Transcript Highlights:

• For retirees, that's on a sliding scale. As of currently, so if you worked less than 20.
• Years for the state you do not get 100% insurance contribution it's add to how long you worked for the
• Chair, and thank you for all your work on this.
• And lastly, as well, I was asked for a quick update on appropriations from the last session.
• You know, having worked with the agency for for many years now, or not many, but a significant time intimately

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• , expedited with great effort by our terrific JLARC staff to be ready for session.
• Just wanted to flag those both for you. Any questions about our work plan and the update?
• So Pete, thank you for this work, and take it away, please. Thank you, Mr.
• Thank you very much for the work on this, Pete, and the whole staff. Thank you.
• And so thank you for the extraordinary work you’ve done in preparing and having this ready for us.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee met on January 7, 2026, approved the December minutes, and adopted an amended work plan. Staff proposed moving the drug take-back program sunset review up to 2026 and delaying the thermal energy network pilot review to 2028, which would free capacity for new studies. Members also discussed active bills that would eliminate two recurring JLARC reports, including one on lodging tax revenue data collection, and the committee adopted the work plan without objection. JLARC staff then outlined new performance measures for the committee itself, covering effectiveness, efficiency, and quality. The measures include member and legislative satisfaction surveys, presentations to other committees, recommendation follow-up, staff retention, on-time report delivery, peer review results, and national recognition. Members praised the effort and did not take formal action, treating the measures as an ongoing process. The committee also heard a proposal to improve JLARC’s review of tax preference performance statements by adding a standard rubric in fiscal notes to assess whether a metric matches the policy objective, is measurable, uses reliable data, and allows enough time for evaluation. Members supported the pilot approach. Staff also described planned changes to public records reporting guidance, including opt-outs for low-volume metrics, better validation, targeted outreach to nonreporting agencies, and a survey of records officers. Two preliminary reports were presented. On ignition interlock devices, JLARC found that only 41% of drivers with a requirement had installed a device, with installation rates rising sharply with income; financial assistance reaches only about 11% of users, and JLARC recommended clearer program goals and stronger coordination between the Department of Licensing and State Patrol. On the drug take-back program, JLARC found that the fee structure tied to operator expenditures limits the Department of Health’s ability to recover oversight costs and recommended public reporting of oversight spending and a statutory change to better align fees with actual costs. Agency representatives generally agreed with the findings, described current coordination and administrative changes, and said they would consider the recommendations. No formal votes were taken on the reports, which will return in final form later in the year.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are beginning as a subcommittee. We have seven members present. We need ten for a quorum.
• So that's really what I was looking for to make sure that someone had actually done some work and not
• And when it addresses it, it is very appropriate for the budget subcommittee to hear that recommendation
• I will vote for it today for the reasons that have been said.
• Just thank you for that. I'm being serious. Thank you for the answer.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Summary: The committee heard AB 108, a budget bill junior that would amend the 2025 Budget Act to create a one-time $25 million General Fund grant program at HCAI for hospitals in immediate and significant financial distress. The bill also included a technical change related to property tax deferments for eligible low-income seniors. Finance explained that eligible hospitals would have to be not-for-profit, have less than 10 days cash on hand, show best efforts to exhaust other financing, and have a payer mix of more than 50% government payers and uninsured patients; the bill also gives HCAI expedited contracting and rulemaking authority. Members and the LAO noted the proposal is intended as a short-term bridge until July 1, while broader hospital support is expected in the May Revision and next year’s budget. Much of the discussion focused on whether $25 million is enough, how many hospitals would qualify, and whether the 10-day cash threshold is too narrow. Several senators argued the administration had not provided enough data or a clear methodology, and raised concerns about fairness compared with the earlier Distressed Hospital Loan Program, which used broader criteria and provided loans rather than grants. Members also raised broader policy issues affecting hospital finances, including Medi-Cal reimbursement rates, seismic retrofit costs, federal funding changes, and the need for better data and more immediate assessment of hospital distress. The LAO said the current proposal is narrower than the prior loan program and emphasized the need for better reporting and analysis going forward. Public commenters, including the California Hospital Association, district hospital representatives, Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, and county officials, supported the bill and urged additional longer-term funding for distressed hospitals. The chair and several members said the bill is a short-term emergency measure for a small number of hospitals at risk of imminent closure, while broader solutions will be addressed later in the budget process. AB 108 was then moved and passed out of committee on an 18-0 vote, with the roll held open briefly to secure remaining votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• their hard work.
• Thank you for the overview and presentation for all of you.
• So you can be off for a few weeks and then come back to work and then decide to take subsequent weeks
• Just for DI.
• for worse.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on State Administration held an informational hearing on whether the Employment Development Department is ready for the next recession, with a focus on EDD Next, the department’s long-running technology modernization effort. The Legislative Analyst’s Office reviewed EDD’s major benefit programs, the history of prior modernization attempts, the current Integrated Claims Management System work, and the department’s remaining risks, including continued reliance on a COBOL-era mainframe and the challenge of adapting quickly to future federal or state policy changes during a downturn. The LAO also explained that most pandemic-era fraud was tied to temporary federal unemployment programs rather than California’s core UI system, and that the state’s UI loan repayment is not largely attributable to fraud. Members raised concerns about the cost of repeated modernization efforts, paper versus online claims, appeal overturn rates, WARN notices, and legislative oversight of the project. EDD’s panel said the department has made substantial customer-service and processing improvements, including online self-service tools, improved call center features, identity verification, fraud controls, language access upgrades, and a new document management system. Officials reported that as of early 2026, about 83% to 85% of claims across programs were being processed timely within two weeks, and said paid family leave delays in 2024 were tied to the transition into the disability insurance online platform and seasonal workload patterns. They also said EDD is working with the Department of Technology on EDD Next and that the project will proceed in phases, with paid family leave and disability insurance first and unemployment insurance later. Members pressed EDD on persistent paid family leave backlogs, the share of paper applications, response times for constituents, and whether the department tracks long-running cases and WARN notice trends. EDD said its service standard is generally immediate response through phone, chat, or callback tools, while more complex cases can take longer because the department may be waiting on claimants or medical providers. The department also said it tracks call outcomes and outstanding cases, and that it can provide additional data on WARN notices. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with plans to continue discussing EDD Next and paid family leave at a later March 10 budget hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Oh, and for the record, Jason Keaneley, assistant deputy reviser and counsel to the joint subcommittee
• I just want to thank you and the authors for working on this.
• But I'm going to vote for the amendment, again, to recognize and respect the work that you've done.
• Chair, and I just want to thank you and the authors for working on this.
• on</c> thank the authors for their hard work on thank the authors for their hard work on this<00:26:25.360

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate the Governor's budget proposals for CSU and hope we can work with all of you to secure
• So I think the intent is for the AI to be a tool to help the human staff do the work. Great.
• Also, I just want to end by thanking again the subcommittee and the Legislature as a whole for all of
• We have worked with CSAC to identify areas for easing administrative burdens to Cal Grant receipt and
• Is that something that you all are working on? Yeah, thank you for that question.

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:

• As we work through the agenda, I respectfully ask for your patience and understanding in advance.
• that work and therefore also for the overhead cost.
• They have the same organizational structure for all of that work.
• This created opportunity for several emerging artists to share their work publicly for the very first
• This created opportunity for several emerging artists to share their work publicly for the very first

Transcript Highlights:

• Like my colleagues, I've been working in housing policy and finance for my entire career.
• Thanks for the work you guys are doing. Thank you. Assembly Member Ward.
• So I want to thank you for the work that you've done today to be able to successfully work through the
• Thank you again for your work. For your work. Development proposal trailer bill.
• Finally, we'd like to thank the administration for all their work on this and for their openness to gathering

Summary: Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration heard two housing-related trailer bill items tied to the Governor’s reorganization plan. The first item would codify the creation of a new Housing and Homelessness Agency and a Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency structure; the second would further streamline the state housing finance system by creating a Housing Development and Finance Committee and reserving most private activity bond capacity for affordable housing. Administration officials said the changes are intended to reduce duplication, speed awards to construction, and make housing funding more predictable and efficient. Agency leaders described recent housing investments and implementation steps, including work groups, coordination with Finance, the Controller, and the Treasurer’s Office, and development of new guidelines and staffing. Members raised concerns about limited funding, the need for better program-by-program outcome data, youth homelessness, excess sites, and fraud prevention. The Interagency Council on Homelessness presented new three-year action plan metrics, including goals to increase exits from unsheltered homelessness to 70% and move more people into permanent housing, while also noting current performance data and quarterly public reporting. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said it had no concerns with the first trailer bill, but supported the general concept of the second while recommending changes, including removing or revising the proposed 50% bond-cap floor for the new committee and adding attention to 9% and state tax credits. Public commenters, including local governments, nonprofit developers, housing authorities, and advocacy groups, largely supported the reorganization and streamlining goals, but several urged stronger protections for deeply affordable housing, earlier reallocation of unused bond authority, continued access to 9% credits, and more funding for housing programs. No votes were taken in the portion provided; the chair closed item one and moved to item two after member and public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thanks for the work you guys are doing. Thank you. Assembly Member Ward.
• issues, likely our most pressing issues, certainly for this budget subcommittee.
• So I want to thank you for the work that you've done today to be able to successfully work through the
• Thank you again for your work. For your work. Development proposal trailer bill.
• Finally, we'd like to thank the administration for all their work on this and for their openness to gathering

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you so much for all that work. Jesse, go ahead. Great.
• Well, thank you all so much, and thank you for all the work that you've done in the past and that I know
• So generally, the first half of the session we start at 9, and we start as a subcommittee with whoever
• But it's important for us to get started on time because we have a lot of work to do, and we have a hard
• For opposition, we encourage organized opposition on bills. We encourage you to work together.

Committee: Senate Senate Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, just want to thank the committee for their work on this bill.
• And thank you for working with us on the amendments and also for your leadership in this area.
• I would like to start by thanking the Chair for working with us and Dory for the thorough analysis.
• And thank you again for your commitment to work with us and your sponsor as well.
• Thank you so much for your leadership and your thoughtful approach to this and for working with the committee

Summary: The Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee heard several housing bills. AB 2270, by Assemblymember Arambula, would give farmworker housing projects scoring parity in the state low-income housing tax credit program so they are not disadvantaged by amenity-proximity criteria that do not fit rural agricultural areas. Supporters, including La Cooperativa Campesina, said the bill would help farmworker projects compete fairly for credits; there was no opposition, and the bill was later approved 11-0 and sent to Appropriations. The committee also considered AB 2552, which would clarify use of the state’s new CEQA vehicle miles traveled (VMT) mitigation bank for affordable housing near transit. The author and supporters from the California Building Industry Association and business groups said the bill would add guardrails so the program is cost-effective and usable, while Housing California, the Planning and Conservation League, and others opposed the least-cost requirement, arguing it could undercut the new mitigation bank before implementation. After discussion about balancing housing and environmental goals, the bill passed 11-1 to Appropriations. AB 2689 would require good cause for nonrenewal of certain state-subsidized housing tenancies when a household’s income exceeds 140% of area median income for two consecutive years, with notice requirements and protections if the tenant cannot afford market rent. Some members supported the bill as a way to free up scarce subsidized units and create a housing “ladder,” while others objected that it could punish people for increasing their income. The bill was amended and passed 11-1. The consent calendar items AB 2308, AB 2397, and AB 2512 were also approved unanimously.

Transcript Highlights:

• We will go ahead and call the meeting for the, I think, our final meeting of A&B Subcommittee on Education
• My commitment to you is that unless I can get a compromise that works for everybody, I'm not going to
• Yeah, so here's something for you to work on. Thank you for bringing the bill forward, by the way.
• Members, I want to say thank you again for your work. Thank you, Madam Vice Chair.
• So thank you for all of your work, for all of the extra meetings.

Summary: The A&B Subcommittee on Education heard and advanced several bills, beginning with HB 4491, which would allow virtual charter, charter, and homeschool students to participate in extracurricular activities in their resident school district. The sponsor said the bill was intended to expand student opportunity and was still being worked on, especially on eligibility and proximity requirements. Members raised concerns about accreditation, fairness, and potential disruption, but the bill was reported out 8-2. The committee then approved HB 4146, which moves the state-paid maternity benefit for teachers to begin in a teacher’s first year of employment, and HB 4149, which grants up to 10 years of service credit for certain prior experience, including out-of-state or out-of-country teaching, active-duty military service, law enforcement, and firefighting. HB 4158 raised the income cap for O-TAG grant eligibility to $80,000, and HB 4159 allowed parents to request dyslexia screening after formative assessments at any time during the year, with notice from the State Department; both passed with little opposition. A more contentious debate surrounded HB 3242, which sought to clarify voluntary religious expression in schools and provide Attorney General guidance and legal protections for districts. Supporters argued it protected First Amendment rights and gave schools guardrails, while opponents warned it could expose schools to litigation, create power imbalances, and blur the line between voluntary student expression and school-sponsored religious activity. After debate, the bill passed 6-4. Finally, HB 3718 was heard to address delays in special education evaluations by starting the 45-school-day timeline from the date of request rather than the date of consent, with the sponsor citing families missing scholarship deadlines because evaluations took too long. Members discussed federal timing rules and district practices, and the bill passed 7-3. The chair closed by noting it was the subcommittee’s final House bill meeting of the session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for having us.
• I've been on this subcommittee for the last three years.
• For a lot of secret exceptions for a lot of things, we're modifying CEQA for a lot of different types
• I'm going to fight for the money for all of our areas, for Inland Empire, for Riverside, everybody.
• forward and ask for that.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, this subcommittee of broadband and OMEs is now in session. We're gonna start with broadband.
• There's $105,000 in funds designated for the broadband for Pathfinder.
• We know it works.
• within the existing Workday system for certain agencies to really empower it and make it work better
• for them.

Transcript Highlights:

• Also, money for vital county administration in the face of HR1 and work requirements and re-verification
• Is that really beneficial for folks? I have questions. How that licensing works.
• Our contractors are in the communities working to advocate for their populations at their local planning
• Thank you so much, and I appreciate all the public commenters for your succinctness and working with
• So that's something we're working on now and could probably have something for ...registry.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits. The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements. The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually. The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So right now we're working to solve the problems for the housing crisis from the ground up.
• We need laws that work not only on paper, but actually in real life, in real cities, for real families
• For those reasons, I respectfully request your support for SB 1117. Thank you for your time.
• I mean for for for some of the fees where we are directly in the in the line so you the the regional
• And again, we will work with them, along with others who want to work together to solve for this.

Committee: Senate Housing

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Housing heard two substantive housing bills and two consent items. SB 1116 by Senator Caballero would update the Starter Home Revitalization Act (SB 684) by clarifying development standards for small infill housing, reinforcing ministerial approval and timelines, improving state oversight and reporting, updating subdivision rules, and addressing private restrictions such as HOA or deed provisions that can block housing. The author and supporters, including California YIMBY and a small developer, said the bill responds to implementation problems and would help produce more starter homes; there was no opposition testimony. Members generally supported the measure but noted concerns about local implementation and the broader impact-fee/infrastructure context. SB 1117 by Senator Cervantes would clarify ADU fee law so local governments assess impact fees only on the portion of an ADU above 750 square feet, rather than on the full unit, while keeping the existing 750-square-foot exemption intact. Supporters argued the current fee structure discourages larger ADUs and creates a sharp production drop above 750 square feet; a homeowner witness said fees on an 800-square-foot ADU would have exceeded construction costs. Local government and fire-related organizations opposed or opposed unless amended, arguing impact fees fund essential infrastructure and services and should remain tied to nexus studies. Several senators said the bill was narrowly tailored but emphasized the need to address broader infrastructure financing. The committee also took up consent items SB 1267 by Senator Allen and SB 1426, the committee omnibus bill. After the committee obtained a quorum and later reconvened, it approved the consent calendar 10-0, SB 1117 10-0, and SB 1116 8-0. All measures were ordered out to the Senate Local Government Committee, and the hearing was adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to thank my witnesses for their work and for their testimony today, and respectfully ask for your
• I also want to thank the author for her work.
• Thank you to the author for your work on this. Thank you to the author for your work on this.
• For too long, working people have relied on Medi-Cal for care.
• For too long, working people have relied on Medi-Cal for care. Why?

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee heard a long agenda of health-related bills, with most items presented for later vote once quorum was reached. Early in the hearing, the committee adopted a consent calendar of multiple bills with motions for due pass to Appropriations, and it noted that AB 2029 had been pulled from the agenda. The committee also took up AB 1973, a bill by Aguiar-Curry to expand who may provide procedural abortion care. Supporters, including physicians and certified nurse midwives, argued the bill would align law with current training and improve access, while opponents said later-term abortion procedures require physician-level surgical training and raised safety concerns. The author emphasized hands-on training, consultation, and transfer protocols, and the bill was held pending quorum with a motion and second recorded. The committee then heard AB 1558 by Arambula, which would adopt the Uniform Emergency Volunteer Health Practitioners Act to speed the use of out-of-state licensed volunteers during declared disasters. Supporters from the Uniform Law Commission and the Red Cross said the bill would reduce delays and clarify legal authority for volunteer health workers; there was no opposition testimony. AB 2282 by Alanis, a temporary rural emergency stabilization center for Patterson while a permanent hospital is built, drew support from local emergency responders and a late opposition from the California chapter of ACEP. The chair praised the bill as a creative local solution and agreed to coauthor it; a motion and second were recorded, with the vote to occur later. Several public health access bills followed. AB 1843 by El-Hawari would limit prior authorization and align hepatitis C treatment coverage with medical guidelines; supporters said it would remove barriers to a curable disease, while health plans opposed it as a mandate, citing premium impacts and the recent SB 306 prior-authorization process. AB 2247 by El-Hawari would create the THRIVE program for mental health services for youth affected by gun violence; Youth Alive and other supporters described trauma-informed, community-based care, and the chair and another member asked to be added as coauthors. AB 2138 by Krell would expand access to certified peer support specialists in enhanced care management and remove automatic disqualifications based solely on criminal history; supporters said peers are essential to engagement and recovery, and the bill was held with a motion and second. Later, AB 1682 by Hart would require coverage of scalp cooling for chemotherapy patients, with emotional testimony from cancer survivors and clinicians; insurers opposed it as another mandate, but the author stressed the modest per-member cost and the bill was moved with a motion and second. AB 1879 by Dixon would standardize data reporting for alcohol and drug treatment facilities, including private providers, to improve statewide information on outcomes and access; the bill drew broad support from recovery organizations and the prior opposition was withdrawn after amendments. AB 1906 by Aguiar-Curry would require coverage of at-home cervical cancer screening kits without cost sharing; supporters cited improved access for rural and working Californians, insurers opposed it on affordability grounds, and the bill passed on a recorded roll call after quorum was established. Finally, AB 1556 by Haney would clarify and support drug-free recovery housing and return-to-use policies; supporters said it would expand sober housing options, while opponents warned it could allow evictions after relapse and conflict with Housing First principles. The hearing ended with the bill still under discussion and opposition-unless-amended concerns noted.

Transcript Highlights:

• So right now we're working to solve the problems for the housing crisis from the ground up.
• We need laws that work not only on paper, but actually in real life, in real cities, for real families
• For those reasons, I respectfully request your support for SB 1117. Thank you for your time.
• I mean for for for some of the fees where we are directly in the in the line so you the the regional
• And again, we will work with them along with others who want to work together to solve for this.

Committee: Senate Housing

Transcript Highlights:

• But I do want to note that the work that’s being done to fight fraud is work that’s been happening for
• Isn’t that for RFPs for state agencies? It is for legislatively named grants.
• accountable for.
• </c> the uh fraud committee for? the uh fraud committee for?
• </c><00:26:31.679><c> uh</c> for uh for Medicaid fraud uh for uh for Medicaid fraud uh investigation,

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Guy Herman, presiding statutory probate court judge, and I want to thank our representative for working
• Appreciate the hard work of this committee on behalf of children and families in Texas and we ask for
• I understand, but the main goal for us is to make sure. works. Right.
• West intends for it to work.
• And the courts, because the clerks work for the courts. All right.

Bills: SB387 , SB1335 , HB1671 , SB1760 , SB1839 , SB1923 , HB1928 , HB4942 , HB5628 , HB5642 , HB1980

Committee: House S/C on Family & Fiduciary Relationships

Keywords: judicial bond, guardianship, probate law, county judge, statutory county court, estates, inheritance, representative duties, court authority, personal representative, retroactive child support, parentage, genetic testing, family code, child's conception, incapacitated persons, court proceedings, guardianship fees, estate management, probate