Transcript Highlights:

• state agencies that monitor environmental toxins and pollutants to establish environmental action levels
• pollutants to establish<00:00:54.000> environmental<00:00:54.640> action<00:00:54.960> levels
• <00:00:55.280> or establish environmental action levels or establish environmental action
• levels or EALs<00:00:56.079> to<00:00:56.239> ensure<00:00:56.559> the<00:00:56.719

Bills: SB2094

Keywords: toxic chemicals, environmental action levels, public notice, environmental safety, pollution control, Hawaii State Constitution, public participation, government transparency, environmental health, 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee first took up SB 2094, which would require state agencies monitoring environmental toxins and pollutants to establish environmental action levels and limit changes to those levels without meeting procedural requirements. The chair recommended passing the bill with amendments, including inserting estimated costs for a secure portal website and webinars into the committee report and deferring the effective date to July 1, 2050. The motion passed unanimously among those voting, with excused members noted. The committee then considered several other measures and adopted recommendations to pass them with amendments, generally adding technical and clarifying changes and setting a defective date of 2525. SB 2862 was amended to broaden the preamble, make additional appointees confirmable, clarify reporting requirements for gubernatorial appointees, and was held for further discussion. SB 2781 on lei production created a working group to review existing studies and conduct a statewide study of Hawaii’s floriculture industry. SB 3015 adopted California’s definition of PII, applied it to government agencies and political subdivisions, created a private cause of action, and required a compliance report. SB 3230 removed a categorical prohibition on certain third-party project management procurements while preserving state oversight responsibility, in line with procurement office requests. The joint GVO Health and Human Services agenda then focused on two related bills requiring universal changing accommodations in public restrooms. SB 2932 would apply to new state building construction beginning July 1, 2026, and testimony from disability advocates, the Hawaii State Council on Developmental Disabilities, and others supported the measure while asking for language clarifying that the requirement applies only where technically feasible and, in some cases, only to state-managed buildings. SB 2268 was described as broader, extending beyond government buildings into the private sector and including a private right of action; witnesses supported the concept but raised implementation concerns, especially for smaller businesses, and requested the same technically infeasible language and other clarifications. Both bills were advanced with amendments, and the committee noted adoption of the recommendations.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is my understanding of the bill that it would go back to property tax payers and income tax payers
• source of income, is exempt from state income tax.
• tax uh is not as big percentage income tax uh is not as big as<00:30:23.200> a<00:30:23.320><
• but we also down um from the state level but we also get<00:32:10.200> some<00:32:10.440>
• <00:41:35.720> people like we want to help loow income people like we want to help loow income

Bills: HF4, HF173

Keywords: tax relief fund, budget surplus, surplus revenue, tax rebate, tax refund, one-time refund, income tax, property tax, constitutional amendment, Minnesota Constitution, general fund, budget reserve, taxpayer relief, state surplus, fiscal forecast, wealthy taxpayers, high-income exclusion, 2026 ballot, referendum, surplus distribution

Bills: HF3127, HF3524, HF3525, HF3754

Keywords: taxation, pass-through entity, qualifying owner, partnership, S corporation, tax return, overtime compensation, tax deduction, income tax, federal regulations, tax reform, tip income, federal tax deduction, Minnesota Statutes, individual income, employer contributions, Trump accounts, federal law, gross income exclusion, 1183

Transcript Highlights:

• They<00:19:08.400> made<00:19:08.679> income, They made income, They made income, and<00
• income tax. income tax.
• a fifth-tier income tax today. a fifth-tier income tax today.
• as an income. Chair Gomez. as an income. Chair Gomez.
• . income. income.

Bills: HF4621, HF4123, HF4616, HF1183

Keywords: child tax credit, financial assistance, low-income families, state revenue, tax policy, net investment income, taxation, business income, self-employment, tax increase, wealth tax, fairness, public services, high-income earners, economic equity, Internal Revenue Code, employee classification, federal law, Minnesota statutes, 1183

Transcript Highlights:

• So, 3611 is a bill that allows a state income tax withholding deduction for damages that are won by individuals
• taxes for the time that Minnesota income taxes for the time that they<00:36:35.200> lived<00:
• Representative Hollins responded that Minnesota residents already pay income taxes, and protesters are
• not paid for doing that work, so they do not have to pay income taxes on protesting.
• of income tax. Thank you. of income tax. Thank you.

Bills: HF3611, HF3659, HF3909

Keywords: taxation, income tax, damage awards, sexual harassment, abuse claims, immigration enforcement, taxpayers, file income tax return, Minnesota-source income, tax regulations, detention facilities, gross revenues, private prisons, Minnesota law, 1183, house

Summary: The committee first approved the March 3, 2026 minutes and then laid over House File 3611 for possible inclusion in the 2026 tax bill. Representative Finke described HF 3611 as creating a state income tax withholding deduction for damages awarded to individuals in lawsuits against federal agents such as ICE or CBP, including emotional and financial awards. There was no public testimony or member discussion on the bill before it was laid over. The committee then took up House File 3909, which Representative Hansen said would impose a 50% tax on the gross receipts of detention centers operated by private nongovernmental entities. Hansen argued the measure would recapture public money, deter what he characterized as misuse of taxpayer dollars, and target profits made by private detention contractors such as GEO Group and CoreCivic. He also cited projected revenues and profits for those companies and said the bill was a response to human rights and civil rights concerns tied to private detention operations. Testimony on HF 3909 included support from Nancy Fitz Simmons, a Minnesota State University, Mankato social work professor, who said social workers see the effects of these issues across the state and that the bill could return money to Minnesotans in need. Representative Swedzinski opposed the bill’s impact on the Appleton facility and emphasized local jobs and economic opportunity, while Representative Lee said Minnesota should seek better economic options than jail-related work. Representative Holland supported the bill as a way to offset costs to families and the state from detentions and deportations. Representative Weiner questioned the bill’s revenue potential and criticized the 50% gross-receipts tax as politicizing taxes. Representative Hansen responded that similar proposals were being explored in Washington and California and that the bill was intended to stand up to large corporate interests. The bill was laid over for possible inclusion in the 2026 tax bill.

Bills: HB156, HB474, HB602, HB633, HB852

Keywords: severance tax, parish revenue, constitutional amendment, natural resources, local government funding, HB 474, Act 400, Louisiana income tax, tax refund checkoff, refund donation, alumni association, Grambling University National Alumni Association, Louisiana Tech University Alumni Association, Department of Revenue, Title 47, voluntary contribution, tax return designation, state tax refund, nonprofit donation, higher education

Transcript Highlights:

• Under current policy, families contribute the same percentage of income regardless of whether their child
• Under current policy, families contribute the same percentage of income regardless of whether their child
• pension income.
• Right now, military retirees can subtract up to $12,500 of their pension income from their taxable income
• The bill authorizes the addition of a full-time equivalent investigator level three position.

Bills: SB219, SB9

Keywords: military pension, military retirement pay, veterans, retiree tax relief, income tax exemption, pension exclusion, Delaware income tax, retirement income, state tax subtraction, armed forces retirement, National Guard, Space Force, Coast Guard, NOAA, Public Health Service, taxable income, Title 30, Section 1106, wetlands protection, nontidal wetlands

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee met to hear several bills, with members repeatedly reminded to focus on fiscal impacts rather than policy merits. The committee first considered SB 9 on freshwater wetlands, which would combine tidal and non-tidal wetlands programs into one permitting framework; supporters said the bill resulted from a two-year consensus process and that the governor’s office and DENREC would absorb a significant share of the cost. Public testimony was largely supportive, emphasizing flood control and ecosystem services, though one speaker opposed the spending. The committee voted to release SB 9. The committee then heard SB 278 on child care assistance, which would preauthorize summer camp for eligible school-age children and create a separate lower co-payment for half-day care. The sponsor and the YMCA of Delaware said the change would better align family co-pays with provider reimbursement and make before- and after-school care more affordable for working families. The committee also released SB 278, SB 168 on alcohol delivery for package stores, SB 120 on health insurance coverage for certain testing and treatment, and HB 4, a pilot program for artificial intelligence and extended reality in schools; HB 4 was described as having a near-$3 million fiscal note and a one-year implementation delay because it was not funded in the budget. Later, the committee approved SB 219, which gradually increases the military pension income tax exclusion from $12,500 to $25,000 over three years and includes related joint-filing and residency changes. Supporters argued it would help attract and retain military retirees and bring federal dollars into the state. The committee also released SB 1, a major primary care reform bill that would increase primary care spending and implement hospital payment reforms, with projected long-term savings to the state employee health plan, and SB 325, which expands background checks and wrap-back monitoring for fire service personnel and adds an investigator position for the Fire Prevention Commission. In each case, public commenters and committee members generally supported the bills, and all were released from committee by recorded vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• :28.360> state<00:32:28.559> level<00:32:28.760> for been followed the state level
• to work towards implementing a level to work towards implementing a state<00:35:25.599> level
• making that income he's paid through making that income he's paid through Minnesota<00:55:57.599>
• Low-income families rely on their income tax returns to meet the basic needs of their kids, and so I
• state level state level in<01:24:25.719> last<01:24:25.960> year's<01:24:26.400>

Bills: HF2274, HF1932

Keywords: taxation, income tax, property tax, corporate tax, homestead credit, local government aid, tax credits, economic development, taxpayer assistance, tax credit outreach, tax preparation, free tax help, IRS, Department of Revenue, general fund appropriation, earned income tax credit, child tax credit, volunteer income tax assistance, VITA, low-income taxpayers

Transcript Highlights:

• If you win on a future appeal at another level, it changes it.
• to get certified by DOR, you know, level one, level two.
• We have level one appeal with my office. It's free.
• To have a process, we have level one appeal with my office. That's free.
• We didn't have income tax. We didn't have sales tax. We had property tax.

Bills: HB2016, HB2104, HB2105, HB2288, HB2289

Keywords: tax penalties, filing, tax returns, administration, Arizona Revised Statutes, agricultural property, classification, county assessor, property inspection, appeal process, property tax, agricultural classification, Department of Revenue, property valuation, inspection notice, inspection report, on-site inspection, full cash value, rural land, farm land

Summary: The committee began with member, staff, and page introductions, then heard reminders about public testimony limits. It first considered House Bill 2016, which would eliminate late-filing penalties when a tax return shows zero tax due. The sponsor argued the bill would prevent unnecessary fines on small businesses and individuals with no liability, while staff noted any fiscal impact would likely be minimal. The bill passed on an 8-1 vote, with one member opposing it on the grounds that current waiver procedures already exist and the change could weaken compliance incentives. The committee then took up House Bill 2104, which would bar county assessors from reclassifying agricultural property for four years after an owner prevails on appeal, unless there is a change in use, ownership, or parcel configuration. The sponsor and agricultural groups said the measure would reduce repetitive annual appeals and provide stability for ranchers and farmers, especially in urbanizing areas and in places affected by fallowing. County assessors opposed the bill, arguing that their offices are better qualified than the State Board of Equalization, that the bill could allow inaccurate classifications to persist, and that it relies too heavily on owners to report changes. After extensive testimony from the Maricopa County Assessor and the State Board of Equalization executive director, the committee approved the bill 5-4. Next, House Bill 2105 was heard. It would require advance notice of certain property inspections and provide inspection reports to property owners. The sponsor said the goal was to give owners a chance to be present for inspections and to receive the reasons for any denial of agricultural status. Assessors opposed the bill as an unfunded mandate and said they already communicate with owners through mail, door hangers, and other methods, but that a standardized report form does not currently exist. Supporters from the farm and ranch community said the bill would improve transparency and help avoid disputes. The committee passed the bill 5-4. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2289, which updates truth-in-taxation and election pamphlet language to reflect higher residential property values, including a new $400,000 example. The sponsor and the Arizona Tax Research Association said the changes would make taxpayer notices more accurate and noted the bill was similar to one that had previously advanced, but without a provision that contributed to a veto. No vote was taken on this bill in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• two sort of refundable income tax credits that are targeted mostly towards lower income individuals,
• income, so the maximum credit based on earned income is $379 in 2025.
• So none of the people on this table are eligible at that income level. So that's the overview.
• uh<00:04:33.400> that<00:04:33.520> that that income level so that's uh that that that
• income level so that's uh that that concludes<00:04:33.919> the<00:04:34.039> overview

Bills: HF2254, HF2302, HF2502, HF2315, HF2475, HF2086

Keywords: HF2254, Minnesota child credit, baby bonus, child tax credit, income tax, individual income tax, tax relief, newborn, birth credit, family tax credit, tax refund, advance payment, Department of Revenue, taxable year, parenting, families with children, child credit, state regulations, families, taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• Area median income for the island.
• income subaccount.
• income subaccount.
• loans funded through the mixed income loans funded through the mixed income sub<02:19:20.639>
• Authorizes the mixed income sub account.

Bills: HB2611, HB2102, HB1710, HB1868, HB1920, HB1812, HB1733, HB1715, HB1723, HB1724, HB1727, HB1711

Keywords: HB2611, Hawaii antitrust, rental housing, rent price-fixing, algorithmic pricing, algorithmic rent-setting, property management software, pricing algorithms, rent coordination, price-fixing, collusion, cartel, multifamily housing, landlord software, occupancy levels, lease terms, Attorney General, public education program, consumer protection, housing affordability

Summary: The committee first took up HB 2611, which would prohibit algorithmic price-setting in Hawaii’s rental market, require public education by the Attorney General, and establish fines and penalties. The Department of the Attorney General opposed the bill, saying its language was too unclear and could expose landlords and agents to criminal and civil liability for ordinary rent-setting practices based on public information or assistance from property professionals. Members asked about antitrust standards, tacit agreement, and whether using county-published affordable-rent schedules would be unlawful; the AG said that would not be unlawful if based on public information and without collusion. Testimony was mixed, with the chair noting support from the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, Hawaii Realtors with comments, 50501 Hawaii and General Strike Hawaii, Haloha Project, 13 individuals, and one opponent. The committee then heard HB 2102, which clarifies that residential projects involving ground disturbance in high-risk areas remain subject to state historic preservation review and removes an exemption for lands presumed nominally sensitive. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Department of Planning and Permitting supported the measure, saying it would improve clarity and ensure review focuses on projects most likely to affect historic properties or iwi kupuna, while also urging language refinements to better define sensitive sandy-soil areas and balance preservation with housing timelines. NAP Hawaii opposed the bill, arguing it would undo progress made last session and that the current process already includes protections for inadvertent discoveries and efficiency for lower-risk areas. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs strongly supported HB 2102, explaining it was responding to beneficiary complaints about late-added language in last year’s law and saying the nominally sensitive-area language should be removed because it was adopted without sufficient stakeholder input and could be harmful to iwi kupuna protections. Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and several individuals also supported the bill. Committee discussion focused on how “nominally sensitive” areas are determined, whether project proponents could self-certify areas as exempt, and how high-density residential projects should be treated; SHPD said it uses survey and monitoring data to map sensitivity, that highly sensitive areas like Kīauea are not nominally sensitive, and that some high-density projects should remain exempt if they do not involve new ground disturbance. The hearing included no final vote in the portion provided, but the chair noted 48 individuals in support and continued questioning on the bill’s definitions and implementation.

Transcript Highlights:

• to their income. to their income.
• fair definition of income because we're not counting non-taxable income.
• income to just using AGI, or adjusted gross income, which is a narrower definition of income but also
• gross income. gross income.
• income sources.

Bills: HF2715, HF2499, HF3420, HF3657, HF2303

Keywords: HF2715, homestead credit refund, property tax refund, property tax relief, homeowner tax relief, homestead credit, co-pay reduction, Minnesota property taxes, tax rebate, state refund, income thresholds, inflation adjustment, property tax circuit breaker, housing affordability, elderly homeowners, fixed income, taxation, Minnesota Statutes 290A.04, renters credit, income tax

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:20:56.000> They're basic middle-income family. They're basic middle-income family.
• We also understand the higher incomes and stuff like that. This is addressing middle-income people.
• 00:26:49.560> you because you have a higher income, you because you have a higher income, you
• address is addressing middle-income address is addressing middle-income people. people. people.
• household income of 19,000. household income of 19,000.

Bills: HF495, HF4321, HF3902, HF4161, HF3755

Keywords: day care, tax subtraction, child care costs, licensed child care, dependent care assistance, HF4321, dependent care assistance programs, gross income exclusion, federal conformity, Internal Revenue Code, individual income tax, Minnesota tax law, tax conformity, child care assistance, employer-provided dependent care, taxable income, state income tax, retroactive tax change, family care benefits, housing tax credit

Transcript Highlights:

• to income.
• to income.
• But then again, what is income?
• to income.
• And if you have a income?

Bills: HB259, HB206, HB207, HB259, HB206, HB207

Keywords: income tax credit, tax incentive, recruitment, remote work, remote worker, recruited worker, rural counties, small counties, county population tiers, opportunity zone, teacher recruitment, nurse recruitment, law enforcement recruitment, workforce development, economic development, relocation incentive, Alabama Department of Revenue, nonrefundable tax credit, tax carryforward, state income tax

Bills: HB256, HB272, HB350, HB363, HB386, HB434, HB445, HB690

Keywords: mandatory reporting, school employees, child protection, training requirements, Department of Children and Family Services, education, reading program, student eligibility, literacy, school performance, R.E.A.D. program, book distribution, École Pointe-au-Chien, French immersion, public school, Terrebonne Parish, grade levels, independent school, virtual school, extracurricular activities

Transcript Highlights:

• We sell jewelry components at the wholesale level predominantly.
• Businesses locate at a certain level based on the tax environment. And so to Mr.
• The approach in this bill, instead of a sales tax refund, is a refund to income taxpayers, a rebate to
• Is there an income cap to use public roads? Mr. Palomino. Chair, Representative Kupper, no.
• Is there an income cap to use public roads? Mr. Palmino. Chair, Representative Keper, no.

Bills: HB2143, HB2273, HB2290, HB2373, HB2784, HB2794, HB4037

Keywords: public safety, retirement system, investments, trust fund, board of trustees, financial report, income tax rebate, Pinal County, taxpayer eligibility, state revenue, financial assistance, transaction privilege tax, business location, tangible personal property, shared vehicle, sourcing, income tax, veterans, donations, tax refunds

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee first set aside House Bill 2794 at the sponsor’s request and then took up House Bill 2290, which would clarify Arizona transaction privilege tax sourcing rules for tangible personal property by specifying that an order is received at a seller’s business location and that server location does not control sourcing. The sponsor said the bill codifies existing, historic treatment and would provide certainty for taxpayers, while the League of Arizona Cities and Towns opposed it, arguing it would be a major departure from current practice, could shift revenue away from rural communities, and could create multiple tax rates for a single transaction. The Department of Revenue said it was neutral, acknowledged ongoing ambiguity and administrative complexity, and explained that a 2023 draft ruling had been based on a legal analysis but was never finalized. Several business and association witnesses supported the bill as necessary to prevent inconsistent audits and to preserve origin-based sourcing for in-state sellers. After extended debate, the committee passed HB 2290 on a 5-3 vote, with one member absent. The committee then heard House Bill 2373, which would add a space on the individual income tax return for taxpayers to voluntarily direct part of a refund to the Veterans Donations Fund or a veterans service organization fund. The sponsor and a representative of veterans advocacy groups described it as a simple, voluntary way to support veterans organizations and local projects. No opposition was raised, and the bill was approved unanimously by the members present, 8-0, with one absent. Finally, the committee considered House Bill 2143, a technical change to Public Safety Personnel Retirement System law that would limit the 5% ownership cap to publicly traded corporations. PSPRS representatives said the change would reduce compliance costs and avoid unnecessary workarounds while maintaining existing investment safeguards and diversification rules. Members discussed that ASRS does not have the same cap and that PSPRS already has broader limits on concentration risk. The bill was presented as an administrative cleanup measure, and discussion focused on clarifying that it would not increase investment risk.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um they're mixed income sub account.
• 21:53.520> levels<00:21:53.919> rise<00:21:54.159> in how much do income levels
• rise in how much do income levels rise in Hawaii?
• qualification level.
• qualification level.

Bills: SB2060, SB2063, SB2062, SB2069, SB2070

Keywords: rental housing revolving fund, HHFDC, Hawaii Housing Finance and Development Corporation, mixed-income housing, mixed-income rental project, affordable housing, low-income housing, housing finance, housing development, preservation, rehabilitation, pre-development, construction financing, equity investment, credit enhancement, collateral, gap financing, area median income, AMI, perpetual affordability

Summary: The committee heard five housing measures, with the chair announcing that SB 2060, SB 2063, SB 2062, and SB 2069 were works in progress and that decision-making would be deferred to February 3. SB 2060 would allow HHFDC, with Finance approval, to transfer money within the rental housing revolving fund and its subaccounts without further legislative authorization, including a transfer to the mixed-income subaccount for FY 2026-2027. HHFDC and other supporters said the change would give the agency more flexibility to move projects forward, while Catholic Charities Hawaii and a testifier from Roars and Cares supported the bill but warned that shifting money away from lower-income housing could weaken efforts to serve households under 80% of area median income and people at risk of homelessness. HHFDC said the fund’s uncommitted balance was about $100 million and that demand exceeded available resources. SB 2063 would revise the mixed-income subaccount by changing project priorities, adding new criteria, allowing transfers within the subaccount without legislative approval, and directing conveyance tax revenues into the subaccount. HHFDC, OPSD, LURF, Hawaii Appleseed, Housing Hawaii’s Future, Stanford Carr Development, and Roars and Cares supported the measure, while Catholic Charities urged the committee to keep rental and for-sale housing policy separate and to use other mechanisms for homeownership. Catholic Charities said the rental housing revolving fund should remain focused on rentals, and that for-sale initiatives should be addressed separately. The chair indicated an intent to defer the bill for further edits. SB 2062 would make the dwelling unit revolving fund equity pilot a permanent HHFDC program, allowing the agency to buy equity in for-sale developments to lower initial purchase prices and require repayment through shared appreciation. HHFDC said the pilot had been successful, with 83 units committed and $7.6 million of the $10 million program cap already committed, and said permanence would let the agency pair the program with DERF loans earlier in project financing. The chair said SB 2069 would be used as the vehicle for amendments to the DERF equity program and related changes. SB 2069 would authorize HHFDC to use existing dwelling unit revolving fund balances for the equity pilot; it drew support from HHFDC and several housing organizations. SB 2070 would create a permanently affordable for-sale housing program by replacing the current 10-year buyback restriction with a resale price cap tied to an appreciation index, which HHFDC said would preserve affordability while allowing owners to build equity. In questioning, senators pressed HHFDC on whether the bill was necessary, whether it would remove first-time homebuyer and other ownership restrictions, and whether the new program was truly “permanently affordable” if not tied to AMI. HHFDC said the current statutory restrictions limit flexibility, that the proposal would expand access to local residents, and that the price cap would be based on about 4.5% annual appreciation. Supporters said the approach would help buyers move up the housing ladder, while some senators expressed concern that it could open the program to owners of multiple properties and that the committee should see sales-velocity data on existing restricted units before proceeding.

Transcript Highlights:

• , the Medicaid high-level staff three times, four times a year, and also twice a year on the medical
• ...use something called broad-based categorical eligibility loophole which raises the income threshold
• This means that their household incomes were at or below 185% of poverty—that's $ Children and youth
• is 130% of the poverty level. of the poverty level, so nobody rich is getting SNAP benefits in Alabama
• You know, if you might see a higher level of voter irregularities?

Bills: SB245, SB246, HB30, HB30

Keywords: SB245, public assistance, Medicaid, SNAP, food assistance, Alabama Medicaid Agency, Department of Human Resources, eligibility verification, self-attestation, data matching, fraud prevention, improper payments, program integrity, benefit eligibility, income verification, residency verification, asset verification, electronic benefit transfer, EBT, cross-checks

Transcript Highlights:

• know, being a long-time county worker, we do the right thing every day, regardless of the funding levels
• Think about your households when you weren't bringing in that kind of income during the Great Recession
• I'm shocked to learn this, even at the current funding levels."
• Families can't access early care and learning programs for low-income families.
• For our littlest kids and low-income families. Thank you.

Bills: HF2436, HF2929

Keywords: child welfare, economic assistance, child care, grant program, video security cameras, HF2929, SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, food assistance, nutrition assistance, public benefits, eligibility determination, income eligibility, federal poverty guidelines, poverty level, county agency, Tribal agency, human services, children and families, benefits administration

Transcript Highlights:

• Section 5 would modify income limitations applying to housing TIF districts to allow for income averaging
• Regarding income limitations.
• These are constituents, some of whom are low income.
• I'm kind of an average income Minnesotan.
• Hispanic infants and toddlers live in low-income households.

Bills: HF2730, HF2257, HF2768, HF1932, HF2437

Keywords: local government debt, municipal bonds, county bonds, capital improvements, public financing, bond issuance, public hearing, notice period, bond guarantee, Minnesota Public Facilities Authority, volume cap, private activity bonds, housing finance, residential rental bonds, LIHTC, low-income housing tax credits, redevelopment, courthouse financing, jail financing, law enforcement center