Transcript Highlights:

• And if you look at the small business loan guarantees that you have, how do you make sure there's some
• Andy Nakahata responded that creditworthy means having enough revenue coverage to repay the loan.
• He then asked how effectiveness is measured and whether I-Bank has a good track record for its loans.
• You do track loan activity by region or by county, right?” Andy Nakahata answered, “Yes.”
• , and the agency guarantees those loans.

Committee: Senate Rules

Summary: The Senate Rules Committee met to consider several governor’s appointments and procedural items. The committee approved, largely on unanimous or near-unanimous votes, the appointments of Gina Castro Rodriguez to the Board of State and Community Corrections, Richard Stein to the California Arts Council, and Nicholas Hardiman to the California Housing Finance Agency Board of Directors. It also approved references to bills, committee appointments, subcommittee ratifications, joint committee appointments, and floor acknowledgments. A motion to grant rule waivers for Senators Perez and Padilla to introduce additional measures under SR 22.5 drew opposition from Senator Grove and ultimately passed on a 3-2 vote in the final tally. The committee then heard testimony on the appointment of Andy Nakahata as executive director of the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (IBank). Nakahata described his background in finance and infrastructure lending and said he would focus on expanding access to IBank programs statewide, especially in underserved and rural areas. Members questioned him about outreach equity, county-by-county loan activity, creditworthiness standards, the California Transmission Accelerator, and financing for public hospitals and other infrastructure projects. He said IBank works through financial development corporations, municipal advisors, and other partners, monitors geographic reach, and can work with applicants to adjust loan size or identify additional funding sources when projects are not fully creditworthy. Public witnesses spoke in support of Nakahata, including representatives from Siebert William Shank and O’Melveny/other public finance firms, who praised his expertise and leadership. No opposition testimony was offered. The committee voted 5-0 to move Nakahata’s appointment to the full Senate for confirmation. After completing a final roll call on the earlier agenda items, the committee adjourned its public session and announced it would move into executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• And if you look at the small business loan guarantees that you have, how do you make sure there's some
• And so it may be working with them to decrease the loan size, which then obviously decreases the loan
• the nature of those loans, is, I think, very commendable.
• You do track loan activity by region or by county, right? Yes.
• , and we guarantee those loans.

Summary: The Senate Rules Committee met to consider several routine agenda items and a gubernatorial appointment. The committee first approved appointments not required to appear, including Gina Castro Rodriguez to the Board of State and Community Corrections, Richard Stein to the California Arts Council, and Nicholas Hardiman to the California Housing Finance Agency Board of Directors. Members also approved references to bills and committees, committee and subcommittee appointments, joint committee appointments, and floor acknowledgments. Two rule waiver requests by Senators Perez and Padilla to suspend SR 22.5 for additional bill introductions were discussed and ultimately approved on a divided vote. The committee then heard testimony from Andy Nakahata, nominated to serve as executive director of the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (IBank). Nakahata described his background in finance and infrastructure lending and said he would focus on stewardship, expanding access to IBank programs, and supporting small businesses and infrastructure projects statewide. Senators questioned him about geographic equity in lending, outreach to underserved counties, creditworthiness standards, the Transportation Infrastructure Accelerator, and whether IBank could better reach municipalities and health care providers. Nakahata said IBank tracks lending by county, works through financial development corporations, municipal advisors, and other networks, and can adjust loan sizes or partner with other funding sources when projects are not fully creditworthy. Public witnesses spoke in support of Nakahata, citing his expertise and leadership in public finance. No opposition testimony was presented. The committee then voted unanimously to move Nakahata’s nomination to the full Senate for confirmation. Afterward, the committee re-ran the earlier votes for the record, confirming the appointments and other agenda items, and then adjourned the public portion of the meeting to enter executive session.

Transcript Highlights:

• A third option could be to suspend the Proposition 98 guarantee.
• So it's what all of the deposits are: within the Proposition 98 guarantee.
• them—a general fund loan versus a loan through the iBank.
• And in one of the districts, they're a year and a half from paying off their loan.
• CTA is opposed to the Governor's proposal to underfund the Proposition 98 Guarantee.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance met for its annual Proposition 98 overview, with Chair Alvarez outlining the committee’s focus on K-12 funding, student outcomes, and use of one-time funds. Superintendent Tony Thurmond gave an update on education issues, including wildfire recovery support for affected school communities, ongoing concerns about federal threats to education funding and immigration enforcement, progress on literacy and math, dual-language immersion, educator housing, and support for dual enrollment. Members broadly expressed support for these priorities, while also raising concerns about implementation, funding stability, and the need for schools to remain safe places for students. The committee then reviewed the Governor’s Proposition 98 proposal. The Department of Finance said the 2025-26 Proposition 98 guarantee is projected at $118.9 billion, with higher revenues and TK-related rebenching driving the increase. The LAO said the budget adds about $7.5 billion over two years and discussed the volatility of the guarantee, especially in 2024-25, when changes in revenue could have an outsized effect on school funding. Members questioned the proposed $1.6 billion delayed settle-up payment, the legal basis for delaying it, and the impact of possible federal funding freezes. The LAO presented alternatives such as a reserve deposit or delayed disbursement, while Finance said the proposal is intended to manage uncertainty. Members also raised concerns that ethnic studies implementation was not funded in the January budget, and Finance said the administration was not proposing funding for it. The committee next heard on the Proposition 98 rainy day fund and education deferrals. Finance said the reserve would receive a mandatory deposit of about $1.2 billion in 2024-25 and a discretionary deposit of $376 million in 2025-26, leaving a balance of about $1.5 billion. The LAO supported rebuilding the reserve as a way to manage volatility. On deferrals, Finance described the Governor’s plan to eliminate remaining deferrals by 2025-26, and the LAO said paying them off improves cash flow and budget resilience. Members generally supported eliminating deferrals and rebuilding reserves, though some asked about acting earlier if revenues allow. The committee also reviewed the proposed $1.8 billion student support and professional development block grant; Finance said it would fund professional development, recruitment and retention, and dual enrollment, while the LAO recommended clearer language on local discretion and use for one-time costs. Members were divided, with some supporting flexibility and others warning that one-time block grants can create instability and confusion for districts.

Transcript Highlights:

• A third option could be to suspend the Proposition 98 guarantee.
• Position 98 guarantee.
• Districts that go into receivership don't choose the type of loan that the state...
• Ultimately, it gives them a general fund loan versus a loan through the iBank.
• Obviously, the loan goes out for an extended period of time.

Transcript Highlights:

• It guarantees lifetime health care for its members, and that, my friends, we all know, is expensive.
• It guarantees unique in one particular aspect it guarantees lifetime health care for their members and
• The Left One members and their benefits and their dependents are guaranteed that they will get all of

Bills: SB6061 , SB6234 , SB6176 , SB6335 , SB6047 , HB2235 , HB2464 , HB2619 , HB1376 , SB5808 , SB5949 , HB1347 , HB1759 , HB1983 , HB2120 , HB2264 , HB2338 , HB2385 , HB2495 , HB2521 , HB2604 , HB2610 , HB2675 , HB2426 , SB6061 , SB6234 , SB6176 , SB6335 , SB6047 , HB2235 , HB2464 , HB2619 , HB1376 , HB1796 , HB2091 , HB2249 , HB2353 , HB2431 , SB5808 , SB5949 , HB2124 , HB2104 , HB2624 , HB2510 , HB1347 , HB1759 , HB1983 , HB2120 , HB2264 , HB2338 , HB2385 , HB2436 , HB2495 , HB2521 , HB2604 , HB2610 , HB2675

Keywords: tourism, self-supported assessment, funding, statewide promotion, economic development, sewage, grinder pumps, residential buildings, regulation, construction, vehicle registration, enforcement, renewal, transportation, state law, state commission, infrastructure, traffic safety, responsibilities, state capital projects

Bills: SB6061 , SB6234 , SB6176 , SB6335 , SB6047 , HB2235 , HB2464 , HB2619 , HB1376 , SB5808 , SB5949 , HB1347 , HB1759 , HB1983 , HB2120 , HB2264 , HB2338 , HB2385 , HB2495 , HB2521 , HB2604 , HB2610 , HB2675 , HB2426 , SB6061 , SB6234 , SB6176 , SB6335 , SB6047 , HB2235 , HB2464 , HB2619 , HB1376 , HB1796 , HB2091 , HB2249 , HB2353 , HB2431 , SB5808 , SB5949 , HB2124 , HB2104 , HB2624 , HB2510 , HB1347 , HB1759 , HB1983 , HB2120 , HB2264 , HB2338 , HB2385 , HB2436 , HB2495 , HB2521 , HB2604 , HB2610 , HB2675

Keywords: tourism, self-supported assessment, funding, statewide promotion, economic development, sewage, grinder pumps, residential buildings, regulation, construction, vehicle registration, enforcement, renewal, transportation, state law, state commission, infrastructure, traffic safety, responsibilities, state capital projects

Bills: SB6061 , SB6234 , SB6176 , SB6335 , SB6047 , HB2235 , HB2464 , HB2619 , HB1376 , SB5808 , SB5949 , HB1347 , HB1759 , HB1983 , HB2120 , HB2264 , HB2338 , HB2385 , HB2495 , HB2521 , HB2604 , HB2610 , HB2675 , HB2426 , SB6061 , SB6234 , SB6176 , SB6335 , SB6047 , HB2235 , HB2464 , HB2619 , HB1376 , HB1796 , HB2091 , HB2249 , HB2353 , HB2431 , SB5808 , SB5949 , HB2124 , HB2104 , HB2624 , HB2510 , HB1347 , HB1759 , HB1983 , HB2120 , HB2264 , HB2338 , HB2385 , HB2436 , HB2495 , HB2521 , HB2604 , HB2610 , HB2675

Keywords: tourism, self-supported assessment, funding, statewide promotion, economic development, sewage, grinder pumps, residential buildings, regulation, construction, vehicle registration, enforcement, renewal, transportation, state law, state commission, infrastructure, traffic safety, responsibilities, state capital projects

Bills: SB6061 , SB6234 , SB6176 , SB6335 , SB6047 , HB2235 , HB2464 , HB2619 , HB1376 , HB1796 , HB2091 , HB2249 , HB2353 , HB2431 , SB5808 , SB5949 , HB2124 , HB2104 , HB2624 , HB2510 , HB1347 , HB1759 , HB1983 , HB2120 , HB2264 , HB2338 , HB2385 , HB2436 , HB2495 , HB2521 , HB2604 , HB2610 , HB2675

Keywords: tourism, self-supported assessment, funding, statewide promotion, economic development, sewage, grinder pumps, residential buildings, regulation, construction, vehicle registration, enforcement, renewal, transportation, state law, state commission, infrastructure, traffic safety, responsibilities, state capital projects

Summary: The Senate considered and passed several House bills. HB 2624, relating to consumer protections for unsolicited real estate transactions for public purposes, was amended with a striking amendment from the Business, Trade, and Economic Development Committee and then passed 30-18, with Senator Dozier voting no and saying the bill still needed work. HB 2104, which makes permanent aviation assurance funding for wildfire response by removing a sunset clause, passed 47-0 with two excused after Senator Short urged support based on its wildfire-fighting value. The Senate also adopted an amendment to Substitute HB 2334, which addresses cash transactions and rounding to eliminate the need for pennies, adding language that customers with exact change must be able to pay exact change. The bill passed 45-2, with Senator Frame describing it as permissive guidance for businesses and Senator Dozier supporting it humorously; Senator Gainer voted no. HB 2436, concerning requirements for oil tankers operating in restricted waters and clarifying tugboat horsepower standards to match current practice, passed 46-1 after support from Senator Lovelett and Senator King. Finally, Engrossed HB 2575, reducing certain reporting obligations under environmental or energy laws, passed 47-0 with two excused. Senator Schumaker said it would save administrative costs for the Department of Commerce and utilities and free up money for low-income energy assistance. The Senate then adjourned until the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• And that's what bothers me is that I don't have that guarantee. guaranteed funding for them, and that's
• what bothers me, is that I don't have that guarantee.
• loan compared to a loan that might have been achieved in the regular market unsubsidized?
• But are we going to value that at the whole $2.5 million loan?
• So it is directly addressed as far as pre-development loans.

Summary: The committee heard several housing-related measures, beginning with SB 222 by Senator Wiener, the Heat Pump Access Act. The bill would streamline permitting for heat pump water heaters and HVAC systems, allow virtual contractor participation during inspections, and limit HOA barriers to installation. Supporters, including Spur, a contractor, and several clean-energy and environmental groups, said the measure would lower costs, reduce pollution, and speed replacements. The League of California Cities opposed the bill over the permit fee cap and concerns about virtual inspections, while committee members raised questions about HOA authority, electrical panel upgrades, and whether the bill could create unintended costs for local governments. SB 222 was approved 10-0 and sent to Local Government. The committee then considered SB 677, a follow-up to SB 79. The author announced the bill had been narrowed to two items: mobile home exemption language and a future SB 79 cleanup bill in the next session, with the larger set of implementation issues to be handled separately. Local governments and counties said the reduced bill still needed clearer definitions and more implementation guidance, while several housing and transit advocates supported the narrowing and the decision to revisit the broader cleanup later. After the amendments were accepted, SB 677 passed 10-1 and was sent to Local Government. The main debate centered on SB 417, a proposed $10 billion affordable housing bond for the 2026 ballot. Supporters, including the California Housing Consortium, labor, housing nonprofits, local governments, and many advocacy groups, argued that the state’s existing housing bond funds were exhausted, that thousands of shovel-ready projects were waiting for financing, and that the bond would leverage federal tax credits and private capital to produce and preserve affordable homes. Opponents and skeptics focused on state debt levels, the cost of housing production, and whether another bond was the right approach, with Habitat for Humanity asking for a dedicated CalHome allocation. Committee members discussed debt capacity, affordability, homeownership, and the need to keep funding flowing to existing programs. SB 417 passed 8-1 to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 492, a youth housing and youth center bond proposal, which the author said was intended to be folded into the larger housing bond package; testimony from Covenant House California emphasized the need to house transition-age youth and prevent long-term homelessness. No vote on SB 492 was shown in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• And when they're aging in, they're automatically guaranteed.
• But of course, if the loan is less than that, you can't get any extra money, only what covers the loan
• Again, they would owe the service time for the complete loan.
• If they have a big loan, they can do that.
• If they have a big loan, they can do that.

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 21, as amended, which would create an annual birthday-based open enrollment period for Medicare supplement policyholders age 65 and older, allowing them to switch to equal or lesser coverage without medical underwriting. The Aging and Long-Term Services Department and the Office of Superintendent of Insurance supported the bill as a consumer protection measure for seniors who are locked into rising premiums, while AHIP opposed it, warning it could raise premiums for existing policyholders. The League of Women Voters and AARP supported the measure. After debate over premium impacts and market stability, the committee voted 6-4 to give SB 21 a due pass. The committee then considered Senate Bill 20, dealing with prior authorization for medications used to treat serious mental illness. An amendment to change the bill from limiting prior authorization to once every three years to once every 12 months was debated; insurers supported the annual review, while nursing, disability, and mental health advocates argued that more frequent prior authorization would add burden and delay care. The committee tabled the amendment 5-4, then passed the unamended bill on a do pass vote. Testimony emphasized that the bill would not change how often patients see their doctors, only how often insurers can require prior authorization. Next, Senate Bill 101 was heard, which repeals the delayed sunset of the Health Care Delivery and Access Act so the hospital provider tax can continue. Sponsors and the Health Care Authority said the program has generated substantial federal matching funds and supports hospitals, especially rural facilities. AARP, Health Action New Mexico, the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, and the New Mexico Hospital Association supported the bill. Committee members asked about how funds are distributed and reported; the agency said distributions are based on Medicaid discharges and hospitals must report on spending. The bill received a do pass. The committee also approved House Memorial 52, which requests a study group on health insurance premium affordability for working families and small employers. Supporters from Blue Cross and Blue Shield and AHIP said the memorial would help identify cost drivers and improve transparency. The committee then passed House Bill 132, as amended, creating a workers’ compensation presumption for certain occupational conditions affecting police officers. Supporters from labor, state police, OSI, and business groups said it would help recruitment, retention, and recovery, while members discussed the removal of back pain from the presumption and the reinstatement of PTSD. Finally, the committee began hearing Senate Bill 14, which expands the state’s health professional loan repayment program and creates a broader advisory structure to address workforce shortages. The bill would cover physicians and many other health professions, with a large appropriation and special provisions for part-time service and loan repayment terms. The sponsor described it as a competitive recruitment tool, and numerous health care, labor, and consumer groups testified in support. The sponsor also described a proposed amendment to reallocate physician funds to other eligible health professionals if there are not enough qualified physician applicants, but the committee was preparing to move on when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• The details of the loan are that CalSTA is required to loan up to this $590 million amount to the Metropolitan
• It is a 12-year loan term with the first two-year loan... Program, or TIRCP.
• It is a loan, not a bailout. There have been needs identified.
• the loan to the state so that the state is not out money on this.
• Hence, the important aspect of this being a net-neutral loan.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• Parent PLUS Loan Program.
• And then finally, on graduate student loans, Congress eliminated the Graduate PLUS Loan Program for new
• borrowers and changed annual and aggregate loan limits in the federal Direct Loan Program, depending
• Applying a 50% proration average to these loans means a loss of $97 million in loan borrowing annually
• Applying a 50% per ration average to these loans means a loss of $97 million in loan borrowing annually

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard updates on higher education issues, beginning with California State University’s turnaround plans for seven campuses with enrollment declines. CSU said overall enrollment is growing systemwide, but some campuses, especially in Northern California, face structural declines tied to demographics and community college pipelines. The plans focus on reengaging stopped-out and adult learners, expanding partnerships and guaranteed admissions, improving retention and student support, and reducing costs through program suspensions, hiring freezes, shared services, and procurement consolidation. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the strategies were reasonable but urged regular legislative updates, and the Department of Finance had no additional comments. Committee members emphasized the need for implementation oversight, written updates, and attention to student outreach, financial aid, and privacy concerns around AI tools used in recruitment. The committee then reviewed the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education’s request for a $10 million General Fund appropriation to repay litigation-related borrowing. Department of Consumer Affairs and bureau staff said the bureau has a long-standing structural deficit, has already cut positions and shifted some costs, and that the General Fund backfill would reduce future fee increases on institutions. The LAO opposed the request, arguing the bureau can cover near-term costs with its existing loan and that litigation costs should remain the responsibility of the regulated entities through fees. Finance supported the one-time backfill as a unique situation that would lower fee increases and avoid passing litigation costs on to schools and students. Members asked about preventing a repeat of the problem, and bureau staff said they are pursuing fee increases through the sunset review and have strengthened internal policies and disability accommodation practices. The subcommittee also heard a broad update on Cal Grant funding and student aid. The California Student Aid Commission, UC, CSU, and the community colleges described Cal Grant as essential to affordability, but the LAO noted spending has grown faster than historical averages and said the state likely lacks capacity for major expansion in the near term. The segments highlighted the importance of state aid in covering tuition and living costs, and raised concerns about federal changes to student loans and Pell Grants, especially the elimination of Grad PLUS for some graduate students and limits on part-time borrowing. Committee members pressed for data on students who are eligible but not served by current Cal Grant rules, including adult learners and students affected by age and merit restrictions, and asked for analysis of phased-in implementation of the Cal Grant Equity Framework. Finance said full implementation would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and that affordability remains part of the state’s multi-year compact with the segments. Finally, the committee began discussion of the Middle Class Scholarship Program. CSAC and the UC and CSU said the program is a key part of affordability and debt reduction, especially after the 2022 reforms that expanded awards to total cost of attendance and improved administration. They warned that cutting funding by more than half would reduce award coverage from 35% to 17.5% of cost of attendance and could affect enrollment and persistence, particularly for middle-income students who do not qualify for other need-based aid. The segments also noted that recent administrative changes have reduced award revisions and campus workload, but that data exchange and award volatility remain challenges.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then finally, on graduate student loans, Congress eliminated the Graduate PLUS Loan Program for new
• borrowers and changed annual and aggregate loan limits in the federal Direct Loan Program, depending
• Applying a 50% pro-ration average to these loans means a loss of $97 million in loan borrowing annually
• Applying a 50% per ration average to these loans means a loss of $97 million in loan borrowing annually
• As such, we are not eligible for loans.

Transcript Highlights:

• This investment will be used for a combination of a loan loss guarantee program, an interest rate buy-down
• That would be the construction loan loss guarantee.
• That would be the construction loan loss guarantee.
• So one thing that I do want to make clear is that the construction loan loss guarantee and the silent
• And with respect to the construction loan loss guarantee, that loan loss guarantee would be in place

Summary: The committee opened with the State Controller’s Office May Revision requests, including funding for Fiscal book-of-record stabilization, a Broadcom IDMS licensing adjustment, the California State Payroll System, ACFR reporting automation, and $3 million for unclaimed property outreach. Testimony emphasized progress on Fiscal becoming the state’s accounting book of record in July, faster ACFR publication, and the move to electronic unclaimed property claims. Members asked about the size of the unclaimed property fund and how quickly money is transferred to the General Fund; the Controller’s office said about $15 billion is held, with most excess transferred regularly, and the LAO noted the fund is the General Fund’s fourth-largest revenue source. No concerns were raised by Finance or the LAO, and the item was closed after no public comment. The committee then heard the administration’s proposal to tax prewritten digital software and software-as-a-service, with Finance saying it would modernize sales tax treatment and raise an estimated $450 million General Fund and $560 million local revenue in 2026-27. The LAO supported modernizing the tax but suggested broader digital goods coverage and a business-use exemption; industry and taxpayer groups opposed the proposal, warning of higher costs for consumers and businesses. Members also heard CDTFA’s administrative request tied to the proposal, plus a separate CDTFA budget reduction reflecting lower operational needs; that reduction was presented as a savings item and drew positive reactions. Next, the committee considered federal conformity for “Trump accounts,” which would align California tax treatment with federal rules for tax-deferred children’s accounts and avoid tracking burdens for families. The LAO recommended approval, and the item drew no opposition. The committee also heard a proposal to cut the first-year $800 annual business tax to $400 for LLCs, LPs, and LLPs; Finance argued it would lower startup costs and encourage new business formation, while the LAO said the benefit was not well targeted and could subsidize entities that would form anyway. Members discussed the policy tradeoff, and public commenters split between support for small business relief and concern about revenue loss. The final major revenue item was a permanent business tax credit limitation, capping credits at the greater of $5 million per corporation or 50% of pre-credit liability, while excluding the low-income housing tax credit and personal income tax credits. Finance said it would raise significant revenue from large profitable corporations, and the LAO said it was a reasonable option but noted it would mainly affect the R&D credit and could have future implications for programs like California Competes. Public testimony was sharply divided, with business groups opposing the cap and anti-poverty advocates supporting it as a way to recapture revenue. The committee also heard FTB’s CalFile realignment request, which would return most of the direct-file-related resources to the General Fund while retaining a smaller staff to improve CalFile, and the California Arts Council’s request to reauthorize the Keep Arts in Schools voluntary contribution fund, which members and advocates supported despite relatively modest annual donations. The hearing continued with GoBiz proposals on civic media funding, CA RISE reappropriation, and a semiconductor facility reversion, with the LAO supporting the latter two and members raising questions about the civic media program’s scope, outreach, and inclusion of broadcast and ethnic media.

Transcript Highlights:

• guarantees available the amount of loan guarantees available to<04:09:42.960><c> attract</c><04:09:43.520
• and guarantors like the state compared to housing loan guarantees, primarily because business loans are
• </c><04:10:56.399><c> primarily</c> housing loan guarantees. primarily housing loan guarantees. primarily
• </c><04:11:56.960><c> guarantee</c> in place for the home loan guarantee in place for the home loan guarantee
• loan guarantees for businesses, extend loan guarantees for businesses, why<04:12:10.640><c> are</c><

Transcript Highlights:

• Of all the loans made, I think there's been about 24 of them. Only three remain open.
• Is this only loan money, or is this grant money? Please, Madam Chair, Mr.
• Chairman—it's a loan program.
• services for a payment of a portion of the loan.
• I am curious what the average loan amount...

Bills: SB21 , SB42 , SB81 , SB101 , SB139

Committee: Senate Senate Health & Public Affairs

Keywords: SB 21, Medicare supplement, Medigap, open enrollment, guaranteed issue, birthday month enrollment, health insurance, insurance regulation, senior health coverage, elderly, retiree, Medicare beneficiaries, preexisting conditions, underwriting restrictions, premium discrimination, New Mexico insurance law, superintendent of insurance, health care coverage, policy portability, healthcare

Transcript Highlights:

• program and the Native Hawaiian housing loan guarantee program and the Native Hawaiian housing block
• program and the Native Hawaiian housing loan guarantee program and the Native Hawaiian housing block
• guaranteed by the U.S.
• guaranteed by the U.S.
• So it's a 10-year loan, and then the loan would be repaid at that time.

Summary: The committee heard testimony on SB 834, which would change restrictions on transfers of real property under chapter 201H, HRS, and was discussed in the context of Hawaiian homelands and HHFDC-funded projects. Supporters, including HHFDC, DHHL, and individual testifiers, said the bill would clarify that Hawaiian homelands should not be subject to the 201H buyback and appreciation restrictions, while preserving affordability requirements tied to federal mortgage and tax credit programs. HHFDC explained that the main concern was the buyback/share-appreciation provisions, especially for DHHL projects using LIHTC or similar financing, and said aligning the statute with DHHL’s program goals would not be a problem. Members questioned whether removing the restrictions could weaken affordability protections, and whether the state could still prioritize beneficiaries and workforce housing, but no vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee then took up SB 759, which would add the DHHL chairperson or designee to the HHFDC board of directors and adjust quorum requirements. DHHL and several supporters argued the measure would give Hawaiian Homes a seat at the table, improve access to HHFDC funding sources such as tax credits, private activity bonds, and revolving funds, and help leverage limited resources to reduce the Hawaiian Homes waitlist. One testifier supported the bill but urged safeguards to prevent favoritism or abuse of power, and another raised concerns about whether a DHHL representative would need to recuse from voting on projects involving DHHL. HHFDC testified that DHHL projects still must compete under the same criteria and set-asides as other applicants, and that the board already includes multiple public and executive representatives. Members pressed on whether DHHL could achieve the same informational goals without a voting seat, and whether the added board role would create leverage or conflicts. The DHHL witness said a nonvoting role could provide information, but a voting seat would be more useful for decision-making and advocacy. The discussion also covered DHHL’s use of LIHTC, rent-to-own models, transitional housing, and other layered financing, as well as the broader need to coordinate state housing resources. The transcript ends during continued questioning, with no final committee action or vote shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• , originating loans.
• the loan amount.
• We only fund loans that they do in New Mexico, but they are doing real estate loans.
• loaning them money at 2%.
• Or a non-profit loan, they also require personal guarantees, but that's waived for non-profit corporations

Committee: House Investments & Pensions Oversight Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• If we were to... ...potential issues surrounding waiving interest from special fund loans.
• loan is about $245,000.
• And moved it into the Student Support Block Grant, and that accounts for the full guarantee.
• We're just trying to max out the COLA to get to the full amount of the guarantee.
• resources would come back into the guarantee and it would be subject to that 89-11 split.

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision proposals for higher education, beginning with the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education. Finance proposed a one-time $10 million General Fund backfill to repay a special fund loan used to cover litigation costs, plus provisional language to allow budget flexibility for a remaining legal expense and to repay the loan without interest. The LAO opposed shifting the litigation costs to the General Fund and raised legal concerns about waiving interest on the loan, noting that special fund loans have historically been repaid with interest. Members asked about the litigation amount and the estimated interest savings, which Finance said would be about $245,000. The committee then discussed University of California funding, including the Governor’s proposed compact funding and a $1.5 million one-time increase for the First Star foster youth program at UC campuses. UC said the program has strong outcomes at UCLA, including a 100% college-going rate and high college completion rates, and that the new funding would expand the program to additional campuses and eventually be self-supporting through fundraising. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing that UC already has overlapping outreach programs, including the Early Academic Outreach Program, and that the new initiative would duplicate existing services. Several senators questioned whether the state should expand a new program instead of strengthening existing ones, while UC and Finance emphasized the program’s focus on foster youth and its high success rates. For the California Community Colleges, Finance outlined the May Revision’s increase to the Student-Centered Funding Formula COLA from 2.41% to 4.31%, along with enrollment growth funding, categorical COLAs, deferred maintenance, and other ongoing and one-time investments. The Chancellor’s Office supported the flexible “super COLA” approach and asked for more enrollment growth funding, arguing that many districts are already above current targets and that unfunded growth restricts access. The LAO recommended funding at least the statutory COLA, redirecting some ongoing funds to enrollment growth or one-time priorities, and rejecting the $9.7 million Adult Learner Demonstration Project because districts already have incentives to do similar work. Senators pressed Finance and the Chancellor’s Office on the use of COLA funds to cover the new paid pregnancy disability leave requirement, the impact on hold-harmless and basic-aid districts, and whether the state should fund actual enrollment growth rather than a flat COLA. The committee also reviewed California Student Aid Commission proposals, including adjustments to Cal Grant and Middle Class Scholarship funding, continued Golden State Teacher Grant funding, and implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance said the Middle Class Scholarship changes reflected updated caseload estimates and that the higher 35% unmet-need level had been one-time funding, while CSAC urged continued support and noted the importance of financial aid for student success. The LAO recommended rejecting additional Golden State Teacher Grant funding as not well-targeted and urged caution on Workforce Pell trailer bill language, citing uncertainty about federal rules, ongoing administrative workload, and the need for clearer implementation planning. Members also raised concerns about declining CADAA applications and the need to better promote state aid for undocumented and mixed-status students. No votes were taken during the transcripted portion, and the committee moved through the agenda items with questions and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• loan fund.
• It isn't an operating loan program.
• Medical Facility Infrastructure Loan Fund.
• And I'm asking for the guarantee of his committee.
• —us free lunch, I guarantee you.

Bills: HB1623

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 1624, the “Universal Lunch Bill,” from Rep. Mike Nathie. He argued the proposal should be placed in Century Code rather than the Constitution so future legislatures can adjust it if state finances tighten, and said the bill would start the program a year earlier with a $65 million appropriation for one school year. DPI testified that the estimate did not include nonpublic schools that do not participate, and members questioned the impact on Title I, free-and-reduced applications, private-school accountability, breakfast mandates for schools that do not currently serve breakfast, and whether the funding could come from the DPI budget or other sources. Supporters, including North Dakota United, the North Dakota Catholic Conference, a pediatrician, and the American Heart Association, said universal meals improve student health and learning, reduce family costs, and are better handled in statute than by constitutional amendment. No opposition testimony was offered, and the chair closed the hearing for later work-session action. The committee then took up House Bill 1627, introduced by Rep. Tye Dressler, which would raise the income threshold for the state-funded school lunch program from 225% to 300% of poverty, with an estimated cost of about $7 million for 2026-27. Dressler said the bill is intended as a targeted, budget-friendly alternative to the ballot measure and emphasized that the state should maximize federal meal dollars while improving participation in the current program. Members questioned whether raising the threshold would actually increase utilization, whether a dollar amount would be clearer than a percentage, and how the change would affect federal reimbursements and application rates. DPI said it could quickly calculate additional percentage levels, and the chair closed the hearing, directing DPI to prepare more numbers for the work session. Finally, the committee opened Senate Bill 2403, presented by Sen. Schiable, to create a short-term bridge-loan program for financially distressed hospitals, centered on Jacobson Memorial Hospital in Elgin. The bill would authorize up to $5 million per loan, with a $10 million appropriation available on a first-come, first-served basis, and would run only through June 30, 2027. Schiable said the hospital’s debt and operating problems threaten local health care, ambulance service, and the community’s economy, and that the proposal was designed narrowly with Bank of North Dakota review to avoid creating a broad precedent. Committee members asked whether the appropriation could be reduced and whether the bank would still apply commercial feasibility and repayment standards; Schiable said yes, the bank would still evaluate the loan and could reject it if it was not sound.