Transcript Highlights:

• , the bonds...
• And the bonds are issued, 30 years, maximum on the bond. Would have its own CID.
• And the bonds are issued, 30 years maximum on the bonds.
• And so it's simply a function of getting the bonds retired.
• But the bonds still have got 25 years to run.

Committee: Senate Local Government and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> particularly in relation to the bonding particularly in relation to the bonding bill<00:05:13.240
• bonding bill could address?
• So the minority has one say, and this is it, the bonding bill.
• </c><00:07:30.479><c> I</c> and then we can do the bonding bill.
• I and then we can do the bonding bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Bonding, is that your big victory? And was that worth it? No.
• And Bonding, is that your big victory?
• </c> that we gained by agreeing to a bonding that we gained by agreeing to a bonding bill<00:03:02.480
• </c> Bonding bill that they were happy with.
• Yeah, and typically bonding will be closer to the end.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> PSIG on top of that were the geo bonds PSIG on top of that were the geo bonds for<00:20:46.160><
• year's bonding bill.
• </c> program and and bonding bills. program and and bonding bills.
• </c> projects you will see in our bonding projects you will see in our bonding request.<01:08:16.000>
• </c> bonds issued by the Met Council. bonds issued by the Met Council.

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> ability to bond. ability to bond.
• </c> for approving a bond then was 2/3. for approving a bond then was 2/3.
• year bonds.
• year bonds.
• year bonds.

Committee: House Municipal and County Government

Transcript Highlights:

• new bonds.
• </c> Hampshire is a double A plus rated bond. Hampshire is a double A plus rated bond.
• I don't really bond expert.
• </c> um the the bond. um the the bond.
• </c> enhancement on the rate reduction bonds. enhancement on the rate reduction bonds.

Committee: House Science, Technology and Energy

Transcript Highlights:

• So the bonding framework is as follows.
• I'm dealing with the bonding area. Through 43 of page 18 in the back.
• I'm dealing with the bonding area.
• they wouldn't use the bonding process as a way to sabotage the project.
• They can't use the bonding process in any other way besides that.

Committee: House Utilities

Transcript Highlights:

• , with the new bonding package.
• We would be paying a separate debt for whatever we would bond with the bonding authority.
• So instead of paying 108 million on the 2003 bonds and whatever the new debt service on the new bonds
• Because the bonding authority allows for us to bond for projects as they're ready for construction.
• 320 million in severance tax bonds.

Transcript Highlights:

• and then appropriate money to pay the debt service on those bonds.
• </c><00:24:56.960><c> and</c> both general obligation bonds and both general obligation bonds and additional
• Given the uncertainty in state bonds.
• Thanks. bonds and challenge program. Habitat bonds and challenge program.
• </c><00:46:23.920><c> As</c><00:46:24.079><c> HUD</c> State general obligation bonds.

Transcript Highlights:

• We've got Senate bond initiatives.
• All right, the bond initiatives are ordered to the capital budget subcommittee.
• We've got Senate bond initiatives.
• We've got Senate bond initiatives.
• Take care. right, the bond initiatives are uh right, the bond initiatives are uh ordered<00:02:44.480

Transcript Highlights:

• that as bond discussions happen in this building, because we know how this goes, bonds compete, and it
• you do a bond and it all gets issued on day one, right?
• As with all bonds, it doesn't, it's not like you do a bond. It all gets issued on day one, right?
• with any bond.
• bit different, which was that a bond was appropriate because what we were buying with the bond wasn't

Summary: The committee heard SB 1135, which would reestablish the California Wildlife Coexistence Program to reduce human-wildlife conflict through nonlethal strategies such as deterrents, conflict reporting, and outreach. The author and supporters said the program had been effective but lost funding in 2024, and they argued it would help communities, ranchers, and wildlife by preventing conflicts before they escalate. Support came from conservation, animal welfare, local government, and county groups, while the California Cattlemen’s Association and California Farm Bureau opposed unless amended, saying the bill needed clearer limits on when nonlethal measures are practicable and protections so compensation funds for livestock losses are not reduced. Members discussed wolf-livestock conflicts, compensation, and the need for continued collaboration. The committee voted 2-0 on call to send the bill to Appropriations. The committee then heard SB 1085, which would preserve water supply assessments for large housing and development projects even when those projects are exempt from CEQA. The author and sponsor EBMUD said the bill is needed to keep water planning tied to land-use planning and avoid “paper water” problems, especially as climate and drought conditions worsen. Supporters included water agencies, environmental groups, labor, and local governments. The California Building Industry Association opposed the bill, arguing that current law already requires verified water supplies, that the bill could add unnecessary process and litigation risk, and that it could slow housing production. Members raised concerns about duplication in cities that also operate their own water systems, but the author said the goal was better coordination, not more bureaucracy. The committee voted 4-1 on call to send the bill to Local Government. The committee also heard SB 1270, which would expand the state wildfire mitigation home-hardening pilot to the top 10 counties by wildfire risk and social vulnerability, adding Riverside, Calaveras, Los Angeles, and Tehama counties and prioritizing future funds for those areas. The author said the bill responds to recent destructive fires and aims to extend home-hardening assistance to more high-risk communities. There was no opposition, and members discussed how to scale funding, whether the program should be broader than the listed counties, and how to focus on cost-effective mitigation. The committee voted 5-0 on call to send the bill to Emergency Management. Finally, the committee heard SB 895, a major science funding measure that would place a $23 billion bond on the ballot and create a California Foundation for Science and Health Research to support research in the state. The author and supporters said California’s research sector is a major economic engine and that federal funding cuts and instability threaten jobs, talent retention, and scientific progress. There was broad support from UC, CSU, labor, health, and research organizations, with no formal opposition. Some members raised concerns about the role of sponsoring unions and the potential for politicization, but the author said the new foundation would operate under California law and that the measure is meant to protect science funding and collaboration. The committee discussion continued, but the transcript excerpt ends before a final vote on SB 895.

Transcript Highlights:

• The 40% requirement for bond money is to go towards disadvantaged families.
• So the requirement is applicable to the whole bond.
• Well then, from a bond overall bond perspective, that gives you some flexibility in other programs where
• It's just a bond, but of everything on the agenda, the bond is what I think you find the Assembly most
• Maximize the bond dollars.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, but that's what happens when bonding bills don't get passed all the time.
• Current interest rates of bonding have also added to the cost.
• The amount on this bond, uh, Representative Rinsky, thank you, Chair.
• We're hoping for $12 million, I believe, on this bonding bill.
• We also really need a bonding bill to pass.

Bills: HF220 , HF230 , HF240 , HF241 , HF295 , HF429 , HF490 , HF505 , HF574 , HF576 , HF581 , HF865 , HF918 , HF1085 , HF1449 , HF1452 , HF1454 , HF602

Committee: House Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• We've never been a barrier to bonding bill.
• Are you expecting any strings attached to passing a bonding bill?
• And we need to do a bonding bill this And we need to do a bonding bill this year.<00:02:42.800><c> So
• Um, Senate Democrats have announced their bonding target of 1.35.
• </c> October. any of these bonding October. any of these bonding discussions,<00:09:27.920><c> has</c

Transcript Highlights:

• that as bond discussions happen in this building, because we know how this goes, bonds compete, and it
• So, as with all bonds, it doesn't—it's not like you do a bond, it all gets issued on day one, right?
• As with all bonds, it doesn't—it's not like you do a bond, it all gets issued on day one, right?
• true with any bond.
• bit different, which was that a bond was appropriate because what we were buying with the bond wasn't

Committee: Senate Natural Resources and Water

Transcript Highlights:

• Bonds.
• There is an increase to the SR 520 bond authorization of $500 million, and it repeals some older bond
• Authorization of $500 million, and it repeals some older bond authorizations.
• We will now move on to Senate Bill 6225, authorizing bonds for transportation funding.
• I just wanted to recognize our staff as we passed this budget and the bond bill.

Summary: The Senate Transportation Committee met in executive session to brief and act on three measures: proposed substitute Senate Bill 6005, the 2006 supplemental transportation budget; proposed substitute Senate Bill 6225, authorizing transportation bonds; and engrossed substitute House Bill 2508, relating to the Office of Independent Investigations. Staff first reviewed eight amendments to SB 6005, including technical corrections and several funding changes for ferry service, rail projects, transit electrification, and other transportation programs. The committee then adopted all eight amendments, rolled them into the bill, and advanced SB 6005 with a due-pass recommendation to the Rules Committee. For SB 6225, staff explained that the bill would authorize additional transportation bonds, including $1.1 billion in general bonds backed by gas tax and vehicle-related revenues, $400 million for potential cost increases on Move Ahead Washington projects, and a $500 million increase in SR 520 bond authorization, while repealing some older bond authority. With no amendments offered, the committee advanced the bill with a due-pass recommendation to the Rules Committee. The committee also considered engrossed substitute House Bill 2508, which would clarify the scope of authority of the Office of Independent Investigations and add public disclosure and privacy provisions. The committee moved the bill without recommendation to the Ways and Means Committee. Members concluded by thanking staff for their work on the budget and bond package before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Division of Bond Finance to secure a bond to finance the building of the 550-bed inpatient mental health
• But it came in above the bond, and so immediately It came in, but it came in above the bond.
• Currently, the balance of the bond is $145 million.
• The other thing is that the bond money was already issued.
• What was it that caused the initial design to go above the bond?

Summary: The committee first heard an update from the Florida Department of Corrections on the proposed Lake Correctional Institution mental health project in Clermont. Tim Fitzgerald explained the project’s history, including the 2016 Disability Rights Florida litigation, the 2018 consent decree, and the original plan for a 550-bed inpatient mental health facility. He said inflation and design changes pushed the project above the bond amount, leading the department to shift to a “continuum of care” alternative with 572 beds total: 92 inpatient beds and 480 residential treatment beds in three special housing units. Fitzgerald said the project is currently paused pending House concurrence, while the Senate has already agreed to the alternate plan, and noted the bond balance, prior expenditures, and the need to spend down the tax-exempt bond by August 2026. Members questioned how the new plan differs from the original facility, whether it satisfies the consent decree, and what caused the cost increases. Fitzgerald said the department believes it has already met the consent decree through systemwide improvements to housing, staffing, programming, and out-of-cell time, though he said he would confirm the court documentation. He also said the original scope grew from 275,000 to 350,000 square feet as treatment, nursing, security, and programming needs were refined, and that inflation, fees, permitting, and contingencies contributed to the higher cost. Several members asked for follow-up information on Senate approval, consent decree documentation, and the project’s impact on crisis-stabilization capacity. The committee then received a joint court-system presentation from State Courts Administrator Eric McClure and Clerks Corporation Executive Director Jason Welty on caseload trends, case tracking, and staffing. McClure described statewide filing trends, the use of weighted caseload studies to certify judicial need, and recent Supreme Court rule changes aimed at active civil case management, including differentiated case tracks, stricter deadlines, and proportional discovery. He said the latest workload study led the Supreme Court to certify a need for 23 circuit judges and 25 county judges. Welty reviewed clerk workload trends, the statewide case maintenance and CCIS systems, and declining clerk FTE despite rising case volumes, and said clerks are seeking additional funding for injunctions, Baker Act/Marchman Act/sexually violent predator work, and juror management. In questions, members pressed both presenters on data quality, case-weight calculations, filing fees, and whether current resources are enough to reduce delays. McClure clarified that the workload weights are based on judge time studies and that a capital murder case averaged 3,177 minutes, while other examples such as auto negligence and dissolution cases were much lower. Welty said the Legislature could help by increasing funding or potentially revisiting filing fees, and noted that many clerk services are unfunded or underfunded, especially indigent and protective filings. The chair and members also raised concerns about backlog, inconsistent case reporting across circuits, and enforcement of judicial time standards; McClure said there is no direct sanction in the rules, and compliance is largely managed through chief judges and the Supreme Court. The meeting ended with no votes taken and adjournment by motion.

Transcript Highlights:

• surety bond to occur within six years.
• Uh, we talked about that, uh, shy bonds 332 30, shy bonds for all durable providers, really.
• </c> about that uh shy bonds 332 30 shy bonds about that uh shy bonds 332 30 shy bonds for<01:13:39.040
• bonds are required.
• we gonna not allow them to a shy bond?

Summary: The joint hearing opened with chairs explaining that the program integrity omnibus bill is a combined draft assembled from individual member bills and governor proposals, many of which had already been heard in committee. Members emphasized the compressed end-of-session timeline, said the language was not yet ready for enactment, and invited continued revisions as the bill moves next to judiciary and finance. Several speakers stressed the need for bipartisan collaboration, while also warning that the Legislature must act this session on program integrity rather than defer reforms. The fiscal staff then walked through a spreadsheet showing the bill’s overall budget effects and major provisions. The package includes DHS proposals on transforming human services, market- and receipt-based rate reform, enhanced program and payment integrity, uniform service standards, nursing facility rate changes, ICS reforms, and a repeal/redesign of housing stabilization, along with child care assistance integrity and human services redesign items in DCYF. Staff highlighted that the bill combines multiple sources, including governor proposals and member bills, and noted several items that are also in the supplemental human services budget. Committee discussion focused heavily on prepayment review, remote supports, ICS, and provider accountability. Chairs said the bill would codify prepayment review with a 60-day notice requirement after providers were caught off guard by prior rollout, and that remote supports and ICS language were placeholders or under active debate. One member argued the system needs stronger standards but cautioned against harming compliant providers, while another urged the committee to learn from good providers and warned against repeating failed implementations. Staff also reviewed thematic indexes covering billing and service delivery oversight, EVV, administrative reform, licensing and background studies, provider enrollment, sanctions, and child care provider compliance training. No formal votes were taken in the portion provided. The hearing ended with staff beginning the index walkthrough and members indicating that posted amendments would be considered as the bill advances through the remaining committees.

Transcript Highlights:

• General bond issue: $3,780,000,500.
• I’d like to thank the gentleman from West Springfield for his work on the bonding committee.
• And these investments are so important in this bond bill in particular, we have Coastal community.
• And these investments are so important in this bond bill in particular.
• I think the bond bill has done that.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um it is in last year's bonding bill.
• Um, 1 million in GEO bonds for highway rail grade crossings and 1 million GEO bonds for Minnesota rail
• </c><00:48:54.960><c> for</c> funding for of trunk highway bonds for funding for of trunk highway bonds
• <c> projects,</c><01:25:03.760><c> we</c> priorities for bonding projects, we priorities for bonding
• </c><01:30:03.120><c> and</c><01:30:03.760><c> 650,000</c> being geo bonds and 650,000 being geo bonds

Committee: House Capital Investment