Transcript Highlights:

• The program diverts their resources from solving crimes.
• This 287G program does not target people who pose a danger to public safety.
• A comprehensive analysis of the program found that half of all the containers issued through the program
• The current training for this program is woefully inadequate.
• According to DHS statistics obtained through the Secure Communities program.

Bills: SJR12, SJR37, SB7, SB8, SB16, SB27, SB108, SB125, SB207, SB251, SB318, SB371, SB379, SB396, SB406, SB472, SB503, SB533, SB578, SB599, SB608, SB617, SB621, SB689, SB707, SB763, SB836, SB854, SB856, SB857, SB875, SB878, SB906, SB922, SB942, SB965, SB985, SB988, SB1021, SB1059, SB1084, SB1098, SB1185, SB1188, SB1202, SB1207, SB1307, SB1321, SB1330, SB1366, SB1388, SB1396, SB1453, SB1484, SB1497, SB1498, SB1535, SB1563, SB1596, SB1610, SB1619, SB1737, SB1738, SB1741, SB1816, SB1822, SB1841, SB1939, SB2188, SJR36, SJR12, SJR37, SJR81, SJR50, SCR22, SCR12, SCR39, SB875, SB318, SB707, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB1497, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB1215, SB1302, SB856, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB608, SB955, SB957, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB541, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB1352, SB785, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB1029, SB1185, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741, SB7, SB927, SB1227, SB1229, SB1353, SB1366, SB1464, SB1709, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1816, SB1841, SB2188, SB1147, SB879, SB1008, SB1536, SB2016, SB1453, SB1173, SB1163, SB996, SB27, SB568, SB1370, SB1321, SB1101, SB906, SB860, SB1563, SB993, SB693, SB1610, SB1537, SB836, SB1332, SB1307, SB963, SB493, SB922, SB984, SB1084, SB619, SB1098, SB1122, SB455, SB522, SB1057, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1664, SB1877, SB464, SB1277, SB32, SB732, SB660, SB731, SB921, SB268, SB1822, SB1188, SB1939, SB1589, SB397, SB1388, SB2230, SB1058, SB1036, SB1267, SB2112, SB1930, SB532, SB1035, SB2155, SB508, SB29, SB292, SB291, SB901, SB1333, SB1436, SB1494, SB964, SB779, SB1378, SB2312, SB1719, SB1386, SB287, SB2143, SB1245, SB261, SB1247, SB1948, SB2406, SB2407, SB1882, SB1197, SB1814, SB618, SB38

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, voter ID, citizenship, election integrity, voting rights, water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability, immigration enforcement, ICE agreements, sheriff grants, law enforcement, county jail, federal immigration law

Transcript Highlights:

• Everything in this bill is already done in the WIC program, the Women, Infants, and Children program.
• the WIC program, the Women, Infants, and Children Program, which is about 800,000 people are in that
• Send us the waivers to the F&S program.
• Well, we don't run the program; it's federally run. But we have a program.
• in the program and what they will not.

Bills: SJR37, SJR57, SB7, SB8, SB16, SB108, SB125, SB207, SB318, SB371, SB379, SB396, SB406, SB503, SB533, SB565, SB578, SB599, SB686, SB689, SB707, SB763, SB854, SB857, SB875, SB878, SB920, SB924, SB961, SB965, SB985, SB988, SB1021, SB1024, SB1026, SB1038, SB1059, SB1185, SB1202, SB1207, SB1252, SB1330, SB1396, SB1484, SB1527, SB1535, SB1596, SB1619, SB1697, SB1737, SB1741, SB1841, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SJR37, SCR22, SCR12, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB504, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB1497, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB1215, SB1302, SB856, SB583, SB673, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB608, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB541, SB379, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB1352, SB785, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB961, SB1038, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SB16, SB310, SB311, SB396, SB505, SB1209, SB1210, SB1470, SB264, SB924, SB1029, SB1185, SB1202, SB1358, SB1364, SB1569, SB1697, SB1376, SB1228, SB519, SB878, SB1350, SB462, SB1535, SB827, SB1585, SB207, SB1207, SB1619, SB1396, SB920, SB1484, SB1273, SB1741, SB7, SB927, SB1227, SB1229, SB1353, SB1366, SB1464, SB1709, SB1729, SB1733, SB1744, SB1772, SB1816, SB1841, SB2188, SB1147, SB879, SB1008, SJR81, SJR50, SCR39, SB1536, SB2016, SB1453, SB1173, SB1163, SB996, SB27, SB568, SB1370, SB1321, SB1101, SB906, SB860, SB1563, SB993, SB693, SB1610, SB1537, SB836, SB1332, SB1307, SB963, SB493, SB922, SB984, SB1084, SB619, SB1098, SB1122, SB455, SB522, SB1057, SB1239, SB1254, SB1255, SB1259, SB1341, SB1664, SB1877, SB464, SB1277, SB32, SB732, SB660, SB731, SB921, SB268, SB1822, SB1188, SB1939, SB1589, SB397, SB1388, SB2230, SB1058, SB1036, SB1267, SB2112, SB1930, SB532, SB1035, SB2155, SB508, SB29, SB292, SB291, SB901, SB1333, SB1436, SB1494, SB964, SB779, SB1378, SB2312, SB1719

Keywords: voter ID, citizenship, election integrity, constitutional amendment, voting rights, water infrastructure, financial assistance, Texas Water Development Board, water supply, environmental sustainability, immigration enforcement, ICE agreements, sheriff grants, law enforcement, county jail, federal immigration law, voter registration, proof of citizenship, Election Code, criminal offenses

Transcript Highlights:

• These four programs are first, $37.6 million for the State Water Efficiency and Enhancement Program,
• These programs are the year-round certified farmers' market program for grants to support year-round
• , and these are established programs; they're existing programs with a good track record.
• 20 in the GGRF programs.
• 20 in the GGRF programs.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee heard the administration’s spending plan for Proposition 4’s climate smart agriculture and biodiversity chapters, along with related trailer bill language. CDFA outlined proposed funding for existing programs such as SWEEP, Healthy Soils, Urban Agriculture, and invasive species work, plus new or phased-in programs including year-round and mobile farmers’ markets, tribal food sovereignty, and regional farm equipment sharing. The Department of Conservation described funding for the California Farmland Conservancy Program and Working Lands and Riparian Corridors Program, while the Department of Finance and LAO discussed pending allocations and generally found the overall approach reasonable, though LAO suggested the Legislature may want more statutory guidance and reporting, especially for new programs. Members focused on implementation details, equity, and accountability. Questions covered how programs would serve vulnerable and disadvantaged communities, whether new solicitations would be reopened for previously oversubscribed grants, how outcomes are tracked, and how to structure guidance for new programs such as farm equipment sharing. The chair emphasized that the Legislature wants clearer direction on program design and noted that AB 2313 should guide implementation of the regional farm equipment sharing allocation. The committee also discussed the administration’s request to directly appropriate bond funds to departments and to exempt bond program guidelines from the Administrative Procedures Act; LAO supported the APA exemption with possible legislative guardrails for public notice and comment. The committee then heard on the farm-to-school proposal, with CDFA requesting $24.9 million General Fund for incubator grants, technical assistance, and network support. CDFA said the program has reached nearly half of California schoolchildren and has shown strong demand and positive evaluation results. LAO supported the core program but recommended rejecting the $3 million technical assistance component as too broad and suggested the Legislature consider using Proposition 98 for some of the funding. Members debated that point, with some expressing concern about using General Fund dollars for a new discretionary request during a tight budget year. The biodiversity and nature-based solutions chapter included funding for the Wildlife Conservation Board, state conservancies, and tribal nature-based solutions. WCB described major recent investments and proposed projects tied to 30 by 30, habitat restoration, tribal partnerships, and public access. Members raised concerns about long-term stewardship, the size of the WCB allocation, and whether the Legislature should receive more detail on how funds will be distributed. The committee also heard requests for Bolsa Chica wetlands maintenance and Rincon Island decommissioning funding from the State Lands Commission, with members questioning long-term liability, remediation costs, and the role of private oil operators. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with public comment from stakeholders largely supporting the APA exemption, farm-to-school funding, biodiversity investments, and related conservation programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• professional diploma programs, and 194 practical nursing programs.
• programs.
• Diploma nursing programs, associate degree programs, Bachelor of Science programs, and direct entry Masters
• PN programs.
• The ASUSA degree nursing program is a two-year program.

Summary: The subcommittee met to examine Florida’s nursing education pipeline and the state’s persistently low NCLEX passage rates. Chair Tuck opened by noting the projected nurse shortage and Florida’s ranking near the bottom nationally for first-time NCLEX pass rates. The Department of Health explained the Board of Nursing’s approval process for nursing programs, including application requirements, probation standards, and termination for programs that repeatedly fail passage-rate benchmarks. The Florida Center for Nursing then presented statewide data showing Florida has more test takers than most states, but still trails the national average; the gap has narrowed in recent years, though Florida remains below average. Members focused heavily on why the state continues to underperform, with discussion of faculty shortages, clinical placement constraints, accreditation, student preparedness, and the large share of newer private for-profit programs among those placed on probation. Committee members asked about how probation works, what happens when programs improve, and whether the board requires corrective plans. They also questioned the relationship between program type and outcomes, the effect of Operation Nightingale, and how many students fail and retest. The Florida Center for Nursing said first-attempt pass rates are the standard measure and that students who fail are expected to remediate and retest, though costs vary. The center also said Florida’s data shows accredited programs outperform approved or probationary ones, and that the state’s nursing workforce challenges are tied to broader issues such as faculty vacancies, clinical site competition, and student demographics, including many students balancing work, family, and language barriers. A panel of nursing school leaders from public, private nonprofit, and private for-profit institutions then described strategies used to improve outcomes. These included transparent recruitment, early orientation, tutoring, success coaching, stronger faculty development, curriculum mapping to NCLEX standards, higher course benchmarks, mandatory remediation, simulation labs, and commercial NCLEX prep tools such as ATI, Kaplan, and HESI. Several panelists said their programs had improved after probation or had very high passage rates, and they emphasized that student success depends on academic preparation, clinical experience, and support services. Members also asked about tuition, program length, translation into other languages, and faculty recruitment; panelists said costs vary widely, faculty hiring is difficult because hospitals pay more, and some schools are considering medical Spanish and immersion options rather than full curriculum translation.

Transcript Highlights:

• from a program.
• program.
• program. insurers, but they also save money for the state's Medicaid program.
• as a pilot program in 2000 as one of their early programs.
• as a pilot program in 2000 as one of their early programs.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee’s Initiative 900 subcommittee held a hybrid public hearing on two State Auditor performance audits. The first audit examined efforts to reduce non-emergency use of emergency systems through CARES programs. Auditors reported that Washington has 52 fire-agency-led CARES programs in 26 counties, but many communities without programs said they need one. Major barriers included unstable funding, difficulty hiring qualified staff, volunteer-based rural departments, and lack of statewide guidance. The audit also found that only about half of programs tracked both required performance measures, and it recommended that the legislature consider private insurance reimbursement options and convene a statewide work group to develop guidance, standards, and possible changes to the role of the Department of Health. Agency representatives and fire officials largely supported the findings and emphasized that short-term grants and one-year contracts make programs hard to sustain. Committee discussion focused heavily on financing, especially Medicaid reimbursement and accountable communities of health (ACHs). Auditors clarified that the 10% figure cited in the report referred to direct Medicaid reimbursement for treat-and-refer services, which some agencies do not pursue because the $115 rate is too low relative to the administrative effort. Several fire officials testified that their programs rely on grants and ACH support, but that funding is often year-to-year and uncertain. They also described the value of CARES programs in reducing emergency room use, jail detentions, and long ambulance wait times, while noting barriers to sharing patient records across systems. Members asked whether the new public safety sales tax authority could help, but fire district representatives said it is not a direct funding option for them. The second audit reviewed performance management in the Department of Commerce’s Office of Economic Development and Competitiveness. Auditors found that the division does not yet have a statewide economic development strategic plan and that performance management is inconsistent across its 16 programs. In a limited review, all six sampled programs had goals, but only half clearly identified performance measures and targets, and only three tracked outcomes and published results. The audit highlighted leading practices from other states, including strategic planning, regular progress reporting, aligning program goals with agency goals, and using performance-based contracts and grant monitoring. Recommendations urged Commerce to seek stakeholder input, assess internal and external conditions, set goals and measures, align programs with the strategy, and strengthen monitoring and evaluation. Commerce officials agreed with the audit and said the division is already working toward a strategic plan, with a new assistant director to be hired and a target of completing the work by mid-next year. Members pressed the department on how the plan would connect to workforce, higher education, housing, and other economic development systems, and asked Commerce to return to JLARC next year with progress updates. The meeting ended with instructions for submitting written public comments and notice of the next JLARC meeting schedule.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have other demand response programs, base interruptible program, air conditioning cycling program,
• Programs.
• , take the best of both of the programs, create a new program.
• of the program.
• program costs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard a budget item on demand-side grid support and emergency load flexibility funding. The Department of Finance proposed redirecting General Fund money for summer 2026 to the CEC’s Demand-Side Grid Support program and using accumulated CalCHAP interest to support a successor ratepayer-funded demand response program for summers 2027 and 2028. The CEC and CPUC said they are working on a transition from DSGS to ELRP or an equivalent program, while the LAO said the proposal mainly presents a choice between keeping the money in General Fund savings or using it for DSGS. Members pressed the administration on why DSGS should be sunset when it has higher enrollment and lower administrative costs than ELRP, and on whether the state should continue funding demand response at all. The CPUC argued ELRP and DSGS are not directly comparable, said it is pursuing a broader demand flexibility rulemaking, and noted a decision on a successor program is expected in Q3 2026. No vote was taken in the excerpt, but members signaled interest in keeping DSGS funding at the CEC. The second item concerned trailer bill language for the transmission accelerator program under SB 254 and Proposition 4. GoBiz and IBank described a new financing structure for major transmission projects selected through CAISO’s competitive planning process, with about $26 million in administrative resources over five years. The LAO raised no specific concerns but emphasized that this is the Legislature’s first appropriation for a new program and that the final language should clearly reflect legislative intent. Members asked about state liability, ownership, and how the financing would lower ratepayer costs; staff explained that state financing would cover only a portion of large projects and could reduce the amount included in utility rate base, with estimated lifetime savings varying widely. Members also discussed offshore wind transmission needs and asked for an update on related Proposition 4 funding. The final item covered CEC and DPMO budget requests related to petroleum market oversight and supply stabilization. The CEC requested funding for additional positions to implement AB X2-1 and related fuel market monitoring work, while DPMO sought to make a data specialist position permanent. The LAO said it found the staffing requests justified. Members questioned why the work is funded through the Energy Resources Programs Account, whether staff from paused price-gouging work could be reassigned, and what evidence had been found of price gouging or market manipulation. CEC and DPMO said their work on reporting, analysis, and supply stabilization continues, that some staff are still working on related analyses, and that they are preparing further workshops and recommendations. The discussion also touched on refinery closures, gasoline imports, and the state’s changing fuel supply conditions, but no formal action was taken in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have other demand response programs: base interruptible program, air conditioning cycling program,
• of both of the programs, create a new program.
• But does that mean all of those programs are mandatory programs?
• We’re here on a subject of solar programs. This is a solar program.
• of the program.

Summary: The committee first heard Issue 1 on trailer bill language to redirect funding for emergency demand-response programs. The Department of Finance proposed using about $26.9 million in General Fund originally set aside for the Distributed Energy Backup Assets program to bolster the Demand-Side Grid Support Program for summer 2026, and using about $70 million in CalCHAP interest to support ratepayer-funded demand response in summers 2027 and 2028. The CEC and CPUC said they are working on a transition from DSGS to ELRP or a successor program, while the LAO noted the General Fund money would otherwise revert to savings. Members pressed the administration on whether demand response remains important, whether DSGS has been successful, and whether the state should keep funding it through the CEC rather than shifting to a ratepayer-funded CPUC program. The CEC and CPUC said the programs are not directly comparable, emphasized different cost structures and enrollment metrics, and said a CPUC rulemaking is underway with a proposed decision expected in Q3 2026. No vote was taken in the transcript. The committee then took up Issue 2, a budget proposal tied to SB 254 and the new transmission accelerator. GoBiz and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank described a five-year, roughly $26 million request to staff and administer the accelerator and manage Proposition 4 and AB 1207 funds for transmission financing. Members asked about state liability, ownership of financed lines, FERC revenue requirements, and whether the program would help underserved regions and offshore wind development. Staff explained that the accelerator would only consider projects already identified through CAISO’s competitive transmission planning process, and that state financing would be a small portion of large projects intended to lower overall costs to ratepayers. The LAO said it had no specific concerns but urged the Legislature to ensure the final language matches its intent. The committee also heard Issue 3 on petroleum market oversight. The CEC and its Division of Petroleum Market Oversight requested additional positions and funding to implement ABX2-1 and continue work on supply stabilization, refinery monitoring, and transportation fuels analysis. Members questioned why the work was funded through the Energy Resources Programs Account, whether existing staff from the paused price-gouging work could be reassigned, and whether the program had produced evidence of price gouging or improved supply conditions. CEC and Finance said the new positions are needed because the workload has expanded, while some existing staff remain on related analysis and reporting duties. The discussion ended without a vote in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those programs are the Tribal Food Sovereignty Program.
• Conservation programs, including the California Farmland Conservancy Program, which is one of the programs
• Of the CDA program, you know, the existing school nutrition funding programs.
• Programs, but those federal programs are distinct from these funds.
• 20 in the GDRF programs.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the next program we'll talk about is the North Star Promise program.
• year of the program.
• program.
• The next program I'd like to talk about is a pilot program, a temporary funded program, and that's the
• <01:26:27.960> program our direct admissions programs program our direct admissions programs

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The first program I'll talk about is the MFIP program.
• The first program I'll talk about is the MFIP program.
• The first program I'll talk about is the MFIP program.
• <00:32:34.399> that program is a federal program that program is a federal program that distributes
• /c> sovereignty program is a program to sovereignty program is a program to improve<00:32:54.039>

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee met for an introductory overview of its jurisdiction and budget, with the chair emphasizing the committee’s role over a large portfolio of children, youth, and family programs and the new Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF). House Research and House Fiscal staff explained their roles and described the 2023-24 reorganization that transferred many programs from DHS, DPS, MDH, and MDE to DCYF, along with a statute recodification and a crosswalk resource for members. Doug Berg then walked through the committee’s budget structure, explaining the difference between all-funds and general fund views, the major funding sources, and how forecasted programs and grant bases roll forward. He highlighted that the committee’s general fund base is a little over $2.1 billion for the biennium, with large federal components such as SNAP and TANF, and noted smaller accounts including child protection-related opioid funds and federal reimbursement offsets (FFP) for administrative costs. Members asked several questions about federal financial participation, TANF, and the effect of the repeal of the Diversionary Work Program (DWP). Staff explained that FFP generally applies to administrative costs for federally related programs and usually does not change much unless program activity changes, while TANF is a block grant that has been stable for years. On DWP, staff said the program was sunsetted effective March 1, 2026, and that the associated funding and administrative costs were being reworked rather than simply removed. A member also asked about federal funding fluctuations; staff said no changes were currently factored in, though SNAP or other federal policy changes could alter future numbers. Danielle Penelli then presented on economic assistance and employment supports transferred to DCYF, focusing first on MFIP, Minnesota’s state-supervised, county-administered welfare program jointly funded by state and federal dollars. She explained that MFIP provides cash and food assistance, employment and training services, and related supports, with a 60-month time limit and certain exemptions for illness, incapacity, or other barriers to employment. She also described the program’s income and asset standards, including a $10,000 asset limit with exclusions for homesteads and one vehicle per assistance unit member age 16 or older. Members asked clarifying questions about how the time limit applies and what assets count, and staff responded that the limit applies to the caregiver and does not restart with additional children. Penelli also introduced support services grants, which fund employment services for MFIP, DWP, and SNAP participants through workforce centers, counties, tribes, and community agencies, and help cover some county and tribal administrative costs. She began outlining nutrition programs under DCYF, including SNAP, the Minnesota Food Assistance Program, the Minnesota Food Shelf Program, the Emergency Food Assistance Program, and the American Indian Food Sovereignty Program. No formal votes or bill actions were taken during this meeting; it was primarily an informational staff briefing and question-and-answer session.

Transcript Highlights:

• into the program.
• Many of the trades programs actually articulate with various programs, multiple programs.
• their programs.
• program.
• We have many programs, we have other programs within our RT suite, but just wanted to showcase this program

Summary: The work session focused first on Washington’s apprenticeship system, especially building trades programs and support services. Labor and Industries staff explained how registered apprenticeship works in the state, including the role of the Washington State Apprenticeship and Training Council, the requirements for paid on-the-job training and classroom instruction, and the difference between apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship. Panelists emphasized that apprenticeship is tied to actual jobs and training agents, and that many waitlists reflect a shortage of job openings and employer participation rather than a lack of interest. They also discussed youth apprenticeship, the growth of apprenticeship and pre-apprenticeship programs, and the use of Career Bridge and L&I’s database to help people find programs. Representatives asked whether the state should expand apprenticeship programs and how people can find openings. Speakers said more programs alone would not solve the backlog without more employers signing on as training agents and more apprenticeship utilization on projects. The panel also highlighted the Constructed Career Initiative, a grant-funded navigation and support program that helps people enter and stay in building trades apprenticeships through outreach, case management, and wraparound aid such as transportation, tools, and work clothes. A related nonprofit, Build Up, described similar support services, including prison-based boot and PPE programs and assistance for reentry participants. The panel said these services are especially important because apprentices often face unstable income, housing, food, and transportation barriers. The panel also discussed House Bill 2084 and the new Construction Training Pathway Oversight Committee, which is examining construction training in correctional facilities and how to create clearer pathways from prison-based training to apprenticeship, college, or work. Speakers said the committee is still in its early stages and will report to the legislature. The session ended with committee members thanking the panel and noting the importance of support services and referral networks for apprentices. The meeting then resumed at Renton Technical College, where college leaders and faculty discussed serving non-traditional students. The college reported strong enrollment growth, a median student age of 30, a diverse student body, and high job placement rates, while also noting significant budget cuts and program reductions from the prior year. Health care and early childhood education programs were highlighted, including efforts to expand access through hybrid scheduling, evening and Saturday classes, Spanish-language offerings, and in-person wraparound support for admissions, financial aid, and registration. Faculty said these changes were driven by student data and were aimed at helping working parents, English learners, and other non-traditional students complete credentials and enter family-wage careers.

Transcript Highlights:

• and our vpk Summer Bridge program.
• Both of these programs are new programs that were implemented for the first time in fiscal year. 24 25
• our S our vpk program first and foremost is our school readiness plus program.
• So what is the average co pay increase from the SR program to the SR plus program?
• program.

Transcript Highlights:

• Great program.
• Workforce Program, the Community College Perkins Program, and the K-12 Strong Workforce Program, which
• Strong Workforce Program, which supports high school CTE programs.
• These types of experiences set our program apart from other college campus programs.
• These types of experience sets our program apart from other college campus programs.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance heard an overview of the governor’s new Career Education Master Plan and related budget items. Labor Secretary Knox described the plan as an effort to reduce fragmentation across K-12, community colleges, workforce boards, and other systems by improving statewide and regional coordination, data sharing, skills-based hiring, career pathways, and wraparound supports such as child care, housing, food, and transportation. Members asked how success would be measured, how the plan would serve disconnected youth and adults, and whether the proposed data integration would rely on Cradle to Career; the secretary said it would. The Department of Finance said it was available to answer questions on the education side. The committee then reviewed existing CTE funding and oversight. The LAO, CDE, and Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office described the major ongoing programs, including CTIG, Perkins, K-12 Strong Workforce, and Community College Strong Workforce, and noted that many programs overlap in purpose and administration. Members repeatedly raised concerns about duplication, annual applications and reporting burdens, lack of clear outcome metrics, and whether funding incentives should be better aligned to regional collaboration. CDE and the Chancellor’s Office said they support alignment and dual enrollment, and Finance and CDE said LCFF/local match dollars are part of the funding structure. The committee also discussed child care as a barrier to participation and the need for better tracking of enrollment, completion, and job outcomes. On the consolidated application proposal, Finance proposed a study directing CDE to examine whether three long-standing CTE grant programs—Specialized Secondary Programs, CTIG, and California Partnership Academies—could be streamlined into a single application and reporting process. The LAO supported reducing administrative burden but noted that the largest programs, CTIG and K-12 Strong Workforce, were excluded from the proposal even though districts most often cite them as burdensome. CDE said it did not oppose the study but warned that statutory differences may limit consolidation. Members said the proposal should better address regional coordination, multi-year funding stability, and outcome measures rather than only simplifying paperwork. Finally, the committee heard a proposal for a $5 million ongoing California Education Interagency Council. GovOps said the council would provide a neutral venue for statewide coordination across education and workforce systems. The LAO opposed the proposal, arguing that existing bodies already provide coordination, the proposal does not change agency incentives, and the council would lack authority to implement decisions. Members expressed mixed views, with some supporting a coordinating body and others questioning whether it would differ from past efforts. No votes were taken during the portions summarized here, and the committee indicated it would hold some items open for further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• Number one, they may have programs that have less than 10 individuals in those programs.
• program.
• program.
• And the program, our nursing program, has grown by 26%.
• There’s no programs.

Summary: The Education Postsecondary Committee met to hear an overview of Florida career and technical education (CTE) from Chancellor Kevin O’Farrell and presentations from Big Bend Technical College and Santa Fe College. O’Farrell described Florida’s CTE structure, including career clusters, postsecondary program types, enrollment and completion growth, apprenticeship expansion, and the state’s credentials review process. He said postsecondary CTE enrollment is near 480,000 students and completions reached a record 76,806, with strong growth in nursing, law enforcement, EMT, and other public-safety credentials. He also discussed the CTE audit, which uses retention/success, employment or continued education, and labor-market demand metrics; programs not meeting thresholds would eventually require phase-out plans beginning in 2026. He highlighted the workforce development capitalization grant as a major driver of program expansion and facility renovation, and answered questions about business outreach, construction trades, apprenticeships, and space-industry training. Shelby McCall of Big Bend Technical College described how the college responded to hurricanes, mill closures, and regional economic disruption by expanding rural workforce training. She highlighted aluminum welding, millwright, welding technology, health sciences, and a new advanced manufacturing facility funded by state grants and local partnerships, along with a new LPN-to-RN bridge program. She said the college has strong placement and certification results and is working with employers such as Lippert, NAMO, and others to align training with local demand. Senator Simon praised the college’s role in Taylor County’s recovery and workforce development. Dr. Paul Brody of Santa Fe College said state workforce grants have helped the college expand nursing, skilled trades, apprenticeship, automotive, diesel, and manufacturing programs, including partnerships with Bradford County Technical College, UF Health, Habitat for Humanity, and local employers. He reported growth in CTE enrollment, nursing credentials, apprenticeship enrollment, and job placement rates, and described new efforts in semiconductor training, CDL training, and a charter school model that combines high school, an AS degree, and industry credentials. The committee took no formal action beyond hearing the presentations and adjourned after Senator Berman moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is not the primary goal for the program. It is not the primary goal for the program.
• Cap is half of this program, and if we go above the cap, we're failing 50% of the program.
• As far as the direct benefit, it depends on the program. There are a number of programs.
• Thank you. ...programs and the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program.
• Low Carbon Transit Operations Program, and the transit intercity capital program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Environmental Quality Committee and Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 2 held a joint hearing on CARB’s proposed amendments to the cap-and-invest regulations. Opening remarks from senators emphasized the 2025 reauthorization of the program through AB 1207 and SB 840, and focused on whether CARB’s April revisions faithfully implement legislative intent while balancing climate ambition, affordability, leakage prevention, and the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF). Several senators raised concerns that the proposal could reduce GGRF revenues, weaken funding for transit, affordable housing, wildfire prevention, drinking water, and other community programs, and shift too much support toward industry. Others stressed the need to protect businesses and consumers from higher costs and to avoid leakage and refinery closures. Senator Cortese’s statement, read into the record, warned that the proposal could jeopardize transportation funding commitments. CARB Chair Lauren Sanchez said the amendments respond to legislative direction and public comment, and described four main changes: increased electric bill credits, a larger manufacturing decarbonization incentive (MDI), additional compliance support for industry, and removal of post-2030 allowance allocations from the current rulemaking. She said the proposal keeps the cap aligned with 2030 and 2045 targets, maintains affordability protections, and is intended to reduce emissions while minimizing leakage and supporting in-state jobs. CARB staff also said the MDI would have guardrails, require applications and reporting, and be tied to emissions-reducing facility upgrades. The Department of Finance explained that GGRF revenue estimates are highly uncertain and are updated periodically based on auction data. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the amendments are significant and could materially affect environmental ambition, industry support, utility credits, and GGRF revenues. LAO highlighted that the MDI could add allowances above the cap, potentially reducing certainty that 2030 targets will be met, and noted that the proposal appears to shift more allowances to industry and fewer to GGRF than current regulations. LAO also said the proposed GGRF estimate of about $8 billion through the decade could be insufficient to fully fund lower-priority tiers of programs. In questioning, senators pressed CARB on whether the proposal would raise consumer costs, whether free allowances or MDI funds would actually lower prices at the pump, how leakage is measured, and whether the Legislature’s budget assumptions would need to be revised before final action. No votes were taken during the hearing; the discussion was informational and focused on questioning CARB and fiscal staff ahead of the board’s planned May 28 consideration of the amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a mentoring program.
• the adult education program.
• The specific categorical programs include the adult education program, Extended Opportunity Programs
• . workforce Pell Grant Program.
• , and the program expands upon the federal Pell Grant program, but has some key differences.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard May Revision proposals covering higher education, including the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the University of California, California Community Colleges, the California Student Aid Commission, UC College of the Law, San Francisco, and trailer bill reporting changes. For the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education, the administration proposed a one-time $10 million General Fund backfill to repay a special fund loan taken to cover litigation costs, plus provisional language to adjust for a pending legal expense and to repay the loan without interest. The LAO opposed shifting costs to the General Fund and raised legal concerns about an interest-free loan under Proposition 26. Senators asked about whether the $10 million would cover the litigation and about the estimated $245,000 in interest savings. For UC, the May Revision maintained the Governor’s ongoing support and included budget language requiring campuses to grow by 2,968 California undergraduates in 2026-27. UC also sought $1.5 million in one-time General Fund support for the First Star foster youth program. UC described strong outcomes for the UCLA program, while the LAO recommended rejecting the new spending because UC already has overlapping outreach programs, including the Early Academic Outreach Program, and because the need for new state funding was not clear. Senators debated whether the proposal duplicated existing services and discussed the program’s reported college-going and completion rates. The committee also heard a request for $1 million ongoing General Fund for UC College of the Law, San Francisco, to maintain campus safety services; the college described its shared-campus model and public-interest mission, while the LAO noted the college was also raising tuition and that the proposal would maintain, rather than expand, current security spending. The committee then reviewed community college proposals. Finance outlined a larger May Revision package centered on a 4.31% SCFF COLA, enrollment growth funding, categorical COLAs, a one-time Adult Learner Demonstration Project allocation, deferred maintenance, and other ongoing and one-time items. The Chancellor’s Office supported the package but asked for more enrollment growth funding, a higher growth rate, and additional policy changes. The LAO recommended at least funding the statutory 2.87% COLA, then considering whether to redirect remaining funds to enrollment growth, categorical COLAs, or one-time priorities; it recommended rejecting the Adult Learner Demonstration Project. Senators questioned the use of the discretionary COLA to cover paid pregnancy disability leave, the impact on hold harmless and basic aid districts, and whether the state should instead create a separate categorical. The Chancellor’s Office and Finance said the COLA approach was intended to provide flexibility, though Finance said it was open to further discussion about districts that would not receive direct funding. For student aid, Finance described May Revision changes to Cal Grant and the Middle Class Scholarship, including a one-time reduction tied to lower estimated costs and a later true-up, as well as proposals for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. CSAC supported the financial aid investments but urged more time and clearer implementation planning for Workforce Pell, noting the need for state approval processes, data linkages, and likely ongoing administrative workload. The LAO recommended rejecting additional Golden State Teacher Grant funding and cautioned that the Workforce Pell trailer bill and one-time funding were premature given the new federal rules and unclear workload. Senators also raised concerns about the Middle Class Scholarship reduction, the need to support students facing higher living costs, and the decline in CADA/DREAM Act applications, with CSAC saying the drop did not reflect reduced need and that outreach should be strengthened. The final item was a set of technical trailer bill changes to shift some UC, CSU, and community college reporting from annual to biennial and consolidate reports; Finance said there were no programmatic changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• programs.
• it's a workforce program.
• funding programs.
• with 48 associate degree programs and 16 bachelor's degree programs.
• 48 associate degree programs and 16 bachelor's degree programs.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education received an overview of Florida’s career and technical education (CTE) system from Chancellor Kevin O’Farrell, who described the state’s CTE pathways, program types, enrollment and completion growth, quality audit metrics, and the Master Credentials List used to identify credentials of value. He highlighted record postsecondary CTE enrollment and completions, strong statewide performance in talent attraction, and several funding tools supporting expansion, including Open Door, the Florida First Responder Scholarship, Workforce Development Capitalization grants, Perkins funding, CAPE performance incentives, and apprenticeship grants. Senators asked about eligibility for Open Door and first responder aid, top industry certifications, and the teacher apprenticeship initiative. A panel of college and technical school leaders then described how state and federal funding has supported local program growth and facility expansion. Santa Fe College, Palm Beach State College, North Florida Technical College, Lake Technical College, Florida Gateway College, and Manatee Technical College each cited increases in enrollment, high placement or licensure pass rates, and new or expanded programs in nursing, welding, CDL, automotive, manufacturing, public safety, and apprenticeship. Several speakers emphasized partnerships with hospitals, employers, school districts, and local governments, and noted that grants helped fund equipment, renovations, and new training hubs. Palm Beach State also raised a request to broaden line funding beyond nursing to other health science fields, and multiple presenters asked for more flexibility, multi-year support, and continued or increased funding to sustain growth. Members discussed broader challenges, including the difficulty of sustaining grant-funded growth after initial awards, the lag between enrollment growth and funding formulas, and alignment problems for dual enrollment and technical programs with high school schedules. Senators also noted the need to balance support for high-demand core programs like nursing and welding with the ability to respond quickly to emerging industries such as AI and space. The meeting ended with no formal action beyond adjournment after Senator Davis moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• strong communities is a program created strong communities is a program created to<00:01:06.560>
• apprenticeship Readiness program apprenticeship Readiness program designed<00:02:50.200> to
• Additionally, each participant is assigned a program advocate at the beginning of the program and one
• But that program, I think there's a grant program, Women in Nontraditional Occupations, and other programs
• But that program, I think there's a grant program, Women in Nontraditional Occupations, and other programs

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• become available to support the programs become available to support the programs and<00:02:56.319
• sure that the JC would create a program sure that the JC would create a program Statewide<00:07:
• <00:08:22.840> I getting people through the program I getting people through the program I
• that registered apprenticeship program that registered apprenticeship program is<00:09:46.680>
• > with programs ensure program compliance with programs ensure program compliance with state<00

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Workforce Program.
• The programs include the Community College Perkins Program and the K-12 Strong Workforce Program, which
• , including the largest CTE program, the ROCP program.
• high school CTE programs.
• Alignment not only between our programs and K-12 programs, but with industry need as well.

Keywords: 988, house, all