Transcript Highlights:

• The current programs funded at the $218 million.
• fund could be used for the program.
• It's time to fully fund these programs.
• It's time to fully fund these programs.
• its maintenance program funds.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee 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 reviewed proposals for EDD Next document management system funding, updated UI loan interest costs, disability insurance and paid family leave benefit and administration adjustments, WIOA funding changes, UI administrative and benefit changes, school employee benefit adjustments, an EMT training reappropriation, and a technical correction tied to EDD Next. PERB discussed funding tied to AB 28 and AB 1, including litigation-related workload and new jurisdiction over 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 on electronic assessment payments and the DWC director salary cap. CalHR proposed additional funding for a consolidated employee assistance program contract, and CalPERS and CalSTRS presented budget adjustments tied to investment costs and state contribution changes. Members focused heavily on UI debt and interest payments, asking the administration for a plan to reduce the outstanding loan and relieve employers. Finance said no specific repayment plan was included in the May Revision, while LAO said the state’s UI tax structure is structurally insufficient and that any debt payoff should be paired with tax-system reform. Senators also questioned EDD Next costs and timelines, PERB’s caseload and staffing needs, and DIR’s emerging technologies unit, with LAO noting that the unit would appear focused on physical workplace safety rather than broader AI labor issues. CalHR said the new EAP contract would consolidate services, improve access to clinicians, and lower costs relative to the current model. CalPERS defended higher external management fees as part of a strategy to pursue higher net returns, while some members pressed for more transparency about private investments; CalSTRS said it was not prepared to address investment-strategy questions at this hearing. Public comment in Part A was dominated by advocates urging support for an immigration enforcement emergency relief fund, along with comments supporting the Jails to Jobs proposal, the Apprenticeship Innovation Fund, and additional PERB funding. The chair noted that many of the immigration-related requests might fall under other committees and said staff would follow up. In Part B, Finance and LAO outlined judicial branch and DOJ May Revision items, including funding for court interpreter services, appellate court security, lactation room implementation delays, courthouse construction reappropriations, and DOJ budget increases. LAO recommended approving the language-access proposal with a report on reducing interpreter cost growth and reducing the General Fund backfill for state court facilities by $10 million on an ongoing basis.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's a state-funded program.
• funds to provide some summer programming.
• And there's a big difference between an ABC program that has school funding and an ABC program, obviously
• They changed the funding system, replaced the minimum foundation program aid with equalization funding
• They changed the funding system, replaced the minimum foundation program aid with equalization funding

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the previous minutes and then focused on an update from the Department of Education on early childhood programs, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ongoing work to review ABC slots, which have been flat for years at about 23,800 slots and roughly $114 million. They said about 1,000 slots statewide are currently unfilled despite a waiting list of more than 2,000 families, and the department is shifting toward paying based on enrollment rather than guaranteed slots. Members asked about school choice, income eligibility, year-round access, curriculum flexibility, transportation, and whether funding should be increased or rebalanced; the department said it is collecting data, may survey providers more formally, and is considering whether to modernize income thresholds, daily rates, and other program rules. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical information on income limits and other program details. The second major portion of the meeting was a legal presentation on the framework for Arkansas school adequacy by BLR education attorney Taylor Lloyd. She reviewed the constitutional basis for a “general, suitable, and efficient” public school system, the Dupree and Lake View cases, and the principle that adequacy and equity are different but related: adequacy asks what resources are needed, while equity asks whether those resources are distributed fairly. She explained that the General Assembly must define adequacy, study it, and react to evidence over time, and that the current adequacy definition includes curriculum and career/technical frameworks, the 38 mandatory Carnegie units, state testing standards, and sufficient funding. She also described the matrix as a funding tool, not a spending mandate, and noted that categorical funds are separate from the matrix. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum then gave the historical framework, tracing legislative responses from Dupree through Lake View and into the present. She highlighted major changes such as the creation of equalization funding, fiscal distress and academic distress laws, the adequacy study process, the Educational Adequacy Fund, facilities and transportation changes, declining enrollment and student growth funding, and later adjustments to teacher salaries, isolated funding, and categorical programs. She explained that the adequacy study has evolved through committee hearings, surveys, site visits, and outside consultants, and that recent changes include updates to accountability references and the addition or removal of certain funding categories. Members asked follow-up questions about how the matrix is used, whether homeschool or private-school funding raises comparable issues, whether stakeholders include private and homeschool participants, whether school board members should be surveyed, and whether the state should revisit average daily membership versus attendance-based funding. No votes were taken on the adequacy presentations, but the committee did agree to continue the early childhood discussion in a future subcommittee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• hasn't received funding for many years, and so the department In a while or it's a program that hasn't
• This is an existing program, but it hasn't had funding for a bit.
• Those are the programs where multi-benefit, I mean multi-year funding is one that we will probably be
• “We put together a program, requested some FEMA funding, post-fire recovery funding, and have developed
• continue funding for our hauled water programs, drinking water for schools programs, which are very important

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on water and coastal resilience heard an overview of the governor’s Proposition 4 spending plan, with presentations from the Department of Finance, the State Water Resources Control Board, the Department of Water Resources, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and later coastal agencies. Members discussed the water chapter’s major allocations for drinking water and wastewater, recycled water, tribal water infrastructure, groundwater recharge and SGMA implementation, dam safety, flood protection, integrated regional water management, Salton Sea projects, and water data/stream gauges. The LAO noted that many programs are established and have clear funding processes, but some newer or less-defined programs may warrant more detailed future budget requests and reporting. No votes were taken on the agenda items. Members raised concerns about groundwater subsidence, water deliveries from the Delta, the pace of water storage investments, instream flows, and whether bond dollars were being used to backfill General Fund reductions. Administration witnesses said groundwater recharge spending is being paced because prior years already funded substantial SGMA work, that Delta operations are governed by water quality, salinity, and species requirements, and that Proposition 1 storage projects have moved slowly because they are locally led and require permitting and financing. The Water Board and DWR said they use public needs assessments, annual plans, and existing grant processes to prioritize projects, and Finance said some General Fund programs were shifted to Proposition 4 to help balance the budget. Members also asked for clearer public tracking of bond spending and more concise future reporting. In the coastal resilience portion, the Ocean Protection Council and Coastal Conservancy described Proposition 4 funding for sea level rise adaptation, coastal flood management, habitat restoration, public access, and San Francisco Bay projects, with a multi-year rollout based on project readiness and recent large state investments. The Conservancy said it would use its existing rolling grant process, while OPC said its sea level rise grants would build on existing programs and new technical assistance. The Department of Fish and Wildlife explained its proposed use of bond funds for climate-ready fisheries, hatchery modernization, salmon monitoring, whale- and turtle-safe fishing gear, and a specific hatchery operations request tied to the Friant settlement. The LAO said the coastal chapter’s proposed first-year spending is relatively modest but generally reasonable given staffing and project readiness, while members emphasized oversight, transparency, and coordination across agencies and jurisdictions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We were able to increase funding for affordable housing programs to $435 million.
• Bright Futures Program and other financial aid programs, a total of $62 million to restore funding or
• Although we didn't fund through that specific program, we put $200 million dollars...
• Although we didn't fund through that specific program, we put $200 million.
• And while we have provided some funding for these programs in our budget this year.

Summary: The House convened on the final day of session, observed a moment of silence for the Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, and for Representative Rosenwald’s father, then swore in and seated new members Boyles and Hodgers. The Speaker also outlined the chamber’s end-of-session priorities, including action on the budget and related conforming bills. The House then took up H.J.R. 5019, a constitutional amendment to expand Florida’s budget stabilization fund by raising the cap, requiring annual transfers, and allowing withdrawals for critical state needs. After sponsor explanations and questions about what would qualify as a critical need and how the fund might respond to possible federal funding cuts, the House adopted an amendment that added more flexibility for suspending transfers and withdrawals. The joint resolution then passed on final passage. Members next considered HB 7031, the tax package conference report. The bill repeals the business rent tax and aviation fuel tax, delays the natural gas fuel tax, creates or extends several sales tax exemptions and holidays, and makes changes affecting property taxes, local taxes, pari-mutuel taxes, and revenue distributions. Debate focused heavily on the new permanent exemption for ammunition and hunting-related items, the elimination of recurring housing trust fund and transit-related distributions, and the shift of some funding from recurring to nonrecurring status. Supporters argued the package provides tax relief and preserves annual budget flexibility, while opponents criticized the ammunition exemption and the reductions in recurring housing and transit support. The conference report was adopted and the bill passed. The House then passed HB 5017, which creates a debt reduction program funded by a recurring transfer from general revenue to retire state bonds early, and HB 5015, the state group insurance conforming bill, which directs DMS to develop a formulary management plan and codifies the administrative health insurance assessment. Finally, the chamber began explanation and questions on the General Appropriations Act conference report for fiscal year 2025-26, described as a $115.1 billion budget that is down from the current year and includes more than $12 billion in reserves. Subcommittee chairs summarized major budget areas, including K-12 education, health care, transportation and economic development, agriculture and natural resources, higher education, state administration, justice, and information technology, highlighting funding for school choice, Medicaid, housing, transportation infrastructure, Everglades restoration, workforce programs, cybersecurity, and technology modernization.

Transcript Highlights:

• million from the general revenue fund that reverts back to the EASE program.
• Senator Davis, we are no longer funding the Canadian drug importation program.
• We are funding $4 million for a new direct-buy program.
• Is that total funding for the voucher programs, and what is the difference of that funding from last
• The voucher programs and what is the difference of that funding from last year? Chair Burgess.

Summary: The Senate took up the 2026-2027 budget and related implementing bills. Appropriations Chair Hooper presented a $115 billion General Appropriations Bill, saying it reduces overall spending from the prior year, preserves reserves, and includes a 3% raise for state employees and 5% raises for state law enforcement, firefighters, correctional officers, and park rangers. Committee chairs then outlined major budget areas, including K-12 education, higher education, health and human services, criminal and civil justice, transportation/tourism/economic development, and environmental/agricultural agencies. Highlights included increased funding for school safety, teacher and scholarship funding, workforce education, Medicaid and kid care, corrections operations, judgeships, affordable housing, hurricane recovery, Everglades and water quality projects, and arts and cultural grants. Members asked detailed questions about several items. Senators discussed the Emergency Management Trust Fund, cultural arts grant allocations, Florida Forever land acquisition versus conservation easements, teacher salary support, charter school capital outlay funding, Bright Futures and EASE funding, New College funding, DOC deficits and inmate health care/food service costs, the ADAP HIV drug program, Medicaid reductions for non-critical access hospitals, and the use of opioid settlement and COVID relief funds. Chairs explained that some apparent reductions reflected shifts below the line or reclassification, that the ADAP appropriation would only cover about six months, and that some vacant positions were being removed as part of a right-sizing effort. Questions also covered lottery staffing, concealed weapons permit processing, elections security funding, and arts grant selection and proviso language. The Senate then substituted House bills for the Senate budget and implementing measures, amended them into the Senate posture, and passed them. HB 5001 (the appropriations bill), HB 503 (implementing bill), HB 5201 (collective bargaining), and HB 5205 (retirement) all passed 36-0 and were sent to conference. Other budget-related bills also passed, including SB 2506 on fuel taxes, SB 2508 on the state agency law enforcement radio system surcharge, SB 2510 on court trust funds, SB 2512 creating 13 circuit and 12 county judgeships, SB 2514 on K-12 education, SB 2516 on higher education, and SB 2518 on health. Most of these passed unanimously, with the Senate requesting the House either pass the Senate versions or include them in budget conference.

Transcript Highlights:

• some information here that breaks out which programs that federal funding is for.
• For example, that funding for the UAS program historically has not been as high as $8 million.
• to Budget Section semiannually, excluding federally funded programs.
• This program is a strong example of the Development Fund deploying targeted grant funding to address
• Programs, the ability to understand program needs, and set funding priorities that align with overall

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Budget Section’s Commerce and Legal Services Division met to review the Department of Commerce base budget for the 2027-29 biennium and to receive an update on Commerce programs. Legislative Council staff first walked the committee through the “blue sheet” base budget summary, explaining the major line items, the large share of federal grant authority in Commerce’s budget, and the continuing appropriations that support several Commerce funds. Members asked how grant funding is coordinated across agencies, and staff said collaboration varies by program but is strong in areas like UAS and LIHEAP. Commerce Commissioner Chris Schilken then presented on current activities, focusing heavily on grant administration, transparency, and economic development programs. Members questioned how grant applicants are selected, whether Commerce tracks applications and return on investment, and how long grant awards take to reach recipients. The commissioner said Commerce uses scoring criteria, outside reviewers, a minimum 30-day application window, and typically completes awards within two to three months. A lengthy exchange followed over whether Commerce should open some grants only to intended recipients versus running competitive application processes; Commerce said it follows best-practice grantmaking and that its attorney in the Attorney General’s office approved that approach. Commerce also highlighted the North Dakota Development Fund, citing long-term investment and job creation results, examples such as Red Trail Energy, Packet Digital, Valiance, Corvent Medical, child care loans, and the Automate ND program. Members asked about acceptable failures, lessons learned, regional economic development coordination, and the expansion of the fund into non-primary sectors. Workforce Director Katie Ralston Howell then outlined a statewide workforce ecosystem review, a new governor’s workforce sub-cabinet, and three task forces focused on simplifying entry, warm handoffs, and data integration. She discussed the in-demand occupations list, Workforce Pell, apprenticeships, and efforts to better connect students with employers and higher education. Commerce also briefly reviewed housing programs and a new housing sub-cabinet. No votes were taken; the committee simply received testimony, asked questions, and adjourned after setting up the next meeting to hear the Attorney General budget in June.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're proposing to not fund the program at this time and achieve that. at savings in the next fiscal
• We recommend that you ask OES to prepare options for the program in the in the case that federal funds
• So the funding for this program is set to expire at the end of this fiscal year.
• And so, in the future, will there be funds available for this type of program, jury pilot program?
• So the COVID funding is in its own program.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to CASA advocates, to fund Prop. 36, to fund programs that help victims of human trafficking.
• This bill provides funding and policy direction for various community college programs and activities
• , and clarifying the use of Adoption Assistance Program funds for in-state out-of-home placement and
• The bill authorizes funds previously provided for the distributed energy backup assets program to be
• Like to extend our appreciation for the AB 617 Community Air Protection Funding program funding, and

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is an existing program, but it hasn't had funding for a while. for a bit.
• There are several groundwater programs that have received funding...
• So for that grant program, is that program construct already in place, and your better funding would
• We have some longstanding federal programs known as the State Revolving Funds.
• So, we put together a program, requested some FEMA funding, post-fire recovery funding, and I have developed

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Those are to administer new federal grant funding for energy programs.
• being deposited to fund 195 for the statewide 9-1-1 program.
• To the pension fund that funds the retirees from this program. So I'm gonna go ahead and skip.
• And VOCA not only funds the life-saving work of sexual assault programs.
• So we've gotten about $18 million from CEPR to fund two programs.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• are a project that can be funded through that program.
• You know, it's really around the funds and all these programs that we've discussed.
• Both of those programs are components of US EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.
• Well, we've had outreach programs. We did have some funding. For doing some outreach.
• Restoration Fund and infusing that program with some funding to modernize it to a certain extent in

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I know that we have continuous funding, or we have funding for a separate film program under IAD.
• So it has some more flexibility than federally funded programs.
• So that's part, I think, of the yearly funding of this program: it's a good supplement to federally funded
• Supply Program Fund, and $15 million for the River Stewardship Program.
• And then line 267 funding to support the Federal Nutritional Services Income Program.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• In the Department of Transportation, the work program is fully funded at $11.6 billion.
• As I looked at the budget, I see that we did not fund the premium assistance program.
• Did not fund the premium assistance program. We did not restore that.
• program, and is there future consideration for us to fund this program to the extent that we're funding
• On housing, we're fully funding the sale and ship program.

Keywords: 998, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• using those sorts of funds to start programs.
• Again, you want to know what program funds we're using for what programs.
• We have three different programs: the Connect New Mexico Fund, and capital programs must be completed
• These are programs and projects throughout the state that we have funded or completed.
• The ARPA Capital Projects Fund, which is the first program that the Office of Broadband received funding

Transcript Highlights:

• IN PARTICULAR THE FUNDING OF THE FAMILY EMPOWERMENT SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM IN THE F DLA.
• PROGRAM STUDENT ACCOUNTS THAT HAVE BALANCES EXCEEDING $50,000 FOR STEP UP RECORDS, TRANSFERRING FUNDS
• FUNDING SIX HAS TO DO WITH YOUR VERSION OF FUNDS.
• IN THE LAST FOUR TO FIVE YEARS AND THE SUCCESSFUL AND ACCURATE FUNDING OF THESE PROGRAMS AS WELL AS
• IN RED GUARDS TO THE UA PROGRAM, I WOULD ASSESS A QUESTION REGARDING THE $367 MILLION OF UNUSED FUNDS

Transcript Highlights:

• As everyone is aware, federal funding for a number of social safety net programs that support vulnerable
• To have successful implementation of opportunities, a program must have two things: funding and access
• are operating normally, and the funds awarded for those programs are also flowing normally as well.
• normally, and the funds awarded for those programs is also flowing normally as well.
• So we, because we run all of the social services, publicly funded social service programs, we really

Summary: The Senate and Assembly Human Services Committees held a special oversight hearing on California’s 2026-27 Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) state plan, a federal anti-poverty funding stream. Committee members opened by citing statewide poverty and homelessness data and said the hearing was meant to review how CSBG dollars are used, how local agencies respond to community needs, and how the state is preparing for possible federal funding cuts. Jason Wimbley of the Department of Community Services and Development (CSD) explained that California’s CSBG network works through 60 organizations in 58 counties, serving about 1.5 million low-income Californians in 2023, and that the state received $68.4 million in federal CSBG funds in fiscal year 2025. He described the program as flexible funding used for housing, employment, education, food, health, transportation, and emergency response, and noted that the federal administration had proposed eliminating CSBG, though the Senate Appropriations Committee had voted to fully fund it for the coming year. Representatives from the California Community Action Partnership Association and several CSBG-funded agencies described how the program supports local anti-poverty work and leverages other funding. CalCAPA emphasized local flexibility, workforce development, partnerships, and data systems such as ROMA, while also warning that agencies are preparing for possible reductions by tightening budgets, planning staffing contingencies, and seeking private foundation support. Agency witnesses from Contra Costa County, Northern California Indian Development Council, Proteus, and Sacred Heart Community Service described services including housing assistance, food distribution, utility help, employment training, youth programs, and culturally specific services for Native communities and migrant farmworkers. They repeatedly said CSBG is essential because it funds staffing and infrastructure that allow them to braid other grants and serve people who do not qualify for standard safety-net programs. Members also asked about the impact of federal staffing changes and the Los Angeles fires. Wimbley said federal layoffs had affected some CSD programs but not CSBG administration, and that the department coordinated disaster response with state agencies and used CSBG-funded supply distribution, food, water, clothing, and documentation support during the fires. Witnesses said they were preparing for possible future cuts by diversifying funding, reducing expenses, and considering service changes, while county officials warned that state and federal reductions could not be backfilled locally. During public comment, one speaker urged stronger oversight of community action agencies and raised concerns about transparency and compliance with state law. The chair then thanked the witnesses, emphasized the importance of CSBG for low-income seniors, youth, and people with disabilities, and adjourned the hearing without any votes or formal action taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• programs, and this will be allocated through our existing funding model.
• for the LINE program, Linking Industry to Nursing Education Fund.
• for the line program, linking industry to nursing education fund.
• FEFP and the scholarship program, the funding you're referring to in the APA, the accelerated programs
• Are you talking about the scholarship programs and the Stabilization Fund?

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and several gallery introductions before taking up Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 168, the Tristan Murphy Act, on mental health. Senator Bradley explained that the bill is intended to divert clinically appropriate defendants with mental illness from jail to treatment, create pretrial mental health diversion programs, expand grant uses for mental health and substance abuse reinvestment, require evaluations and treatment follow-up in certain probation and prison settings, add Hillsborough County to a forensic hospital diversion pilot, and establish a Florida Behavioral Health Data Repository. Senators from both parties spoke in support, emphasizing treatment over incarceration, public safety, and the Murphy family’s role in the bill. The Senate passed the bill 37-0 and then recorded 37 co-sponsors. The chamber then moved into presentations on SB 2500, the 2025-26 General Appropriations Act. Chair Hooper said the Senate budget totals $117.4 billion, reduces overall spending from the prior year, maintains reserves, keeps employee health contributions level, and includes major investments in water quality, transportation, education infrastructure, and nearly $1 billion in education capital outlay. Committee chairs outlined their portions of the budget, including increased funding for K-12 schools and scholarships, higher education workforce programs, Medicaid and health services, corrections and courts, transportation and housing, and environmental restoration such as Everglades and water quality projects. Members then asked extensive questions, especially about education funding, school choice, AP/IB and accelerated programs, the Family Empowerment Scholarship, and the FEFP calculations. Senator Burgess repeatedly explained that scholarship funding is being moved “below the line” to improve tracking and that the Senate position is to preserve funding while giving districts more flexibility. Senators also questioned the APD wait list for disability services, opioid settlement spending, arts funding, the My Safe Florida Home condo pilot, and proposed IT and agency restructuring. Several chairs said some issues would be resolved in conference, and no final vote on the budget was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• , to provide funding to CASA advocates, to fund Prop. 36, and to fund programs that help victims of human
• This bill provides funding and policy direction for various community college programs and activities
• This bill implements several significant... clarifying the use of adoption assistance program funds for
• The bill authorizes funds previously provided for the distributed energy backup assets program to be
• The federal government just stopped funding a 60-year-old sickle cell program, and health care plans

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the final three-party agreement for the 2026-27 state budget and 19 implementing bills, including two budget bill juniors and 17 trailer bills. Committee leadership and administration officials described the budget as a balanced plan that reduces out-year structural deficits, maintains large reserves, and makes major investments in health care, education, housing, child care, public safety, and other core services while also responding to expected federal cuts and fiscal uncertainty. The Department of Finance outlined the package’s major components, including Medi-Cal adjustments, education funding increases, higher education changes, child care and human services updates, housing and homelessness funding, energy and transportation provisions, and tax and general government changes. Members asked questions about several provisions, including CSU enrollment targets and turnaround plans, the Prop. 98 settle-up mechanism, the plastics market development payment program, housing accountability measures, NextGen 9-1-1 implementation, and veteran services. Staff and administration witnesses explained that the higher education language is intended to improve campus-by-campus reporting and oversight, that Prop. 98 settle-up would be finalized later through the statutory certification process, and that NextGen 9-1-1 now includes one-time funding, quarterly reporting, an independent technical review, and a state audit. Members also discussed the HAP homelessness funding increase to $900 million and the balance between accountability and timely distribution of funds. The most extended exchange centered on comparisons between funding for veterans and Medi-Cal/immigrant health coverage. Republican members argued the budget spends far more on undocumented immigrant services than on veterans, while Democratic members and Finance staff responded that the comparison was misleading because many veterans’ services are federally funded and the state budget also includes dedicated veteran support. The chair and other members emphasized that the budget reflects difficult tradeoffs and that the package protects vulnerable populations, preserves health care access, and advances affordability. No final vote was described in the excerpt, but members indicated support for the overall package and said they would support it on the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• All those programs, and now we're asking for more targeted funds.
• In all of these programs, including the literacy and math coach program, are supplemental to that funding
• and the $150 million in one-time funding for the kitchen infrastructure and training program.
• A UC Berkeley study in 2020 cited a $5.8 billion funding need for these programs.
• A UC Berkeley study in 2020 cited a $5.8 billion funding need for these programs.

Summary: The committee heard a series of budget proposals focused on education finance, with repeated questions about whether the state’s investments are coordinated, targeted to the highest-need students, and likely to produce measurable results. On the first item, the administration proposed $1 million for a study of California’s curriculum framework, standards, and instructional materials process, plus $250,000 for supplemental ELA/ELD guidance. CDE and Finance said the study would examine how other states organize standards, frameworks, and adoptions, while the chair and members questioned why California has gone so long without updating some standards, what the study would actually accomplish, and whether the proposal was too vague to justify the cost. The issue was held open. The committee then took up a proposed $25 million statewide literacy network within the system of support. CCEE and CDE said the network would coordinate multiple existing literacy leads, create a clearinghouse of evidence-based resources, and improve coherence across the state’s many literacy initiatives. Members pressed on how a one-time, five-year allocation could support a long-term system, how the work would reach distressed and rural districts, and whether the proposal would translate into classroom change rather than just another layer of coordination. The issue was also held open. Next, the committee reviewed a $500 million proposal to expand literacy coaches and reading specialists and to create a math coaches program. CDE described the existing literacy coach cohorts as producing positive reports from participating LEAs, while the LAO recommended modifications, especially for the math coach portion, including limiting eligibility to elementary schools, setting minimum grant amounts, directing funds to eligible school sites, and making eligibility automatic rather than application-based. Members focused on whether coaches were actually being placed at the schools with the greatest need and whether the state has a coherent long-term strategy for literacy and math investments. The committee also heard a $40 million proposal for training and implementation of K-2 reading difficulty screeners, which the LAO said was reasonable but could be reduced because $25 million had already been provided for training; CDE said the new funds were needed for full implementation, procurement, and sustainability. Finally, the committee heard a $10 million proposal for a developmentally appropriate TK multilingual learner screener, with CDE explaining why the preschool language-identification process is different from K-12 EL assessment and the chair asking staff to explore whether a single, more consistent approach could be developed. The meeting concluded with a presentation on universal school meals and kitchen infrastructure, including a $31.5 million backfill, an $84.1 million increase for projected meal growth, a COLA adjustment, and $150 million for kitchen upgrades and training to support freshly prepared meals.

Transcript Highlights:

• It fully funds Florida's $35.1 billion Medicaid program to Utilize budget and funding authority.
• We were able to increase funding for affordable housing programs to $435 million.
• the Bright Futures Program and other financial aid programs, and a total of $62 million to restore funding
• Although we didn't fund through that specific program, we put $200 million.
• Although we didn't fund through that specific program, we put $200 million.

Summary: The House met on the final day of session, swore in Representatives Boyles and Hodgers, and observed a moment of silence for the Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, as well as for Representative Rosenwald’s father. The chamber then moved into final budget work, with leaders outlining the plan to take up H.J.R. 5019, HB 7031, HB 5017, HB 5015, and then the general appropriations act once the Senate transmitted it. H.J.R. 5019, a proposed constitutional amendment to expand the budget stabilization fund, was explained and amended to raise the rainy day fund cap, require annual deposits, and allow withdrawals for critical state needs by a two-thirds vote; it passed 100-1. The House then adopted the conference report on HB 7031, the tax package. The bill repeals the business rent tax and aviation fuel tax, delays the natural gas fuel tax, creates or expands several sales tax holidays and exemptions, including permanent exemptions for disaster-preparedness items, hunting/fishing/camping items, and ammunition and firearms-related purchases, and makes changes to property, corporate income, local tax, and economic development provisions. Members debated the removal of recurring housing trust fund and transit-related revenue streams, the new ammunition exemption, and the data center tax changes; supporters argued the package reduces taxes and preserves annual budget flexibility, while opponents raised concerns about housing, transportation, and gun violence. The conference report passed 93-7. HB 5017, creating a debt reduction program funded by a recurring transfer to retire state bonds early, passed unanimously. HB 5015, the state group insurance conforming bill, which directs DMS to develop a formulary management plan and codifies the administrative health insurance assessment, also passed. The House then began explanation and questions on the fiscal year 2025-26 general appropriations act, described as a $115.1 billion budget that is down $3.8 billion from the current year and includes more than $12 billion in reserves. Subcommittee chairs summarized major spending areas, including pre-K-12 funding increases, health care funding for Medicaid, KidCare, nursing homes, opioid treatment, and mental health, transportation and economic development funding, environmental and water projects, higher education, state administration, justice, and information technology. Questions focused on school vouchers, inflationary pressures on school districts, and the adequacy of funding for housing, transportation, and other priorities.