The Senate Finance Committee met on March 20 to hear invited and public testimony regarding the Economic Stabilization Fund, the implementation of behavioral health services across state government, and Hurricane Harvey updates.

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics the committee took up. This report is not a verbatim transcript of the hearing; it is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

Chair Nelson Opening Remarks

  • Next hearing will include discussion on mental health expenditures relating to Hurricane Harvey
  • Harvey will be discussed at every hearing
  • Will have some key costs presented today

 

Hurricane Harvey Update

Sara Keeton and staff, Legislative Budget Board (Eileen Murphy & Edward Rodriguez)

Handouts/Presentation

  • Fiscal years 2017–18 hurricane expenditures total $2.1 billion in All Funds ($1,644.6 million in Federal Funds and $206.2 million in General Revenue
  • Reviewed the slides on total cost including details on PREPS, Sheltering Assistance, Solid Waste Disposal Fees, FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds, and TEA
  • TEA currently legally required costs of $426 million and TEA has estimated future potential costs ranging from $993 to $1.6 million
  • Hurricane Harvey expenditures and comparisons were also provided – for many expenditures, agencies will need to go back and reclassify expenditures made for Harvey that were marked as everyday expenditures
  • Hinojosa – is HHSC able to identify Hurricane costs?
    • Working with agency to do this but Medicaid piece may prove must difficult to distinguish
    • Regarding higher education, funds held outside the treasury are not recorded in GAA and not captured in state accounting system
    • LBB in next update is trying to separate higher education institutions from state agency costs
  • Nelson – will this be an ongoing updated process?
    • Yes
  • Bettencourt – timing lag? Wants to see a report on what state paid for
    • As time goes on, once recoding and classification occur on previous expenses and take out HHSC the discrepancies will be minimized
    • Believes their number will be higher than CPA because it counts in future costs
  • Nelson – asked about final debris removal costs and what happens to left over funding?
    • Any unspent amount lapse back to GRD account and treasury, so TCEQ would not have additional amounts to spend on a different program

 

Mike Morath, Texas Education Agency

  • Funds listed by LBB are just TEA related and do not include Foundational School Program
  • List some highlights of current funding and situation including:
    • Schools are eligible for CDBG for rebuilding but anticipates small fraction of schools will access this funding
    • Anticipates $800 million in FEMA support to schools
    • Congress passed disaster aid but not sure amounts Texas will see but anticipates $500million
    • Tracking 95k students that were displaced by storm
  • Provides list to committee of items possibly needed for supplemental support which includes facility repair and reappraisal
  • Facility repair
    • After insurance and FEMA, schools can then draw down from state for facility funding which could impact state either by reducing recapture or will need to address funding in supplemental
  • Reappraisal
    • M&O – a dozen districts have reappraised and $150 million will be drawn down from those districts that chose to reappraise
    • Do not know how much this will cost but best guess is $500 million and $1 billion cost to schools
    • State will need to determine degree of funding support for districts
    • West – Regarding three quarters of a billion dollars what is states obligation?
      • No obligation to pay it, no obligation under FSP either
      • It would show up to state in subsequent year
      • Question is if state wants to get involved in 18-19 school year
    • West – state funding and local funding in property taxes?
      • State obligation will go up $750 million for supplemental and GA will face significant pressure because of reduction of local property tax collections
      • Whether you choose to fund supplemental is a matter of legislative prerogative
    • Schwertner – to clarify, if M&O is supplemented for Harvey, it will be put into formulas in the future does this not put one district above another
      • Would not say it impacts subsequent payments, so if state collects substantially less than previous years then the state will have a hole to consider but the following year the state has to fill in
    • Nelson – can you repeat state and local tax statement
      • Add up local tax collections and state has a target/amount per pupil that’s about $8k ish per kid so if local taxes get you up to say $5k then state puts in the rest
      • Next year the amounts will catch up with the state regardless and that is currently how the law works
      • Nelson – thank you, there is some current misunderstanding about how the law works
    • Kolkhorst – what happens if we don’t fund?
      • Could result in staff layoffs
    • Kolkhorst – thinking about those hardest hit, knows we made districts whole after Ike, but still concerned
      • Could use legislative guidance, districts today are working on budget for next school year so how should they plan
      • Will the state provide a hold harmless in its entirety?
    • Nelson – can’t speak for future lawmakers but she doesn’t want to lay-off any teachers but her sense is they will take care of those kids
    • Kolkhorst – thanks Nelson for leadership and mentions how some have slabs for homes now
    • West – over 20% of districts in state of Texas have been running deficits for last several years
    • Bettencourt – works through example of district that has 6% of homes damaged, wants vote to show support to districts who did the right thing
    • Nichols – some districts were not impacted and some were, appraised values will be dramatically down and Superintendents are looking from confidence from legislature and said he intends to support schools
    • Birdwell – echoes earlier sentiments, is his slide inclusive of districts that received an influx of students or is that a separate calculation
      • Some figures in handout did include them and as a function of law the money follows the students so the school will receive money for them
      • They may not have budgeted for them, but they can request assistance from TEA to receive adjustment – about 4 or 5 districts have asked for it
      • Birdwell and Morath continue discussion on how it works such as need to hire “surge” teachers, money follows the child, etc
    • Birdwell – will TEA report provide direction in the supplemental that accounts for differences in student population
      • Sort of, have asked district to provide 2-year estimate on enrollment
    • Nelson – thinks there will be legislators wanting to help regardless if their district was impacted
    • Hancock – teacher employment is contract so even if student is gone…is anyone estimating that cost to local districts
      • TEA committed in the interim knowing you do not hire fractional teachers so ADA hold harmless allows for this cost but only for ONE year
    • Continued with details on facility repair by doing a deep dive
      • Districts in varying stages regarding FEMA reimbursement
    • Reviewed what is legally obligated versus optional funding
      • ADA hold harmless done by administrative action and consistent with past practice – $100 million to foundational hit and just for one year
      • M&O property decline for first year – unless reappraised, do not take a “hit” from last year without an increase in taxpayer delinquency – $300 million (more detail in appendix); State does not normally intervene
      • M&O property declines following years – typically no involvement in I&S declines but do fund M&O, some districts will raise I&S rates to deal with it and highlight localized (more detail in appendix)
        • Nelson – how long would state have to intervene
        • Morath – in terms of M&O, only talking about one year of activity but bill will come due to state for subsequent year so overall 3 years of substantial impact to state but one year is optional
        • West – is that M&O and I&S
        • Morath – state has almost no involvement in I&S
        • Bettencourt – if Sen. Taylor was here would say limit is about 5 years for recovery from property tax value, 1 year is optional and next two years will be largest impact
      • Facility reimbursement is consistent with past practice
      • Facility offset for recapture is automatic as function of law so this bucket will capture more districts – $30 million
      • Free and Reduced lunch – floats to funding formulas going to Comp Ed weights and should cease as impact in 19-20 school year
      • West asked about facility funding/repairs
        • NIFA has been expanded to cover some need but generally will not apply

 

Interim Charge #1: Economic Stabilization Fund: Examine options to increase investment earnings of the Economic Stabilization Fund in a manner that minimizes overall risk to the fund balance. Investment options should ensure the liquidity of a sufficient portion of the balance so that the legislature has the resources necessary to address the needs of the state, including natural disasters. Evaluate how the Economic Stabilization Fund constitutional limit is calculated; consider alternative methods to calculate the limit, and alternative uses for funds above the limit.

 

Glenn Hegar, Texas State Comptroller

  • Will not go through entire packet but reviews his concept from last session regarding investing some funds
  • Concerned if we don’t find way to address issue, Texas could be downgraded which would impact those agencies borrowing funds
  • Provides examples from trust company, a certain amount of ESF could be put into endowment and could be established in state statue
  • Believes this is critical
  • If take legacy fund portion and dedicate to long term liabilities they have options on how to refill ESF such as keep current law, give transportation better deal than before and guarantee funding etc
  • Plea is first thing they have to do is shore up long term liabilities and hedge against a downgrade
  • Nelson – says she may have erred in not asking LBB to speak so calls Ursula up or anyone from LBB to give more details on ESF

 

Ursula Parks and staff, LBB

  • Sufficient balance is a relatively new mechanism and critical component is to think of it of being a sufficient balance to determine ability to make transfers so need to get away from thought of it being a floor, if you go below sufficient balance then you do not make transfer
  • Role of sufficient balance is to determine transfer ability
  • Hegar – constitutional amendment set it for a 10 year period so in next 6 years that will go away unless the legislature takes a pro-active step to reauthorize it
  • Nelson – last session it was $7.5 correct?
    • Yes

 

Q&A (grouped by topic not necessarily chronologically)

Structural Imbalances

  • Seliger – need to be careful of oversubscribing to ESF for credit agencies ratings, Hegar refers to a lot of large structural imbalances, what are they?
    • Pensions for example, governments underfund typically, and this is not unusual to Texas
    • Transportation, health care, education but can debate if they are weak or strong but they can be pressures on the system but the amounts the legislature wants to put in is up to them
  • Seliger – is the imbalance the amount raised or funded?
    • Wants to talk about pension but in health care have a growing population and puts a significant pressure on the budget
  • Seliger – pension liabilities are one thing, based on actuarial soundness but what are weak funding practices where everything else is funded by cash…other than pension is it in revenue or expenditures?
    • Biggest issue is pension, also Texas Tomorrow Fund is upside down, deferred maintenance in buildings
    • Regarding other things credit rating agencies look at: transportation, public education and health
  • Seliger – some items in weak funding practices include mental health care, particularly in state facilities but regarding structural imbalances in budget, what does it mean?
    • Say for example HHS and public education, they are growing populations that put significant pressure on the state
  • Seliger – how does that impact ratings? Believes decisions being made on state of economy should help
    • But not if state cannot keep pensions actuarial sound and gap is becoming wider
  • Seliger – working on ESF seems trivial regarding other issues rating agencies look at
  • West – pensions are you talking about state level only?
    • State level only

 

Pension Discussion

  • West –have you compared our situation to other states that have been downgraded because they could not fully fund pensions?
    • Yes, there have been state downgraded due to this
    • Piper Montemayor, Comptroller’s Office – 7 states have been downgraded due to pensions and rating firms continue to measure pension obligations
  • West – are we “treading water” regarding to rating agency calculations?
    • Montemayor – long term obligations continue to grow
  • West – are we putting in enough?
    • Montemayor – we currently do not do that
    • Hegar – we are not that far off, not saying there is a crisis but going in wrong direction
  • West – therefore strategy you put forth in regard to ESF allows for decisions on long term funding needs and change should be made in statute
    • Hegar – Statute and Constitution
  • Schwertner – issue of new fund to help have its earnings distributed to long term needs has some issue, some at risk amount and could see a negative five-year return, some question on what is a long-term liability; Schwertner notes Tomorrow Fund was reformed, perhaps they need to look at pension reform
  • Campbell thinks it’s a good idea to make pensions actuarially sound but can Hegar describe amount of dollars they would realize
  • Comptroller was given $1.7 billion in tobacco dollars to invest back in 2000 and huge market crash occurred and in 2008 recession hit, have since distributed almost $1 billion and account worth over $2 billion so it is a long-term game
  • Comptroller staff – tobacco fund was one and done so very conservative in investing approach, but this fund would be easier because there are additional cash amounts coming in
  • Bettencourt – Huffman’s bill has a lot of good components going forward addressing pensions

 

 

ESF Floor/Amounts

  • Nichols – how much money should we keep in ESF, feels there should be a formula so wants to know what % of revenue
    • 8% is what he recommends, and House moved it to 7.5% but range can be anywhere between 4% and 12%
  • Nichols – in regards to sufficient balance needs to adjust for inflation in earning power and purchasing power be adjusted upwards
    • Yes, believes it would be more prudent to put in statute than in Constitution because once you shore up certain areas and get a higher distribution can then use it on other types of needs
  • Nichols – believes conceptually this is a good idea
    • All states but 2 have developed endowment

 

Liquidity

  • Bettencourt – asked about targets in graph provided, what would be liquidity of fund/ what could be drawn down quickly?
    • draw down would not come from endowment side of ESF but other side
  • Bettencourt – what if we have to go get other dollars?
    • point of endowment is that funds would not be readily available
  • Bettencourt – so effectively shifting responsibility from legislature to trust
    • State of Texas does not need full access so portion going to ESF would ensure money would be available in many years in the future

Miscellaneous

  • West – asked about minority participation of investment vendors
    • Staff – do not know, will go back and review, does not have African American firms and is looking globally and will follow up with West on it

 

Ursula Parks, LBB and staff

  • Reviews handout from LBB that covers certain aspects of LBB
  • Texas has a sizeable fund, 40 states cap fund and Texas’ cap is biennial so it s a high cap
  • Label and use of funds are similar across the states
  • Largest source of revenue to Texas ESF is from severance tax
  • Appropriations from ESF are restricted: need 2/3 vote, address deficit in current biennium or if revenue is estimated to decrease with three-fifths of members
  • Nelson – asked for examples
    • On handout generally, usually those in crisis at moment and could be assumed as reoccurring demand
    • TDCJ back in 1990’s, cover Medicaid shortfall in 2003, TRS benefits in 2003, TEF in 2003 was created, in 2005 for TEA to fund FSP short fall, etc
    • Votes to exceed threshold needed when votes to spend funds have come before lawmakers
  • Taylor – asked about dotted line on handout
    • Line outlines percentages of ESF appropriated, until 2005 appropriations were draining the fund
  • Taylor – did we spend whole fund balance?
    • There have been times when everything was spent in the fund
  • Growth of ESF is also illustrated on first chart of page
  • Kolkhorst – in 2003, thought they emptied account, but LBB is saying revenue came in?
    • Yes, not estimated but appropriated an actual amount
  • Kolkhorst – would love to see history and examples of when ESF was tapped, what years were not tapped?
    • 1993 until 2003
  • Kolkhorst – since 2003 when it was emptied what years was is not tapped?
    • Points to handouts, didn’t tap in 2015
  • Kolkhorst – if we created an endowment that was a certain percentage, can you get to it if you really need it? So floor becomes a different floor
    • Cannot access endowment
  • Kolkhorst – so legislation would determine how easily or readily available funds would become available
  • Taylor – what is difference now and when lawmakers used to drain ESF so how does bond rating get impacted now
    • Rating agencies like there is a dedicated revenue stream
    • To her knowledge Texas has not been downgraded in regard to ESF

 

Robert Zahradnik, Pew Charitable Trust 

  • Compared and contrasted Texas ESF to other state’s saving accounts
  • Revenue volatility should be addressed as first step
  • Reviews best practices as well as other state practices
  • Bettencourt – asked overcollections and if it went back to taxpayers
    • Not sure
  • Bettencourt – in dollar terms do we have largest ESF balance
    • Think we are third in terms of budget
  • Hinojosa – asked after sovereign wealth fund
    • Fact that ESF is large and could take a portion of the balance but may be idea to set up separate sovereign wealth fund
    • It would be for a different purpose and have different structure
    • Hinojosa – brings to mind PUF fund, is this concept similar
    • Not familiar with PUF fund
  • Kolkhorst – in regards to other states & interest received from endowments, some have it dedicated and others have it go to GR
    • Majority of states consider it GR
  • Nelson – how do other states determine amounts to keep in reserves
    • Optimal size – model has been developed by state of Minnesota, takes a look back over last 15 years and bases risk threshold on state fund experience
    • There is a methodology using historical data they are willing to share which produces a set of options, there will be policy decisions in how to approach

 

Dale Craymer, Texas Taxpayers and Researchers Association

  • Directs committee to his handout and a research brief on origins of ESF
  • A part of ESF is fiscal conservatism of holding revenues down
  • Increasing fund earnings – observes a sufficient balance too high creates two types of harm – transfers to transportation and reduces yield on fund
  • Suggests look at largest withdraws and saw sufficient balance is that amount or some multiple of the amount
  • Alternative limit calculations – right now limited at 10% by Chair’s decision at the time ESF was established, research and bill before it was brought up for vote had it at 5%
  • Have inadvertently raised cap due to federal funds flowing into state budget
  • Would counsel against having too much money in the fund which could create corresponding harm to the economy
  • Alternative uses for funds above the limit – among bills introduced would reduce severance tax, use excess to reduce debt, would put to pension fund or Tomorrow Fund, would also recommend using excess to increase compression percentage in school finance which would in effect buy down property taxes
  • Nelson – what would you say is the appropriate minimum balance
    • Look at historical use of fund and take biggest withdrawal ever made and tie it to that
  • Nelson – are purposes consistent
    • Absolutely, original desire was rather than make deep cuts can draw on account
  • Kolkhorst – asked about highest expenditure amount
    • Did exclude the SWIFT amount because he calls it a horse of a different color
  • Kolkhorst – believes this upcoming biennium could potentially be the largest expenditure out of ESF
  • Bettencourt – assuming large withdrawal this session so feels need to consider leaving money in private sector where it can generate additional wealth
    • Agrees
  • Seliger – reiterates Bettencourt’s point and asks about production taxes that could be addressed/reduced to help economy
    • No – there are cement and sulfur production taxes, but they are very minor
  • Campbell – asked about sufficient balance
    • Sufficient balance is not a minimum or maximum on fund, its about transfer to highways and thinks over time it will be self-adjusting

 

Interim Charge #2: Monitor the state’s progress in coordinating behavioral health services and expenditures across state government, pursuant to Article IX section 10.04, including the impact of new local grant funding provided by the 85th Legislature.  

 

Chair Nelson Opening Comments

  • Current budget projects to spend $7.6 billion on behavioral health over many agencies, 3 years ago we did not have a budget-wide total or statewide strategic plan, rider was added to detail these expenditures and to implement plan

 

Samantha Schaffer, Legislative Budget Board

  • Presented infographic on behavioral health funding (link) and details (link), highlighted certain portions of the handout – $7.6 billion in behavioral health funding, $1.2 billion in AF for mental health facilities, includes $366.3 million from ESF for construction repair, etc.
  • Nelson – So when we left Session, we expected to spend $7.6 billion on behavioral health, but now we are looking at close to $8 billion, can you explain this?
    • This is a number we are working on over time, part of the cause is the Behavioral Health Coordinating Council identifying funding that wasn’t previously identified and new federal transfers

 

Sonja Gaines, Health and Human Services Commission

  • References slides regarding Statewide Behavioral Health Coordinating Council (link)
  • $700 million+ given to HHSC has made a huge impact and been very helpful in implementing strategic plan
  • Originally 18 state agencies participated on the Behavioral Health Coordinating Council, continuing to bring in partners and making progress on collaboration
  • HHSC was able to survey and collect data on prevalence, funding, etc., helped identify 15 gap areas needing focus and goals, including: program services and coordination, program service delivery, prevention and early intervention, agency collaboration, statewide data collection
  • HHSC work on goals:
    • HHSC has tried to capitalize on existing resources and services through the Behavioral Health Coordinating Council
    • Coordinated Expenditure documents have been created identifying dollars spent on behavioral health at each agency, has helped to identify additional funds not captured in initial survey
    • Disaster and veteran mental health services were bolstered through coordination, HHSC is collaborating with the VA, several other initiatives have been started to increase communication & collaboration
    • HHSC put together an inventory of services and programs, was helpful in responding to call for action on opioids
    • Last budget cycle, HHSC also collaborated with other agencies to coordinate emergency items requests, helped to prevent duplicated efforts
  • HHSC appreciates focus from legislature during last session through SB 55 (outcomes registry), SB 292 (grant for offenders with mental illness), HB 13 (grant program for community mental health programs), and SB 27 (grant for veterans)
  • Crisis stabilization programs addressing co-occurring mental health and substance abuse issues are being developed and implemented
  • Council has directly led to programs in juvenile justice opening access to Medicaid benefits, has allowed for joint staffing to help address unique needs, other initiatives
  • Education Service Centers are now partnering with HHSC
  • Council has embraced Mental Health First Aid under TEA as a way to teach people about mental health in general, has helped train over 3,000 state employees
  • Chair Nelson – All of this got started when HHSC was originally asked how much they spend on mental health and questions arose as to how much other agencies were spending
  • Nelson – Pleased with the progress on these initiatives
  • Nelson – Required all of these extra expenditures go through the exceptional items process last budget cycle, will be watching for this in the coming budget cycle
  • West – This type of coordination should be a model for other state agencies
  • West – Pg. 6 notes $3.9 billion in behavioral health funding for FY18, is that state only or does it include federal?
    • Includes Medicaid as well
  • West – Are there other mental health expenditures from other sources?
    • Schaffer, LBB – Yes, receive funds through all traditional means, data on these expenditures is in Article IX 10.04
  • West – How do we get the collaborative group to start looking at mental health gaps that need to be addressed by local providers and how do we coordinate resources to assist?
    • Gaines, HHSC – This is a part of the strategic plan, we will make this a priority moving forward
    • Collaborative grants offer some opportunity
  • West – Would like to know if you received any Dallas County requests and which ones have been funded?
    • Can get this info to you
  • Nelson – How has Harvey affected the timing of the grants?
    • Harvey occurred right when grant applications were coming due, had to make some adjustments and allowed some affected areas some additional time to respond

 

Kelly Kravitz, Texas Education Agency

  • Presenting on Hurricane Harvey Task Force on School Mental Health Supports
  • Focused on responding to needs of students and staff in affected areas, draws on things learned from previous disasters
  • Meadows Mental health was key in creating the task force, provided structural and material support
  • Purpose is to identify short- and long-term mental health needs and spur coordination between state and local partners to meet needs, responding to deliverables outlined in charge:
    • Leverage existing networks, resources, and supports
    • Survey and assess needs
    • Develop comprehensive list of statewide and regional resources
    • Link responders to school communities in need of service
    • Engaging ESCs to coordinate responses
    • Developing coordinated responses meeting the needs of each community
  • Task Force was able to identify over 50 resources in the early days of the storm and publish to TEA’s website
  • Meadows developed maps of ESCs with overlay of other districts, LMHAs, etc. and to survey areas affected by Harvey; coordination between differing entities is unprecedented
  • Survey helped coordinate ISDs affected and identify needs: classroom handouts, training, partnerships with other entities, school mental health liaison, etc.
  • Coordinated with UTMB to expand telemedicine efforts to rural communities
  • Collaborated with FEMA and federal services to establish a superintendent consulting network; brought superintendents from across the nation to meet with Texas superintendents after Harvey
  • Working with Behavioral Health Coordinating Council to address gaps in areas like service coordination
  • Nichols – Asks after funding opportunities
    • Using every opportunity to identify funding opportunities and leverage these opportunities where possible
  • Nichols – So you’re focused on building a structure?
    • Yes, making linkages between entities
  • Schwertner – Deliverables and needs identified in survey point to need to identify and educate on mental health issues, as well as need to be able to identify children possibly experiencing issues
  • Schwertner – Are you looking at Mental Health First Aid and trying to get this out to affected school districts?
    • There are a lot of opportunities to leverage Mental Health First Aid for these districts, will be definitely putting this on their radar
  • West – How successful have you been in identifying philanthropic and private resources?
    • Have been working with Rebuild Texas, Hackett Center for Mental Health, others; Meadows will be able to speak more to this

 

Andy Keller, Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute

  • Harvey was an unprecedented disaster, many of these initiatives were formed in response to this, coordination especially
  • Mental health issues can unfold slowly and in subtle ways post-disaster; We will likely see a gradual increase of cases resulting from Harvey
  • Quick response to mental health following a disaster is a new concept, Katrina did not see the same effort
  • Could continue to have problems in rural areas or in areas without mental health infrastructure, will see mental health issues peak ~18 months out, or potentially peaking continuously
  • Generally expect 15,000 cases of post-traumatic stress in adolescents in an area as large as that affected by Harvey, potentially we could have 5x that due to disaster conditions, metrics tend to be much worse for adult populations
  • Greater Houston Community Foundation approached Meadows for some data on mental issues, happened to have the data prepared and asked Foundation to do a grant round instead
  • Philanthropic interests can be helpful in the short-term and can ramp up quickly, leveraging federal funding is important for long-term recovery
  • DSRIP has been leveraged to start enrollment projects, etc., but this is not a long-term funding structure, would encourage looking at these types of programs in terms of sustainability and whether these efforts are scalable
  • Campbell – Asks after use of ER for children with mental health issues
    • Big part of this was the wellness check mental health screening; Children don’t need to go to the ER if these issues are caught during regular checks
    • Impacts won’t be realized fully for several years
  • West – Is this philanthropic effort statewide or related to Harvey?
    • All of the effort is Harvey related right now, philanthropy won’t be able to continue these efforts long-term
  • West – You indicated supporting these projects will be $85 million?
    • No, $85 million is the overall impact, primarily due to treatment of post-traumatic stress
  • Nelson – How can we as a state best coordinate with local entities to carry out our strategic vision and support local needs at the same time?
    • Grant programs are effective as they require local entities to identify needs, but also to tie it to strategic plan
    • HB 13 grants in the Fall will possibly be a fantastic program to knit these efforts together; Allows state to point to existing programs
    • Gaines, HHSC – We embedded a requirement to tie applications into the strategic plan as part of the grant programs; Has helped in making local communities more knowledgeable about the strategic plan

 

Public Testimony

Cyrus Reed, Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club

  • Harvey relief was good overall
  • Should be realistic and recognize that climate is getting more extreme, should be realistic in planning at the TWDB, TCEQ, etc.
  • TCEQ did a good job in general in looking at pollution post-disaster, but there is analysis equipment TCEQ doesn’t have and could use to better assess pollution; Had to rely on EPA
  • Should fund superfund sites
  • Housing should be efficient
  • $61 billion infrastructure should be carefully reviewed, some is needed, some is not, should be reviewed for environmental impact
  • Should examine other funding initiatives

 

Talmadge Heflin, Texas Public Policy Foundation

  • TPPF recommends constraining ESF use by increasing number of votes required from 2/3 to 4/5, changing constitution to shift limit from 10% to 7%, and providing tax relief with funds above the limit

 

Josette Saxton, Texans Care for Children

  • Need to carefully consider the role of schools in these issues that span entire lives; mental health issues and substance abuse issues often begin in school
  • HHSC and TEA should provide guidance on how to identify effective practices
  • Task Force was great in assessing needs in affected areas, but children also face issues outside the Harvey regions; initiative should consider into the future

 

Colleen Horton, Hogg Foundation for Mental Health

  • Needs of IDD individuals is a primary gap in our services, silos still exist in our agencies
  • Services for IDD individuals do not focus on metal wellness, there is a lot we can do to improve services
  • Should have proof of readiness before transferring these services to managed care, should also have strict network adequacy and data requirements

 

Greg Hansch, NAMI Texas

  • Recent investments and efforts to coordinate services is improving mental health care across the state, increasing access to robust services & supports
  • Looking at data, service has improved, LMHA statistics are significantly better than they were 3 years ago

 

Chair Nelson Closing Remarks

  • Today was 5th hearing & most interim charges done, will post for meeting to discuss charge on monitoring health care costs in the coming weeks
  • Health care, education, and Harvey costs will be the major funding drivers in the coming session