Transcript Highlights:

• This law either requires you to subtract from 80 or divide by 30, and I think most farmers, most employers
• professionals this law either requires<00:16:03.800> you<00:16:03.920> to<00:16:04.120> subtract
• <00:16:04.560> from<00:16:04.680> 80<00:16:05.319> or requires you to subtract
• from 80 or requires you to subtract from 80 or divide<00:16:05.839> by<00:16:06.000> 30

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up House File 1325 and adopted the author’s A2 amendment before hearing testimony. Representative Schultz presented the bill as a set of bipartisan changes to make Minnesota’s earned sick and safe time law more workable for small businesses, public employers, and taxpayers, arguing the current law is an unfunded mandate that increases costs and property taxes. The bill’s supporters said it would add flexibility, including changes affecting coverage for certain workers, employer size thresholds, front-loading, weather-related exceptions, and a delay on penalties. Commissioner Nicole Blissenbach of the Department of Labor and Industry opposed the bill, saying it would exclude about 800,000 workers, or roughly 30% of the workforce, from earned sick and safe time protections and create confusion and enforcement problems. She also objected to the proposed penalty delay, saying the department already uses compliance assistance and needs penalty authority for serious violations. The Minnesota Chamber supported modifications to the mandate, saying businesses—especially small ones—have struggled with compliance and that the law has had unintended effects on PTO policies and leave use. The League of Minnesota Cities supported parts of the bill, especially changes affecting more generous city leave policies and weather-event exemptions, saying current language creates confusion and can interfere with emergency staffing. Opponents from Education Minnesota, SEIU Minnesota, TakeAction Minnesota, and a nurse from Unity Hospital argued the bill would strip protections from part-time workers, minors, and workers with family caregiving needs, and would weaken a law they said has helped workers avoid discipline or lost wages when sick. Supporters from counties and an HR consultant emphasized administrative burdens, emergency staffing needs during weather events, and the difficulty of applying ESS rules to existing leave policies. No final vote on the bill was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the bill was laid over for further consideration.

Transcript Highlights:

• SB 1203, income tax subtraction standard deduction.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The Senate opened with a prayer and pledge, then recorded attendance, approved the journal, and recognized several guest groups in the gallery, including CRNAs for Capital Day, rural electric cooperative representatives, AEA Retired members, March of Dimes participants, students, and other visitors. The invocation focused on faith, courage, and the need for just laws, and several senators used personal privilege to introduce guests and highlight causes such as public education, maternal and infant health, and the Equal Rights Amendment. The body then moved through a lengthy calendar of second-reading bills, covering a wide range of topics including child welfare and DCS procedures, public school safety, health care and insurance, groundwater and water supply, tax and appropriations measures, housing and HOA issues, elections and campaign protections, criminal justice, firearms, abortion-related measures, and transportation projects. The transcript primarily reflects bill titles being read rather than debate on substance, and no floor votes on those measures are shown in the excerpt. The Senate also received a large set of first-reading bills and committee referrals, including measures on motor vehicle booting fees, EMS reciprocity, election procedures, physician assistant licensure, mental health hearings, assisted living, Alzheimer’s planning, safe haven providers, short-term rentals, fire district formation, correctional officer contributions, and several appropriations items. After the readings and routine announcements, the Senate adopted a motion to adjourn and recessed until Thursday, January 22, 2026, at 10:00 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, there are a lot of things if we had more revenue, you know, not subtracting $450 million, not
• subtracting money for ESA vouchers, if we had that revenue available to budget for various different
• Those were added as other subtractions, other adjustments. Thank you.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The joint House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees met to hear identical conformity bills, HB 2153 and SB 1106, which would align Arizona tax law with the federal Internal Revenue Code as of Jan. 1, 2026, including some retroactive provisions for tax year 2025. Staff explained that the bills would exclude three federal provisions: the higher federal SALT deduction, the new senior deduction as written in H.R. 1, and the deduction for interest on new car loans. They would instead include a $6,000 retirement-income deduction for taxpayers age 60 and older, a $6,000 Roth IRA contribution deduction, a higher dependent tax credit, and a deduction for child and dependent care expenses above the federal credit. JLBC estimated the package would reduce general fund income tax revenue by about $441.3 million in FY 2026. Members also discussed that the Department of Revenue’s forms had been issued assuming full conformity, and staff and supporters argued the bills were needed quickly to avoid confusion and amended returns during filing season. Committee members and sponsors largely framed the bills as tax relief and a way to provide certainty for taxpayers and preparers. Supporters said the package would help families, seniors, and workers, and noted that the Arizona version was negotiated to keep the overall tax relief roughly comparable to full conformity while shifting benefits away from the SALT deduction and toward child credits, retirement income, and child care. The sponsors also criticized the governor’s executive action and urged prompt passage so taxpayers would know how to file. Opponents argued the bills would reduce state revenue, worsen the budget outlook, and disproportionately benefit higher-income taxpayers and corporations. Several witnesses and members also raised concerns about the child care deduction, the retirement-income deduction, and the business expensing provisions, while supporters responded that the bill was designed to help working families and encourage saving and investment. Public testimony was mixed. The Arizona Society of Certified Public Accountants and the Arizona Free Enterprise Club supported the bills, emphasizing early conformity, filing certainty, and reduced confusion for taxpayers and software providers. Opponents included Save Our Schools Arizona, the Arizona Center for Economic Progress, Opportunity Arizona, and several individuals, who argued the package would deepen budget problems and favor the wealthy. One witness objected to a federal school-choice-related provision she said was being tied to the bill, though committee members said the measure before them was a tax conformity bill and not a school finance bill. The hearing included extended debate over the fiscal impact, the governor’s prior requests for some of the same tax changes, and whether taxpayers would need to file amended returns if the legislature later changed course. The transcript ends during testimony from NFIB, with no final committee vote or action shown in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that would just be a simple a piece of language or simple piece of legislation to add or subtract

Bills: HJR1088, SB1280, SB1316, SB1433, SB1455, SB1456, SB1457, SB1459, SB1461, SB1463, SB1465, SB1466, SB1721

Keywords: education rules, administrative rules, joint resolution, Oklahoma State Department of Education, higher education, State Regents for Higher Education, Teachers' Retirement System, charter schools, Statewide Charter School Board, career and technology education, CTE, OEQA, rule approval, legislative oversight, permanent rules, school governance, teacher retirement, education agencies, excise tax, oil tax

Transcript Highlights:

• So just tell me surely that it's all accounted for, it's all add and subtracted, right, Mr.

Transcript Highlights:

• HB 2931, civil rights advisory board; HB 2935, income tax subtraction; HB 2941, motorcyclists; HB 2944

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, approved the prior day’s journal, and recognized Dr. Gary Figgi as Doctor of the Day. Members also introduced guests and issued a proclamation honoring the Arizona hotel and lodging industry for anti-human-trafficking efforts, with remarks emphasizing employee training, survivor support, and recent law-enforcement operations targeting trafficking and child sex crimes. On the floor, the House handled several bill actions. HB 2004 was first read. HB 2091, a state-revenue measure requiring a two-thirds vote, passed 47-11 and was sent to the Senate. HB 2122, relating to the Board of Technical Registration, passed 48-10, and HB 2138, relating to firefighters, passed 54-4; both were transmitted to the Senate. The House also moved HB 2113, HB 2941, and HB 2833 between committees as noted in the desk announcements. The House then resolved into Committee of the Whole and recommended HB 2792 and HCR 2043 do pass. HB 2792 was reported out of Ways and Means, and HCR 2043, a congressional term-limit convention resolution, drew some opposition and discussion about term limits before also receiving a do-pass recommendation. The House adopted the Committee of the Whole report, referred both measures to engrossing, and then heard additional personal privilege remarks honoring Phillips Christian Methodist Episcopal Church during Black History Month. The meeting ended with committee schedule announcements for the following days and adjournment until 1:15 p.m. Wednesday, February 4, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so they'll subtract benefits and give it a negative cost-benefit ratio.

Bills: SB2271, HB1216

Keywords: adult residential facilities, care services, Medicaid, payment rates, elderly care, health services, North Dakota, prescription drugs, drug affordability, copay assistance, copayment accumulator, deductible accumulator, out-of-pocket maximum, health insurance, health benefit plan, self-insured health plan, self-funded plan, third-party payment, manufacturer assistance, patient assistance program

Summary: The Appropriations Committee met with a quorum and took up three bills. House Bill 1216, dealing with prescription drug expense co-pay accumulators in health plans, was presented by Rep. Karen Carl’s, who explained it would prevent insurers from refusing to count third-party assistance toward deductibles for patients using high-cost, non-generic drugs. An amendment was offered to clarify effective dates, including a delayed January 1, 2026 start for PERS coverage. PERS testified that the amendment would align with its calendar-year benefit structure and likely reduce the fiscal note. The amendment was adopted 16-0, and the bill was set aside for further discussion later. House Bill 1199, creating a criminal justice data-sharing system and missing persons/missing Indigenous people task force, was introduced with a committee amendment changing the Attorney General reference to the Attorney General or designee. The committee noted the bill includes a $250,000 general fund appropriation for ongoing costs. The amendment passed 16-0, and the amended bill received a do pass recommendation by a 15-1 vote, with one no vote from Senator Magrum. House Bill 1531, appropriating $75,000 for an irrigation expansion study by the Agriculture Commissioner, was supported as a way to update older economic-impact studies on irrigation and assess opportunities for expansion. Members discussed its relationship to broader study pauses and the history of irrigation development in the state, including Garrison Diversion and remaining authorized acres. The bill passed 16-0. The committee then discussed scheduling for the coming week, noting a heavy bill load and plans for daily morning meetings before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• amount because remember we allow you to earn 30% of your weekly benefit amount before we start subtracting
• amount because remember we allow you to earn 30% of your weekly benefit amount before we start subtracting
• amount because remember we allow you to earn 30% of your weekly benefit amount before we start subtracting
• amount because remember we allow you to earn 30% of your weekly benefit amount before we start subtracting
• amount because remember we allow you to earn 30% of your weekly benefit amount before we start subtracting

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• You add to that the number of absentee ballots that you received, you know, then you subtract off the
• You add to that the number of absentee ballots that you received, you know, then you subtract off the
• 04.320> you um that you received, you know, then you um that you received, you know, then you subtract
• 05.600> ones<01:43:05.840> that<01:43:06.080> you<01:43:06.320> have subtract
• off the ones that you have subtract off the ones that you have left.<01:43:07.840> both<01:43

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Minnesota Housing Finance Agency would have to determine the amount of its investment income and then subtract
• c> income investment income investment income and<00:05:08.720> then<00:05:08.960> subtract
• from<00:05:09.680> that<00:05:09.840> amount<00:05:10.160> the and then subtract
• from that amount the and then subtract from that amount the amount<00:05:10.480> that<00:05:10.600

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The conference committee on the housing omnibus bill began with member introductions and a staff walk-through comparing House and Senate provisions. House Research staff reviewed major policy differences affecting Minnesota Housing Finance Agency operations, including limits on how much the agency may retain from state appropriations for administrative costs, new reporting requirements, restrictions on transfers between appropriated accounts, and House-only language requiring annual expenditure of investment income from state appropriations. Senate provisions were also summarized, including tighter rules on when appropriations may be placed into Housing Development Fund bookkeeping accounts, updated operating-cost reporting, and Senate-only changes to how investment earnings may be used. Staff also described shared and differing provisions on program-money transfers, a lived-experience earnings exemption, and a long list of Senate-only policy changes, including manufactured home park tenant protections, low-income housing tax credit and bond-related changes, a task force on housing taxes and fees, and repealers affecting Housing Development Fund authority and certain older programs. Fiscal staff then reviewed the budget impacts. The House side included one-time appropriations for workforce housing development, family homeless prevention and assistance, a Minnesota Nice Home Share pilot, and homebuyer education, along with debt service for $100 million in housing infrastructure bonds and transfers/cancellations that produced a net zero general fund impact across the budget window. The Senate side noted a fiscal note for the housing taxes and fees task force and a smaller housing infrastructure bond authorization, with corresponding debt service costs and a total Senate budget-window impact of about $1 million in general fund debt service. After the staff presentations, the committee moved to public testimony. Commissioner Jennifer Ho of Minnesota Housing said the bill’s housing infrastructure bonds and continued support for family homeless prevention were important, and she supported the lived-experience earnings exemption, while noting concerns about the interest-earnings provisions. Testifiers from Greater Minnesota groups praised the workforce housing investments and Senate updates to the state housing tax credit and infrastructure grant program, though they suggested changes to the geographic distribution language. HOME Line urged funding for statewide tenant hotline services, citing rising demand and asking for $1 million if additional money becomes available. The Minnesota Consortium of Community Developers supported the bill’s investments and emphasized the need to pair housing development with supportive services. Housing First Minnesota praised housing infrastructure bonds and other investments but criticized the omission of the Minnesota Starter Homes Act. The Minnesota Multi Housing Association began testimony opposing certain rent-control-related provisions in the House bill. No votes or final actions were taken during the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Minnesota law at a basic level allows for 20% of the federal amount through addbacks and future subtractions
• federal amount through adbacks and the federal amount through adbacks and future<00:39:43.760> subtractions
• which<00:39:44.560> leads<00:39:44.800> to<00:39:44.960> bonus future subtractions
• which leads to bonus future subtractions which leads to bonus depreciation<00:39:46.079> tracking

Bills: HF3127, HF3816, HF3814, HF3815, HF3817

Keywords: taxation, pass-through entity, qualifying owner, partnership, S corporation, tax return, corporate franchise tax, individual income tax, research expenditures, federal compliance, Minnesota Statutes, income tax, corporate tax, section 179, federal conformity, HF3815, Minnesota taxes, tax conformity, Internal Revenue Code, IRC conformity

Transcript Highlights:

• once we get to that provision, we'll be able to add to that $228 million, $80 million, and then subtract
• c><01:17:18.320> then $228 million $80 million and then $228 million $80 million and then subtract
• 19.040> the<01:17:19.199> items<01:17:19.440> we've<01:17:19.679> already subtract
• out the items we've already subtract out the items we've already done. done. done.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• These are additional subtractions into our budget that we have to figure out at this time.
• These are additional subtractions into our budget that we have to figure out at this time.
• These are additional subtractions into our budget that we have to figure out at this time.
• These are additional subtractions into our budget that we have to figure out at this time.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee on Economic Development and Technology heard testimony on several measures, beginning with SB 1343, which would amend quorum requirements for the Small Business Regulatory Review Board. The board chair testified in support, saying it has been difficult to fill all seats and that using active seats for quorum would help the board function more effectively. No opposition or questions were raised, and the committee moved on. The committee then heard SB 1578, which drew mixed testimony. DBEDT supported the measure and the Attorney General suggested inserting preamble language from HB 1025 to provide historical context on the East-West Center. Austin Martin of the Libertarian Party of Hawaiʻi opposed the bill, arguing it could invite improper behavior, create loosely regulated satellite offices, increase foreign influence, and add competition for land ownership. The committee took no vote during the hearing. The bulk of the meeting focused on SB 1641, a measure to establish a Hawaiʻi film commission/authority and related funding and governance structure. DBEDT supported the intent and offered friendly amendments to clarify the distinction between film and media industries, while the Honolulu Film Office and labor representatives from IATSE, Teamsters, and Pride at Work supported the bill but urged changes. Their concerns centered on conflicts of interest, especially having producers on the commission, and they asked for more labor representation and clearer oversight rules. The Attorney General raised constitutional and special-fund concerns, saying the grant standards and special-fund language needed work. Committee members discussed renaming the entity as a Hawaiʻi Film Authority, broadening its scope beyond cultural production, adjusting the commission makeup, and clarifying funding sources, including the existing film and creative industries fund and the 0.2% rebate contribution. No final vote was taken in the portion provided, but members indicated the bill would need substantial revisions and an HD1.

Transcript Highlights:

• 2770, Prostitution Assessment, Judiciary; HB 2743, Homeowners Association; HB 2747, Income Tax Subtraction

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The House convened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, approved the prior day’s journal, and recognized the Doctor of the Day, Dr. John Lynch of Legislative District 12. Members also introduced a number of guests and visiting groups, including Arizona electric co-op representatives, March of Dimes advocates, CRNAs, AEA retirees, a University of Arizona legislative fellow, and other constituents and visitors in the gallery. The chamber then handled routine floor business: attendance was recorded at 58 present, one absent, and one excused; committee substitutions were announced; HB 2677 was removed from the Judiciary Committee and additionally referred to Public Safety and Law Enforcement; and a large slate of House bills and one concurrent resolution were first read and referred to committees. The clerk also read a lengthy list of bills on second reading, covering a wide range of topics including education, health care, housing, taxation, elections, water, labor, public safety, and other policy areas. No substantive debate or votes on legislation occurred during the floor session beyond the referral actions and procedural announcements. Members made announcements about upcoming blood donations, a Veterans Caucus coffee and donuts event, and several committee meetings scheduled for later in the day or the following day. The House then adopted a motion to adjourn until 10 a.m. on Thursday, January 22, 2026.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're subtracting the SWP tax. Go ahead.
• They're subtracting the SWP tax. So we've got this handout.
• They're subtracting the SWP tax. The left-hand side of the page is the actual adequacy aid.
• They're subtracting the SWP tax. formula that says um you know formula that says um you know regular<
• So if I subtract 0.29 from one, I'm going to have to add another 0.29 to another?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee held a work session focused on school funding formulas, adequacy aid, and special education aid, with the chair outlining a schedule for the next several Tuesdays and noting that the committee would likely need multiple executive sessions to narrow down the bills. Members discussed the FY 26 formula, including base cost, differentiated aid, extraordinary needs grants, hold harmless provisions, and the roughly $28 million in excess statewide education property tax (SWP) funds that are not currently returned to the state under the existing formula. The first bill discussed was HB 137, which would allow excess SWP funds to remain with the local municipality for school and municipal purposes. Representative Spilsbury argued the issue is fundamental and suggested the state should require excess funds to be remitted back to the state, while Representative Damon said the bill appears to codify current practice and may be unnecessary, especially given possible court action. The discussion then shifted to a related bill from Representative Fellas that would redefine SWP as local money rather than state money and keep the current adequacy aid numbers revenue-neutral for now. Representative Fellas explained that SWP was created in 1999 after the Claremont lawsuit as part of the state’s effort to show increased school aid, but that it effectively labeled part of the local property tax as state money without changing property tax bills. She argued the state should not be tapping local property tax revenue and said her bill would preserve the current distribution while removing the SWP tax label, with future work possible on a different measure of local capacity such as income, home values, or poverty rate. Members also referenced prior discussions of fiscal capacity aid, relief aid, and other formula changes as part of the broader effort to restructure school funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• When this was calculated, were the online students subtracted out?
• Were the online students subtracted out?

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• For actual growth, the change in the unemployment rate should be subtracted, but that change is negligible
• For actual growth, the change in the unemployment rate should be subtracted, but that change is negligible

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate and House Ways and Means chairs opened the FY 2027 consensus revenue hearing by emphasizing the need for a balanced, fiscally responsible budget amid federal funding cuts, health care cost pressures, and uncertainty around the federal tax law changes referred to as OB3. They also noted the state’s current revenue performance is slightly above benchmark and paid tribute to the late Representative Anne Margaret Ferranti. Secretary of Administration and Finance Matthew Gorkowitz echoed the call for caution, saying Massachusetts has protected core services while building reserves and that the FY27 budget process begins with a careful revenue estimate. Department of Revenue Commissioner Jeff Snyder, along with DOR staff, presented FY26 and FY27 tax forecasts and identified major drivers and risks: OB3’s negative impact on state revenue, surtax collections, labor market conditions, capital gains, and corporate/business excise taxes. DOR estimated OB3 would reduce FY26 revenue by about $664 million and FY27 by about $282 million, while surtax and capital gains were expected to remain strong in FY26 but soften in FY27. Members questioned the outlook for surtax, capital gains, and the potential fiscal effect of a ballot question reducing the income tax rate from 5% to 4%; DOR said that proposal could cost roughly $4.2 billion to $4.8 billion annually, with a smaller but still significant impact in FY27 because of phase-in timing. Treasurer Deb Goldberg testified next on the stabilization fund, lottery, PRIM, unclaimed property, and the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission. She reported the rainy day fund at about $8.1 billion, said the lottery was on track for $1.5 billion in FY26 net profit and projected $1.25 billion in FY27, and highlighted that iLottery is expected to launch in summer 2026 with revenue beginning in FY27 and dedicated to child care initiatives. She also described strong PRIM performance and record unclaimed property returns, while members asked about the child care use of iLottery revenue, multilingual outreach, and the economic impact of expanded liquor licensing. Mass Taxpayers Foundation President Doug Howgate and Tufts’ Evan Horowitz then offered differing revenue outlooks and policy warnings. Howgate projected modest growth, cautioned against overusing reserves for ongoing obligations, and urged caution on federal tax conformity changes and health care spending pressures. Horowitz projected higher FY26 and FY27 revenues than other witnesses, warned that the surtax and capital gains make the tax system more volatile, and said a 4% income tax ballot question could reduce FY27 revenues by roughly $800 million to $1 billion. He also flagged the rent control ballot question as a potential risk to municipal finance and suggested the state consider giving a permanent home to the independent revenue model used by Alan Clayton-Matthews.

Transcript Highlights:

• We garnish wages or subtract future benefits, and we are still penalized from that.
• subtract future benefits and we are still penalize from that.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Is what's left when you subtract responsibility. I think there's a time for accountability.
• base-plus approach over time, where you're essentially looking at the last year and either adding or subtracting

Transcript Highlights:

• . >> Add a million, subtract the million, result 1.5. >> But we also have 611,000 commitments, which
• Because if I take the beginning balance on the top line, add 1,063, subtract the expense, subtract the
• 08.560> 1063 on the top line add 1063 on the top line add 1063 >> 239<01:25:11.360> subtract
• 01:25:11.600> ract<01:25:12.480> the<01:25:12.719> expense<01:25:13.760> subtract
• >> 239 subtract ract the expense subtract >> 239 subtract ract the expense subtract

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Dedicated Funds met to review inactive and dedicated accounts, note prior legislation that had passed, and begin its annual review of agency funds. Members discussed several inactive funds, including some HHS-related accounts, a law enforcement memorial fund, and possible cleanup of accounting references where funds had been reorganized or merged. Staff noted that some newer funds may simply not have started receiving revenue yet, and the committee agreed to follow up on specific accounts later rather than address everything immediately. The committee then heard from Fish and Game on its dedicated funds. Topics included the statewide public boat access account, which is used for boat ramp and access-site maintenance and is supported by boat registration fees and federal funds; the ORV education, training, and enforcement account, which has declined over time and may need attention because revenue depends heavily on weather and snowmobile use; and the search and rescue account, which is funded by Hike Safe cards, a $1 fee from boat and OHRV registrations, and court-ordered fees. Fish and Game also explained that the conservation license plate fund had been merged into the non-game species management account, which is supported by donations, federal funds, and a statutory general fund transfer, and that pheasants are treated as game species under a separate program. The committee spent considerable time on the lifetime license account, an off-book Treasury-held account that collects lifetime license sales and returns funds to Fish and Game based on annual sales plus 9% of the fund balance. Members questioned why the account’s presentation did not clearly show the transfer as a revenue reduction and suggested the reporting format needed cleanup so the flow of money would be easier to understand. Fish and Game said the account is operating properly and that the transfer to the unrestricted Fish and Game fund exceeded $400,000 in the most recent year. The committee also reviewed the publications and fundraising revolving fund, which keeps a $100,000 balance for inventory purchases and transfers excess year-end funds to the unrestricted Fish and Game fund; members again raised concerns that the reporting format did not clearly show the transfer, and staff said they could add a note or other clarification.