Transcript Highlights:

• those funds could be spent in other places, I think we'd like to know whether that money really needs
• Allocation, which wasn't needed and used, and then also the Economic Development Advancement Fund, which
• that’s trying to utilize these funds, they need to have leveraged all those.
• They just need the ability to...” “And again, this is just one funding mechanism for them, right?
• funds.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• for the fund that would be needed for the fund as<00:37:28.320><c> it</c><00:37:28.440><c> is</c><00
• c><00:46:00.160><c> to</c><00:46:00.280><c> transfer</c> fund or whether we need to transfer fund or
• </c> need general funds. need general funds.
• needed needed into<00:49:10.120><c> the</c><00:49:10.240><c> settlement</c><00:49:10.760><c> fund</c
• If we need it, we take it out of general fund, but if we take it out of general fund now, it just complicates

Summary: Division Three of the Finance Committee met in work session on April 20, 2026, to consider Senate Bills 481, 603, and 663, with the discussion focused primarily on SB 481, relative to the sale of the Sununu Youth Services Center property. The chair explained that the bill was advisory only and that the committee’s recommendations would go to full Finance on April 27. For SB 481, members reviewed conflicting provisions in the prior budget law about whether sale proceeds should go to the general fund or the Youth Development Center Claims and Administration Settlement Fund, and the bill was described as a compromise that would direct proceeds to the general fund before June 30, 2027, and to the settlement fund after that date. It was noted that the settlement fund had originally received about $20 million and had roughly $10 million remaining. The committee also received an extensive update from DCYF Director Marie Noonan on the new Youth Development Center in Hampstead. She reported that construction remained on schedule, with major structural and interior work complete, substantial completion expected in late summer or early fall 2026, and occupancy anticipated in early 2027. The presentation highlighted the facility’s design features, including single-occupancy bedrooms, sensory rooms, an education wing, medical and clinical suites, visitation space, a gym, and multiple outdoor courtyards, all intended to support a trauma-informed setting. Members asked about the facility’s funding, square footage, fencing, and scanner; staff said the building is about 34,000 square feet, funded entirely with federal ARPA state recovery funds to date, and that the scanner is on site but not yet operational pending policy and staff training. Committee members also raised concerns about the facility’s design and security. In response, DCYF said some concrete walls are required for structural and safety reasons, but they are being painted to maintain a brighter environment, and that the fencing will be about 15 feet high with privacy netting because the campus is shared with Hampstead. Officials said the new facility is legislatively limited to a maximum of 12 youth, while the current center can house 12 to 18, and emphasized that courts ultimately determine placements. No votes or final actions were taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of those are removal of funding no longer needed, and also right-sizing different grants within
• And the $7.6 million decrease is largely tied to funds no longer needed that were carried forward into
• that fund to make sure that those funds are no longer needed for FY27.
• from the overcollections fund that is no longer needed.”
• needed.”

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The committee began a series of House Appropriations budget hearings focused on the fiscal year 2026-2027 executive budget, the preamble, and the executive department. Staff presented revenue and spending trends showing projected declines in revenues alongside increasing expenditures, with members emphasizing the need for a standstill budget and additional efficiencies. The House Fiscal Division also reviewed the FY25 surplus and FY26 excess, the constitutional uses of surplus funds, and the overall FY27 budget structure, including the distinction between discretionary and non-discretionary spending. The commissioner of administration described the administration’s use of one-time money, efficiency reviews, and budget reductions, while members asked about revenue forecasts, the motor vehicle sales tax dedication, corporate tax changes, and the impact of federal policy changes on state costs, especially SNAP and Medicaid administration. The committee then moved through several executive department agencies. The Division of Administration presentation covered its budget, vacancies, debt service, and reductions tied to statewide adjustments and efficiency measures. GOSEP’s functions were described as transferred into the Department of Military Affairs under Act 262 of 2025, and military officials outlined the new combined structure, emergency response duties, overseas deployments, youth programs, and concerns about future federal funding. The Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority reviewed its largely dedicated funding and explained that large apparent balances reflect long-term project planning and multi-year capital work. The Office of the State Inspector General presented a budget increase for consulting services tied to the governor’s DOGE-style efficiency initiative, and the inspector general said the effort had identified nearly $1 billion in savings across the executive branch, largely through eligibility reviews in Medicaid and SNAP and implementation of prior audit recommendations. Members raised questions throughout about how budget figures were calculated, why some totals appeared to rise while state general fund support fell, and how federal changes would affect state agencies. There were also questions about the transition of GOSEP into Military Affairs, the status of school safety centers, and whether the new structure would change local emergency responsibilities. No formal votes or amendments were taken during the portion provided; the meeting consisted of presentations, explanations, and member questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Emergency funds within 24 to 48 hours to support immediate needs.
• Preliminary information on that next cycle looks like that funding will be needed.
• So we'll continue tracking that and reporting to you all on the status of need for those funds.
• As well as additional needs going forward. All right, next up, the Colonia Infrastructure Fund.
• I don't need extra funding; we were sufficient.

Transcript Highlights:

• But the moment Governor Newsom signed that bill on July 12, 2019, the fund was on risk, and it needed
• The fund was on risk, and it needed to immediately get prepared.
• First, we want to provide an order of magnitude about how much capital and/or funding is needed for an
• I think we need to protect the wildfire fund from subrogation claims and find another way to support
• The state needs durable funding to pay for wildfire costs that directly benefits victims.

Summary: The hearing focused on the SB 254 Natural Catastrophe Resiliency Study and its recommendations for addressing California’s wildfire risk, utility liability, and the financing of catastrophic losses. Committee members and presenters discussed the history of the wildfire fund created after the 2018 fire crisis and PG&E bankruptcy, the role of the California Earthquake Authority as fund administrator, and the report’s three broad policy pathways: continuing mitigation investments, more equitably allocating catastrophe costs, and considering expanded state involvement in catastrophe financing. Presenters emphasized that the report was intended as a neutral, stakeholder-informed analysis rather than an advocacy document, and that the status quo is not working well for survivors, ratepayers, insurers, or utilities. CEA, CPUC, and the Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety each described their contributions and recommendations. CEA outlined options such as risk-tolerance standards for utilities, preserving safety certificate accountability, tying executive compensation more directly to safety, confidential near-miss reporting, liability reforms, and a fast-pay facility for survivors. CPUC stressed that wildfire mitigation and liability costs are a major driver of electricity affordability problems, and said the state should broaden how wildfire recovery and mitigation are funded beyond ratepayers alone. Energy Safety highlighted its wildfire mitigation plan oversight and recommended stronger safety reporting and stronger safety weighting in utility executive compensation. The modeling portion of the report estimated that a more durable wildfire fund could require about $36 billion in capitalization, with lower initial capital needs if risk transfer or liability reforms are used, but potentially higher ongoing premium or assessment costs. The report also examined state-backed insurer or backstop models, post-event funding mechanisms, and targeted community wildfire mitigation, which could reduce overall funding needs. Members raised concerns about the cost burden on ratepayers, the financial stability of utilities, the fairness of asking communities outside high-risk areas to pay, the role of local governments and home hardening, and whether broader climate-related liability or insurance reforms should be considered. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational and ended with plans for further committee hearings and stakeholder discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• to those in need.
• We swapped that from that type of funding to federal funds because federal funds were going to expire
• lack of demand or accessibility or the need for additional funding?
• It's well funded.
• They had to fund ongoing costs. We didn't fund any of that.

Bills: SB 1

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Transcript Highlights:

• And we multiply by that levy effort to come up with their special education funding formula need, or
• the funds that they would need... ...funding formula need, or the funds that they would need to provide
• fund.
• Then the school district will, out of their funds, pay for that student fully until maybe they need to
• And again, we're happy to discuss our funding formulas with you and help you in any way you need help

Summary: The committee met to discuss special education funding and retention, beginning with approval of the prior meeting minutes and then hearing a presentation from North Dakota United on a statewide special education survey and retention rubric. Presenters described how the rubric and survey were developed from special educator input around four domains: paperwork and due process support, workload, student and staff safety, and paraprofessional management. They reported high levels of stress and burnout, including increased workload, difficulty taking prep and lunch time, concerns about mental health, and widespread difficulty filling special education positions. Committee members questioned the survey’s lack of a general-education comparison group, the interpretation of terms like “rarely” and “sometimes,” and whether results could be broken down further by district size, unit, or disability area. The survey results showed the weakest area was workload, with respondents reporting caseloads increasing without corresponding adjustments, little additional support or compensation when workloads rise, and few negotiated-agreement protections. Paperwork and due process also scored poorly, with many teachers saying they rarely receive dedicated time during the duty day, often work outside contract hours without compensation, and take work home on evenings and weekends. Student and staff safety scored somewhat better but still showed gaps in crisis follow-up, notification about violent behavior, protective gear, and leave options after incidents. Paraprofessional management also drew concern, especially low pay, insufficient staffing, limited administrative support, and the burden placed on teachers to supervise and train paras. Several teachers then testified directly about the practical impact of these issues. One special education teacher described the job as combining instruction, legal compliance, and paraprofessional supervision, often requiring work beyond contracted hours and contributing to burnout and turnover. Another testified that special education case managers are effectively doing three full-time jobs and that the paperwork and caseload demands are a major reason people avoid or leave the field. Committee members discussed whether the problems are primarily local or state-level, whether more funding would solve them, and whether changes to the funding formula or weighting for high-cost students might be needed. No formal vote or action was taken beyond a recess and return to order for the next presentation, which continued the discussion of possible special education study objectives and potential policy directions.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> additional funding that may be needed. additional funding that may be needed.
• Hey, I want to, I need more restricted funds here and less there.
• , what your funding anything you need, what your funding levels<00:41:10.800><c> are,</c><00:41:11.320
• One is on the actual need, not the funding.
• Uh you have $2 need, not the funding.

Committee: Joint Appropriations & Revenue

Transcript Highlights:

• awarded the potential state support, but we don't know how much funding will actually be needed for
• So if the funding is needed, there is that commitment of potentially up to $500 million, but it won't
• And then the city of Northwood received a small amount of funding because Valley City ended up not needing
• need.
• A school district needs to pass a bond issue before they can have access to this fund.

Summary: The committee took roll, approved the March 18 minutes, and then received a compliance-report update on the Industrial Commission and related funds and programs. Staff reviewed the status of one-time appropriations and grant programs, including electric grid resiliency, lignite research, enhanced oil recovery, the Clean Sustainable Energy Authority, the salt cavern business-case study, and the new NDSU research and technology park grant. Members asked about funding balances, reimbursement timing, matching requirements, and how some commitments would affect the State Investment Fund and future biennia. Industrial Commission staff then gave a broader update on the agency’s administrative office, grant management system, leadership transitions at several commission agencies, and active grant rounds. They reported that the grant management system is nearing completion, that several agency leadership searches have concluded, and that the commission’s grant programs currently have 108 active grants totaling more than $165 million. They also described the Clean Sustainable Energy Authority round, the oil and gas research program’s enhanced oil recovery awards, the grid resiliency grants, the salt cavern study, and the research technology park program, noting that some projects are awaiting federal funds or additional matching cash. Ron Ness, speaking for the Oil and Gas Research Council, focused on the state of the oil industry and the enhanced oil recovery “Bakken 2.0” effort. He said production remains steady, but future growth depends on better infrastructure, longer laterals, and new EOR methods such as CO2, natural gas, and surfactants. He emphasized the importance of the Bakkeneast pipeline and related gas-utilization projects, the recent DOE funding that will return some money to the research council, and the need to modernize tax and incentive rules for CO2-based recovery. Members discussed the potential economic benefits for oil, agriculture, and manufacturing. The Bank of North Dakota then presented its compliance report and a broader strategic update. Bank leadership reviewed the bank’s mission, governance, participation lending, student lending, disaster programs, and legislatively directed programs, and said the bank is managing for a flatter deposit base and stronger liquidity because of fintech competition and changing market conditions. They reported improved earnings, with net income rising to about $231 million, and described Rough Rider Coin as a new internal payment rail for North Dakota banks and credit unions, not a public cryptocurrency. Members asked about student loan eligibility, disaster lending, and the bank’s capacity to support state programs while maintaining its balance-sheet and liquidity requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• funds.
• We currently need $19.3 million in state funding to meet the match requirement for our federal fiscal
• So we need to try to make sure that we fully fund these agencies that draw money down from the federal
• to provide much-needed funds to our consumers.
• My role ensures these are, Assess performance and our funding needs.

Summary: The committee met to receive a detailed financial operations presentation from the South Carolina Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) agency, with staff walking members through funding sources, budgeting, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and grants management. Sabrina Walker explained VR’s blended funding structure, including federal grants, state appropriations, program income, and interagency contracts, and emphasized that state funds are essential to meeting the federal match and maintenance-of-effort requirements. Members asked repeatedly about transparency, audit controls, and the risk that state cuts could reduce federal drawdowns; staff responded that all reports reconcile back to the SCEIS accounting system, are subject to state audits and internal reviews, and that even modest state reductions could significantly reduce total available funding. The committee also discussed pre-employment transition services for students with disabilities, with staff confirming services are offered through school districts, charters, and private schools, and that contracts are monitored for performance and compliance. The presentation then shifted to budgeting and internal controls. Walker described a zero-based departmental budgeting process, monthly monitoring reports, contingency reserves for unexpected expenses, and a formal annual cycle that culminates in board approval. Members asked about facilities tracking, culture, and how the agency maintains accountability; staff said facilities staff inspect buildings and equipment, supervisors justify line-item requests, and the process has become smoother over time as departments learned the system. Cynthia Johnson followed with an accounts receivable overview, describing invoicing, receipting, aging, customer verification, year-end reporting, and the use of cross-training, shared email inboxes, and spreadsheets as checks and balances. She also explained work training center billing, interdepartmental transfers, and the revolving fund used to issue consumer checks more quickly than standard vendor payments. Olivia Perez presented accounts payable operations, including invoice processing through SCEIS and OnBase, the three-way match, travel reimbursements, revolving fund checks, State Treasury Office interactions, and handling of reversals, rejections, and levy notices. She reported that AP processed 67,723 SCEIS payments, 13,670 case management system invoices, 3,379 travel reimbursements, and 15,693 revolving fund checks in fiscal year 2025, with only 70 payment rejections. The final portion of the meeting covered Grants and Funds Management, where Walker explained federal reporting, drawdowns, payroll allocation, asset tracking, lease and IT contract reviews, cost allocation, and closing packages. She noted upcoming system changes such as S/4HANA, Workiva, and SC Pro, but said the agency is receiving training and feedback opportunities. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the presentation portion beyond approval of the prior minutes and a brief recess.

Transcript Highlights:

• fund it okay then need so if we don't fund it okay then it's<00:08:59.480><c> on</c><00:08:59.880><c>
• These are all state agency projects using LIHTC funding, which are going to need RHRF funding. the 792
• need to be funded think that rhrf does need to be funded because<00:19:39.760><c> there</c><00:19:39.880
• It would be needed for the 2026 funding round; that's where the 50 million...
• This you're going to use with existing funds, or you need additional?

Transcript Highlights:

• to the degree that we need to, just in terms of baseline funding.
• So are we going to continue to see the same level of funding, or it sounds like we need additional funding
• But what we'll do is calculate the per-line surcharge necessary to meet that funding need.
• just give the crisis centers the funding that we think that they need.
• As others are discussing, there is an urgent need for sustained, stable funding for 988 services.

Summary: The hearing focused on California’s 988 suicide and crisis lifeline and the broader crisis response system, with members and witnesses emphasizing both the system’s life-saving role and the risks posed by funding gaps, rising demand, and uneven local implementation. Opening remarks highlighted the personal impact of suicide and the need to strengthen crisis response so calls are answered quickly and linked to appropriate care rather than defaulting to 911, emergency rooms, or law enforcement. State officials described the AB 988 five-year implementation plan, which sets goals around public awareness, equitable access, high-quality call/chat/text response, and better integration with ongoing behavioral health services. State agencies reported progress on infrastructure, coordination, and related behavioral health investments. CalHHS said California has expanded mobile crisis teams, crisis stabilization units, and youth behavioral health supports, and is preparing additional public awareness and grant programs tied to Proposition 1. DHCS explained that 988 is funded through a federal SAMHSA grant and the AB 988 surcharge, while Medi-Cal separately funds mobile crisis services; officials said the mobile crisis benefit is active in 53 counties and that statewide expansion remains a work in progress. Cal OES described the statewide technical buildout, including network infrastructure in all 11 crisis centers, interoperability with 911, and a pilot of next-generation routing and call-handling tools. The 988 California Consortium said call volume continues to rise sharply, missed calls remain a major concern, text/chat capacity is limited, and centers need more stable funding, better reimbursement, and stronger feedback loops with the state. County and community witnesses stressed that local systems need more flexible, sustained support to match the demand. Lake County described a peer-led rural mobile crisis model that has reduced law enforcement holds and increased housing placements, but said county-run mobile crisis teams still cannot reliably access 988 surcharge dollars and face reimbursement problems from Medi-Cal and commercial plans. Santa Clara County reported strong performance metrics, rapid call answer times, and a broad continuum of mobile crisis services, but said staffing and funding are strained and commercial reimbursement remains slow. The Mental Health Association of San Francisco said the peer-run warm line complements 988 by offering non-emergency support and warm handoffs, but recent budget changes forced cuts to Spanish-language service, federation support, and hours. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; members mainly asked questions about surcharge levels, budget timing, coordination among agencies, data collection, and how to improve collaboration with frontline crisis centers.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, if the defund is extended, we will once again need to explore alternative funding mechanisms
• While these funds are helpful, there's certainly still need out there. Yes, we have.
• While these funds are helpful, there's certainly still need out there. Yeah.
• To prevent people from losing coverage, we need this funding now.
• Coverage, we need this funding now.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health began with a hearing on the impacts of H.R. 1 on California health programs, focusing first on reproductive health state investments. HCAI outlined five state-funded reproductive health programs created after Dobbs, including uncompensated care, practical support, capital and clinical infrastructure, and workforce programs. Essential Access Health and Planned Parenthood testified that these funds have served hundreds of thousands of patients, but warned that the uncompensated care program is fully awarded and needs renewal, and that Title X and Medicaid-related federal uncertainty continues to threaten access. Members questioned who the uncompensated care program serves, why Medi-Cal covers a large share of abortions, and whether Planned Parenthood could expand prenatal services; public commenters urged continued support for reproductive health access. The committee then took up long-term care services and supports, starting with the HCBA and Assisted Living Waiver programs. DHCS reported large wait lists for both programs and said enrollment is limited by workforce and provider capacity, while LAO noted that increasing slots alone may not increase access without additional programmatic changes. Members pressed the department on whether more slots should be added given the lower cost of home- and community-based care compared with skilled nursing facilities, and public testimony argued that the wait lists should be reduced and that staffing concerns do not fully explain unused capacity. The committee also heard testimony on congregate living health facilities, where providers and a patient family described the homes as critical, lower-cost alternatives to nursing facilities for younger, medically complex people. Witnesses requested short-term bridge funding, while DHCS said it is proposing to transition CLFs into a managed care benefit by January 1, 2028, which would remove caps and expand access statewide. The final long-term care topic was PACE. DHCS explained that it has paused new PACE applications and service expansions for at least two years to reassess oversight capacity and develop a statewide strategic growth framework, while existing programs continue operating. CalPACE supported the pause as a planning measure but asked for four additional state nurse positions to reduce delays in level-of-care determinations and speed enrollment for frail older adults. Members shared personal stories about how PACE has helped family members and asked how the state will meet growing demand; DHCS said stakeholder engagement will begin later in the year and that some existing applications already in process will continue. Public commenters broadly supported PACE, HCBA, and CLF funding requests. The hearing then moved to the Department of Health Care Services’ 2026-27 Medi-Cal budget and related trailer bills. DHCS said Medi-Cal spending has grown due to coverage expansions, higher acuity, rising utilization, and especially pharmacy costs, and it described proposals to extend the current skilled nursing facility financing framework for one year while the state develops a new value-based payment strategy. LAO said most recent Medi-Cal spending growth has been driven more by higher per-enrollee costs than by caseload growth, with pharmacy spending growing especially quickly, and recommended better and more timely data to analyze the drivers. Members expressed concern about the rapid rise in Medi-Cal spending and asked for more detail on the largest cost increases.

Transcript Highlights:

• funds.
• use of federal funds as well as other funds.
• </c><00:10:25.760><c> source</c> fish fund is the largest funding source fish fund is the largest funding
• 16:56.839><c> funds</c> other funds spread across other funds other funds spread across other funds and
• We also need to fund the staff at a level, and we fund the agency at a level that meets the expectations

Committee: Senate Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:

• funding programs.
• contaminant funding.
• Unmet need.
• requesting funding.
• from federal funds.

Committee: House Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Why would we create a special fund when we already have the harbor special fund?
• Fund will go towards the cruise ship industry, or do we need to amend the special fund to address them
• If we need to dedicate a portion of the revenue into the harbor special fund, I think legislative language
• to amend the ship industry or do we need to amend the special<00:28:48.640><c> fund</c><00:28:48.960
• is needed, or should this fund go directly to harbors and we can amend it so that there's a special

Bills: SB2816

Committee: House Tourism

Summary: The committees heard House Bill 2195, HD1, which would replace the existing transit accommodations tax on cruise ships with a per-passenger infrastructure fee collected by the Department of Transportation and deposited into a new cruise ship special fund. Testimony included support from Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings and comments from the Tax Foundation of Hawaii warning that the bill should remain narrowly tied to harbor-related uses to avoid potential Tonnage Clause issues. The Department of Transportation testified that cruise-related harbor work includes pier repairs, dredging, terminal upgrades, and shore power, and said a dedicated revenue stream would help prioritize cruise infrastructure needs. The Attorney General’s office said it had submitted written comments but did not address questions about the litigation or constitutional background. Members questioned whether the new special fund was necessary when the existing harbor special fund already finances similar improvements. DOT said the funds overlap and suggested the bill could be amended to use the harbor special fund with a separate cruise subaccount, while still preserving a dedicated revenue stream and separate accounting. DOT also said it currently collects port entry, dockage, and per-head passenger fees from cruise ships and that existing cruise-related expenditures from the harbor special fund have not been challenged. The chair ultimately recommended moving HB 2195 forward as introduced, while continuing discussions about the fund structure and awaiting further clarity from the Attorney General and DOT. In decision-making, the committees voted to pass HB 2195, HD1, as is. They also voted to pass House Bill 916, HD1, relating to the low-income housing tax credit, which would allow certain state low-income housing tax credits to offset state transient accommodations taxes in the same county and make Act 129 of 2016 permanent. Both the Committee on Tourism and the Committee on Economic Development and Technology adopted the chair’s recommendation to pass HB 916, HD1, unamended. The hearing was then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're inclined to repurpose existing positions to this higher need, to this modern need.
• it needs to.
• </c> Services will need it to be we'll need Services will need it to be we'll need to<00:08:15.159><c
• So, for example, nursing may be... the person might need long-term care, and so if the person has funding
• So, for example, nursing may be... the person might need long-term care, and so if the person has funding

Summary: The Joint Committee on Labor and Judiciary heard the Judiciary’s budget presentation from Brandon Kimura and other court administrators. The Judiciary outlined its mission and access-to-justice programs, including specialty courts, self-help centers, online small claims dispute resolution, and e-reminders. It requested an operating budget of $6.17 million in FY 2026 and $6.25 million in FY 2027, along with 17 permanent and one temporary position, and described a series of staffing and program requests tied to specialty courts, district court operations, technology, and public guardianship. Major program requests included making women’s court permanent by converting seven temporary positions to permanent and adding a substance use counselor; expanding truancy court and the Early Education Intervention Program on Oahu; and making the driving while impaired court permanent. The Judiciary also sought staffing and funding for the new Wahiawa District Court, including security, janitorial, IT, clerical, bailiff, and social worker support, plus an additional district court judge and staff in Kona. Technology requests included cybersecurity tools and a cybersecurity unit, enhanced email protection, and replacement of aging network switches. Other operating requests included continued funding for the Criminal Justice Research Institute, restoration of 12 positions cut during the pandemic, and added support for the Office of the Public Guardian. For capital improvement projects, the Judiciary’s top priorities were $4 million to design a new South Kohala District Court, $900,000 to replace an aging AC chiller on Kauai, and $5 million for lump-sum facility preservation work. Members asked questions about purchase-of-service contract rates, implementation of court-appointed fee increases, federal grant dependence, specialty court effectiveness, truancy court outcomes, and the condition of the Ewa District Court site. Judiciary witnesses said they were working to raise provider rates through contracts and a separate bill, cited low recidivism and reduced petitions as evidence that specialty courts and truancy efforts are working, and said the Ewa site has significant foundation issues that may require further assessment or a different location.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that school districts need consistent and sustainable funding for those programs.
• We need to fund them all; you know, we need to get them all to school.
• And this was the same at pre-K as well, targeted funds for the kids who need it most: low-income, at-risk
• We've heard from the department about the need to fund some of those initiatives, and it's funding that
• If the school districts across the state ask them, what do you think you need for funding to either stand

Committee: House House Appropriations & Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• I think we need a paradigm shift in education generally, but higher education, the way we fund it.
• We need to fund not institutions, not systems, not the 19th, 20th century way of doing things, but we
• So does that bring the pension fund down to roughly—like, we're moving most of that that we don't need
• And it is the, you know, what's needed to fund the pension obligations for the state and our employees
• But we are cutting the GR transfer to the Homes Fund, but we don't believe that funding is needed with

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• And we're going to need those funds to come from a state level because everybody knows that in Washington
• So with that, the agency has been able to fund $6 million a year, leaving a great unmet need.
• you need.
• Fund and those other funds, like the TIF, Tribal Infrastructure Fund, and the Water Trust Fund funding
• Representative Duncan, the source for that fund is not enough to meet the needs of, yes, I guess the

Committee: House House Taxation & Revenue