All Videos - California 2025 - 2025-2026 Regular Session (Page 34)
Page 34 of 163
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on State Administration May 20th, 2026
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education May 20th, 2026
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 5 on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor and Transportation May 20th, 2026
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 5 on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor and Transportation May 20th, 2026
Summary:
The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 5 held an informational hearing on the Governor’s May Revision proposals for labor, public safety/judiciary, and transportation, and no votes were taken. In Part A on labor, the Employment Development Department described funding for EDD Next document management work, updated UI loan interest costs, disability insurance and paid family leave benefit increases, WIOA adjustments, UI and school employee benefit changes, an EMT training reappropriation, and a technical correction tied to an EDD Next reversion. PERB discussed reduced funding requests for AB 288 due to litigation and a proposal to implement AB 1 covering legislative employees. DIR presented proposals for legal unit reclassifications, two major IT modernization projects, a new Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, a COIA reappropriation, and trailer bill language requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and removing a salary cap for the DWC administrative director. CalHR proposed consolidating employee assistance services into a statewide contract with enhanced support for first responders, and CalPERS and CalSTRS presented budget adjustments tied to investment costs, state contributions, and benefit overpayments.
Members focused heavily on the unemployment insurance debt and interest payments, asking why the administration had no concrete plan to pay down principal. Finance and LAO explained that the state’s UI tax structure has long been insufficient and that any long-term solution would need to address both the outstanding federal loan and the structural imbalance in employer taxes. Questions also centered on EDD Next costs and timelines, with the chair asking for clearer long-term project cost estimates and Finance noting that future maintenance and operations costs will continue after implementation. On DIR’s emerging technologies unit, members asked whether it would address AI-driven workplace harms; DIR said the unit would focus on physical workplace safety issues involving AI, robotics, autonomous equipment, and related guardrails, while LAO noted broader labor-practice questions would likely fall outside Cal/OSHA’s scope.
In the CalPERS discussion, members raised concerns about transparency in private equity and external management fees, while CalPERS said higher fees reflect a strategy of greater private-market and active-management exposure and are offset by higher net returns. Members urged more information on specific investments and future reporting. For CalSTRS, Finance presented routine contribution and overpayment adjustments, but members also raised broader transparency concerns that CalSTRS staff said they would follow up on separately. Public comment in Part A was dominated by strong support for an immigrant worker emergency relief fund, along with support for apprenticeship and workforce proposals and PERB staffing. The chair and members said they would follow up on where the immigrant relief proposal should be considered, noting it may belong in another policy area. The hearing then moved into Part B with an overview of Judicial Branch-related May Revision items, including court interpreter funding, appellate court security, workload cap changes, lactation room implementation delays, and a reduction to the state court facility construction backfill.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 4 on State Administration and General Government May 20th, 2026
Summary:
The subcommittee heard several May Revision proposals related to the state’s housing and homelessness reorganization. On the first item, administration and Finance staff described technical adjustments to move administrative positions and resources between the California Housing and Homelessness Agency, HCD, and Cal ICH, plus authority for a chief deputy director at the new Housing Development Finance Committee. The LAO recommended approval but asked for clarification on funding for the chief deputy position. Several senators questioned whether the staffing shifts would reduce Cal ICH’s capacity and whether adding communications support and a new executive position was appropriate absent new housing funding; the item was held open.
The second item proposed a new $100 million CalHFA Disaster Rebuilding Fund, with $56 million General Fund and $44 million in existing National Mortgage Settlement funds, to help disaster-impacted homeowners access construction financing through tools such as a loan loss guarantee and interest rate buy-downs. CalHFA said the fund would help close the gap between insurance proceeds and rebuilding costs and would work through approved lenders. The LAO raised concerns about the lack of alternatives analysis, the broad delegation in the trailer bill, and the General Fund cost. Senators pressed for more detail on the estimated number of homeowners served, lender and homeowner eligibility, equity safeguards, and the role of the Legislature in program design; the item was held open.
The third item was trailer bill language for HAP Round 7, including accountability metrics, pro-housing designation requirements for certain large cities and counties, local match requirements, and a mechanism to recapture unspent funds. HCD said the proposal would streamline reporting by using one consistent set of system performance measures and would phase in the new requirements. The LAO questioned the timing, the burden of pro-housing designation, the size and source of the local match, and whether the proposal conflicted with the Legislature’s prior goal of getting funds out quickly. Several senators criticized the added requirements and the lack of new funding, while others said the proposal could improve accountability and reduce administrative burden by reusing existing plans. The item was also held open.
The fourth item began a proposal to reduce local development impact fees on state-funded affordable housing projects, framed as a condition on competitive multifamily funding rather than a statewide mandate. The presentation started but the transcript cuts off before questions or action on that item.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education May 20th, 2026
Summary:
The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s May Revision TK-12 education proposals, beginning with Proposition 98. The Department of Finance explained that the minimum guarantee rises by about $6.4 billion relative to the January budget across the three-year window, with a total of $124.9 billion in 2024-25, $125.1 billion in 2025-26, and $127.1 billion in 2026-27. Finance also described revised settle-up and reserve actions, including maintaining a $3.9 billion settle-up balance, increasing discretionary deposits into the Prop. 98 reserve, and ending with a projected reserve balance of about $10.3 billion. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the overall estimates were reasonable but urged the state to fully fund the guarantee and use other budget actions or reserves to manage volatility rather than delay settle-up payments. Members questioned the rationale for leaving the $3.9 billion unsettled, and Finance said the amount reflects revenue uncertainty and the risk of overappropriating Prop. 98 if revenues later fall.
The committee then reviewed the Department of Education portion of the May Revision. Finance said the budget adds positions and state operations funding for CDE and includes trailer bill changes affecting community schools, preschool, literacy, special education, charter accountability, and other programs. The LAO highlighted concerns and recommendations on several proposals, including the size and structure of the LCFF increase, the special education base-rate increase, additional one-time community schools funding, literacy coach and math professional development augmentations, the multilingual screener, inclusive college grants, homelessness grants, and the proposed paid pregnancy disability leave mandate. CDE supported the special education increase, paid pregnancy leave, community schools, homelessness funding, literacy and math investments, and preschool parity, while urging more support for county offices of education and clearer definitions and implementation details for some programs. Finance said the paid pregnancy leave proposal would cost an estimated $218 million annually and is intended as a recruitment and retention measure.
In the Commission on Teacher Credentialing item, Finance proposed funding for legal staffing tied to SB 848 and educator misconduct cases, plus funding and fee changes to support a statewide transcript review platform for subject matter competency and additional support for the residency technical assistance center. The LAO said it had no concerns with the staffing for misconduct and SB 848, recommended the transcript review platform and related fee increase if the platform moves forward, and recommended rejecting the residency technical assistance center expansion because current funding lasts through 2029. CTC said the misconduct workload has grown over the last five to six years and that AI would be used only as a backstop to human review in the transcript system. Public commenters were split, with unions and education groups supporting special education, paid pregnancy leave, community schools, homelessness funding, and literacy investments, while opposing the $3.9 billion settle-up delay and the reduction to preschool COLA.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 3 on Health and Human Services May 20th, 2026
Summary:
The committee heard opening budget remarks from the Department of Finance and the Legislative Analyst’s Office on the May Revision for Health and Human Services. Finance said the proposal significantly reduces projected out-year operating deficits through a mix of revenue increases and program cost reductions, while the LAO warned that even with booming revenues the state still faces a structural deficit and should prioritize reserves and avoid new ongoing commitments. The chair and members echoed concern about cuts to vulnerable populations, but also noted the need to maintain the overall level of budget solutions and add to reserves.
The hearing then moved through a series of CalHHS and HCAI proposals, mostly held open after presentation. CalHHS requested additional legal support to respond to federal H.R. 1-related issues and a net-zero transfer of positions for a shared eligibility/data-sharing platform. Other items included ongoing funding for the 988 Behavioral Health Crisis Service Fund and a request for EMSA to fund maintenance of its enterprise data management system. HCAI presented proposals for hospital fair pricing implementation, the data exchange framework, the all-payer claims database, CalRx insulin development, the diaper access initiative, distressed hospital grants, opioid settlement fund reversion, and the Rural Health Transformation Program. Members questioned funding sources, special fund use, contracting exemptions, timelines, and whether some proposals should be more targeted or supported by alternative funding.
A major discussion centered on HCAI’s diaper access initiative and the use of a Public Contract Code exemption to continue contracting for free diapers distributed through hospitals. The chair and some members criticized the optics of the selected vendor and questioned the lack of an income threshold, while HCAI said the program was designed to be universal and administratively simple, with future phase-two direct-to-consumer purchasing to be handled by a different vendor. Another extended exchange focused on distressed hospital funding, where HCAI said the May Revision would provide up to $50 million for hospitals at immediate risk of closure, but members argued the repeated annual need shows a structural problem and asked for broader reforms to hospital payment and care transitions.
The final major topic was the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission’s budget. The Commission opposed the May Revision’s reduction of the Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and a $6.7 million cut to community advocacy contracts, arguing both are core Proposition 1 tools for statewide innovation and community engagement. Finance responded that the proposal is within Proposition 1’s allowable maximums and that prior unspent appropriations could be redirected if the Legislature wanted to restore the full amount. No votes were taken; items were generally held open for later action.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Rules Committee May 20th, 2026
Summary:
The Senate Rules Committee established quorum and first approved several governor’s appointments to the California Housing Finance Agency Board of Directors and the State Mining and Geology Board, with one mining board appointment passing 3-2 and the others passing 5-0. The committee also approved a rule waiver request from the Budget and Fiscal Review Committee to allow budget subcommittees to meet during the blackout period, and it referred ACA 7 (Jackson) to the committees listed on the agenda after rejecting a motion to add Labor, Public Employment and Retirement as an additional referral.
The committee then heard testimony from five appointees to the Board of Parole Hearings: William Munis, Michael Ruff, Rosalind Sergeant Burns, Mary Thornton, and Jack Weiss. In opening remarks, the appointees emphasized their corrections, legal, and public safety backgrounds and described parole work as evidence-based, collaborative, and focused on current risk rather than the original offense alone. Senators, especially Senator Jones, pressed them on recent high-profile parole grants involving child sex offenders, the extent of commissioner discretion, the use of coping mechanisms and risk assessments, transparency in en banc review votes, and whether the board’s decisions adequately protect public safety. The appointees said they must follow the law, rely on structured risk tools and expert assessments, and treat each case individually; several said they would defer to the Legislature on whether en banc votes should be made public.
Members also questioned the board about use of MAT/drug-treatment records, commutation review, institutional behavior and write-ups, victim participation, elderly parole, and the role of community support and rehabilitation. The commissioners said treatment records are considered only in context with other reliable evidence, that reconsideration hearings and recidivism data help evaluate whether tools are working, and that victim and family members are given respectful accommodations and opportunities to participate. Senator Jones said he was not satisfied with the answers on discretion and accountability and stated he would not support Jack Weiss’s reappointment, citing ongoing concerns about professionalism. Public testimony at the end was overwhelmingly supportive of the five commissioners, with several advocates, formerly incarcerated people, and anti-recidivism coalition members praising the board’s rigor and the role of rehabilitation.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Floor Session May 20th, 2026
California Senate Floor Meeting
Summary:
The Senate convened with a quorum, prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and a floor introduction welcoming Berkeley Mayor Adina Ishi. The body then moved through a series of third-reading bills, with most measures presented as responses to current policy concerns and several placed on call before roll votes were completed. Early measures included SB 1312 on abandoned cemeteries, SB 1112 increasing penalties for towing industry notice violations, SB 877 requiring insurers to disclose claim materials and revisions, SB 1046 directing Cal/OSHA to develop protections for workers exposed to transboundary pollution in the Tijuana River Valley, and SB 1091 creating a community anti-displacement and preservation housing program. These bills generally drew support and passed, with SB 1091 ultimately passing 34-2 after a call vote.
The floor also considered SB 951 on AI-related layoffs and worker notice, SB 1030 repealing the “man in the house” rule in CalWORKs, SB 1218 tying vehicle registration renewal to payment of illegal dumping fines, SB 1013 tightening privacy and oversight rules for automated license plate readers, SB 1116 making technical changes to the Starter Home Revitalization Act, SB 1201 protecting veterans from food-assistance cuts, and SB 1164 strengthening state voting-rights protections. Debate on SB 1013 featured sharp disagreement over whether the bill’s 30-day retention limit and audit requirements were necessary guardrails or would hinder law enforcement investigations. SB 1164 also drew opposition over concerns about litigation and expanded Attorney General oversight, but supporters argued California should codify voting-rights protections amid federal uncertainty. Most of these measures passed, with SB 1013 and SB 1164 receiving notable no votes.
A major portion of the session focused on AB 1768, an urgency measure authorizing Los Angeles and Contra Costa counties to place local sales-tax measures before voters to help offset federal funding cuts to health care and safety-net services. Supporters framed it as a local-control measure needed to backfill losses from federal disinvestment and protect Medi-Cal, CalFresh, hospitals, clinics, and county services; opponents argued it would worsen affordability, expand regressive taxation, and bypass normal committee review. After extensive debate, the urgency measure received the required votes and passed. The Senate also adopted SCR 171 designating May 20 as California Nonprofits Day by unanimous roll call. The session ended with committee announcements, including budget subcommittee meetings, and a notice that the Senate would recess and reconvene later in the week.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Floor Session May 20th, 2026
California Senate Floor Meeting
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Rules Committee May 20th, 2026
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on State Administration May 19th, 2026
Summary:
The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration held a May Revise hearing focused on state administration proposals, with the chair noting no actions would be taken and all items would remain open. The committee heard presentations on a range of budget proposals, including technical adjustments for the Governor’s Office of Service and Community Engagement and the California Workforce Development Board, security and election-related funding for the Secretary of State, modernization and loan-backfill requests for the Department of Consumer Affairs, and multiple Employment Development Department updates covering EDD Next, UI and DI/PFL benefit estimates, workforce funding, and an EMT training reappropriation.
Several items drew discussion from the LAO and committee members. The LAO generally supported technical or modernization items such as PERB’s implementation requests, GoServe’s College Corps adjustment, the Secretary of State’s security and HAVA grant items, and the Board of Pharmacy modernization proposal, but raised concerns about the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s proposed $10 million General Fund backfill and interest-free loan language. For EDD, the LAO flagged the size of the DI/PFL benefit adjustment and the unusual structure of the document management system proposal within EDD Next, while EDD said the changes reflected higher participation and benefit levels after SB 951 and ongoing modernization needs.
The Department of Industrial Relations drew the most extensive questioning. It proposed funding for legal unit reclassifications, EAMS and Cal/OSHA data modernization, a new Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, a COYA reappropriation, and trailer bill changes requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and adjusting the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board timeline. Members pressed DIR on high vacancy rates, long wage theft and workers’ compensation backlogs, low collection rates for fines, and the need for clearer workload and outcome measures. DIR said the requests were intended to improve efficiency, support audits and corrective action plans, and better address emerging workplace risks, while the LAO said the workload drivers behind delays remain unclear. The hearing also included support for CalHR’s employee assistance program consolidation and CDT’s proposal to expand “Poppy,” a statewide generative AI assistant for state employees.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Health May 19th, 2026
Summary:
The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits.
The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements.
The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually.
The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 3 on Education Finance May 19th, 2026
Summary:
The committee heard an overview of the May Revision’s Proposition 98 changes for K-12 and community colleges. The Department of Finance said the minimum guarantee rises by $6.4 billion over the Governor’s Budget across the three-year window, with higher guarantees in each year, full payment of the prior settle-up, and larger deposits into the school rainy-day fund. The LAO said the revenue and LCFF updates were reasonable, but urged caution about the settle-up approach and recommended using more of the available funding to protect ongoing programs and build budget resilience. Members focused heavily on the size of the proposed $3.9 billion settle-up, the $10.3 billion reserve deposit, declining K-12 enrollment, and how much of the new funding should be ongoing versus one-time.
The committee then reviewed the community colleges portion of the budget. Finance described the May Revision’s higher SCFF COLA, additional funding for enrollment growth, a student support block grant, apprenticeship adjustments, and continued funding for deferred maintenance, Calbright, Common Cloud, and credit for prior learning. The Chancellor’s Office supported the core investments but asked for more funding for enrollment growth, changes to the growth formula, and a COLA for Student Equity and Achievement. The LAO recommended prioritizing the statutory COLA increase, noted that more than half of districts are already above current-year growth targets, and said the new adult learner demonstration project should be rejected because districts already have tools to support similar services. Members also discussed a $52 million current-year apportionment shortfall, which Finance said was discovered too late for the May Revision and would need to be addressed later.
Finally, the committee took up the proposed implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance proposed one-time funding for the California Student Aid Commission and Cradle to Career to build eligibility and data systems, along with trailer bill changes to set up state approval processes. CSAC said the program is promising but highly complex, that California lacks the needed infrastructure, and that the state will need emergency regulations, data linkages, and ongoing funding beyond the one-time proposal. The LAO agreed that some initial funding is needed but warned that the amounts and ongoing costs remain uncertain and that the Legislature should carefully draft the trailer bill language. Members asked about timing, other states’ actions, and how the state would ensure the program is ready for students and institutions.
CA