Transcript Highlights:

• any boating fund special fund and any boating fund special fund and any improvements<01:15:32.160
• continuing to fund the Aha Moku. continuing to fund the Aha Moku.
• The funding is there.
• Wildlife Fund and Health Institute. Wildlife Fund and Health Institute.
• Went to a private developer. Went to a private developer.

Bills: HCR13, HCR61, HCR136, HCR185, HCR155, HCR68, HCR174, HCR178, HCR179, HCR91, HCR103, HCR115, HCR199, HR15, HR128, HR175, HR147, HR62, HR164, HR168, HR169, HR83, HR95, HR107, HR189

Keywords: coral reefs, sunscreen, environmental education, student stewardship, marine conservation, reforestation, Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources, native forests, climate resilience, sustainable practices, economic opportunity, biodiversity, wildland-urban interface, WUI, wildfire mitigation, wildfire safety, Maui County, County of Maui, Kauai

Summary: The Committee on Water and Land met on March 31, 2026, and heard testimony on several resolutions. HCR 13/HR 50, which asks DLNR to work with DOE and the Public Charter School Commission on a student coral stewardship program, drew comments from DLNR, which said it stood on written testimony and had proposed amendments, and from supporters in the room. HCR 61, urging investment in reforestation policies, workforce, nursery capacity, and related support for public and private lands, received strong support from DLNR and multiple testifiers, including members of a reforestation policy hui, a resident, and others who emphasized watershed protection, flood and fire resilience, and the need to upgrade nursery infrastructure and staffing. Committee members asked questions about nursery modernization, staffing, island-specific needs, and whether reforestation could reduce wildfire impacts; the DLNR witness said all islands need investment, with especially large opportunities on Hawaiʻi Island, and that healthier forests improve resilience though they cannot eliminate climate-related risks. The committee then heard HCR 136/HR 128 on wildland-urban interface safety standards for Maui plantation towns, but no one testified. It also heard HCR 185/HR 175, which urges denial of permits for ICE detention-related warehouses; Chris Coffey of Immua Alliance testified in support, saying migrant survivors of exploitation are harmed when ICE detains people and that Hawaii would not be the first place to take such action, citing examples from other states and cities. In questioning, members explored whether a local facility would keep people closer to families and services or instead increase local detention; Coffey said detention generally cuts off access to services and can intensify fear, and that a local facility could incentivize more detention and make survivors less likely to come forward. Finally, the committee heard HCR 155/HR 147 supporting the Hawaii Water Safety Coalition’s Hawaii Water Safety Act. Testifiers included Allison Shapera, who described the statewide water safety plan, Hawaii’s high drowning rate, the economic and human costs of drownings, and her personal loss of her daughter in a preventable drowning; Kirsten Hermstead and Kalani Vierra of the Hawaiian Lifeguard Association said the plan’s recommendations need legislative recognition to help with implementation and grant funding; and Jessamine Town Horner testified by Zoom as a co-founder and bereaved family advocate. The transcript provided does not show any votes or final committee actions on the measures discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• the lining of the uterus to thin and keeps those essential nutrients from going to that little developing
• We also know that if the mom's pregnancy is further along than she realizes, the little baby has developed
• larger than the daily legislative per diem, or from paying... for travel-related expenses with campaign funds
• sacrificed and placed on hold, all while those responsible for this delay flee the state and raise funds
• And then can you walk us through the receiving or accepting... or expending funds from a PAC or to a

Bills: SB 8, SB 1, SB 2, SB 5, SB 10, HB27, HB7, HB17, HB1, SB 9, SB 7, SB 17, SB 4, HB20, HB18, HB7, HB17, HB1, HB20, HB18, SB9, SB7, SB17, SB4, SB1, SR85, SR87, SB8, SB5, SB2, SB10, HB27

Keywords: sex designation, restroom access, civil penalties, private civil right of action, women's privacy, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, disaster relief, flood preparedness, emergency funding, local government support, meteorological forecasting, abortion, healthcare, jurisdiction, civil action, qui tam

Transcript Highlights:

• the House on will appropriate 200 million dollars to cover the projected 25% non-federal matching funds
• As we talked about before, the money will come from the Economic Stabilization Organization Fund, or
• the rainy day fund.
• One was funding for the water rescue at a place called Storm Ranch.
• You know, Senator Campbell, when you developed this very illustrious resolution, did you notice that

Bills: SB 8, SB 1, SB 2, SB 5, SB 10, HB27, HB7, HB17, HB1, SB 9, SB 7, SB 17, SB 4, HB20, HB18, HB7, HB17, HB1, HB20, HB18, SB9, SB7, SB17, SB4, SB1, SR85, SR87, SB8, SB5, SB2, SB10, HB27

Keywords: sex designation, restroom access, civil penalties, private civil right of action, women's privacy, campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards, disaster relief, flood preparedness, emergency funding, local government support, meteorological forecasting, abortion, healthcare, jurisdiction, civil action, qui tam

Bills: SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5, SB 6, SB 7, SB 8, SB 9, SB 10, SB 11, SB 12, SB 13, SB 14, SB 15, SB 16, SB 17, SB 18, SB 34

Keywords: flash flood, flood warning, outdoor warning siren, emergency alert, disaster preparedness, flood mitigation, Hill Country floods, Texas Water Development Board, municipalities, counties, local government mandate, public safety, grant program, backup power, weather siren, emergency management, flood-prone area, warning system, redistricting, election

Transcript Highlights:

• We have to fund those developments.
• We have to fund those developments.
• We have to fund those developments.
• We have to fund those developments.
• So when we fund a development, we have the applicant tell us, how are...

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs held its first meeting and heard presentations focused on affordable housing implementation under the Live Local Act. Florida Housing Finance Corporation described its role in administering rental and homeownership programs, including SAIL, SHIP, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, disaster recovery efforts, supportive housing, and the Live Local funding and tax incentives. Officials said the first year’s $150 million Live Local rental allocation was fully committed to 23 developments producing 3,171 units with mixed-income set-asides, and they outlined how projects were selected through competitive solicitations tied to statutory priorities such as mixed-use development, publicly owned land, foster youth, rural areas of opportunity, redevelopment, and housing near military installations. They also discussed the tax credit contribution program, the missing-middle property tax exemption, sales tax rebates, and the year-one ad valorem exemption for qualifying affordable projects. Members asked detailed questions about the data and program design, including the use of area median income figures, per-unit subsidy levels, county targeting, tenant relocation during redevelopment, and whether the programs were helping lower-income households. Florida Housing said it uses competitive scoring and data from the Schimberg Center and that redevelopment projects are supposed to include tenant relocation plans. The homeownership portion of the presentation covered the Hometown Heroes program, which provides down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers, with exceptions for active-duty military and veterans. Staff said the program has assisted more than 21,000 families and leveraged over $6.5 billion in first mortgages, and members asked about repayment rates, credit scores, and whether participants were staying in homes long enough to show the program was serving intended buyers. The committee then heard from OPAGA on two required Live Local evaluations: affordable housing strategies in other states and affordable housing policies in Florida. OPAGA reported that Florida has a high share of cost-burdened households, with 1.5 million households cost burdened and 1.4 million severely cost burdened, and that Florida’s counties and municipalities reported more than $1.4 billion in affordable housing expenditures in fiscal year 2023-24. The report identified 13 innovative out-of-state programs, with three considered high-potential for Florida implementation, and summarized Florida local government practices such as SHIP-funded homeownership and rental assistance, expedited permitting, mixed-income zoning, rehabilitation programs, and interlocal cooperation. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• There's tax increment financing that Pasco has used to fund improvements that encourage economic development
• That is great because it doesn't actually cost money to the developer as the developer is trying to develop
• JTC funded.
• Oriented development policies that the JTC funded, and if you would introduce it, that would be very
• There's lots of different strands of funds—STBG, bridge funds, safety funds, Infrastructure Act funds

Summary: The meeting began with introductions from members of the Joint Transportation Committee and a presentation from the Association of Washington Cities and the public works directors of Richland, Kennewick, Pasco, and West Richland. The cities described the Quad Cities region as one of the fastest-growing in the state and outlined shared transportation priorities that align with the committee’s focus on safety, multimodal access, climate resilience, and economic development. They emphasized Vision Zero efforts, complete streets, ADA accessibility, regional trail and bike/pedestrian planning, and coordinated long-range transportation and land-use planning to manage growth. The city officials also discussed major funding and delivery challenges, including rising construction costs, project phasing, pavement preservation, right-of-way acquisition, and delays caused by state and federal permitting and review processes. They highlighted regional cooperation through the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments, Good Roads, and local funding tools such as impact fees, transportation benefit districts, REET, tax increment financing, and state and federal grants. Specific projects discussed included Richland’s SR 240/Aaron Drive complete streets project and downtown connectivity work, Kennewick’s Columbia Center Boulevard improvements and rail study, Pasco’s Court/Road 68, Sylvester Street corridor, I-182 bridge/interchange work, and a new north-south bridge study, and West Richland’s SR 224 Red Mountain corridor project, which officials said was awarded under budget and is scheduled to begin construction. Committee members asked questions about sidewalk connections to schools, state-agency right-of-way timelines, apprenticeship utilization, contractor selection, and whether complete streets requirements add burdens to pavement preservation projects. The city officials said new development is generally meeting sidewalk standards, but older infill areas remain a gap; that state right-of-way transactions can take much longer than expected; that apprenticeship requirements are common but harder for smaller contractors and local labor markets; and that low-bid contracting leaves little room to screen for performance history. They also said complete streets requirements are usually manageable on major projects but can be difficult to absorb in smaller preservation work. The committee then shifted to a JTC-funded study on transit-oriented development, presented by Urban Institute researcher Yona Freemark. The study examined TOD conditions in 33 cities in Snohomish, King, Pierce, Clark, and Spokane counties near rail and bus rapid transit stations. Freemark said Washington’s housing affordability crisis is severe, especially near transit, and found that high-cost cities have seen more development near stations but also signs of gentrification and loss of affordable housing, while lower-cost cities have had less development and worsening affordability relative to income. He identified barriers including high debt costs, land costs, infrastructure costs, zoning and parking rules, and limited subsidies for affordable housing. He recommended more neighborhood infrastructure funding near stations, stronger affordable housing investment, and better use of public land, noting that HB 1491 and related legislation are already changing some local requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Nevada Supportive Housing Development Fund, originally established as a special revenue fund, plays
• The Nevada Supportive Housing Development Fund as an account within the State General Fund.
• housing development fund.
• housing fund and those funds, like the Supportive Housing Development Fund in Assembly Bill 366...
• And those funds, like the Supportive Housing Development Fund in Assembly Bill 366 that was heard in

Keywords: 909, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Most of them are one-year funding.
• So, yeah, funding is key. Dedicated funding is key.
• the most of limited funds.
• development and competitiveness.
• development stakeholders around the state to develop a plan.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• And we can see on average it was five sources of funding used to build a development.
• fund affordable housing developments.
• pre-development, acquisition, gap funding, the gap funding that we've been talking about.
• to fund affordable housing developments.
• pre-development, acquisition, gap funding, the gap funding that we've been talking about.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Housing Finance and Affordability held its first hearing of 2025 to examine California’s housing finance system, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s severe housing shortage, high costs, and the need for practical recommendations to the Legislature and Governor. Co-chairs described the committee as an educational and problem-solving forum focused on financing housing production, first-time homeownership, mixed-income developments, and affordability across the income spectrum. Witnesses from state agencies and the development sector were invited to explain how housing is financed and where the system is breaking down. Panelists from the California Housing Partnership, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee/State Treasurer’s Office, CalHFA, and Related outlined the “capital stack” used to finance affordable housing, stressing that projects typically rely on multiple public and private sources, including federal and state low-income housing tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, state subsidies, local funds, and rental income. Speakers noted that affordable housing rents generally cannot support full project costs without public subsidy, and that recent federal changes—especially the expansion of the 4% and 9% tax credit programs and the reduction of the bond financing threshold for 4% credits—should allow California to finance substantially more units. CalHFA also described its homeownership programs, including My Home, Dream For All, and disaster-related mortgage assistance, as well as its multifamily lending and bond issuance programs. Several witnesses and committee members emphasized that the system remains too complex, too slow, and underfunded. They pointed to the need for more state funding, a housing bond, a permanent funding source, and better coordination among agencies, while also citing recent streamlining efforts such as AB 434’s SuperNOFA, AB 519’s one-stop-shop working group, and the planned California Housing and Homeless Agency reorganization. Members raised concerns about equity, access, missing-middle housing, gender and racial disparities, and whether current programs adequately serve extremely low-income households and those at risk of homelessness. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing; the discussion ended with committee members and witnesses agreeing that both funding and administrative reform are needed to increase production and improve affordability.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it does provide some certainty for developers that the funding is there when the funding round
• I think it does provide some certainty for developers that the funding is there when the funding round
• So this is sort of a new development and figuring out a use of the fund that we could do.
• and figuring out a use of development and figuring out a use of the<00:57:39.799> fund<00:57:
• for phase one which is the funds for phase one which is the developments<01:15:22.520> for<01

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The majority of our funding for the Statewide Economic Development Finance Act has been federal funding
• I'll touch a little more on that in a bit, and the Housing Development Fund.
• funds, to help with technical assistance and capacity development.
• Another one that I'll mention here is the Home Rental Development Funds Program.
• We awarded some funds there. We awarded funds for some single-family development there.

Transcript Highlights:

• So plans are developed.
• The act creates two particular funds: the Opportunity Revolving Fund and the Housing Revolving Fund.
• Lastly, there are some other nuances for the housing development program: 30% of the funds must be delivered
• fund.
• other funds will come as a result of our funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Destination Development Grant was funded $15 million during the 25 session.
• I would frame Corvent as a growth-stage example that shows how the North Dakota Development Fund can
• Touching on some programs that have come out of the North Dakota Development Fund would be the North
• This program is a strong example of the Development Fund deploying targeted grant funding to address
• Historically, if you remember, the Development Fund was started as early-stage investment.

Keywords: 908, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• Those funds allowed them to develop a total of 348 units of occupied housing for local employers, and
• have allowed us to Road These funds have allowed us to develop<01:09:13.040> a<01:09:13.159><
• Development Fund for workforce home ownership programs.
• from the general fund to the Housing<01:18:17.880> Development<01:18:18.480> Fund<01:18
• Fund uh and that is Housing Development Fund uh and that is for<01:18:20.679> uh<01:18:20.800

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• According to the Turner Center, on average, affordable housing developments need 3.5 sources of funding
• According to the Turner Center, on average, affordable housing developments need 3.5 sources of funding
• I mean, people may think that only HCD, CalHFA provides what the developers call the soft funding, the
• It's what the developers call the soft funding, the grants and loans, in the capital stack.
• Basically, HCD, two important sources, is disaster recovery funding in the form of Community Development

Summary: The joint hearing focused on the Governor’s 2025 reorganization plan to split the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency into two new agencies: a Business and Consumer Services Agency and a California Housing and Homelessness Agency. Administration officials said the change would give each side more focused leadership, improve consumer protection and regulatory oversight, and better align housing and homelessness policy with the state’s broader housing goals. Leaders from the Department of Consumer Affairs, Cannabis Control, Alcoholic Beverage Control, and Financial Protection and Innovation all voiced support for the business-side reorganization, while housing officials emphasized that the new housing agency would help streamline funding, compliance, and coordination across programs. Members raised concerns about timing, budget impacts, office space, and whether the split would actually reduce bureaucracy. The administration said the plan would be included in the May Revision, was intended to be cost-neutral, and would not require fee increases for licensees or additional office space. On the housing side, officials said the new Housing Development and Finance Committee would work toward a single application and more coordinated award process for affordable housing funding, while preserving CalHFA’s statutory and financial independence. They also said the reorganization would improve compliance monitoring, data collection, and coordination with local governments, including Los Angeles homelessness programs. Public testimony was largely supportive. Industry groups representing beverage distributors, craft brewers, wine, mortgage lenders, and housing organizations backed the business-side split, and housing advocates such as Housing California, the California Housing Partnership, and the California Housing Consortium supported the housing agency concept and the proposed one-stop-shop approach. Several witnesses urged that tax credits, bonds, and other funding sources be better coordinated, and some said the plan should be paired with additional state investment and implementation resources. No formal vote was taken; the hearing was informational.

Transcript Highlights:

• of planning sustainable development of planning sustainable development mainly<00:04:35.440>
• modifications to Housing Development modifications to Housing Development proposals<00:05:05.520
• really helps der risk the development really helps der risk the development process<00:05:49.479
• <00:10:54.040> that funds that funds that are<00:10:55.800> uh<00:10:55.920> or<
• will be good to talk to the developers will be good to talk to the developers to<00:11:19.800>

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on a series of housing measures focused on streamlining approvals, reshaping financing programs, and expanding affordability requirements. SB 27 would exempt state-financed housing developments from County Council approval; SB 38 would bar county legislative bodies from changing housing proposals in ways that increase project costs; SB 25 would let counties reduce housing capacity in one area only if they offset it elsewhere with no net loss; and SB 379 would require perpetual affordability covenants for HHFDC projects and prohibit affordable housing in special flood hazard areas. SB 378 would create an HHFDC working group to identify mixed-use Maui properties for possible acquisition, SB 414 would authorize condemnation proceedings for a new Lānaʻi access road tied to disaster recovery, and SB 13 would eliminate the state income tax mortgage interest deduction for second homes. Testimony was mixed across the bills, with state agencies and housing advocates generally supporting faster permitting and more production, while county planners, NAIOP, Catholic Charities, and others raised concerns about local control, marketability, financing feasibility, and long-term affordability enforcement. A major portion of the hearing centered on the rental housing revolving fund. SB 70 would limit eligible applicants to government agencies or organizations that reinvest all surplus into additional housing; HHFDC said most developers would not object in principle but questioned how the surplus requirement would be enforced, while NAIOP and Catholic Charities opposed it as too restrictive and difficult to monitor. SB 71 would amend the fund’s preference criteria and eligibility rules, and SB 163 would require HHFDC to prioritize projects with the shortest repayment terms and highest unit production per dollar per year. HHFDC and some advocates supported the goal of faster recycling of funds, but NAIOP and Catholic Charities warned that shorter loan terms and narrowed preferences could burden developers and disincentivize projects, especially for lower-income tenants. The chair indicated SB 163 would be deferred and its concerns folded into amendments to SB 71. In decision-making, the committee voted to pass SB 27, SB 38, SB 70, and SB 71 with amendments, and SB 25 unamended. The chair said SB 27 would be amended to include projects with a state financing commitment and a report note that such projects still undergo 21-38 review; SB 38 would receive technical changes and language preventing county bodies from imposing cost-increasing conditions; SB 70 would add language addressing enforcement of the surplus requirement and a preamble citing the need to recycle taxpayer-financed housing value; and SB 71 would be amended to incorporate concerns raised in SB 163, including a broader preamble and revised priority criteria. SB 163 was deferred, while the other measures on the agenda were heard but no final action was described in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• SO WHEN WE FUND A DEVELOPMENT WE HAVE THE APPLICANT TELL US HOW ARE YOU SETTING ASIDE THESE UNITS BECAUSE
• FOUR DEVELOPMENTS THERE.
• IT PROVIDES FUNDS FOR ASSISTANCE TO DEVELOP PARTNERSHIPS WITH HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS TO BUILD AFFORDABLE
• BLOCK GRANT FUNDS.
• OF FUNDING.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The Governor's budget also includes $250,000 one-time non-Proposition 98 General Fund to develop supplemental
• Or is that going to be part of developing the study that's included in the funding of the study?
• The proposed $40 million funding allows for additional professional development and the procurement of
• These funds have enabled schools to increase training and professional development for their staff so
• These funds have enabled schools to increase training and professional development for their staff so

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

Transcript Highlights:

• There are funding mechanisms where there is an opportunity for that development.
• I think number one is definitely impressive that the general fund recurring funding for economic development
• , as well as funding for a Research Development and Deployment Fund.
• That helps our economic development. Why did we not want to fund that position? Yes, Mr.
• However, only about 11% of that is from the general fund, mostly funded by federal funds.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have limited funds.
• If one of those two conditions exists, then we fund. So we always fund after we verify.
• along with our own funds.
• Is that correct, or near that development, touches that development?” “It is nearby.
• We've received these funds. These are IRA funds.

Summary: The committee met to consider a series of temporary appropriation requests, reserve fund transfers, federal grant appropriations, and review items. Early items included a $32 million appropriation and matching reserve transfer for the Department of Education’s educational freedom account program, a $476,000 request for the State Crime Lab, and a $90,000 assessment coordination request from DFA. Members asked questions about the assessment contract costs, and the item was approved. The committee also approved a $1 ARPA return to the CDC and a Department of Human Services reallocation package that moved general revenue and positions among divisions to meet client needs. The most extensive discussion centered on a $32 million restricted reserve transfer for the educational freedom account program. Members questioned the growing number of participating students, the program’s long-term funding needs, and safeguards against improper purchases. Agency representatives said about 44,000 students were being funded, that reimbursements and marketplace purchases are reviewed, and that reporting and audit controls are in place, though not every instance of fraud can be prevented. The committee approved the transfer after discussion. Members also approved smaller cash and federal grant items, including funding for a teacher shortage data dashboard, All Kids Bike grants, crime lab outsourcing, veterans cemetery operations, and a podiatric medicine licensing investigation fund. The most contentious item was a $7 million federal Forest Legacy grant request for Central Arkansas Water and the Department of Agriculture to acquire land in the Maumelle watershed, including acreage in Perry County and Pulaski County. Members debated water quality, development pressure, property tax impacts, local support, and whether Perry County had been adequately consulted. Agency and company representatives argued the acquisition would protect drinking water, preserve forested watershed land, and support recreation, while some legislators emphasized the county’s tax and development concerns. Senator Davis moved to defer the item to the full Legislative Council and to request removal of the Perry County portion; that motion passed. The committee then reviewed the remaining items, including a Veterans Affairs pay plan request, and adjourned.