2006 energy use index. The amendment was adopted, and the bill was then discussed as amended. Mecklin said the bill was intended to address home affordability, arguing that energy code requirements add to housing costs and make it harder for younger Minnesotans to buy homes. Several testifiers opposed the bill, including representatives from the Center for Energy and the Environment, AIA Minnesota, Sierra Club, Fresh Energy, Housing First Minnesota, and ARXUS. They argued that energy codes are not a primary driver of housing costs, that stronger codes do not slow housing production, and that more efficient homes lower utility bills and improve comfort, safety, resilience, and climate outcomes. Testifiers cited studies and examples showing payback over time, including estimates that efficiency upgrades could pay for themselves in five to nine years and save homeowners tens of thousands of dollars over 30 years. The Department of Labor and Industry said it had concerns about the bill because it would move away from a more energy-efficient standard and could create unintended consequences in the code adoption process, though it said the current technical advisory group process already considers cost concerns. Members questioned the cost and savings estimates, especially the comparison between higher upfront mortgage costs and lower utility bills. Fresh Energy explained that its figures were based on Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Slipstream analyses using a typical Minnesota home and that the savings were modeled over time. Representative Johnson expressed skepticism about the assumptions behind the savings numbers and argued that utility costs are not the main barrier to homeownership. The chair said the committee intended to take a vote on the bill that day, but the transcript ends before any final vote or disposition is shown.