Transcript Highlights:

• ; whether interoperable communication systems purchased with fund monies met statutory requirements;
• January, JLAC heard testimony from representatives from most law enforcement agencies that receive fund
• It's the total fund allocations for the 14 law enforcement agencies.
• So the biggest outcome from this funding has really been... ...the biggest outcome from this funding
• And all the schools were made part of this appropriation, and they all got funding.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative Audit Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• So the 2022 Budget Act authorized one-time funding of $1.4 billion General Fund over five years for mobile
• So the 2022 Budget Act authorized one-time funding of $1.4 billion General Fund over five years for mobile
• Mobile crisis through March 30, 2027, and that's just all on the General Fund.
• We now have 44 mobile crisis teams, which are primarily funded through Medi-Cal and state General Fund
• At the same time, proposals shift mobile crisis toward county funding.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the 2022 Budget Act authorized one-time funding of $1.4 billion General Fund over five years for mobile
• And that's just all on the General Fund. Thank you. Okay. Mobile crisis through March 30, 2027.
• We now have 44 mobile crisis teams, which are primarily funded through Medi-Cal and State General Fund
• So what happens if the mobile crisis team becomes optional and counties lose state funding?
• At the same time, proposals shift mobile crisis toward county funding.

Summary: The subcommittee heard budget and policy updates from the Department of State Hospitals, the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services. DSH described its proposed 2026-27 budget of $3.2 billion, including savings tied to IST solutions, higher patient-driven operating costs, and a small increase in caseload projections. Officials said the department has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks, with wait times reduced from a pandemic peak of 1,953 pending placements to about 250, and average treatment initiation now around five days. Members asked about the effects of Proposition 36 and SB 1323, rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, and whether IST solution funding was being overbudgeted; DSH said referrals are slightly down overall, aging and medically complex patients are driving outside care costs, and the IST solution savings reflect slower-than-expected program activation rather than a service gap. The department also outlined proposed funding for CONREP cost increases, a new county-by-county LPS bed allocation model, electrical infrastructure upgrades at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and additional dental staffing and space at Metropolitan and Patton. The Commission for Behavioral Health reviewed its role in the Behavioral Health Services Act transition and its new Innovation Partnership Fund. Staff said the commission is shifting from county-level innovation oversight to a statewide grant strategy, with the first $20 million RFA drawing strong interest and awards expected in mid-June. Members asked how “innovation” would be defined, whether grants could be renewed after the initial three-year contracts, and how the state would ensure the money supports real service delivery rather than general outreach or training. The commission also sought a liquidation deadline extension for the Alcove youth drop-in center grants so remaining funds can be spent before they revert, allowing sites to finish implementation and support the final evaluation. DHCS provided an overview of CalAIM and BH Connect implementation, including updated specialty mental health access criteria, new ASAM-based substance use treatment standards, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation, and transitional rent services. The department also addressed BHSA implementation, saying it does not track specific local program cuts but will monitor county three-year plans, performance measures, and outcomes as counties shift to the new funding structure. On H.R. 1, DHCS said it is preparing outreach, eligibility simplification, and exemption strategies to reduce Medi-Cal coverage losses, including clinic navigators, a statewide outreach campaign, and possible employment supports through a future waiver. The department also reported that BH-CHIP bond funds have supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds, with additional outpatient capacity and tribal investments. Finally, DHCS outlined a proposed 988 trailer bill to create a statewide designation process for 988 centers and mobile crisis teams, with implementation no earlier than October 1, 2027.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the 2022 Budget Act authorized one-time funding of $1.4 billion General Fund over five years for mobile
• What do you anticipate would happen if the mobile crisis units aren't funded?
• We now have 44 mobile crisis teams, which are primarily funded through Medi-Cal and state General Fund
• So what happens if the mobile crisis team becomes optional and counties lose state funding?
• At the same time, proposals shift mobile crisis toward county funding.

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH), the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) on budget proposals and implementation updates. DSH outlined its proposed 2026-27 budget, including funding for patient operating expenses, IST solutions savings, conditional release program costs, LPS bed allocation changes, electrical infrastructure projects at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and expanded dental services at Metropolitan and Patton. DSH also reported that it has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks in the Stiavedi v. Clinton case, with average time to initiate treatment down to about five days and pending placements reduced to roughly 250, while noting that Proposition 36 could increase referrals and SB 1323 may divert some individuals earlier into community-based treatment. Members asked about rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, the timing and structure of capital projects, and whether IST solution funds are being fully used; DSH said the savings reflect slower-than-expected ramp-up of community programs and that the Central California FACT replacement program is still on track for January 2027 activation. The Commission for Behavioral Health described its role under the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA), including data, evaluation, grantmaking, technical assistance, and transparency work. It highlighted the new statewide Innovation Partnership Fund, a five-year, $20 million-per-year program with small and large grant categories; the first RFA drew strong interest, with more than 400 questions and over 1,000 bidders’ conference participants. The Commission also discussed a proposed extension to spend down about $4.1 million remaining for the Alcove Youth Drop-in Center grants so sites can finish implementation and Stanford can complete the final evaluation. Members asked about grant duration, whether projects can be renewed, what qualifies as innovation, and whether the fund could support service delivery rather than awareness campaigns or training; the Commission said awards are expected to be three-year contracts and that proposals must be new or meaningfully expanded approaches that support BHSA priority populations. DHCS reviewed major behavioral health changes under CalAIM and BH Connect, including peer support, mobile crisis, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, updated specialty mental health access criteria, and new substance use treatment standards based on ASAM’s fourth edition. DHCS reported strong contingency management results, with more than 13,000 members served and 95% testing negative for stimulant use during treatment, and said 21 Indian health care providers have been approved to offer traditional health care practices. It also described BH Connect initiatives such as the $1.9 billion access reform and outcomes incentive program, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation by four counties, and transitional rent services. On BHSA implementation, DHCS said it is not tracking individual county contract cuts but is monitoring county plans and statewide outcomes, while stakeholders raised concerns about local prevention and service gaps. DHCS also outlined its H.R. 1 implementation strategy, including outreach, streamlined renewals, exemptions for disabled, substance use, and medically frail individuals, and proposed clinic navigator and outreach funding; it said it has not yet produced a focused estimate of H.R. 1 impacts on behavioral health populations. The discussion ended with DHCS noting that B-CHIP bond funding has supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 new or expanded facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds across the state.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><01:34:02.000><c> Florida</c> Texas increased by 20%. Florida Texas increased by 20%.
• And then the other two fund sources that you'll do revenue estimates for, the highway fund, which starts
• And then the other two fund sources that you'll do revenue estimates for, the highway fund, which starts
• And then the other two fund sources that you'll do revenue estimates for, the highway fund, which starts
• And then the other two fund sources that you'll do revenue estimates for, the highway fund, which starts

Committee: Senate Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• that was a non-funded mandate?
• also lose funding.
• I doubt Palm Beach County will qualify for funding from that trust fund.
• funding children's services, asking to continue funding seniors, asking to continue funding our veterans
• And I funding seniors, asking to continue funding our veterans.

Summary: The House took up the special order calendar for a proposed constitutional amendment on property taxes, CS/HJR 1F, which would create a new homestead exemption for non-school taxes, lower the annual assessment cap on non-homestead property, and restrict how counties and municipalities may use ad valorem tax revenue. The sponsor, Rep. Overdorf, said the measure would give homeowners tax relief and argued local governments could adjust spending or use other revenue sources. Opponents repeatedly questioned the ballot language, the lack of a fiscal estimate or backfill, and the potential impact on local services, public safety, and debt obligations. The House adopted the special order report and then debated the resolution and a series of amendments. Several amendments were offered to carve out or protect specific services from the tax changes. Rep. Bartleman’s amendment to protect Children’s Services Councils and Children’s Trusts was supported by members who said those entities fund early learning, mental health, aftercare, and other services for children and working families, but it failed 25-74. Rep. Cross offered an amendment to include water management districts in allowable ad valorem uses, warning of impacts on flood control, water quality, Everglades restoration, and water supply; that amendment also failed. Rep. Eskamani offered an amendment requiring the Legislature to backfill public safety funding if local revenues fall, arguing police and fire services, staffing, and response times would be at risk; it failed 25-71. The chamber then rejected Rep. Woodson’s amendment to require state backfill for senior services, with supporters citing Meals on Wheels, transportation, adult day care, and other local senior programs, and opponents saying the proposal was outside the bill’s scope. Finally, Rep. Gant offered an amendment to protect veteran services, saying local governments fund housing, mental health, transition, and family support programs for veterans; debate emphasized the importance of honoring veterans and avoiding cuts to those services. The transcript cuts off during debate on that amendment, before a final vote is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• , that was a non-funded mandate?
• also lose funding.
• I doubt Palm Beach County will qualify for funding from that trust fund.
• funding children's services, asking to continue funding seniors, asking to continue funding our veterans
• And I funding seniors, asking to continue funding our veterans.

Summary: The House met in special session, opened with prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, approved the journal, and adopted the special order report setting the day’s calendar. The chamber then took up CS/House Joint Resolution 1F, the Governor’s property tax proposal, which would raise the homestead exemption for non-school taxes, lower the annual assessment cap on non-homestead property from 10% to 5%, and restrict county and municipal ad valorem revenue to public safety and certain other uses. Sponsor Rep. Overdorf said the measure would return money to homeowners and give local governments flexibility, while opponents repeatedly argued the ballot language was misleading and that the proposal could create large local revenue shortfalls, shift costs to other taxpayers, and threaten local services and debt obligations. Members debated a series of amendments aimed at protecting specific programs from the bill’s effects. Rep. Bartleman’s amendment to exempt Children’s Services Councils and Children’s Trusts was defeated 25-74 after supporters said those entities fund child care, mental health, aftercare, and family support, while opponents said local governments could still choose to fund them. Rep. Cross’s amendment to include water management districts in allowable uses of ad valorem taxes was also defeated, despite testimony that the districts are essential for flood control, water supply, Everglades restoration, and drought response. Rep. Eskamani’s amendment to require the Legislature to backfill public safety funding failed 25-71 after debate over whether the proposal could reduce police and fire budgets and response times. The House then rejected Rep. Woodson’s amendment to require state backfill for senior services, with supporters citing Meals on Wheels, transportation, adult day care, and other aging services, and opponents saying the state already funds senior programs. Finally, Rep. Gant’s amendment to protect veteran services was introduced and debated, with members emphasizing housing, mental health, transition assistance, and homelessness concerns for veterans; the transcript cuts off before the vote on that amendment. Throughout the debate, sponsors and supporters of the main resolution maintained that local governments would retain spending discretion and could use other revenue sources, while critics argued the measure lacked clear backfill provisions and could force cuts or tax shifts at the local level.

Transcript Highlights:

• also lose funding.
• I doubt Palm Beach County will qualify for funding from that trust fund.
• fund services and... ...government with any funds necessary to fund services and programs related to
• funding children's services, asking to continue funding seniors, asking to continue funding our veterans
• And I funding seniors, asking to continue funding our veterans.

Bills: SB118 , SB203 , HB420 , HB414 , HB363 , HB405 , HB261 , HB263 , HB327 , HB348 , SB118 , SB203 , HB420 , HB414 , HB363 , HB405 , HB261 , HB263 , HB327 , HB348 , HB228 , HB282 , SB273 , HB7 , SB296 , SB199 , SB47 , SB204 , HB80 , HB11 , HB192 , HB228 , HB282 , SB273 , HB7 , SB296 , SB199 , SB47 , SB204 , HB80 , HB11 , HB192

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Keywords: bail, offenses, constitutional amendment, criminal justice, law enforcement, public safety, dental insurance, medical loss ratio, premium regulation, insurance commissioner, rebate, consumer protection, Baldwin County, local bill, education funding, school tax, privilege license tax, county tax revenue, municipal school board, Baldwin County Board of Education

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there funding for that? Mr.

Bills: HB95 , HB111 , HJR1 , HB32 , HB33 , HB61 , HJM2 , HM7 , HM17 , HM4 , HM22 , HM23 , HM24 , HM26 , HM3 , HM11 , HM14 , HM15 , HM21 , HM34 , HM50 , HB8 , HB30 , HB43 , HB156 , HM2 , HM16

Keywords: HB95, additional judgeship, district court, judicial district, First Judicial District, Second Judicial District, district judges, court administration, judicial staffing, caseload, access to justice, New Mexico courts, judiciary, judge vacancy, court backlog, state courts, water law, state engineer, civil penalty, compliance order

Transcript Highlights:

• Each exists in federal law and some states such as Texas have passed similar legislation.
• This includes funding to build an interdiction station to curb immigration within the I-10 corridor.
• I just want to be clear that an offer and funding given to an illegal alien is illegal.
• Senator Pizzo: ...source of the funds are not illicit or illegal.
• Funding and law enforcement. You can put that on the record. President Albritton: Debate?

Transcript Highlights:

• Although Medi-Cal pays for each mobile crisis response, funding is still inadequate.
• The key source of earmarked funding associated with 988 does not consistently reach county-run mobile
• Ultimately, mobile crisis is really expensive, and counties just don't have any funding coming up for
• Finally, we are concerned about the decreased funding for mobile crisis that California is likely to
• Funding for mobile crisis centers should not decline while demand is rising, and we would appreciate

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on California’s Mental Health Crisis held an informational hearing focused on the 988 suicide and crisis lifeline and the broader crisis response system around it. Chair Pellerin and Assembly Member Schiavo opened with personal remarks about the importance of the issue and the need to strengthen California’s crisis infrastructure, especially as federal actions and funding uncertainty threaten services for youth and LGBTQ+ callers. The hearing was organized into panels covering state implementation, county coordination, and community crisis services, with public comment to follow. State officials from CalHHS, DHCS, Cal OES, and the 988 California Consortium described progress since AB 988 and the five-year implementation plan, including governance structures, statewide network buildout, call-routing technology, public awareness campaigns, and integration with Medi-Cal mobile crisis services. They said California has created or enhanced more than 485 mobile crisis teams, built crisis stabilization and residential facilities, and expanded youth behavioral health supports such as BrightLife Kids and Soluna. They also noted ongoing work to replace lost Trevor Project support with enhanced LGBTQ+ youth training, and to develop a 988 resource directory and future public awareness campaign. Cal OES explained that the 988 surcharge is recalculated annually based on budgeted needs and fund balance, and that text-to-911 and next-gen 911 interoperability are being expanded. County and community witnesses emphasized that the system is still strained by rising demand and uneven local integration. Lake County described a peer-led rural mobile crisis model that has reduced law-enforcement holds and helped place residents into housing, but said 988 calls still do not reliably route to the county’s mobile crisis team and that rural counties need more flexible funding, vehicles, technology, and reimbursement support. Santa Clara County reported strong performance metrics and major growth in 988 call and text volume, but said sustained funding is needed to support staffing, text/chat expansion, and commercial payer reimbursement. The Mental Health Association of San Francisco said the California Peer Run Warm Line is a key part of the continuum of care, but recent budget changes forced cuts to Spanish-language services, federation support, and hours, despite high demand. Across the hearing, members and witnesses agreed that 988 is saving lives but still misses thousands of calls each month and needs more stable, multi-year funding, better coordination, and clearer roles among state agencies, counties, and crisis centers. Witnesses repeatedly called for stronger feedback loops, better integration between 988 and mobile crisis dispatch, and more investment in staffing, technology, and outreach so Californians can be connected to the right help without unnecessary law enforcement or emergency room involvement.

Transcript Highlights:

• Child health and safety funds.
• foundation funds for homeless services.
• foundation funds for homeless services. fund and $500,000 in community foundation funds for homeless
• The bill requires the Department of Social Services to continue funding CalFresh when federal funding
• At the same time, other agencies serving Sonoma County have available funds. Those funds...

Committee: House Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• Although Medi-Cal pays for each mobile crisis response, funding is still inadequate.
• Although Medi-Cal pays for each mobile crisis response, funding is still in the state.
• Although Medi-Cal pays for each mobile crisis response, funding is still inadequate.
• The key source of earmarked funding associated with 988 does not consistently reach county-run mobile
• Ultimately, mobile crisis is really expensive, and counties just don't have any funding coming up for

Summary: The hearing focused on California’s 988 suicide and crisis lifeline and the broader crisis response system, with members and witnesses emphasizing both the system’s life-saving role and the risks posed by funding gaps, rising demand, and uneven local implementation. Opening remarks highlighted the personal impact of suicide and the need to strengthen crisis response so calls are answered quickly and linked to appropriate care rather than defaulting to 911, emergency rooms, or law enforcement. State officials described the AB 988 five-year implementation plan, which sets goals around public awareness, equitable access, high-quality call/chat/text response, and better integration with ongoing behavioral health services. State agencies reported progress on infrastructure, coordination, and related behavioral health investments. CalHHS said California has expanded mobile crisis teams, crisis stabilization units, and youth behavioral health supports, and is preparing additional public awareness and grant programs tied to Proposition 1. DHCS explained that 988 is funded through a federal SAMHSA grant and the AB 988 surcharge, while Medi-Cal separately funds mobile crisis services; officials said the mobile crisis benefit is active in 53 counties and that statewide expansion remains a work in progress. Cal OES described the statewide technical buildout, including network infrastructure in all 11 crisis centers, interoperability with 911, and a pilot of next-generation routing and call-handling tools. The 988 California Consortium said call volume continues to rise sharply, missed calls remain a major concern, text/chat capacity is limited, and centers need more stable funding, better reimbursement, and stronger feedback loops with the state. County and community witnesses stressed that local systems need more flexible, sustained support to match the demand. Lake County described a peer-led rural mobile crisis model that has reduced law enforcement holds and increased housing placements, but said county-run mobile crisis teams still cannot reliably access 988 surcharge dollars and face reimbursement problems from Medi-Cal and commercial plans. Santa Clara County reported strong performance metrics, rapid call answer times, and a broad continuum of mobile crisis services, but said staffing and funding are strained and commercial reimbursement remains slow. The Mental Health Association of San Francisco said the peer-run warm line complements 988 by offering non-emergency support and warm handoffs, but recent budget changes forced cuts to Spanish-language service, federation support, and hours. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; members mainly asked questions about surcharge levels, budget timing, coordination among agencies, data collection, and how to improve collaboration with frontline crisis centers.

Transcript Highlights:

• States like California, Texas, and Washington already lead in this space. Massachusetts...
• families are denied the ability to have extra funds for the child in their care?
• Foster families should not be left in the dark about the status of their own child's funds.
• Massachusetts now has 32 Family Resource Centers backed by $35 million in FY26 funding.
• It's funded through a block grant that's awarded by DPH. We're paying for these resources.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities

Summary: The Joint Committee on Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities held a hybrid hearing on a series of child welfare bills focused on DCF, foster care, mandated reporting, educational records, and family support. Chair Kennedy and Chair Livingstone opened with accessibility and testimony rules, then heard testimony on bills including S.127 on expanding mandated reporters, S.107/H.235 on a Foster Children’s Bill of Rights, S.106/H.228 on transferring foster care review from DCF to the Office of the Child Advocate, H.258/S.125 on an electronic backpack for foster children’s educational records, H.205 on kinship foster care background checks, H.246/H.266 on minimizing trauma in care and protection cases, and S.159 on support for families after sudden unexpected infant death. Supporters of the mandated reporter bill, led by Sen. Feeney and Foxborough advocates, described a local model that trains all adults who work with children and argued the state should scale that approach statewide to improve recognition and reporting of abuse. Testimony on the foster care bills emphasized the need for clearer rights, better notice to children and attorneys, stronger remedies, and independent oversight. Advocates, youth with lived experience, and legal organizations described placement instability, delayed notifications, abuse in care, poor educational continuity, and the need for rights around safety, family contact, culture, language, and access to records. Several witnesses urged that the Foster Children’s Bill of Rights include enforceable court remedies, not just reporting requirements. On the oversight bill, supporters argued DCF should not review its own foster care system and pointed to poor outcomes, high placement instability, and recent investigative reporting as evidence for moving review responsibilities to the Office of the Child Advocate. On the electronic backpack bill, testimony focused on the need for real-time data sharing and a centralized system so schools can receive foster students’ records quickly and support continuity. On the trauma-minimization bill, Rep. Miskin framed the proposal as a set of practical changes to reduce harm during removals and court involvement. On the SUID bill, Sen. Lovely said families should be given information about available grief and support resources after an infant death. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't want to jeopardize that funding.
• funds.
• But we try to leverage those federal and other funds to their max capacity.
• For example, Texas: very big state.
• You have funded it. You have supplied it in all sorts of different ways.

Committee: House Subcommittee on Appropriations - General Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• The first measure up is HB 431, relating to housing, appropriates funds for the CAL initiative and also
• And finally, regarding Part IV, this is establishing Kale special or Kale initiative special funds in
• And finally, regarding Part IV, this is establishing Kale special or Kale initiative special funds in
• And finally, regarding Part IV, this is establishing Kale special or Kale initiative special funds in
• </c><01:22:17.000><c> appropriation</c> initiative special fund appropriation initiative special fund

Committee: House Human Services & Homelessness

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several measures related to housing, homelessness, caregiving, and tax relief. On HB 431, which appropriates funds for the CAL initiative and HHFDC, the Department of Human Services supported the bill and noted the Governor’s request for $50 million per year for HMS, the need for more permanent supportive housing, and a technical issue with establishing a special fund in session law. The Statewide Office on Homelessness and Housing Solutions strongly supported the measure, describing it as unprecedented funding for CAL projects and linking it to goals of reducing homelessness and expanding housing inventory. Catholic Charities Hawaii, the ACLU of Hawaii, and the Reimagining Public Safety in Hawaii Coalition also supported the bill, emphasizing permanent supportive housing, diversion from jail, and public safety benefits. The chair redirected one testifier to stay on the measure when testimony drifted to another program. Written support was also noted from several organizations and agencies. The committee then heard HB 225 on squatting. DHS said it appreciated the intent and deferred to the Attorney General and task force members, while noting that outreach on public lands differs from private land, where owner consent is required. The Office of the Public Defender supported the bill and wanted a voice in finding a solution. The Statewide Office on Homelessness and Housing Solutions also said it supported the intent, while opposition from the Kingdom of the Hawaiian Islands and support from one individual were noted. For HB 280, which would make the community outreach court permanent and appropriate funds, the Judiciary strongly supported the bill, describing the court as a mobile, community-based program serving vulnerable populations and connecting participants to services. The Office of the Public Defender also supported the measure, saying the program has helped people move off the streets and into stable housing and that permanent funding would allow expansion. Written support from the Hawaii Substance Abuse Coalition was noted. The committee then moved to HB 71, creating a refundable family caregiver tax credit, where the Department of Taxation provided comments, the Executive Office on Aging and AARP Hawaii supported the measure, and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii raised concerns about duplication with an existing dependent care credit and the lack of incentives for cost control. The committee next heard HB 753, which would increase the applicable percentage for the household and dependent care services tax credit. Support came from the Executive Office on Aging, Catholic Charities Hawaii, AARP Hawaii, and Hawaii Children’s Action Network, while the Tax Foundation again raised technical concerns about complexity and administration but noted the bill adds guardrails against abuse. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So one of the things the bill does is it repeals the funding for that fund, but it leaves the fund intact
• because there's already money in that fund, and we don't want to get rid of a fund that has money in
• /c><03:28:25.640><c> air</c> the name of the fund is air fund the air the name of the fund is air fund
• </c> the bill does is it repeals the funding the bill does is it repeals the funding for<03:28:32.239
• ><c> leaves</c><03:28:33.199><c> the</c><03:28:33.359><c> fund</c> for that fund but it leaves the fund

Summary: The Transportation Committee opened its public hearing with HB 249, sponsored by Representative Seth Miller, which would allow bicycles, human-powered vehicles, and electric bicycles to treat stop signs as yield signs and red lights as stop signs in certain situations. Miller argued the bill would improve cyclist safety and traffic flow at no cost to the state, citing Idaho and Delaware as examples where similar laws were associated with fewer injuries and crashes. He emphasized that the proposal would remain optional for cyclists, who would still be required to yield to cross traffic and obey right-of-way rules, and said the bill is intended to help riders maintain momentum and avoid the instability that comes from repeatedly starting from a full stop. Committee members raised concerns about uncertainty for drivers and pedestrians, liability, and whether the bill would create a special class of road users with different rules. Representative Crawford asked about the red-light left turn language, and Miller explained it was included because bicycles may not trigger some traffic signals. Representative Hill questioned how other road users would know what a cyclist intended to do at an intersection, and Representative Gon noted the bill did not appear to address liability the way some motorcycle-related laws do. Miller responded that cyclists would still be expected to yield appropriately and said he would be open to an amendment if liability language was needed. Representative Emble also questioned whether the bill would create a special vehicle class, and Miller replied that bicycles already have different roadway rules and that the bill was meant to improve safety and flow. Several supporters testified in favor of the bill. Michael Frank, a cyclist and League cycling instructor from Spofford, said he regularly rides a cargo bike for errands and that stopping fully at intersections leaves him exposed longer and makes it harder to restart on hills. He said the bill would let cyclists slow, assess traffic, and proceed safely while maintaining momentum, and noted that he had not personally received a ticket for rolling through a stop sign, though he had been warned by police. Tim Blagden, former head of the Bike-Walk Alliance of New Hampshire, said the bill reflects how many people already ride, saves energy, and helps bicycles move through intersections faster and more safely. No vote or committee action was taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're leveraging these funds to build homes with healthcare workers, gas station attendants, lumberyard
• We're leveraging these funds the state.
• We're leveraging these funds to<00:09:36.320><c> build</c><00:09:36.560><c> homes</c><00:09:36.880><c
• Adding this language will ensure that critical housing funds are guaranteed in rural regions like the
• are guaranteed in critical housing funds are guaranteed in rural<00:10:52.560><c> regions</c><00:10:

Bills: HF3902 , HF3895

Committee: House Housing Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• They’re choked off of state and local funds, and I think it’s important for us to fund success.
• They're choked off of state and local funds and I think it's important for us to fund success and this
• This funding, this bond, will allow for funding to support housing for that population.
• Are we then going to start funding security in the parking lots?
• Production funding by 188 percent from $26 million to $75 million.

Summary: The Assembly met after a quorum call and first dealt with a procedural dispute over four amendments to AB 1240. The Speaker ruled the amendments out of order as not germane, and the Assembly sustained that ruling on a 49-16 vote. Members then added co-authors to several consent-calendar resolutions, including measures on the National Conference of State Legislators, Suicide Prevention Awareness Month, ALS Awareness Month, and Men’s Mental Health Month, before adopting the consent calendar. The chamber also heard guest introductions, including a welcome for Oakland Mayor Barbara Lee, and took up a motion to bring AB 41 up out of file, which failed 19-48. The bulk of the meeting was floor action on a long series of bills and resolutions, many of which passed with broad bipartisan support. Measures approved included ACR 40 supporting immigrant students and FAFSA privacy; AB 917 on permanent status for certain school employees; AB 985 on anesthesia access; AB 7 and AB 42 on higher education and student services; AB 245 providing property tax relief for wildfire victims; AB 255 allowing funding for drug-free recovery housing; AB 279 updating K-12 library standards; AB 289 creating a pilot for automated speed enforcement in highway construction zones; AB 291 on an educator apprentice program; AB 327 addressing swatting; AB 340 on confidential union communications; AB 341 creating an oral health technical assistance center for people with disabilities; AB 356 on San Diego health care infrastructure; AB 410 on bot disclosure; AB 476 on copper theft enforcement; AB 477 on educator pay targets; AB 485 on stolen wages and business licensing; AB 487, the insurance committee’s technical omnibus bill; AB 573 on tobacco retail license fees; AB 598 on school mapping technology; AB 635 on mobile home law enforcement referrals; AB 651 on remote participation for incarcerated parents in dependency hearings; AB 654 on homelessness hotline assistance in Los Angeles County; AB 662 creating a South County higher education task force; AB 667 on language access in professional licensing; AB 669 limiting early denial of addiction treatment; AB 670 on naturally occurring affordable housing; AB 695 on online continuation of community college for deported students; AB 723 on disclosure for digitally altered real estate images; AB 727 placing Trevor Project information on student IDs; and AB 736, a $10 billion affordable housing bond for the June 2026 ballot, which passed on a 61-11 urgency vote after extensive debate. Debate on AB 736 was the most extensive of the day, with supporters arguing the bond would help address California’s housing crisis and give voters a chance to weigh in, while opponents criticized the state’s bond debt and past spending results. The Assembly then recessed for caucus meetings and later returned to continue the daily file, where additional measures were taken up, including AB 798 adding diapers and wipes to the emergency food bank reserve program, which passed 56-0, and AB 821 on career technical education, which was presented as bipartisan-supported as the transcript continued.